Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
:watch: :watch: :watch: :watch: :watch: :watch: :watch: :watch:
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
FWIW ISO 50 and ISO 100 provide exactly the same amount of DR... ISO 64 or 80 do not. So there’s no harm in using ISO 50 as a “fake” ISO to maximize DR in your image.I was right: I was not clear .
What I meant is that 'fake' ISO-s should be marked so that you use them only when you know what you are doing and not select them accidentally. As you know, for the best dynamic range you use the lowest ISO, unless it is 'fake'. Hence the importance of marking the 'fake' ISOs clearly (underlined, Lo.x, ....).
Even though I do not see it that way, I agree that button customization can be seen as an advantage.
I am referring to Kasson's blog about fake ISOs on Sony A7rII: https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/sony-a7rii-fake-isos/FWIW ISO 50 and ISO 100 provide exactly the same amount of DR... ISO 64 or 80 do not. So there’s no harm in using ISO 50 as a “fake” ISO to maximize DR in your image.
As for the reat it will will be interesting to see what Nikon presents (and Canon too for that matter) but I’d likely pass on both. The smart thing for either of them to do is release their mirrorless camera in EOS and F mount and forego a new mount simply because it would take them upwards of 5-10 years to build out a new lineup of mirrorless lenses. Unless they planned to stick with zooms and semi-fast primes in the common lens types.
Or as mentioned above... adopting E-mount would be smart and unexpected with instant lens support. At that point it will be about just choosing the body you prefer and mix and match from the excellent lens choice and adapter support.
Thats fine... just going off 5 years of using the cameras...I am referring to Kasson's blog about fake ISOs on Sony A7rII: https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/sony-a7rii-fake-isos/
Executive summary: "if you shoot raw, don’t ever use the fake ISO settings". Instead of using ISO 50 it seems to be better to add a stop of exposure compensation as it allows the histogram to be useful.
I think that Nikon's mirrorless system needs a new, optimized mount so that the lenses can be hopefully smaller and lighter. When Sony a7r launched they were embraced by so many Canon shooters that could use Canon lenses with Metabones adapters. A good adapter (and FT1 is a good adapter) could do the same for a new Nikon mirrorless system. Likely, Nikon wants their customers to use efficiently existing Nikon's lenses, not Sony's.
They actually might be wrong - but I hope the are not!!!!Nikon Rumors is reporting we're one week away from the announcement of the rumored cameras
:watch::watch::watch::watch::watch:
All right. How many times do you care to repeat that?After using both EVF and OVF, I have chosen OVF for my style of shooting. I do not think EVF has any advantage over OVF as per my comment below. I will also add, that the heavier OVF cameras are actually more useful in low light using slow shutter speed as the weight is an advantage for stability when hand holding the camera.
The light has been coming for million's of years, however I see little "hint" to mirrorless in this video. But like rayvan I hope they will soon produce something worthwhile. Not so much because I want one but mainly to make sure we get more competition and choices for consumers (especially in the mirrorless FF segment).
No more need to buy a ring light for macro shotsIlluminated lens mount? Awesome! :thumbs: