p.3 #2 · The Truth about Nikon Sensors (finally) ... for All the Sony Fanboys ...
notherenow wrote:
Interesting!
You sure you don't write the speeches for Kim Jong Un?
I can't divulge that information.
notherenow wrote:
So, taking your (revised) logic a step further, most competitons award the top three and since Sony has 66% of the top three on DXO that must mean Sony is crushing everyone (including Nikon), No?
And since the silver medal position is often called first loser, I guess Sony having 100% of the top spot is also crushing Nikon?
Oh and out of Nikon, Sony and Canon, Canon has the LOWEST rated camera (G9) on DXO too just in front of Nikon (P6000).
However you want to spin it.
I said what I said; you're the one who added to it, and said things I never said, I guess to build yourself some strawmen to beat up.
notherenow wrote:
BTW, I could not actually care less about the lists as I use the camera I want (regardless of who makes it) that suits me, that is not currently Nikon but it has been previously and may well be again at some point. I find DXO to be useful but not gospel.
If you didn't care, why respond?
notherenow wrote:
Thanks for the laugh.
You come across as resentful and butt-hurt, actually.
The truth is this, any of the "top-rated" FF sensors are absolutely excellent at this point in time, each barely ahead in some respects, barely behind in others.
Back to the subject: more than likely, the D850 will be the new high-mark of sensor excellence, and their long-standing Base ISO supremacy is a result of Nikon's tech, built on others' tech. All manufacturers build off of some kind of tech before them.
p.3 #3 · The Truth about Nikon Sensors (finally) ... for All the Sony Fanboys ...
Fascinating! I would like to know what Canon is doing (or not doing) such that, although "adequate," their sensor tech has lagged for 3 or more product cycles.
p.3 #4 · The Truth about Nikon Sensors (finally) ... for All the Sony Fanboys ...
Well you said one thing and that was clearly wrong (about the top 20), you then "spun it" to a "list" that meant you could make some sort of "victory" claim for a camera company, all I did was take your spin a bit further.
Oh and on DXO, there are 19 Nikon cameras rated lower than the lowest Sony (including my beloved D50), doesn't mean anything.
The podium at most events has three places, not 10, interesting you chose 10, why not 1 or 3 or whatever.
As for me being but hurt Nah, I just like reading your "alternative facts" and again, I love going through DXO and I do like to read their site and lists but I have never used it to buy any camera. Useful but not gospel (but I do like their Software).
I hope the D850 is as good as people want it to be, it seems very nice.
Again though it isn't for me but that doesn't mean I wont admire it or make disparaging remarks against Nikon.
I have a soft spot for Nikon and have had several Nikon cameras (film and digital) and a few Nikon lenses though only an old retired D50 and some MF primes currently.
The fact I use Sony now mainly is because they made the camera I wanted, not because it is a Sony. If Nikon (or Lego) had made it, I would be using it still.
ANY of the top 100 cameras would be just fine for their markets
p.3 #5 · The Truth about Nikon Sensors (finally) ... for All the Sony Fanboys ...
@notherenow
Don't feed him.. I already had to realise that he's all about numbers and diagrams and doesn't care for the results at all.
In his opinion, you need to have 14 stops of dynamic range to even get a decent image from a camera.
p.3 #6 · The Truth about Nikon Sensors (finally) ... for All the Sony Fanboys ...
mbphoto_2.8 wrote:
@notherenow@
Don't feed him.. I already had to realise that he's all about numbers and diagrams and doesn't care for the results at all.
In his opinion, you need to have 14 stops of dynamic range to even get a decent image from a camera.
Yeh I challenged him to show me one of his images made by his class leading cameras that he says crushes Canon and he came up empty. Lots of talk...not much walk.
Unfortunately, everything on his page is "under construction", so you cannot look at landscapes and portraits and the likes, but if you're patient, the home site will show you some of his amazing work.
It's too bad my eyes and my screen cannot cover the gazillion bits of colour information and dynamic range, because to my eyes these pictures look like something even a Canon camera can come up with.
I mean, can you imagine that? a Canon?...
p.3 #10 · The Truth about Nikon Sensors (finally) ... for All the Sony Fanboys ...
could be amongst other things. they've done it multiple times before on other products. do you know one of the reasons why most chip fabs are no longer operating in the US?
p.3 #11 · The Truth about Nikon Sensors (finally) ... for All the Sony Fanboys ...
I had a tour and made lots of photos of the IBM chip fab in Colorado Springs some years ago a week after it was shut down. There were at least two dozen labeled pipes carrying all sorts of dangerous things all over the huge place, or so said the warning signs.
p.3 #12 · The Truth about Nikon Sensors (finally) ... for All the Sony Fanboys ...
chez wrote:
Yeh I challenged him to show me one of his images made by his class leading cameras that he says crushes Canon and he came up empty. Lots of talk...not much walk.
For such a Nikon fanboy, he sure doesn't like Nikon lenses - most of what he says he uses seem to be Zeiss or Cosina (Voigtlander).
p.3 #13 · The Truth about Nikon Sensors (finally) ... for All the Sony Fanboys ...
JohnK007 wrote:
Take a look at all the sensor ratings, and Nikon builds more of the top 20 sensors than any 3 other companies put together.
Looking at their declining sales figures, it's more like Nikon builds "about 20" sensors, not "top 20"... but in reality, we know Nikon hasn't actually built any sensors since the ill-fated JFET LBCAST in the D2H.
p.3 #14 · The Truth about Nikon Sensors (finally) ... for All the Sony Fanboys ...
molson wrote:
For such a Nikon fanboy, he sure doesn't like Nikon lenses - most of what he says he uses seem to be Zeiss or Cosina (Voigtlander).
That's a lie. I have 5 Nikkor lenses, 2 Zeiss, and 1 Voigtländer. Do you lie, deliberately, just to keep talking?
The truth is, the variety of lenses I have only proves that I am a fan of what works. That means I use Nikon bodies and whatever lenses are tops for that category.
Since I am mostly a macro shooter, none of the standard macros/close-up lenses can compare to the Zeiss or Voigtländer optics. Not even in the ballpark.
On the other hand, even these lenses do not go beyond 1:1, so for greater magnification I utilize Nikkor AI-S lenses, reversed. They all produce primo results imo.
Here's an example of a 27-image stack taken @ .5x magnification with the D810 + Voigtländer Apo Macro:
Here's an example of a single-image taken @ 3.2x magnification with the D500 with a Nikkor 28mm AI-S, reversed:
Here's an example of a 50-image stack taken @ 4.1x magnification with the D810 + a Nikkor 50mm AI-S, reversed, on a Nikon PB-6 Bellows:
The clarity and micro-detail are something I enjoy, especially for this type of work.
For super-telephoto lenses, I use Nikkor. I only have one at the moment but am saving for another: the 600mm f/4E FL ED.
p.3 #15 · The Truth about Nikon Sensors (finally) ... for All the Sony Fanboys ...
mbphoto_2.8 wrote:
Unfortunately, everything on his page is "under construction", so you cannot look at landscapes and portraits and the likes, but if you're patient, the home site will show you some of his amazing work.
I am not a landscape shooter, but am working on improving in this area. I will add landscapes as time permits.
In the meantime, you can see some of my macro work, above. Below is some of my work with birds, taken with the D500 + 300 f/2.8G VR II:
I am trying to work on more and better bird shots, too.
In the meantime, you're welcome to post a few macro/bird shots of your own as a comparison
p.3 #16 · The Truth about Nikon Sensors (finally) ... for All the Sony Fanboys ...
steve807 wrote:
I had a tour and made lots of photos of the IBM chip fab in Colorado Springs some years ago a week after it was shut down. There were at least two dozen labeled pipes carrying all sorts of dangerous things all over the huge place, or so said the warning signs.
the organics used are extremely toxic. liability. my wife used to work for Bell Labs and was a process research scientist. her specialties were Chemistry and materials science. she left.
p.3 #19 · The Truth about Nikon Sensors (finally) ... for All the Sony Fanboys ...
Never said your photographs were bad, John. The macros are really awesome indeed.
How the hell do you get 27 shots of a living insect without it moving a hair? I can't even get close to them to take a single picture.. (Especially not bees or flies..)
But my point was about the camera.. Your pictures could've been taken with a Canon, Pentax, Sony, Olympus, etc.
Hell, the Canon 65mm macro could've done these without reversing anything, if I'm correct about it's specs.
But I'm not a macro person..
The only decent macro I ever took.. handheld.. and on a decade old Canon DSLR
You may continue rambling on and on about the superiority of your Nikon camera, but there hasn't been a single image that even remotely demanded the plus in dynamic range that a Nikon offers. Not even close (several stops from it, in fact!)
p.3 #20 · The Truth about Nikon Sensors (finally) ... for All the Sony Fanboys ...
mbphoto_2.8 wrote:
Never said your photographs were bad, John. The macros are really awesome indeed.
How the hell do you get 27 shots of a living insect without it moving a hair? I can't even get close to them to take a single picture.. (Especially not bees or flies..).
Thank you.
By getting up very early, when it's cold, so they (and the air) move much less.
mbphoto_2.8 wrote:
But my point was about the camera.. Your pictures could've been taken with a Canon, Pentax, Sony, Olympus, etc.
Hell, the Canon 65mm macro could've done these without reversing anything, if I'm correct about it's specs.
I had the MP-E 65mm. Great lens (the only Canon lens I miss).
Do you realize the MP-E is essentially a zoom lens, reversed and doctored with a tripod collar?
mbphoto_2.8 wrote:
But I'm not a macro person..
The only decent macro I ever took.. handheld.. and on a decade old Canon DSLR
Nice image.
For perspective, the spider I photographed would cover half your girlfriend's iris (size-wise).
Me, I am not much of a landscape person. I just take 'habitat' shots, to document the terrain, but I really concentrate on trying to do well in my macro work (or, lately, birds, etc.)
Been doing macro for 10 years ... bird, about 1.
Next year I will try to do better in both landscape and bird (and other) photography besides macro.
mbphoto_2.8 wrote:
You may continue rambling on and on about the superiority of your Nikon camera, but there hasn't been a single image that even remotely demanded the plus in dynamic range that a Nikon offers. Not even close (several stops from it, in fact!)
Camera and lenses.
It's better to have extra abilities, and not need them, then it is to need extra abilities, and not have them.
That's why I shoot Nikon ... and make every effort to buy the best lenses for the focal range(s) I am interested in that I can afford.
, all I did was take your spin a bit further.
