[Ian Stuart Forsyth]

The only time I use up the buffer is when anticipating a move... you have a stationary subject that you think will start walking away, and you want the moment when it turns. Anticipating movement, you press the release and hold it.... but often you fill the buffer, then the critter moves and you have 23 wasted frames, which you delete with gusto, sometimes damaging the keyboard.

Not that i've ever done that.

Oh by the way, about the soft focus thing... a little pixel peeping...

4th frame and 10th frame....





For those of you who saw some really soft out of focus images, looks bad on you. .

Not only that, the tenth frame is one of the sharpest.... so much for lack of tracking ability. I'd like to see hand held panning images, from another camera that are as sharp. Someone has to step up and make a case for the D750.

Following your method of shooting My K5 and 10 year old sigma 18-200 screw drive could do the same so what's the point?
why in the 4th frame is the tail the sharpest part of the image ? at the distance that image was taken it looks to be around 15m that's almost 2 m of DOF
If you want to judge a camera how about you show the same sequence wide open so we can see the AF error ?

Shooting and judging AF performance stopped down to F8 is all but useless as it will not show what the focus error is for that the system and that is what we are interested in & the only way to judge that systems AF ( accuracy). Hiding that AF error in DOF is not showing us anything, we first have to see that error and at what limit that error start to show itself. If we base the best camera with the best AF without seeing the focus error we will always find the best system out there would be any camera using a 10mm lens at F/16.
For the 200mm F8 photographs my guess on the first few images look to be around 20m to 25m away That gives us 3m to 5m of DOF is that hard a test on any camera for AF speed ? If someone shows me the same sequence of photographs wide open so we can see the AF errors then we have a test on the capabilities of a system.

[Parallax]

Why does anyone have to show you the same sequence? You're the one claiming Nikon is better. How about you show us? You shoot the same sequence, with a D750 and a lens wide open, of a backlit black and white dog running toward you from out of the shade.
Norm showed us what he and the K-3 are capable of under normal, non controlled environment, conditions. Now let us see what you and your D750 can do under the same conditions. Doesn't that seem fair?

[normhead]

As noted above, I really don't care what you say... shoot it, that's what I'm interested in....you guys keep telling me you can hand hold an pan and get clearer images, see here's the thing. Any nay sayer can say anything. Doesn't mean he's not lying to himself. Doesn't mean he's not using a camera discussion to posture.... that doesn't mean said person doesn't over value or undervalue their gear. You've got talk. I've got images. Anyone can look at what I've done and say "good enough for me" or "not good enough for me". No one is offering me the same courtesy here has raised it's ugly head.

I go to the K-3 thread and it is full of images showing what the camera can do. Right from day one, people were showing sequences of cars coming at them, birds in flight, but Ihave to say, it's a lot easier getting a panning shot of a car, than my dog, which truly has to be tracked. So, just based on my K-3 experience, I was kind of expecting more definitive images.

I have to say, look at the first few days of the K-3 images thread and first few days here, and the Nikon D750 is a complete letdown. But then it's not a Nikon site. But does that mean we have to put up with lot of smoke and no fire?

My complaint with the D750... same IQ as K-3, slower burst, I need longer lenses for the same angle of view.

What I'm looking for , are some images that demonstrate the upside. What I get is a lot of talk. My suspicion, after this long is , if really am interested in the camera, I'll rent one next time I'm down in T.O. I was kind of hoping, to find a bit of useful information here. The usual "some camera (pick which one) is better than your camera which by the way sucks and so do your pictures" line of banter that is so prevalent here.

Personally, I'm just trying to coax some images out of you. I don't need the rest. I can talk "photography theory " or the "my camera is better than yours" theory or "your pictures suck but I won't show you mine" theory. I can argue those theories as good as anyone, and have been for 50 years, starting in 67 in my photography studio class, on the first day we had an assignment we could use a 35mm camera for, (which if memory serves me well was about week 7, before that it was all large format. So that's when I had my first Nikon vs Canon vs Pentax argument.. I can't say I've learned anything useful from that kind of banter in the 50 years I've been doing it. But I have seen some amazing pictures taken with cameras that are technical dinosaurs. There are no epiphanies to be had in talk. Let's discuss some images. Not K-3 images, D750 images. That's the name of the thread.

