Поколение Nikon D8xx: D800/D800е/D810/D810а/D850 и всё что с ними связано - здесь!
Всего 66175 сообщ.
|
Показаны 6081 - 6100
Re[Doctor_EVIL]:
D800 V MKIII обзор - http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2012/04/nikon-d800-review-a-major-hd-upgrade-but-is-it-the-best-dslr-for-the-money/
Re[Doctor_EVIL]:
Зато D800, в отличие от Трипятака, успешно прошла стресс тест.
Re[Doctor_EVIL]:
от: Pilot_net
http://www.flickr.com/photos/casehouse/sets/72157629352741070/
Спорт на D800? Надо им сказать, что у D800 всего 4 кадра в секунду, что шумодав плохо замыливает шумы с деталями, что на 36мп возможны микросмазы при съёмке без штатива, и что карты памяти быстро заполняются, и жёсткие диски вместо с ними. А то, они, наверное, не знают, что делают не правильно, снимая спортивные репортажи на восьмисотку.
Да нормальные люди даже свадьбы без 6 кадров в секунду не снимают.
Re[Doctor_EVIL]:
от:Doctor_EVIL
Nikon D800 vs. Canon 5D mkIII
[object width="560" height="315"][param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/AfA2mTMt0u8?version=3&hl=en_US&rel=0"][/param][param name="wmode" value="opaque"][/param][embed AllowScriptAccess="never" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/AfA2mTMt0u8?version=3&hl=en_US&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="opaque" width="560" height="315"][/embed][/object]Подробнее
[quot]
The 5D3 like the 1Dx uses pixel binning on video mode, meaning that the capability of the entire sensor is used. The D800, like every other DSLR, only scans the horizontal lines required to make up the 1080 resolution so you’re effectively throwing away most of the sensor information.
If you’re buying a DSLR to shoot video, the 5D3 wins hands down. There’s no debate about that.
Read more on NikonRumors.com: http://nikonrumors.com/2012/04/04/nikon-d800-vs-canon-5d-mkiii-shootout.aspx/#ixzz1r9pgSLLo
[/quot]
смысл вышесказанного: в 5дм3 для видео используется весь сенсор, в д800 только часть необходимая для 1080p разрешения (т.е. бОльшая часть сенсора не используется).
Итого, 5dm3 для видео с высокими исо лучше.
Re[regal123]:
в таком случае, есть надежда, что это смогут, когда-нибудь, исправить в новой прошивке.
Re[regal123]:
Итого, 5dm3 для видео с высокими исо лучше.
Ну Д4 с видео на высоких исо еще лучше.
Если прошивкой видео исправят Д800, это будет окончательное превосходство над пятриком.
Re[Tigra Girl]:
от: Tigra Girl
[
Ну Д4 с видео на высоких исо еще лучше.
Если прошивкой видео исправят Д800, это будет окончательное превосходство над пятриком.
С этой прошивкой и надпись на камере на Red One поменяется
И ужо не д800 будет!
Re[Левон Зироян]:
от: Левон Зироян
Потестил сегодня нормально D800 товарища, я остался в восторге от камеры. ДД очень широкий, резкость просто поражает.
PS: видео пишет нереально круто. Пятак-2 отдыхает.
Можно подробнее с этого момента? Меня как раз видео интересует, пока по забугорным обзорам большого преимущества 800-ки не увидел, помимо теоретического некомпресса. Чем видео в никоне так нереально круче пядвака?
Re[Doctor_EVIL]:
от:Doctor_EVIL
Nikon D800 vs. Canon 5D mkIII
[object width="560" height="315"][param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/AfA2mTMt0u8?version=3&hl=en_US&rel=0"][/param][param name="wmode" value="opaque"][/param][embed AllowScriptAccess="never" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/AfA2mTMt0u8?version=3&hl=en_US&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="opaque" width="560" height="315"][/embed][/object]Подробнее
Вот описание теста - http://www.crisislab.com/index.php?section=1
Re[regal123]:
почему здесь на втором видео с высокими исо все нормально?
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2012/04/nikon-d800-review-a-major-hd-upgrade-but-is-it-the-best-dslr-for-the-money/
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2012/04/nikon-d800-review-a-major-hd-upgrade-but-is-it-the-best-dslr-for-the-money/
Re[Gilgamesh]:
По тестам все видно.
На наиболее часто применяемых 50-3200исо Д800 выдает самую лучшую на сегодня картинку и видео из 35-мм ДСЛР аппаратов.
Для высоких же исо в видео (пьянки-гулянки в ресторанах и квартирах) и большого ресурса станочника - Д4 будет более правильным выбором.
Интересно, что муар на Д800 на видео виден на мире даже на низких исо.
