There's already a competing model for S90/S95 from Nikon.... Besides, mirrorless was meant for more slightly professional/advance user, especially for DSLR users, who doesn't want to carry their DSLR anywhere they go, yet they want to have a camera which has performance close to DSLR.

Anyway, I'm not sure where you are going, it seems you're supporting the smaller sensor or not happy that I mentioned the ISO capability of the S90/S95? Well, I'm just saying based on the mirrorless market.
There's already recent news about Canon mirrorless (not sure rumor or real); Whether it's real or not, imagine this, Nikon come up with small sensor mirrorless, then after that, Canon come up with say APS-C size sensor? Does it have to wait until someone come up with something good only need to wake up?

Well, whatever it is, the fact is, many users out there were disappointed to hear about the small sensor size for mirrorless, especially if it's a Nikon, as I have mentioned. Anyone is free to like or dislike it, whatever decision they make, it's impossible to satisfy everyone, there will be people who think they prefer smaller size, it doesn't matter; but I think as a mirrorless camera and based on the market standard, many people will prefer a bigger size sensor and a good competitor to current mirrorless camera.

1. Imagine Nikonians who wanted a mirrorless, disappointed with Nikon's and have to get other brands.
2. Imagine Nikon come up with true professional mirrorless, with bigger sensor and is giving the others in the same market a good run. Nikonians would be happy to get it; Imagine if they provide the adapter in the package, to mount current DSLR lens.

Based on above, I think point 2 sounds way better and there is more potential on selling the unit, plus, many Nikon DSLR owners might get one? If Canon doesn't offer the same, who knows, there might also be people jumping ship for this reason, especially those normal consumer.

Well, just my cheap 2 shutter clicks. It doesn't change any fact or what decision they already/will make anyway; I just hope/wish for a good mirrorless from Nikon that can give the current mirrorless rivals a good competition.

Don't need EVIL camera for that, they can do it in their compact cameras; which more "consumer" will buy, those who don't bother about changing lens, want a small pocketable camera like Canon S95, Nikon P300, etc.

Those mirrorless, need to mount lens, need to clean sensor? when want zoom lens, it become bulky. If use prime lens (pancake), normal consumer will complain as they will want to zoom, etc. Even the latest GF3, it maybe small, but once mount a zoom lens, it's not really small anymore. No matter what, it won't fit into those small pocketable compact size camera like the likes of S95, P300, which is so small and compact.

If fall to your hand, not for "sports" shooting liao; I think will be your previous signature.

Just kiddin~

huh? Where got fix?

50mm on DX is about 75mm on FX

haha, I think there is a confusion here, CY mean 50mm on DX body is like 75mm on FX body.

Thus, I don't see anything need to be fix, seems the intepretation is different from different people.

As said above, misintepretation. normally, people talk about focal length on DX equivalent of FX. not the other way around.
A dx or fx lens, mount on DX need to multiply 1.5x, so usually people talk and intepret as the equivalent on FX, instead of FX equivalent on DX.

I also got, but very "young" version



This post has been edited by Andy214: Aug 2 2011, 01:14 AM

LoL! Nice one, especially the last 2

Did you wait for the VR to settle/kick-in before taking photo?
The 55-200 is very light, very unstable when hand-held without VR, even with fast shutter you still can get blur shots.

Wait for the VR to kick in and make sure your shutter is not too low as well.

Depend on your usage, for "normal" use, it's should be OK, it's like kitlens quality I suppose?

It's slow to focus, and also take some time for the VR to "settle" down. When it does, you should be able to get reasonable sharp photo; At 200mm wide open it maybe softer tough, if I'm not wrong.
Since you already get it, just learn to use it and utilize it (as well as gain more experience); If you decide to sell, you can use it until you found a buyer, or trade for other lens.
Make it worth.

Let's say the metering is correct and not affected by the background. Metering at 0 or over, I suppose it'll work like filling in?

In Manual mode, if you're way underexpose, the flash might not have enough power to lit up the environment or bring to proper exposure. So, it really depends; For me, I see the output of the picture, I don't want the Flash too bright as well as the photo underexpose. So, need to get it about right.

I'm not sure if there is a way like "flash metering" in the camera, so you don't have to guess or after flash, then see your flash whether it blinks? Anybody?

And by the way, sometimes when taking photos, the pictures turn out muddy; It seems like the focus did not acquire correctly or there is not enough contrast, but the focus did lock on. Until we zoom in from the camera, then we can see how "muddy" the picture is, the noise/grain destroying the details of the face. However, when it locks on accurately, the same settings, the picture will turn out great.
Any ideas? It's annoying especially if you have to keep review in detail to make sure. Is this due to not enough contrast or focusing problem?

