Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-19-2009, 06:18 AM   #1
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,237
Nikon about to enter "Micro-DX" format?

Hmmm... Not sure how I feel about this. (So, someone tell me how I should feel about it )

Nikon's new MX lenses? [Page 1]: Nikon SLR Lens Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

10-19-2009, 06:37 AM   #2
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,911
mirrorless is the future
the small DSLR market will eventually fold into the EVIL concept
10-19-2009, 06:55 AM   #3
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Western Missouri
Posts: 429
That's a 180 degree shift from what I've read in the past about the MX format but then all of this is simple rumor. The idea of a sharp little rangefinder-like camera, about the size of my Olympus Stylus Epic but with live view, with a trio of lenses sounds kind of fun. If they can get the resolution from the lenses required to print up to 8x10 it would be amazing.
10-19-2009, 07:22 AM   #4
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,237
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by B Grace Quote
That's a 180 degree shift from what I've read in the past about the MX format but then all of this is simple rumor. The idea of a sharp little rangefinder-like camera, about the size of my Olympus Stylus Epic but with live view, with a trio of lenses sounds kind of fun. If they can get the resolution from the lenses required to print up to 8x10 it would be amazing.
.

In my book, none of it matters if everything over ISO 800 looks like crap.

Sometimes these small lenses have a lot of barrel distortion, also. But it does seem interesting.

10-19-2009, 08:06 AM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,911
barrel distortion and nasty CA is to be expected
the key is to designing the lens uniform enough so that these things are easily corrected in software
10-19-2009, 09:50 AM   #6
Veteran Member
awo425's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NYC, USA
Posts: 481
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
Hmmm... Not sure how I feel about this. (So, someone tell me how I should feel about it )

Nikon's new MX lenses? [Page 1]: Nikon SLR Lens Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
I know I will pass on mirrorless DSLR system. If I need something small, G11 will be enough for me, IQ and price are more than adequate .
10-19-2009, 09:53 AM   #7
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,575
QuoteOriginally posted by awo425 Quote
I know I will pass on mirrorless DSLR system. If I need something small, G11 will be enough for me, IQ and price are more than adequate .
Have you shot it back to back with a u4/3 camera? The G11 is actually not particularly small, and in my experience no matter how good the small sensor camera, u4/3 will crush it at higher iso.

That said, the G11 gets bonus UI points for having an iso dial.

10-19-2009, 03:13 PM   #8
Damn Brit
Guest




Perhaps Pentax should look at producing something with the old 110 mount. There was a decent range of lenses in that format, they would probably just need reworking instead of redesigning.
10-21-2009, 07:25 AM   #9
Veteran Member
awo425's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NYC, USA
Posts: 481
I've seen samples from G11 at ISO1600 & ISO3200. I am yet to see anything from u4/3 that come even close to this.
And the main point for me, putting tele zoom, even something compact like my SMC F 70-210 on a small body like 4/3 without pronounced grip, zumming it and holding still in front of my face is ergonomically a nightmare. I consider micro 4/3 idea a cute toy for geeks, not a tool.

QuoteOriginally posted by nostatic Quote
Have you shot it back to back with a u4/3 camera? The G11 is actually not particularly small, and in my experience no matter how good the small sensor camera, u4/3 will crush it at higher iso.

That said, the G11 gets bonus UI points for having an iso dial.
10-21-2009, 09:01 AM   #10
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,575
QuoteOriginally posted by awo425 Quote
I've seen samples from G11 at ISO1600 & ISO3200. I am yet to see anything from u4/3 that come even close to this.
And the main point for me, putting tele zoom, even something compact like my SMC F 70-210 on a small body like 4/3 without pronounced grip, zumming it and holding still in front of my face is ergonomically a nightmare. I consider micro 4/3 idea a cute toy for geeks, not a tool.
Well, interesting opinion but I know some very good photographers who like shooting u4/3. I personally can't quite warm to the format but I see the appeal.

So you're saying that you've seen shots online from a G11 at iso 1600 that are better than equivalent shots from EP1 or G1/GH1/GF1? Have you worked with the raw files?
10-22-2009, 11:10 AM   #11
Veteran Member
awo425's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NYC, USA
Posts: 481
Yes, there are plenty samples around from different sources.
The ideal experiment would be to buy micro 4/3 system and try it, but I see it as a pointless experiment.

QuoteOriginally posted by nostatic Quote
Well, interesting opinion but I know some very good photographers who like shooting u4/3. I personally can't quite warm to the format but I see the appeal.

So you're saying that you've seen shots online from a G11 at iso 1600 that are better than equivalent shots from EP1 or G1/GH1/GF1? Have you worked with the raw files?
10-22-2009, 04:20 PM   #12
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,575
QuoteOriginally posted by awo425 Quote
Yes, there are plenty samples around from different sources.
The ideal experiment would be to buy micro 4/3 system and try it, but I see it as a pointless experiment.
Are the samples raw files or jpgs? imho jpg files mean very little.

I've actually shot EP1, G1 and GF1. Of all three I like the output from the EP1 the best, but none are in my bag at the moment. Right now u4/3 occupies an interesting niche and it really depends on what your needs are. I'm holding out for a compact APS-C because I haven't been happy with the Panny u4/3 files.

I'm close to picking up an S90 though as I'd like to have something *really* compact that still shoots raw. I haven't handled a G11 yet but it seems significantly bigger.
10-22-2009, 09:19 PM   #13
Veteran Member
roentarre's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 11,787
I love micro four thirds as long as range finder lenses could be used on these cameras. However, panasonic or olympus sensors really sucked.

Good to see these lenses working on nikon cmos
10-22-2009, 09:36 PM   #14
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,354
QuoteOriginally posted by nostatic Quote
I'm close to picking up an S90 though as I'd like to have something *really* compact that still shoots raw. I haven't handled a G11 yet but it seems significantly bigger.
Have you considered the Ricoh GRD III? I had a GX100 and while I was happy with the IQ, it was the controls and user interface that blew me away. Like a dSLR with 2 control "wheels" but also neat features like stepped zoom, snap/hyperfocal focus, customizable buttons and settings, etc...
10-22-2009, 10:39 PM   #15
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,575
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
Have you considered the Ricoh GRD III? I had a GX100 and while I was happy with the IQ, it was the controls and user interface that blew me away. Like a dSLR with 2 control "wheels" but also neat features like stepped zoom, snap/hyperfocal focus, customizable buttons and settings, etc...
I have shot a GRD2. I love Ricoh but I don't really see the world at 28mm. I'm interested to see if the GX300 comes out, and there also are rumors of Ricoh making an APS-C sensor small cam. It is hard to beat my DLux4 for small sensor at the moment...there really isn't a compelling competitor that gives significant advantages. The X1 still has my greatest interest, in part because it is rumored to have little/no AA filter. And while 35mm isn't an "ideal" FOV for me, if the glass is up to real Leica quality and the sensor is good, the almost perfect UI makes a package that is hard to beat...as long as one can swallow the $2K price tag.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
nikon
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Poor man's Nikon" Naturenut General Talk 21 10-12-2010 07:47 PM
"Micro Macro: A Little Close-up Prime With Big Results" jhaji Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 23 02-27-2010 08:46 AM
"Nikon Girl" Music Video ColonelPanic Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 19 12-13-2009 12:06 AM
"Hunger for a DA*50-135?" or "The DA*50-135 as a bird lens!" or "Iron age birds?" Douglas_of_Sweden Post Your Photos! 4 08-13-2008 06:09 AM
First attempt at "micro" Wasp & Bee GLThorne Post Your Photos! 16 03-21-2007 11:45 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:11 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top