[Kunzite]

Look carefully, all the "pixie dust" is on the sensor
(only on selected Nikon cameras, I'm afraid the D800 is incompatible)

[Parry]

Just out of interest, what was the cause of the oily dusty Nikon D600 sensor problem?

It's likely that Nikon plant in Thailand will flood again in the next week.

[Kunzite]

Dust generated by internal components, AFAIK. It should stop being an issue after few cleanings.

[deus ursus]

Just out of interest, what was the cause of the oily dusty Nikon D600 sensor problem?

Dust from bad pixies. :-)

[SyncGuy]

btw, will it be Ricoh K-3 or Pentax k-3?

Really?

Neither my friends...

It'll be aptly named: CohTax (pronounced as KoTex )



Therefore,

<APSC size = CohTax S for Small
>APSC size = CohTax M for Medium
MF size = CohTax L for Large

LOL!!

[Clavius]

LOL.. Suddenly larger format doesn't equal better anymore.

[kadajawi]

Don't get me wrong, the competition have the edge in areas, and lack of FF is a percieved weakness, but in pure performance terms against the competition they are right up there. The K5-IIs costs way less than the 70D and beats it on IQ, and has more useful features (like weather sealing) and comparable (or only slightly worse) IQ to the comparable Nikons.

Aaaah... don't bring up the 70D. That's a sore spot for me. Video AF... proper one, that works well... One area (the only one) where Canon beats the competition by a large margin, and it doesn't look like any other brand is going to catch up within the next few years.

[SyncGuy]

Aaaah... don't bring up the 70D. That's a sore spot for me. Video AF... proper one, that works well... One area (the only one) where Canon beats the competition by a large margin, and it doesn't look like any other brand is going to catch up within the next few years.

You must be kidding me.... I'm pretty sure this beats it... Well, it'll even maul Canon to death along with the prospective K-9 a few years down the road..

PS: Oh wait.... Are you a photographer or a videographer? You sure you're on the correct forum now? :P :P

[Col]

Is the lack of an AA filter turning into a trend? The K-5 II experimented with that option and the Q7 removed it all together.

I believe it becomes less necessary with increasing photo-site density.

[Belnan]

One of the most interesting "specs" to me, The only reason I see them going with this is it can somehow improve autofocus function. I am not sure how but it could be what gives this pentax the edge it needs.

[nanok]

Aaaah... don't bring up the 70D. That's a sore spot for me. Video AF... proper one, that works well... One area (the only one) where Canon beats the competition by a large margin, and it doesn't look like any other brand is going to catch up within the next few years.

i thought af for video was exclussively for those nasty little video digicams designed for lazy "amateur videographers" who want to shoot their kids at the pool and can't be bothered to focus.

/me runs away ducking the stones

[Clarkey]

I'm picking a new "kit zoom" to go with this body. I suspect higher than the 18-135mm (that is partnered with the K-5II/s), so I think the 18-70 F4 WR from the roadmap will make an appearance in the announcement.

[kadajawi]

You must be kidding me.... I'm pretty sure this beats it... Well, it'll even maul Canon to death along with the prospective K-9 a few years down the road..

PS: Oh wait.... Are you a photographer or a videographer? You sure you're on the correct forum now? :P :P

Well, obviously the Sony rocks for video use (though it is a bit dated by now), not sure how good the AF works though. I thought the Canon (at least in the demo video) is pretty impressive. You tap on the area you want in focus (probably including tracking feature) and it immediately focuses to that, smoothly, and without any hunting at all. Spot on, like PDAF, just during video and over all the frame. IIRC each pixel is also a PDAF sensor...

I get paid to take photos (sometimes), but I love to take video. Mostly private stuff though, I want to document my father's last few years.

@nanok: IF you have good control over the AF, then I do think it is usable. For professional work I guess you'd still prefer manual focus (then again, have you seen House M.D. in HD? At least in the season I watched in HD they rarely ever got the focus right! TNG also suffers after the 1st or 2nd season, they used to have a much better cinematographer (though he used way too little light (or low quality film stock)), IMHO). I can manually focus, but having good AF could be nice too. They should really fix the microphone though, my cheap Canon superzoom point & shoot is vastly superior to the Pentax K-5, and the K-5 probably couldn't even get good quality with a good microphone, due to the extremely crappy AGC. Say you record a concert... whenever there is a snare drum the music gets softer for less than a second, before it gets back to the normal volume. I mean come on... I haven't heard ANY camera screw up that much. Also, go on YouTube and search for concert videos taken with the Nokia Lumia 1020. Mind blowing.