Actually it depends, if you're 100% confident then you probably can?
But IF because of "face", then ONLY to find out the picture did not focus correctly, or the eyes close, or the person didn't smile, etc. That's worst? I'd said, better not to act pro.

Also, reviewing picture is not just about confident you get that shot, it's about making sure you get everyone smiling in the picture and looking good; If you don't review the picture, as a client, I will think, "are you sure I look good in the picture???"; Some people after you took their photo, they want to know or even see the picture, then if not satisfied because they didn't look good (expression, face angle, etc), they want to re-take.

If you're talking about action scene or let's say walk in. Then probably you don't really have the luxury or time to review every photo as you need to get that shot. BUT you still somehow need to make sure you nail it correctly; Imagine after the scene finish, you review, NONE of your shots can be used. The key for this is probably you need to be ready before hand; You may have a short time for "quick" review just to make sure it's right, else, just prepare before hand.

Thanks. I wonder what's causing the AF accuracy, possibly not enough contrast? It's on wide angle at f/5.6 shooting group, sometimes get these kind of "muddy" shot, not sure where it locks on, re-take again might be able to get it right. If happen at longer focal length on smaller subject, I suppose it's higher chance of back focusing? The main problem is it's not really visible in the viewfinder... what about FX viewfinder?

Yet another detail review from him. Surprised to see the bokeh quality of the Sigma there, wooot~

Thanks~
I suppose probably due to the smaller aperture which causes less light thus less contrast? I think the main issue, it's hard to be sure whether the focus is spot on from the small viewfinder, only after reviewing+zoom-in, then need to re-take.

Consider whole image I think, for those which cannot find where it actually lock focus on. For those I can find, then I know where it focus at; For wide angle, this should be less issue.

Yea, at f/5.6 on wide angle should dispel most problems, that's why I use smaller aperture; unless it gives inaccurate focus. What I notice is, sometimes it's able to lock accurately, sometimes it doesn't at same setting, same distance, etc. What I do is, I focus somewhere else, then focus back on the area; If I don't do that, somehow it's not able to re-focus correctly sometimes.

The viewfinder looks fine, focus indicator locks on, on small display, it looks like ok (but noticeable for experienced people), but once zoom in, you can see very clearly. Still trying to figure out how to "tackle" this while shooting.

Basically muddy is like noise/grain smudge destroying the details; If it's spot on, even high ISO, you still get nice clean detail, but when it's not, it's lie out of focus and the many details are lost.

Btw, regarding printing photos, does anybody print photos here? If yes, do you convert to CMYK or what did you do so that the print output colour is similar?

I notice the printed colour, is more dull, just like mentioned with sample, in this article. The bright red, turns dark red in prints.
http://www.printingforless.com/rgb-cmyk.html

If you're talking about AUTO-FOCUS in video, then of course, it's due to the lens.

I guess the person who complain or write the statement about the noise need to understand it first. If Canon offers auto-focus for video, it most probably have same issue.

With kit lens, you should have less problem with manual focus anyway, especially if you're using smaller aperture and more if you're on wider angle.
But anyway, you'll get a hang of it after a while; Plus, you'll most probably want to manual focus because the auto-focus might not always focus on what you want or it may keep try to acquire focus during recording and it can be annoying.

Manual focus in video is far easier than manual focus shooting stills.

Are you sure, how did you test?

It may focus on the background if you did not focus "correctly".

Lately, seems many "interesting" question?

The yellowish should be due to WB. If you don't want to mess with Custom WB and those sort, you can try to correct the WB in LR, and also using the recovery slider.

That is possible with spot metering as it meter for the spot, if the spot is dark, it will increase the exposure. You can use EV compesation, but this means to review and re-take, Or you can use backeting?
I face this problem too, due to changing situation, some photos get overblown and since it's an event, for moving or scene which you can't always review the picture, it's bad. So, I switch back to M mode.
The bad part of M mode is, if the lighting changes drastically during the "duration", it'll affect your photo unless you notice it and quickly adjust, but this is kind of hard (example: Wedding March In, you can use M mode, when you take the people behind the couple later, which doesn't have spotlight, the will turn out darker than the couple shots).

Depends, sometimes, you want the ambience/mood, sometimes, you want the skin color; especially if you're shooting people (especially girls); Imagine their face turn out yellow or orangy or dark when they have fair skin?

And the ISO is not really high especially if you're shooting wedding reception indoor where it's low light, and you're shooting group which requires smaller aperture most of the time.

If you underexpose, then it will be worst, the noise will be more apparent and muddy. So, if you underexpose, you will think or have the mindset that the camera cannot go higher ISO, when in fact, it's not the camera's fault.