I was just trying to get you inspired.

I didn't want to set the bar too high.

Thanks for telling me exactly how to do this test Ian, and telling me what's wrong with mine. Is there somewhere I said my test was perfect? I'm not going to go through your whole post, but I shot ƒ8 because, when you're shooting an animal the size of a border collie coming at you you need at least ƒ8 to keep as much of the animal as possible in focus. So though you have these incredibly rigid ideas about how things can and should be done, they are just that. I know, I know, the way you would do it would be valuable, and the way I do it is worthless, which would be a wonderful thing, accept, as far as I can tell, you don't do it. MY guess looking over your stuff, is, the only person that your test would make happy would be you.

Do me a favour due, post a picture. I saw your squirrel in the 300 plus club. It's not as good as the last 5 I posted and I've never posted a squirrel image that bad.... is that the kind of discussion you want to have? Come on... "mine is bigger than yours? ..but you can't see mine". Really?. show a little maturity.

Other people's imaginary tests are always way better than my real ones.

I accepted that a long time ago.

If I want to know about tests.. I look at Digitalis' work, now that man has a knack for testing.

I don't even aspire to be as good as he is. My best doesn't approach his worst.

We all do what we're good at.

[FantasticMrFox]

I have to say, look at the first few days of the K-3 images thread and first few days here, and the Nikon D750 is a complete letdown. [...] My complaint with the D750... same IQ as K-3 ...

You judge a camera by a couple of sample images posted on this thread and conclude that its IQ isn't better than the K3? I think it's pretty much a fact that the D750 has better image quality (better high ISO performance, larger dynamic range) than the K3. When I look at samples provided online and studio test scene comparison tools, the Nikon beats the Pentax in DR and high ISO. Which is not surprising, considering we're talking a FF sensor vs. an APS-C sensor and $2,000 vs. $700. So there's no criticism of the K3 here, it delivers excellent IQ for its class and price. But I would assume that you're the only person on this planet who would seriously claim that a recent, highly acclaimed FF DSLR does not have better IQ than an APS-C competitor.

I can argue those theories as good as anyone, and have been for 50 years, starting in 67 in my photography studio class, on the first day we had an assignment ...

You have been taking pictures for a very long time, we get it.

Thanks for telling me exactly how to do this test Ian, and telling me what's wrong with mine. [...] I know, I know, the way you would do it would be valuable, and the way I do it is worthless, which would be a wonderful thing, accept, as far as I can tell, you don't do it. MY guess looking over your stuff, is, the only person that your test would make happy would be you.

Ian did exactly what you did. You criticised DPR and their totally flawed methodology, called them 'amateurs' and claimed they've no idea what they are doing. Ian simply pointed out what he saw as flaws in your methodology. But you won't take that, will you? No, you're free to slag anyone's methodology, but no one should do the same to you please.

I saw your squirrel in the 300 plus club. It's not as good as the last 5 I posted and I've never posted a squirrel image that bad ... [...] Show a little maturity.

I rest my case.

[normhead]

You're not getting it Mr. Fox. I don't want endless BS, what I'd like are some images, blah, blah blah doesn't interest me, fan boys going on about their cameras doesn't interest me, if you can't show me with an image what the difference in IQ is, I don't believe there is one. I'm outta here, as far as I'm concerned this thread is next to useless. Nothing to see here.

All that's been offered here is "blah. blah. blah".

I think it's pretty much a fact that the D750 has better image quality

OMG.. do you even read what you post? What does that say for sure? That you've been hoodwinked by the hype. What else could be gleaned by such a statement?

I suppose it's pretty much an assumption that if you pay more money for one camera than another there will be more people out there assuming that the more expensive camera is better especially if it's full frame, even when it isn't. I've actually had people argue with me that 6D images had better resolution than a K-3 despite a host of information Do you really think it's worth posting what you "think" is "pretty much a fact."

