Cake
  • Log In
  • Sign Up
    • Pixel-shift technology kinda weirds me out. I know it sounds great on paper and Baldy's example was stellar....but, back before "turbo" got all the bugs worked out....I would rather buy a V-8 with DOHC versus a 4-banger with turbo. It seems like long exposures can whack out pixel shift technology....I am still considering going out and buying a used Pentax 645Z that can be found pretty affordably....it would probably work well as a niche camera (ok, more about hoarding then usage) but, it seems I would use my Sony A7RII+ much more when looking for adequate file size, etc.

    • wow, I didn’t know about the G9. I am sure those that really want high resolution hopefully know about it. Panosonic seems to fly under the radar, their new SL cameras will probably as well.

    • This is good stuff. It's technology that knows it's still in its infancy but doing the best it can. I love seeing the inner workings of these kind of engineering problems being solved. In only a matter of years; this disparity between digital and optical zoom will be a solved problem and cameras can become even smaller and lighter. I rarely like to dive into the technical details, but that was a good read for sure!

    • Sorry to abandon this post last week y'all. Life and sick little kids in the house and yada yada.

      I love that article from @jpop about super res AI. That's the best method to get clean photos no matter what the sensor size or whether I'm using optical or digital zoom. I've always done it manually though. I didn't know it was available in a commercial device.

      Based on that that LumixGexperience article that @Chris left here and a few others I read this past week it seems this pixel shift technology is still in its infancy. I do like the effect of shooting panels and overlapping the frames by 1/3 to stitch together more pixels for large print sizes.

      Since a cell phone can capture a frame as well as a professional camera from ten years a go, I'm excited to see where this stuff will go. I'm no gear head though. I just want to backpack, and cycle with the least amount of gear possible and come back with great images. I'll keep paying attention to new solutions that do that for me.

    • I'm going to pull the trigger on a D850 as an upgrade for my D800 shortly.

      I agree it's good that there are other players - but the pixel count isn't enough to tempt me to change brands - not because I have any brand loyalty (all my movie kit is Canon), but the existing investment I have in Nikor or Nikon mount lenses precludes.

      I wish I could see the look on my Art Director's face the first time he has to reduce the image from the D850 to run as an A3 Poster in our magazine! He was well pleased with 36mpx from the D800.

    • I did the upgrade from the D800 to the D850 when it came out and I haven't shot a frame with the D800 since. I am 98% thrilled with the camera.

      For one thing, I didn't think I would use all 45 mpix, but I do. I can crop an image in post-production far more than I ever dreamed and still have it look good if the lens was sharp, like my 70-200 seems to be. For example, I couldn't get anywhere close to this hummingbird with my 70-200, but after extreme cropping, it still looks decent:

      I love that it shoots 7 fps because the D800 is something like 3 and I shoot some action, as you do. The high ISO performance is amazing. I was in a darkened room last weekend trying to shoot reptiles and went to ISO 6400 with this shot because I had to:

      The only thing I don't like is the autofocus can be a little too slow for some sports shots.