BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chosun Juan" data-source="post: 3608741" data-attributes="member: 92780">Vespo,I agree, those are some strange results from PTP re the Oly. I  would expect it to go D750 > D500 》Oly EM-1 II for ISO performance.  I mainly posted it because Bill has been the first I've seen to attempt to quantify the D850's SNR and ISO performance  (albeit 'constructed' and 'reverse engineered' as opposed to tested). At least within that site, and in relation to the D810, it's a more or less apples to apples comparison (or crunchy sweet round red fruit that keeps Doctors away anyway! <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />To get the D750's ISO performance  (or more) at near double the resolution, and nearly 50% more speed is quite the achievement I think   :t:As for the WBSE, I really don't know what's specifically going on - crunching the numbers between flight speed, panning, and shutter speed, the maximum distance the bird could have moved (relatively) is ~0.5 - ~1cm. Worst case that might result in some of the softness, but parts like the beak are as sharp as you could expect. It's more a matter of the lack of detail in the areas I mentioned ...... that could be due to atmospheric conditions as you say, perhaps in combination with the angle and quality of the light, which looks reasonably oblique, low, and soft - almost back lighting large portions of the near-side rear of the bird.    :cat:I'm sure other shots down the track will be much better at showing the capability - I really can't see what all the fuss is about over on DP where both Nikon's and the Pro's shots are for the majority bagged??  They've obviously (well to me anyway) been selected with great care as far as colour, lighting, and composition goes, to show off the camera's ability to handle high contrast situations and/or low lighting, and speed. The results seem pretty good. Some noise here and there, and maybe soft focus on the water skier (but he ain't exactly hangin' around to generate a rooster tail like that! :eek!:  <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> , and FWIW, I think the last of the Pro's sample shots of the athlete holding the ball is deliberately focused on the ball to demonstrate off-centre ability, and for nice artistic taste.Technique and lens quality obviously play large parts, but really, if the 28MP Samsung NX-1 (APS-C sized, also BSI CMOS sensor) that everyone raved about 3 years ago, was scaled to FF size, it would be 63MP !!!  :eek!:  So 45.7MP is no dramas at all - I hope we get to see some properly controlled, technically shot and processed 'actual production unit' images soon .....  :cat:I'm still very keen to give the D850 a go, but I've got a good 6months to a year to wait, and watch, and trial, - so no hurry  <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification