I am glad Canon uses the APS-C format for its mirrorless cameras. Pentax and Nikon are making huge mistakes using sensors smaller even than M4/3. Moving in the other direction is Sony, with its full frame mirrorless camera. In a few years, you will find that the only M4/3, and the Nikon and Pentax mirrorless cameras for sale are found inside glass cases in your local pawnshop.
I don't know how they pick gear of the year, but it is obvious that image quality is not an important criterion.
stevevelvia50: A friend of mine still has his F3 collecting dust sadly. I pick it up from time to time, still love the feel, but keep reminding myself that I don't miss film. I think the Df looks great and would be a lot of fun to work with. I am still hoping for a D400 though. Perhaps that camera will be retro by the time it is announced LOL
D400 = D800 with an APS-C sensor selling for about the price of a D610. Is there a market for such a camera? Probably, but is it big enough for Nikon to make such a camera? Nikon so far has said no.
Saffron_Blaze: Paying $3000 for a camera because it looks good seems rather silly.
$2000 gets me a D610.$3000 gets me a D800 or a Df.The Df is a D610 with a D4 sensor.Is the D4 sensor worth the extra $1000 (minus video, and flash)?Is the D4 sensor really better than the D800's?
The Df is meant to appeal to people who like a different looking camera, not a better camera for their money.
ArunasS: In a way it's a nice camera, however D600/610 is not worse for a lot less. It's all about feeling and looks. OK, I could be possibly interested, if the size and weight is somewhere like my old lovely FM3a.
The FM series works without a battery. So, if you are working in a jungle with 100% humidity and all the electronics have gone south, you can still take pictures. There is no way any DSLR can duplicate that.
Nikon should be applauded for making this camera. There are, however, a couple things that could have been better. For example, the top plate looks plasticky, and is probably plastic. The FE camera, which is likely the camera the Df is aping, had a metal top plate. The PC flash terminal should have been put somewhere that is less conspicuous, because the camera looks ugly if you lose the cap for that terminal. The hand grip is too small. They should have made it bigger to be useful or just get rid of it. The mechanical shutter release cable also makes no sense. No one has those anymore, and they are a pain to use. I would love to see a DLSR camera that has interchangeable viewfinders, just like an F5, but with digital sensor. That would be a truly useful camera and not just a gimmick.
They should either make the hand grip beefier so that it can actually be useful rather than decorative. Or else they should just get rid of it altogether since it destroys the retro look to have one. I hope more cameras can have an ISO dial so that ISO can be set with a knob instead of the control wheel. An exposure compensation dial is also a good idea. Not sure about the mechanical remote shutter release socket because an electronic one is faster and easier to attach and use. This camera does not quite get it right, but it is a tiny step in the right direction.
This camera will allow non-AI lenses to mount, but it won't meter with them. This camera really isn't an FM for the 21st century, it is more like a F90 with the cosmetics of an FM or FE camera.
Sony should spend some money and hire a camera body designer because their new cameras are looking less and less sexy. This new body reminds me of the 1970's Japanese cars famous for their origami designs of sharp corners, like folded paper.
Alpha68: Wouldn't it be funny if Nikon is not lying this time and the only new part IS the shutter mechanism, and it has the same leaky sensor like the D600? :) Now they will have two models with leaky sensors...
The oil on the sensor comes from the shutter. The shutter has moving parts, and they need to be lubricated. If there is too much lubrication and/or the lube is not sealed, then it will leak and splatter onto the sensor. No one puts oil on their sensors.
Patco: "Some other things we enjoyed about the D600 were its solid, weather-sealed magnesium alloy body"Really? According to Nikon, only the top & rear covers are magnesium, so the body is mostly plastic.
You are right, both the D600 and the Canon 6D have nothing to brag about when it comes to build quality.
JDThomas: I've had my D700 since the day it was released. I could get more than 50% of what I paid for it if I sold it today. The D600 is less than a year old and you will be lucky to get 50% of the price if you sell today (luckily I sold mine off about 3 months after buying it).
In 5 years what is the resale value going to be on a used D600 since Nikon basically stuck a scarlet letter on it?
In the long run Nikon has forced D600 owners to hold the bag on the loss. This is great for people who buy used cameras because the D600 isn't a bad camera per se, but used camera buyers aren't the ones keeping Nikon in business. Nikon basically thumbed their noses at their loyal customers by killing the resale value of the D600.
I'm not saying the D600 is a worthless camera, far from it. It's very good in many respects, but the market perception of the camera has killed it's value thanks to the manufacturer.
If it really depreciates that much, then I don't mind cleaning the sensor everyday. All it takes is some Eclipse solution and some cotton swabs.
kecajkerugo: why so many people is talking abouit the tiny FF? Real prof. use larger format and Pentax got it: 645. For advanced amateurs the APS-C is perfect and the m4/3 can be even more.
