iAPX: Why remove the optical viewfinder?!?
That is for me the most interesting feature of the X20, compared to my Leica C, or a future Sony RX100 III. I would prefer to have an usable optical viewfinder instead a big sensor: I value the ability to frame and see the field (including outside the frame to anticipate action), more than IQ by itself.
I was just thinking the same thing. Zoom coupled, framing lines, , exposure info, etc. The X20 is/was a sweet camera.
RuthC: Congratulations, MarkByland, on coming second in this weekly challenge, with your misty Mt. Elmore capture. It is a very evocative picture, with interesting shades of light and dark, all soften by the areas of fog. (I would have loved to see this in colour.) Ruth :-)
Thank you, RuthC. This was such a spur of the moment shot, too. You know, I edited this in color and it didn't seem to reach out and grab me like it did in monochrome. I shoot black and white in-camera and, as you know, Lightroom converts it back to color. Once I saw the change, I edited it a little and right back to mono it went! I really do have a thing for B&W images. Thank you for your comment!
What about the misleading terminology of "getting more reach"? After working in two different camera shops, I've heard a lot of customers use this misnomer when referring to 4/3 sensors. Claiming that some how a lens of, say, 100mm focal length will some how bring them closer to the subject. This is wrong. I've often thought that instead of the phrase "Crop Factor", it should be called "Field of View Crop." Because that's exactly what it is. The focal length of the lens doesn't change when it's on a camera of different sensor size. The focal point of the lens does not change. Ultimately, you just see less of the field of view which leads people to believe that they are some how magically getting more distance or "reach" out of a lens. Entirely untrue. Due to the nature of a smaller sensor, you just see less of the FOV in front of the camera given the same focal length lens that was not designed for equivalency.
Oh, will the state PLEASE put Walmart through the worst possible outcome imaginable. And I hope the photographer's widow counter sues and wipes their sorry asses off of the face of this planet. Welfare mooching bunch of greedy bastards. I hate Walmart and every thing it stands for.
Mapel: This is very interesting... and that tree is really huge!
It truly is awful that trees that were around before Jesus was supposedly was born have been cut down. Yay, progress.
Vimeo has the worst streaming capability and stability of any video service on the internet yet is the choice of many. Why? I can't make it 20 seconds in to the video without lag catching up. I gave up on watching the video.
Master Yoda: First, the new Canon M and now this new Nikon 1 . . . both "NOT FOR SALE IN THE USA". Personally, I wouldn't buy either one but it would seem they are waiving the white flag with the USA with these kind of cameras and probably doing us a favor LOL. Meanwhile, Fuji, Oly and Panny continue to move forward.
Oh, but I never said 100%, I said "most." You can not argue that. You're at DPReview, a known gear head hangout.
How is Nikon not moving forward here? Perhaps they've chosen to not release this in the US market because they know the US market is people with ADD when it comes to brand loyalty. They understand most American photographers are just gear heads. Why would they release a camera to market where people wouldn't make good use of a camera like this. They know that all people are going to do is bitch. because it wasn't made with advancements that weren't all built by the same electronics monopoly with a name that starts with $.
Always loved Dakine packs. They've made great stuff for the snowboard world for years. Check out Burton's photo packs, as well. Real world stuff for real world outdoor shooting by people that actually do.
<troll>I don't actually own a Sony A7. Like most people didn't own the 5DIII or D600 when they came out but saw fit to hop on the bandwagon and complain. But this is me marching in the street anyway. With torches and flaming cocktails beckoning answers in regard to the A7 bayonet light leak I just read about. Nice firmware update.</troll>
The second of my two now disqualified entries clearly satisfied every "rule" for this challenge. I would like to DQ the host.
MarkByland: I didn't see it in the specs, but can this do Sidereal Rate for longer term night sky exposures? With a so-so Polar axis alignment a person could probably take in some decent short exposures (15-30s) without much star trailing.
Not that I don't currently own a nice go-to equatorial mount. I wouldn't personally mess with Alt/Az due to my astrophotography requirements. I was just more curious if Sidereal was an included speed rate with this product.
I like the irony here.
Paul Farace: I know this is like a non-driver criticizing the color of a Rolls Royce's hubcaps, but how many of you Nikon fans think the display screen on the back is a bit small? Beautiful camera though...
It has the 3.2" LCD which is only made small in appearance by the overall size of the camera, itself. I have the D7100 and the 3.2" Vs the 3.0" is a major difference on the plus side. Nice in-camera review and details are not sacrificed when reviewing in the higher resolution mode.
I didn't see it in the specs, but can this do Sidereal Rate for longer term night sky exposures? With a so-so Polar axis alignment a person could probably take in some decent short exposures (15-30s) without much star trailing.
cocopro: ‘our reason to exist is to push the envelope so that our pal SONY can break it.'
Yes, by being able to control the future Playstation VII with your mirrorless interchangeable lens camera phone.
Lucas_: I'll never be convinced by a 16MP FF sensor.
Haven't shot one much, huh?
scrup: Declining sales will probably mean Canon will milk its existing sensor technology for another couple of years.
The general consumer public should hope not. Canon finally cleared the noise hurdle with their latest generation of cameras. While still not up to Nikon standards for low light AF performance, IMO, they have come a long way in the last two model years.
What Canon and Nikon need to do is trim down the amount of models in their line-ups and concentrate on innovating and staying neck and neck with broad-reaching electronics companies like $ony.
It will be a sad, sad day if the two original camera companies were crushed out of the camera-making business by companies who profess to manufacture a multitude electronic devices in addition to cameras.
It's because a majority of people don't trust the EVF in mirrorless cameras. It really is that simple. I hate the things. I appreciate the 1:1 visual analog connection to my subjects. It is some thing I depend upon for my photo making. It's not about the "quality" of the image so much as it is about the connection of the photographer with the subject. The EVF is horrible technology and I don't care what "advancements" or "innovations" Company $ (S) or Company F can come up with, it's still a major disconnect and, quite literally, a converted electronic view of the past.
I think we're only getting half the story here.