Anyway have nice lives folks... I'm outta here.

I was interested in the D750. You've pretty much convinced me, you've got nothing.

[Winder]

Winder's Album: A7II C-AF Quick Test - PentaxForums.com

These are taken with the Sony A7II. Its by no means a sports camera and the C-AF is pretty average. The first 5 images are full and the last 5 are crops. The 55mm FE F/1.8 was used which is better with the new firmware, but still considered a slow lens.

EXIF information is intact but for simplicity....
I set the camera to:
ISO 400
Shutter: 1/1000 to eliminate motion blur
Aperture floated from F/4.5 to F/6.7
Shot in RAW with LR5.7 General presets applied.

The K-3 has a higher frame rate, but I typically get the same number of keepers with the A7II as I get with the K-3. Anyone who is happy with the K-3 AF should be just as happy with a modern mirrorless camera like a Fuji or a Sony. The Sony A6000 is much better than my A7II (or the K-3) and I wish Sony had implemented that system in the A7II. The last image is about a 2:1 crop and the last image before she runs partly out of the frame. The last image is F/4.5 and just a few feet from the camera. DoF is decently narrow and the lens has to actually work to keep focus.

I've said this in other threads. Ricoh had better have seriously improved the AF for the new FF body or they will find themselves not only behind Canon and Nikon, but Fuji, Sony, and maybe even Samsung in the very near future.

[Homo_erectus]

Looks good Winder.

Man, I really wish I still had a yard so I could go do this test with my dogs.

[philbaum]

Winder's Album: A7II C-AF Quick Test - PentaxForums.com

These are taken with the Sony A7II. Its by no means a sports camera and the C-AF is pretty average. The first 5 images are full and the last 5 are crops. The 55mm FE F/1.8 was used which is better with the new firmware, but still considered a slow lens.

EXIF information is intact but for simplicity....
I set the camera to:
ISO 400
Shutter: 1/1000 to eliminate motion blur
Aperture floated from F/4.5 to F/6.7
Shot in RAW with LR5.7 General presets applied.

... The Sony A6000 is much better than my A7II (or the K-3) and I wish Sony had implemented that system in the A7II.

Thanks for the sequence Winder, very impressive test. I've been seriously looking at the A7II and its good to see it perform so well.

About implementing the A6000 system in the A7II. I'm sure that Sony tried, but its not so easy I expect. For example, the sensor is larger and has more mass. Which requires more driving force. The data files for figuring out tracking are likely larger for the larger sensor, and therefore require more processing capability that the A6000 system chips could provide.

The point is, just for discussion purposes, is that scaling up the focusing system from a smaller camera to a larger one results in unavoidable differences which will affect performance. Its not that it can't be done, given enough time and money. But....

[Winder]

Thanks for the sequence Winder, very impressive test. I've been seriously looking at the A7II and its good to see it perform so well.

About implementing the A6000 system in the A7II. I'm sure that Sony tried, but its not so easy I expect. For example, the sensor is larger and has more mass. Which requires more driving force. The data files for figuring out tracking are likely larger for the larger sensor, and therefore require more processing capability that the A6000 system chips could provide.

The point is, just for discussion purposes, is that scaling up the focusing system from a smaller camera to a larger one results in unavoidable differences which will affect performance. Its not that it can't be done, given enough time and money. But....

I had not thought about scaling and the impact on the AF.

I was actually pretty surprised by the AF performance of the A7II. Everywhere you read people talk about how bad AF tracking in with MILCs, but I think that has changed in the last year. The upper end MILCs from Sony, Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic, and even Samsung are now as good or better than the enthusiast level DSLRs for most applications.

You Tube

You Tube

[Ian Stuart Forsyth]

.