[wigelII]

I heard a rumor here that although it's not FF, the IQ is close to 645D.

Well, well, ... I wonder.
Maybe there is some truth in it.
If I can believe what I read on the net, the IQ of the Olympus EM-1 with 43 sensor would be close to FF (allthough in an interview one of the Olympus managers said that for IQ "the gap with APS-C is closed for 99%).
I also read that large prints of the EM-1 have the same quality as thos of FF.
If Olympus can do that, maybe even better is possible on an APS-C sensor?
I hope so. (if not, I might even go for the EM-1).

[nanok]

Well, obviously the Sony rocks for video use (though it is a bit dated by now), not sure how good the AF works though. I thought the Canon (at least in the demo video) is pretty impressive. You tap on the area you want in focus (probably including tracking feature) and it immediately focuses to that, smoothly, and without any hunting at all. Spot on, like PDAF, just during video and over all the frame. IIRC each pixel is also a PDAF sensor...

I get paid to take photos (sometimes), but I love to take video. Mostly private stuff though, I want to document my father's last few years.

@nanok: IF you have good control over the AF, then I do think it is usable. For professional work I guess you'd still prefer manual focus (then again, have you seen House M.D. in HD? At least in the season I watched in HD they rarely ever got the focus right! TNG also suffers after the 1st or 2nd season, they used to have a much better cinematographer (though he used way too little light (or low quality film stock)), IMHO). I can manually focus, but having good AF could be nice too. They should really fix the microphone though, my cheap Canon superzoom point & shoot is vastly superior to the Pentax K-5, and the K-5 probably couldn't even get good quality with a good microphone, due to the extremely crappy AGC. Say you record a concert... whenever there is a snare drum the music gets softer for less than a second, before it gets back to the normal volume. I mean come on... I haven't heard ANY camera screw up that much. Also, go on YouTube and search for concert videos taken with the Nokia Lumia 1020. Mind blowing.

fair enough, af could be useful, but i find people make too big a deal of it for "big sensor video". i mean, seriously, we're talking cinematography here, this is no longer "home video, crappy quality, blow all the candles now boby, smile to the camera, got it, can eat the cake now". as far as i understand, you either need to leave the focus alone for a given scene, or have a very good cine-cam operator who can actually "follow focus" smoothly, etc. if they can make af that can trully be controlled, be predictable, read your mind, etc, okay, fine, but meanwhile, come on, video on "big" sensors, this is cinematography, this used to be the stuff of holywood, forget the damn af and enjoy it, it's here (if you're a cinematographer, if not just ignore it). Same goes for audio: these are gimmicks, if you want proper audio, get a proper audio recorder, the camera is for image, the integrated audio is useful only for "quick ones", help syncing, etc.

i can't help wondering if people who are _really_ bothered by lack of af during video or sound quality wouldn't be better off getting one of those (overal very nicely designed) "family" video digicams, either memory based or the great sony magnetic tape ones. they seem to be the perfect tool for such purpose.

hell, one shouldn't even change exposure during a "take" as far as i understand, if serious about cinematography, that's why cinema shots look breathtaking, while the digicam ones are just "nice" (ah, it was adjusting the exposure there, right, got it now, oops, focusing,, allright, we're baaack) -- of course, with the dinamic range on those tiny sensors, you wouldn't see anything while sweeping 20degrees on a sunny day, so exposure must be adjusted, but this is the point of using these big chunky sensors instead.. (high dinamic range, color depth, "holywood here i come" on an affordabel budget)

nokia lumia is a different animal altogether: it's designed for casual use, for documenting stuff with "what you have in your pocket", so it must do a decent job with what it packs, otherwise there would be no point. But if you intend to shoot video with a dslr (so cinema-style), you better be prepared, have the equipment you need, have a proper plan in place (what you will shoot when), and a few assistants to help if possible.

anyway, rant over , of course "things could be better" etc, i'm just saying some things don't matter as much. if they want to do something really nifty, raw video is the trick imho (see blackmagicdesign ), prolly not easy due to pipeline requirements, or maybe not?

wait, this is the rumors section.

completely unreliable sources that i completely trust from inside the outside or thereabouts non-specified strategic location lead me to believe all claims about the new k-3 featuring raw video, and writing it to two cards at once for speed are blatant lies and "they" have never ever leaked such a detailed spec so "you should not even know it exists!" (quite angry here). understandably, i politely excused myself (life and limb first, sorry). make of it what you will.