На наиболее часто применяемых 50-3200исо Д800 выдает самую лучшую на сегодня картинку и видео из 35-мм ДСЛР аппаратов.
Для высоких же исо в видео (пьянки-гулянки в ресторанах и квартирах) и большого ресурса станочника - Д4 будет более правильным выбором.
Интересно, что муар на Д800 на видео виден на мире даже на низких исо.
Re[schum]:
от: schum
С этой прошивкой и надпись на камере на Red One поменяется
И ужо не д800 будет!
А следующей прошивкой уберут морковку на JPG
, улучшат автофокус, скорострельность и добавят sRAW :D Re[Mikhail_K]:
от: Mikhail_K
А следующей прошивкой уберут морковку на JPG
дался Вам этот sRAW.... и название какое: срав....
пишите кроп1.2 и Рав со сжатием, если уж приспичило..
Re[Mikhail_K]:
от: Mikhail_K
А следующей прошивкой уберут морковку на JPG
ну, не знаю как там на счёт "моркови", не заметил, а вот жопег, на первый взгляд вроде бы и ничего, во всяком случае по цветам, мне нра )
п.с.: единственное, что расстроило, так это цвет неба в жопеге, по моему вкусу недостаточно голубое, серяком каким-то попахивает)
Re[referi]:
от: referi
почему здесь на втором видео с высокими исо все нормально?
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2012/04/nikon-d800-review-a-major-hd-upgrade-but-is-it-the-best-dslr-for-the-money/
кстати, да, тут в сравнении получается совсем другая песня.
сдаётся мне бб в никоновском видео как-то не так сработал, но в целом цвета и света намного больше чем на трипаке, на равных исо
Re[PaSus]:
от: PaSus
надо-же не ожидал что по видео будет такой слив у никона :(
На нормальный исо трипак сосет, а в движении, так особенно.
Re[Doctor_EVIL]:
от: Doctor_EVIL
тоже не ожидал, так как до этого говорилось, что оно лучшее из лучшего
на нормальных рабочих исо так и есть, е-мое.
Re[Сергеха]:
что значит знаю ли я какая была цветом куртка....
ну если камера ещё и при дневном свете промахивается по ББ то извольте... но не промахивается.. а значит цвет именно такой. Потому что я не крутил баланс, а вы крутили видимо. раз у вас в зеленый полетело..
ну если камера ещё и при дневном свете промахивается по ББ то извольте... но не промахивается.. а значит цвет именно такой. Потому что я не крутил баланс, а вы крутили видимо. раз у вас в зеленый полетело..
Re[alexxsemsk]:
от: alexxsemsk
На нормальный исо трипак сосет, а в движении, так особенно.
Ага, точняк :cannabis:
Успокойтесь и дышите глубже Re[Doctor_EVIL]:
Очень полезное чтиво. Как с Д800 работают различные никоновские линзы:
AFS 14-24/2.8 G: Not good at 14mm; obvious corner sharpness issues. Displayed AF issues at 24mm. Center is sharp. T stop is probably closer to f4 than f2.8. Average to good performer.
AFS 24-70/2.8 G: Sharp everywhere in the range, at every aperture. No AF issues, even at 24mm. Excellent performer.
AFS 70-200/2.8 G VR II: Sharp everywhere in the range, at every aperture. 85mm setting better than the 85/1.4 G at f2.8, and comparable to the 85/1.8 G at f2.8 (yes, you read that right. The 85/1.8 G is better than the 85/1.4 G.). No AF issues either. Excellent performer.
AFS 24/1.4 G: Sharp everywhere except extreme corners at every aperture if you live view – remains an optically amazing lens, but now even more fiddly to use thanks to the AF issues. Three copies all displayed left-side softness on the D800, but not on other bodies. Cautiously, I’d say excellent performer, to be confirmed once I have a properly working body.
AFS 28-300/3.5-5.6 G VR II: Sharp everywhere if you close down the aperture on stop. Microcontrast not great, but serviceable. Overall global contrast is good. Color a bit odd. Good to very good performer. No AF issues, probably covered by depth of field and small apertures.
AFS 35/1.4 G: No good wide open. Center is okay, both sides are not good – even after AF fine tune. Not recommended. The 24-70 performs much better at 2.8 than the 35/1.4 does at the same aperture. Slight AF issue noticed, same as 24/1.4.
AFS 85/1.4 G: Inconsistent. Wide open displays LCA and LoCA at edges. Nowhere near as good as it was on the D700/ D3/ D3s. Stopped down to f2.8, it improves, but only to about the same level as the 70-200/2.8 II wide open. Note T stop is pretty high for this lens though – probably 2/3 stop more than the 70-200/2.8 II, and half a stop more than the 85/1.8 G for the same aperture. Good to very good stopped down. Honestly, I’m not liking this lens very much anymore.