If you would talk to any action photographers that we are seldom given the opportunity LV-13 to shoot at F8 and 1/640sec granted sometimes we are.
Most of the time we are shooting in LV 9-12 on the best times and most of the time we are shooting 1/2000 sec

First series of photographs are taken at F/4 Iso 800 1/2000sec LV-12 really the upper limit of what I would normally see in my action shooting. Now these are test photographs taken setting up my second D800. Now its not taken with the D750 that has the new cluster center point AF mode belter designed for action, many of the users around here compare the D750 to that of the D4 for Af speeds. They are shot wide open to evaluate AF accuracy and speed. For the test my fastest dog Cooter .For the continual sequence I used a cluttered background to simulate the normal shooting I encounter

NO PHOTOGRPAHS are cherry pick they are all in sequence to reflect true conditions





Second with a back lite








Next LV 10 In this series you can see that Cooter picked up his pace as seen in his large more aggressive strides and even in 4 times less light the camera is still able to keep it targeted on him





Now you may ask why is it important to find out how much AF error we see in tracking
Remember the old saying aim small miss small, same thing is needed in photography. With smaller misses we need less DOF to compensate for that error in turn faster shutterspeed or less noise in the image. When we now how the system reacts we can better plan for the best setting for the needs of that shot





This final shot is a testament to what Nikon has accomplished with regard to AF
Locking onto a very fast target at a very close distance while traveling away while being accurate
Maybe tomorrow I will go into tracking and accuracy with regard to target recognition
Running thru obstacles or having a second target enter the FOV

[Homo_erectus]

Looks excellent Ian. Thanks for taking the time to shoot these and post them.

[normhead]

Thanks guys, I came back for a peak, and I'm thinking probably better than I can do with my K-3.I was looking at some of the posts in some of the Nikon forums... and while I found no K-3 comparisons, their seemed to be a common thread that compared to a D7100 or D7200 this was just a really nice camera to work with. Even they guy who is still working with his D7100 for wildlife and macro, said he loved the way the D750 functioned, in fact they saw that as the big step up, just the way the camera handled. What do you guys who have K-3's think?

[Winder]

Perhaps, but I might need more convincing... The K-3 paired to a pokey ol' long throw (non-WR) DFA 100/2.8 MACRO + HD 1.4TC seems to work fine... eh?



Cheers... M

You can grab a single frame with any camera. Show us the 4 frames before and 4 frames after that one an we can see how well the 100mm D-FA MACRO keeps up.

[normhead]

Perhaps, but I might need more convincing... The K-3 paired to a pokey ol' long throw (non-WR) DFA 100/2.8 MACRO + HD 1.4TC seems to work fine... eh?



Cheers... M

Well I agree, you can't come up with anything definitive from a few sample shots.... but, you can definitely say, the example images have some snap to their AF tracking images. I don't think you can come to any definitive answer without some side by side shooting by someone who knows both cameras, but, you have to admit, if that's what you're looking for is the kind of image in the test shots, the samples are definitely cameras you should give some of your attention. For those of us with K-3s we'll of course see what we can do with our cameras, but, if in your shooting you don't get what you want, it sure is nice to know what you might want to look at next.

Hopefully we'll get some D750 images at some point.

There's some excellent shooting there gentlemen.

[Winder]

Even they guy who is still working with his D7100 for wildlife and macro, said he loved the way the D750 functioned, in fact they saw that as the big step up, just the way the camera handled. What do you guys who have K-3's think?

I think the D750 is the best all around camera that Nikon makes and its AF is on the same level as the D4 in terms of speed. It doesn't have the D4 buffer, frame rate, or build quality, but for short bursts its a great camera. I have never used it with long glass. The kit lens is the only zoom I have used on the D750 and its pretty fast. The 85G and 58mm are the only other lenses I have gotten to play with on a D750, so not a very broad experience. If Ricoh can match or exceed the D750 AF they will have a very successful camera. I didn't use the D750 for tracking anything, but for point to point AF with kit lens it was about as fast as snapping your fingers. The advantage the D4 has with frame rate is that it minimized mirror blackout which makes it easier to keep the composition. D750 only has 6 fps while the D4s has 11.