D850

[Deleted User]

Thank you for that info.i wasn't aware of any issues with Canon's w/a lenses.

I am entirely satisfied with the 20, 24 and 28 f1.8 series from Nikon and both 35mm lenses are quite good. The 24 f 1.4 needs significant CA reduction and improvement in closeup distortion and corner softness. The new 28 f1.4 looks incredibly sharp albeit a bit clinical rendering. I considered the 19mm t/s but at that FL not sure I really would need front tilt in most cases.

Nikon's wide angle biogin lens designs with their large format lenses are renowned for across the field high sharpness, contrast and natural color. The 65, 75 and both 90s are top (used them all).

No question about Nikon's overall exceptionall quality in wide angle primes. Sigma's 20 and 24 art may have some slight advantages but dont quite make it for me.

I like t/s lenses from say 28mm and longer. The 85 f2.8 and 45 T/s are dated and the 24 t/s has some severe limitations. I would use both a 90 and 135 t/s frequently for my style.

So... the jury's out about a switch from Nikon since the in -camera stacking s/w may be a partial solution; but still looking for tele t/s lenses. In fact would like something in the 200-300mm range with t/s capability (crazy pipe dream). There are many instances where front tilt will allow say F8-f11 instead of f20-22 for complete dof over a landscape. So sharpness/resolutuon improves significantly as a result since diffraction is less of an issue.

Suspect very few photogs are looking for t/s lenses.

Nikoniser

Dude, if you are so worried about tilt lenses, go get an 8x10 view camera. They absolutely shit all over any 35mm digital camera for color and sharpness, and they have multiple movements, rise, tilt, shift, etc and the BEST wide angle lenses.

http://r.ebay.com/kNfnCE

[Deleted User]

I still shoot 4x5 but it's very slow process, few images and each film sheet costs $7.00! Including processing.

Perhaps you haven't experienced it yet. If not, try it and let me know how many images you missed by not having a 36+ MP dslr.

FreezeAction

After reading Admins post I know I want a D850 but can I justify the purchase? 5 years ago I would have walked 50 miles for 30 fps at 8 MP. Perfect timing in low light for 8x10 prints. And now in camera focus stacking is another plus for up coming projects. It will be hard to say no. The only question bugging me is how well will my 105mm 2.8 macro and 70-200 2.8 G work with the new sensor? More pixels on the sensor only make sense if captured. The silent shutter is maybe more important to me than the increase in pixels.

donaldejose

I want one also.

framer

Been thinking of this camera more and more. The #1 like is focus stacking if real. I do 1000 products shots at a time every two years and they are always a compromise to get done quick. That would be a nice feature. I also do pano's and it always nice to have a few closeup parts in focus with the far away shots. In the past I've used focus stacking to do that. Doing it in the camera as I shoot the scene would be a game changer.

framer

DenverShooter

starralazn said:

define sports car

997 turbo Mezger engine, PDK and Sport Cron slightly tweaked to 750 RWHP on 91 octane...

Denver Shooter

Capt_Spaulding

Hmm. That air is pretty rarified. And, I'm a purist. Keep the huffer and I'll pass on the pdk.

Give me n/a and three pedals. An h-6 std gearbox Cayman will do just fine. And, an S model could come in under $60k.

donaldejose

I have a 2000 911 with stick. No need for anything with more power. It is still more car than I am driver and I am not going to get any better. To get back to cameras that is also true of the D850: more camera than I am photographer. I just did a series of 20+ photos at a nursing home for use in obituaries. Didn't use my D800, didn't use my D750, Use my D500 because of its new radio flash system. Shot RAW to the XQD card and medium jpeg basic to the SD card. Only used the RAW image once in post processing. All the rest I used in post processing were the medium jpeg images. They are only going to be printed to 5x6 and the newspapers will want small file sizes. If I had shot them as larger files I would just have caused myself an extra step of downsizing them. I didn't need RAW files for more dynamic range or to pull out the shadows because I controlled the lighting with speedlights in softboxes at a 2 to 1 radio with using exposure control to modify slightly for skin tones. The only time I used the RAW file was for a very tan guy wearing a white shirt. The new radio remote in the D500 works great. You can adjust lighting ratios from your back LCD. I am sure the D500 will be great in many ways. But for those who wait a year I am also sure you will be able to get every thing in the D850 in a new Nikon mirrorless body with an EVF which should have focus peaking for MF lenses and What You See is What You Get in the EVF before you press the shutter and image review in the viewfinder to check exposure and focus without having to take your eye away from the viewfinder to chimp on the LCD. In other words, 2018 should bring a D850 Plus in a mirrorless body.

rmp

I love the idea of a mirrorless D850 plus! Now if I can just wait that long for a new toy.

framer

I drive a cheap sports car currently a 2012 Ford Mustang Convertible, deep red w/black top and leather interior. Basic transportation...

framer

retread

No room to swing a big lens around in a sports car. With the 4x4 truck I have plenty of room for them and the bag I carry them in.