AFS 85/1.8 G: Incredible. Sharp everywhere at every aperture, no LCA or LoCA. Bokeh is neutral, not quite as good as the 85/1.4 G. Surprising considering this lens has no ED glass, Nano coating or aspherical elements. It’s honestly an optical masterpiece, and very, very cheap. If you need an 85mm and don’t have the 85/1.4 G already, I’d suggest buying one of these. Performance at wide open at f1.8 is better than the 85/1.4 G at 2.8; it matches or slightly exceeds even the 60/2.8 G Micro at the same distances. You’re probably wonder what’s the catch: two things; T stop and build quality. T stop is half a stop down on the 85/1.4 G for the same aperture, and it’s light and plasticky. Still weather sealed, though. Excellent plus performance, no visible AF issues.
PC-E 85/2.8 Micro: This is the only lens of the group tested that could best the new 85/1.8 G, and by the slightest of margins (or maybe both lenses out resolved even the D800E sensor and we’d need something even higher density to see the difference). Global contrast is a little lower than the 85/1.8 G, but micro contrast has more bite and structure to it – reminds me of the Zeiss macros. Excellent plus performance. (I took this one home, after relieving my credit card of some of its available balance. Look out for a full review in the future once I get a chance to shoot it in the studio.)
PC-E 24/3.5: A truly excellent piece of glass. Matches the performance of the 85/2.8, but at 24mm. Shame about the small aperture, though. Handily focuses to about 20cm – which is about 3cm from the front element of the lens. I’d say sharpness performance of this and the 24/1.4 G at f4 are about the same, however the micro contrast structure of this lens is almost Zeiss-like in detail. Excellent plus performance again. And whoever said it won’t mount is wrong – it mounts and offers full movement just fine, but you must zero all of the movements before trying to mount it, and there are certain orientations that work better than others (big knobs vs small knobs near the prism etc.)
AFS 60/2.8 G Micro: Although this was my reference standard on the 12MP FX bodies, it’s performance clearly isn’t up to the D800′s demands: I’m seeing plenty of longitudinal CA (especially in the bokeh) that wasn’t there, or almost negligible, on the D700. It’s sharp already at f2, but not critically bitingly sharp til f4-5.6; your working aperture range is somewhat limited because diffraction kicks in noticeably by f16, and it’s unusably soft by f25. I’d say f22 is probably best reserved for emergencies. This is the main reason I got the 85/2.8 PCE: lack of depth of field control. I’d put it in the good-to-excellent range.
A word on the D800E: I didn’t have a lot of time with it, but from what I can see, there is a slight but noticeable difference in fine micro contrast, as well as sharpness and resolving power. It seems to offset diffraction to some extent. However, file sizes will be even bigger, and lens demands even higher. Recommendation: use with caution, requires controlled circumstances to get the most out of it (tripod or studio lights, low ISO).
Conclusion: If you plan on getting the most out of your D800/D800E, you’re going to have to rethink your lens lineup. What worked brilliantly for me on the D700 – as in I felt I couldn’t get any more image quality out – isn’t working on the D800. And there are a lot of surprises here; not all of them good – the 85/1.4 G and 24/1.4 G are good examples of this. It seems that one has to now choose for a lens set optimized for studio work (or slightly brighter light conditions) – 24-70, 70-200, 85/1.8G, 85/2.8 PCE – with the compromises that brings for available light work, especially now that you’re going to require more shutter speed to handhold and the sensor loses out a stop to the D700 at the pixel level – or run two sets of lenses. This obviously isn’t ideal, or cheap. I feel the latter route is likely the way I’ll have to go – probably with the 85/2.8 PCE for the majority of my studio work, and a Zeiss 21/2.8 or 24/3.5 PCE for architecture and interiors.
Отсюда http://blog.mingthein.com/
AFS 14-24/2.8 G: Not good at 14mm; obvious corner sharpness issues. Displayed AF issues at 24mm. Center is sharp. T stop is probably closer to f4 than f2.8. Average to good performer.
AFS 24-70/2.8 G: Sharp everywhere in the range, at every aperture. No AF issues, even at 24mm. Excellent performer.
AFS 70-200/2.8 G VR II: Sharp everywhere in the range, at every aperture. 85mm setting better than the 85/1.4 G at f2.8, and comparable to the 85/1.8 G at f2.8 (yes, you read that right. The 85/1.8 G is better than the 85/1.4 G.). No AF issues either. Excellent performer.
AFS 24/1.4 G: Sharp everywhere except extreme corners at every aperture if you live view – remains an optically amazing lens, but now even more fiddly to use thanks to the AF issues. Three copies all displayed left-side softness on the D800, but not on other bodies. Cautiously, I’d say excellent performer, to be confirmed once I have a properly working body.