Pentax DSLR cameras aren't even competitively priced against the competition such as the Nikon D7000. For some unknown reason, we have a group of Pentax advocates (not sure if they are even users) claiming that Pentax does not need to make a FF because they have the 645D and that FF cameras and lenses are huge behemoths, when anyone who doesn't live under a rock can see that those claims are nonsensical.
The K3 can do 8 fps, the 645D 1 frame per second. The D600 FF can shoot at 6 fps. The 645D also costs thousands more than the D600. Is the 645D really competitive against the D600? Doubtful. Stop making excuses for Pentax. The people who want a FF do not want a big hunk of camera like the 645D nor can most people afford one. Giving the people what they want is what every successful company does. Refusing to give the customers what they want is what communist government controlled companies do. It is sad to see Pentax management stubbornly refuse to yield to customer demands. Communist government warehouses are filled with unsold shoes, because the people won't buy those shoes. The only reason Pentax does not have warehouses filled with unsold cameras is because it is smart enough not to make too many of them.
Madaboutpix: Wow, those specs and first impressions sure sound auspicious! Still shooting my trusty old K-7, I suspect that now it's about time to stop skipping upgrades and start some serious saving-up for a K-3 body. I may have to wait, perhaps for years to come, but finally I hope I will get one of these. It may not make me a better photographer, yet I'm definitely itching for this tool.
As for all the fretting about the Ricoh logo below the K-3's LCD, the recent announcements, both in the camera and the lens department, make me fairly hopeful about the future of the K-mount system. Pentax's new owners may be best known for their photocopiers, but they strike me as people who care about photography. And yes, as such, they might actually be kind of proud to display their company name on a Pentax-branded body ...
Another copier maker, Konica, did not seem to care much about photography. They abandoned the Konica SLR cameras in the 1980's, and then the Minolta SLR cameras in the 21st century. Pentax is lucky that Ricoh likes being in the camera business, unlike Hoya. Nevertheless, Ricoh is not doing enough to help the Pentax brand. It needs to burn the midnight oil to come up with a full frame DSLR camera (or let those executives who resist making a full frame go, as Nikon did), instead of allowing them to invent excuses not to market one. Unlike Olympus, Pentax can make a full frame, so it has a brighter future than Olympus, but it needs to take advantage of that opportunity if it wants to be relevant in the future.
yvind Strm: I feel sincerly sorry for all those who bought a D600, who will see a drop in second hand value, and will have to live with doing regular sensor cleaning.
I think Nikon should make a limited time offer to replace the D600 with a D610. That would restore faith. But, I guess they will just count on the short memory of people.
Sigma re-released their SD1 with a new name, lowered the price with 75%, and gave those who had bought the old one a gift card for lenses, according to the price difference.On the other hand, Sigma pulled the same trick when SD15 replaced the SD14, cause there where problems a firmware update could not fix.
Reports on the Nikon FF forum suggests that even if Nikon replace shutters on the D600, it does not fix the problem. So, its probably not D610 shutters that is used.
According to Thom Hogan, if an owner sends in the D600 for service due to oily sensor, Nikon quietly replaces the shutter. So, owners of the D000 can get a free upgrade. The only difference is that Nikon won't put a new camera cover with the name D610 on the old camera
Apewithacamera: If I get this lense I'll need a good uv protector filter wood a tiffen or Hoya be ok?
B+W filters are made by Schneider and they use Schott (Zeiss) glass.
Chaitanya S: Instead of accepting issues with D600 and provide service to faulty cameras they just release a new camera leaving users of old camera frustrated. Nikon needs to get their act up soon or they will be in trouble.
Actually, according to Thom Hogan, Nikon is quietly replacing the cameras that come in for service with new shutters. I am not defending Nikon but they are not doing what you allege.
Johnsonj: No thanks. I'm getting the Lumina 1020. More useful with no oil or dust on sensor.
The Lumina? That is like settling for a Yugo after shopping for a Honda.
stuntmonkey: If there was any justice, the Pentax K-3 should get the lions share of the traffic today, not the D610 announcement.
Many people have leaped off the APS-C upgrade treadmill or they want to, because upgrading mindlessly from one APS-C model to another, year after year, without any noticeable improvement in image quality, simply makes no sense. I call it a treadmill because you can run as hard as you want but you haven't gone anywhere. Assuming that you spend $1200 average for every upgrade and you have gone through 5 upgrades, that is $6,000 spent with nothing to show for it. In the bad old days, when FF cost $3,500 to $7,000, people had no choice but to buy APS-C models. Now there are choices from Nikon and Canon that only cost them a few hundred dollars more than an "enthusiast" APS-C model. Can't blame the people for showing interest in an upgrade that is actually an upgrade.
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review