My First Real Shooting Experience
I went out to a wildlife preserve under beautiful sunny conditions (and muddy from previous rain). I came back a happy dude. I have to say, this camera takes pictures every bit as good, actually better, than my old RTS III could when loaded with Reala. I shot at ISO 100 under super contrasty situations with harsh specular sun reflections, and could not hope for better.
POWER SOURCE
I shot about 140 shots in about two hours with the included Sanyo batteries charged with the Powerx charger. After 70 shots, the camera went dead. I was shooting in Continuous drive - I have heard about possible lock-ups in C mode? Turning the switch off then back on restored it, and I was able to shoot another 70 or so more before it went dead again. Another off-on let me shoot another couple before it was really dead. I had more batteries but I was done anyway.
AUTOFOCUS
The sensor selection controls are intuitive and very well designed. I had no problems with the autofocus, except when too close (out of range). Under some low light situations some hunting occured but nothing overtly annoying. As mentioned in other posts, this is not "action photography" response, but I had no problems getting quick focus on swans moving around in a pond with the 70-300 at full tele.
LENSES
Had the 24-85 and 70-300 (not a light lens, but beautifully balanced). No need to elaborate - typical Zeiss excellent quality, sharp, crisp, beautiful tones. No zoom creep or looseness. Flare only when sun straight in front, and then very tight and controlled with little or no degradation of surrounding area. I really like how the display (when set up accordingly) shows you the actual effective f-stop set by the lens mechanism as you zoom in and out.
METERING
I shot everything in straight matrix mode, as I wanted to get a feel for its behavior. A couple of times I also shot with exp compensation to compare. My conclusion is, unless you are doing specific spot metering analysis based on your familiarity with the sensor characteristics, shoot straight. Yes they may look under exposed, but it appears to me this is done intentionally to preserve the extensive tonal range especially at the highlights. Remember we are dealing with a two-phase process, recording and presenting. The two mediums have very different characteristics and need to be optimized independently of each other. In recording you want to optimize the capture of the full range of the specific image. If there are sharp highlights, it's best to under-expose to prevent wash-out.
OVERALL FEEL
Just like using my old Contax equipment - great ergonomics overall. I do wish you could easily see the current ISO though - didn't we use to have a big frame in the back for this?
PRINTS
I did a quick one-minute monitor gamma calibration to the Kodak 8500 printer so I could judge density. With a quick adjustment to the shot's gamma to bring the sensor's tonal range to the printer's, and minor teaks to brightness, contrast and saturation, I had a great print set up in less than a minute of mouse pushing (trackball rolling in my case). No rocket science here, just good old-fashioned photographic eye-balling. I'm not even using Photoshop - just a cheap $70 organizing & cataloguing program (ThumbPlus). Hell you can use MS Photoeditor which is included with Win NT/2K/XP. Sure, you want to make selective image changes, then there's Photoshop or one of its cheaper variations, but this is a digital darkroom decision based on image content regardless of which camera you use. The results coming out of the Kodak thermal printer could not have made me any happier.
PARTING THOUGHTS
Beautiful prints from difficult images in four minutes from loading the image on the screen to warm print in your hand - enough said. For me, it works beautifully within the parameters indicated. As always, your mileage will vary because your needs may be different in some respects (e.g. Marc). Sure, I'll be pissed if I find waiting a couple more weeks I could have saved $1500!
Cheers,
DJ