Pistnbroke

Before they bring out a mirrorless they have to make the money on the 850 so give it 12 months +

autofocus

NR Facebook page has an interesting post.

DenverShooter

Capt_Spaulding said:

Hmm. That air is pretty rarified. And, I'm a purist. Keep the huffer and I'll pass on the pdk.



Give me n/a and three pedals. An h-6 std gearbox Cayman will do just fine. And, an S model could come in under $60k.

You can't shift fast enough without hitting the rev limiter in a 0 to 60 sprint. And at Denver altitude you take a 25% performance hit with NA.

Denver Shooter

donaldejose

Yes, turbo engines should be especially helpful at Denver's altitude. That is probably also true for all the Ecoboost etc turbo engines now being placed in ordinary cars and trucks.

Capt_Spaulding

DenverShooter said:

Capt_Spaulding said:

Hmm. That air is pretty rarified. And, I'm a purist. Keep the huffer and I'll pass on the pdk.



Give me n/a and three pedals. An h-6 std gearbox Cayman will do just fine. And, an S model could come in under $60k.

You can't shift fast enough without hitting the rev limiter in a 0 to 60 sprint. And at Denver altitude you take a 25% performance hit with NA.

Denver Shooter

I guess the "rarified air" comment was closer than I thought. I see the attraction of FI. The specific power outputs the manufacturers are extracting from smallish (e.g. 1.5l) engines are truly impressive. I've lived my life at or close to sea level and just have a fondness for n/a powerplants. On the transmission front I grew up on motorcycles and still find standard gearboxes with the heel and toeing and related activities a rewarding part of driving. I'd love a Porsche, but my weekend car is (and will likely remain) a Subaru BRZ. No choice but to stir the speed mixer. I guess it's a good thing I enjoy it.

/hijack lol

paulr

Wow, I getting confused, I thought this was about the Nikon D850 or have our moderators gone on holiday?

Pistnbroke

The moderators are still trying to translate that arabic post ......

paulr

Ah yes Pistnbroke, I forgot about that.

tganiats

OK...I'll bite. I like the specs enough to upgrade from my D800... :-)

DenverShooter

Capt_Spaulding said:

DenverShooter said:

Capt_Spaulding said:

Hmm. That air is pretty rarified. And, I'm a purist. Keep the huffer and I'll pass on the pdk.



Give me n/a and three pedals. An h-6 std gearbox Cayman will do just fine. And, an S model could come in under $60k.

You can't shift fast enough without hitting the rev limiter in a 0 to 60 sprint. And at Denver altitude you take a 25% performance hit with NA.

Denver Shooter

I guess the "rarified air" comment was closer than I thought. I see the attraction of FI. The specific power outputs the manufacturers are extracting from smallish (e.g. 1.5l) engines are truly impressive. I've lived my life at or close to sea level and just have a fondness for n/a powerplants. On the transmission front I grew up on motorcycles and still find standard gearboxes with the heel and toeing and related activities a rewarding part of driving. I'd love a Porsche, but my weekend car is (and will likely remain) a Subaru BRZ. No choice but to stir the speed mixer. I guess it's a good thing I enjoy it.

/hijack lol

My Ford Excursion has a V10 triton and its OK at altitude but sea level its a whole other deal.. I grew up on big V8's. My old Man had a slew of them. I vividly recall the 454 with a 4 bbl Olds 98 he had when I was in high school. It was the ultimate make out machine..

I had a 74 VW convertible with the 1.6 L flat four and four speed in that era but its back seat paled in comparison to the living room sized one in the Olds...

I have a 1989 951 that been tweaked (chipped, restrictor port resized and rev limiter increase). It dyno's 288 RWHP and 350 Ft/Lbs at altitude on 100 octane racing fuel. By the time I get "launched" I have about 1 second in first or I bang the rev limiter. On a great day I can hit 0 to 60 in 3 seconds.

Denver Shooter

snakebunk

Stop talking about cars!

rmp

How many people on this forum will pre order a D850? Count me in -- 1.

retread

Does anyone think the D850 sensor could be a D500 cut to FX instead of DX with some tweaking? I am not sure I am using the right math but think it works. If so that would make some interesting possibility's for a D500 up grade.