AFS 28-300/3.5-5.6 G VR II: Sharp everywhere if you close down the aperture on stop. Microcontrast not great, but serviceable. Overall global contrast is good. Color a bit odd. Good to very good performer. No AF issues, probably covered by depth of field and small apertures.
AFS 35/1.4 G: No good wide open. Center is okay, both sides are not good – even after AF fine tune. Not recommended. The 24-70 performs much better at 2.8 than the 35/1.4 does at the same aperture. Slight AF issue noticed, same as 24/1.4.
AFS 85/1.4 G: Inconsistent. Wide open displays LCA and LoCA at edges. Nowhere near as good as it was on the D700/ D3/ D3s. Stopped down to f2.8, it improves, but only to about the same level as the 70-200/2.8 II wide open. Note T stop is pretty high for this lens though – probably 2/3 stop more than the 70-200/2.8 II, and half a stop more than the 85/1.8 G for the same aperture. Good to very good stopped down. Honestly, I’m not liking this lens very much anymore.
AFS 85/1.8 G: Incredible. Sharp everywhere at every aperture, no LCA or LoCA. Bokeh is neutral, not quite as good as the 85/1.4 G. Surprising considering this lens has no ED glass, Nano coating or aspherical elements. It’s honestly an optical masterpiece, and very, very cheap. If you need an 85mm and don’t have the 85/1.4 G already, I’d suggest buying one of these. Performance at wide open at f1.8 is better than the 85/1.4 G at 2.8; it matches or slightly exceeds even the 60/2.8 G Micro at the same distances. You’re probably wonder what’s the catch: two things; T stop and build quality. T stop is half a stop down on the 85/1.4 G for the same aperture, and it’s light and plasticky. Still weather sealed, though. Excellent plus performance, no visible AF issues.
PC-E 85/2.8 Micro: This is the only lens of the group tested that could best the new 85/1.8 G, and by the slightest of margins (or maybe both lenses out resolved even the D800E sensor and we’d need something even higher density to see the difference). Global contrast is a little lower than the 85/1.8 G, but micro contrast has more bite and structure to it – reminds me of the Zeiss macros. Excellent plus performance. (I took this one home, after relieving my credit card of some of its available balance. Look out for a full review in the future once I get a chance to shoot it in the studio.)
PC-E 24/3.5: A truly excellent piece of glass. Matches the performance of the 85/2.8, but at 24mm. Shame about the small aperture, though. Handily focuses to about 20cm – which is about 3cm from the front element of the lens. I’d say sharpness performance of this and the 24/1.4 G at f4 are about the same, however the micro contrast structure of this lens is almost Zeiss-like in detail. Excellent plus performance again. And whoever said it won’t mount is wrong – it mounts and offers full movement just fine, but you must zero all of the movements before trying to mount it, and there are certain orientations that work better than others (big knobs vs small knobs near the prism etc.)
AFS 60/2.8 G Micro: Although this was my reference standard on the 12MP FX bodies, it’s performance clearly isn’t up to the D800′s demands: I’m seeing plenty of longitudinal CA (especially in the bokeh) that wasn’t there, or almost negligible, on the D700. It’s sharp already at f2, but not critically bitingly sharp til f4-5.6; your working aperture range is somewhat limited because diffraction kicks in noticeably by f16, and it’s unusably soft by f25. I’d say f22 is probably best reserved for emergencies. This is the main reason I got the 85/2.8 PCE: lack of depth of field control. I’d put it in the good-to-excellent range.
A word on the D800E: I didn’t have a lot of time with it, but from what I can see, there is a slight but noticeable difference in fine micro contrast, as well as sharpness and resolving power. It seems to offset diffraction to some extent. However, file sizes will be even bigger, and lens demands even higher. Recommendation: use with caution, requires controlled circumstances to get the most out of it (tripod or studio lights, low ISO).
Conclusion: If you plan on getting the most out of your D800/D800E, you’re going to have to rethink your lens lineup. What worked brilliantly for me on the D700 – as in I felt I couldn’t get any more image quality out – isn’t working on the D800. And there are a lot of surprises here; not all of them good – the 85/1.4 G and 24/1.4 G are good examples of this. It seems that one has to now choose for a lens set optimized for studio work (or slightly brighter light conditions) – 24-70, 70-200, 85/1.8G, 85/2.8 PCE – with the compromises that brings for available light work, especially now that you’re going to require more shutter speed to handhold and the sensor loses out a stop to the D700 at the pixel level – or run two sets of lenses. This obviously isn’t ideal, or cheap. I feel the latter route is likely the way I’ll have to go – probably with the 85/2.8 PCE for the majority of my studio work, and a Zeiss 21/2.8 or 24/3.5 PCE for architecture and interiors.
Отсюда http://blog.mingthein.com/
