Nikon D5

[Akira]

I think Sony's fault is lied in the corporate's nature of the quest for profit: they want it the source of licensing business.  They made a big mistake with the Beta video cassettes, and those dreadful memory sticks (do you remember them?!).  I'm not sure if Sony is making the same mistake again...

[Jørgen Ramskov]

Sony made the MiniDisc as well, which was somewhat of a succes but far from as big as it could have been.

It's the disadvantage of the quick improvements in the technology world we see, current technology and standards regularly only have a limited life time before being replaced by something better. USB has improved and given quite stupid alternate names, but it is a very popular and the latest connector standard, USB Type C, have a decent chance of becomming very widely used. It's resonably small, can transfer at speeds up to at least 40Gbps (Thunderbolt 3), supports displayport and provide enough power for charging most laptops as well. The first desktop monitors with USB Type C has arrived which means you can simply connect your laptop with USB Type C (the Macbook was the first) to the monitor and have it charge your laptop while using it as an external display. Smartphones are starting to switch to this standard too. There's of course the ugly part: Apple IOS devices, it would be great if they switched too.

I love this XKCD comic about standards: https://xkcd.com/927/ (and for those who aren't aware, there's extra info in the mouse-overs on XKCD comics)
</off topic>

[Thomas G]

Sony made the MiniDisc as well, which was somewhat of a succes but far from as big as it could have been.

It's the disadvantage of the quick improvements in the technology world we see, current technology and standards regularly only have a limited life time before being replaced by something better. USB has improved and given quite stupid alternate names, but it is a very popular and the latest connector standard, USB Type C, have a decent chance of becomming very widely used. It's resonably small, can transfer at speeds up to at least 40Gbps (Thunderbolt 3), supports displayport and provide enough power for charging most laptops as well. The first desktop monitors with USB Type C has arrived which means you can simply connect your laptop with USB Type C (the Macbook was the first) to the monitor and have it charge your laptop while using it as an external display. Smartphones are starting to switch to this standard too. There's of course the ugly part: Apple IOS devices, it would be great if they switched too.

I love this XKCD comic about standards: https://xkcd.com/927/ (and for those who aren't aware, there's extra info in the mouse-overs on XKCD comics)
</off topic>

For all the non IT-holics, non technical educated, non readers of 'Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance' , all whatsoever people who like to decipher these great comics, please proceed here.

Why is there no standard bayonet to attach whatever lens we want to use to any camera?

[MILLIREHM]

Nikon D5 is reported to have an eyepoint of 17mm which is 1 mm (CORRECTED) less than the D4S

Also detected a new Exposure metering method the "Highlight-Weighted Metering Mode"
Funny enough I then found out that the D810 and D750 are already equipped with that feature. Proves me again that I was deeply off-photography and new techologies for a while ;-)

[Ilkka Nissilä]

Nikon D5 is reported to have an eyepoint of 17mm which is 1 mm left

True, but the Df has 15mm and it works great. I think the ocular design and how recessed it is affects how well one can see the corners with glasses on and eyepoint alone does not tell the whole story.

I do find the D750 with 21mm eyepoint significantly easier to use than the D810 with 17mm. But I have acquired glasses which are very flexible and I can make do with 17mm, though I would like more.

Also detected a new Exposure metering method the "Highlight-Weighted Metering Mode"

I think it works quite well but I tend to forget to return it to regular matrix when I'm no longer needing it, and then exposure chaos results.  I try to keep the camera as much as possible in the same mode always (though I do switch between manual and aperture priority).

[Bjørn Rørslett]

The bezel design and depth of  the ocular needs to be taken into consideration when eye point distances are compared. Most people on the 'net forgot this when the description of the Nikon Df was published thus arriving at entirely false conclusions.

I used the D5  and found the finder bright and easy to observe even with my glasses on. Quite similar to the Df experience in fact.

[Tersn]

Ole J. Liodden has an interesting report of his beta-testing of the D5 on wildlife in the arctic. The D5 looks like an impressive camera!
http://oleliodden.com/photo-gear/field-reviews/beta-test-report-nikon-d5/

[MILLIREHM]

I was and am aware that a simple number (expressing one dimension) does not tell the whole story, and not replace experience. Good that D5s viewer is found to be useful asides parameter-picking

[MILLIREHM]

... has to be eyepoint 1 mm less than D4s (not "left" - must have been very tired)- sorry

[Frank Fremerey]

Ole J. Liodden has an interesting report of his beta-testing of the D5 on wildlife in the arctic. The D5 looks like an impressive camera!
http://oleliodden.com/photo-gear/field-reviews/beta-test-report-nikon-d5/

Thank you for the link. Mouth watering stuff. AF and HighISO is
what I really use. I am also interested in AF performance with fast
primes like the 1.4 and 1.8 series I really love.

[Marc]

I just recognized that Nikon Switzerland offers both versions, the CF configuration approx. USD 150.- more expensive

I found both the CR & XQD are the same price here from Switzerland's Digitec @ CHF6999 
CF- https://www.digitec.ch/EN/s1/product/nikon-d5-body-cf-2133mp-fotokamera-5674933
XQD- https://www.digitec.ch/de/s1/product/nikon-d5-body-xqd-2133mp-fotokamera-5671668?tagIds=520

[stenrasmussen]

Here's a little ISO 12800 "comparison" between the Df and the D5. Bear in mind that these are just snaps of the cameras' screen with the D5 showing off its 2x pixels compared to the Df. Despite that it is quite clear to me that the jpegs from the D5 are better.

[stenrasmussen]

Here at ISO equivalent 204800...

[Andy]

Sten, many thanks for sharing.

So we know, the D5 "is" better. Good. Which triggers the next question, where the improvement is coming from? (The screen usually displays the JPEG file, or the JPEG part of the NEF file)
a) mostly from the sensor
b) mostly from the more sophisticated image algorithms of the EXPEED 5 branded CPU (which might have much more power)
c) a combination of both - most likely, but is (a) or (b) the bigger contributor ?

questions, questions, questions

thanks again,
Andy

[stenrasmussen]

Very appropriate questions Andreas.
Ad a: My guess is that the sensor and its read out pipeline contributes (there is less empty space between the sensels).
Ad b: The D5 (and D4s) has a built in "3D noise reduction" (kind of like the mask option in adobe camera raw) which may contribute.
Ad c: I hope a is the bigger contributor.

"A back of the envelope calculation" in my head says the D5 is somewhere between 0.5-1 stop better in the jpeg department. Raw files are still unavailable (even the promotional pros (Dixie, Ole Jørgen, etc) had only jpegs at their disposal. My hope is that the leap in raw files is 1/2-2/3's of a stop better. That makes me optimistic that the D500 may be very close to the Df/D750 in the ISO 4000-10000 range.