Nikon D810 is out (AKA which AF 85mm is best) Why?

Looks like the Nikon d180 is out,


I really like the iso 32 though
http://fstoppers.com …-announces-the-nikon-d810

and another link
http://www.dpreview.co​m …medium=text&ref​=title_0_0

canon? *crickets*

yeah that's the sad part, well as a gear collector, as a photographer, i'll pretend a new model will help my photography

Yeah, ISO 32 is pretty cool. (ISO 64 natively.)

Iso 64 native? Man, it looks like my 5DII may have to die in a fire; if this thing had an EF mount I'd have it on pre-order already.

eventhough iso 50 on my camera isn't native, but I use it a lot for my style of shooting.

i'm guessing that the iso 32 won't be as sharp or as good dynamic range as shooting iso 64?

Non-native ISOs are generated internally by the camera.

ISO 50 on the 5D3 is ISO 100 overexposed 1 stop and then fixed via software in camera. It has slightly worse dynamic range than ISO 100 untouched.

So this is the D800s we saw rumours about a couple of weeks ago. Looks intersting

It sounds like ISO 64 does not afford any greater DR than ISO 100, so it's not quite as exciting as it might seem at first glance. Of course, it's still a very welcome addition for fast prime users shooting in the midday sun.

Damn. I have to admit this makes me feel like going after instead of waiting in hope for something in 2015.

brettjrob wrote in post #16995026
It sounds like ISO 64 does not afford any greater DR than ISO 100, so it's not quite as exciting as it might seem at first glance. Of course, it's still a very welcome addition for fast prime users shooting in the midday sun.

Where does it say that?

The only way ISO 64 can have less DR than ISO 100 is if they've gone backwards on the sensor design.

It really depends if it will be 100 with some software backing it up, or real 64 and no software enhancement behind it.
I guess we will have to wait and see.

Eyal wrote in post #16995077
It really depends if it will be 100 with some software backing it up, or real 64 and no software enhancement behind it.
I guess we will have to wait and see.

The announcement says ISO 64 is native.

Shadowblade wrote in post #16995072
Where does it say that?

The only way ISO 64 can have less DR than ISO 100 is if they've gone backwards on the sensor design.

Well, it says they have the same DR on the OP's first link:

http://fstoppers.com …-announces-the-nikon-d810

I imagine it's just a case of poor wording. Even the "fake" ISO 50 on our current cameras doesn't have less DR than ISO 100; it's just shifted from the highlights to shadows. Presuming the highlights aren't clipped any lower with ISO 64 than ISO 100 on the D810, then the DR ought to be at least slightly better, so long as the read noise isn't a limiting factor. Doubt it would be with Exmor.

brettjrob wrote in post #16995090
Well, it says they have the same DR on the OP's first link:

http://fstoppers.com …-announces-the-nikon-d810

I imagine it's just a case of poor wording. Even the "fake" ISO 50 on our current cameras doesn't have less DR than ISO 100; it's just shifted from the highlights to shadows. Presuming the highlights aren't clipped any lower with ISO 64 than ISO 100 on the D810, then the DR ought to be at least slightly better, so long as the read noise isn't a limiting factor. Doubt it would be with Exmor.

I read that to mean that, when shooting at ISO 64, you won't lose any DR as compared with shooting at ISO 100, as you do with current sensors with a base of ISO 100. As in, it's a native DR, not an ISO 100 shot that's been pulled back by 2/3 of a stop.

At a native ISO 64, you should get two-thirds of a stop greater DR than at ISO 100, given the same electronics and sensor design.