MJSfoto1956: while I understand why Nikon wants to protect their turf, this kind of thing actually makes me upset at Nikon, not Sigma. In my opinion, Nikon needs to embrace a more modern concept of photography: specifically, they need to open up their APIs and ENCOURAGE 3rd parties to build for their platform. The best example I can think of is how MSDOS (a totally open system) trounced the early Apple Mac OS -- the lesson being that closed systems are difficult to reach critical mass and if/when they do, then the market starts to offer alternatives (example: the wild and early success of IOS (a closed system) led to the ascendancy of Android (an open system) as developers, tired of all the limits that Apple imposed on them, jumped ship).
"The best example I can think of is how MSDOS (a totally open system)"
I disagree. MS licensed the MSDOS away b/c they are a soft ware company and did not have the intention to ever sell computers. Thus, there was no conflict of interest. If they were selling computers too, they would have to worry how they could ever compete with others who could always manage to sell something cheaper. Nikon does not just "design" lenses and cameras, they sell them too. I am not defending Nikon, and am curious why only Sigma's lenses are incompatible with D5300. If Nikon intentionally makes D5300 incompatible with third party lenses, why is Sigma singled out? Or is there any technical changes in how the lenses need to operate with D5300 that render Sigma lenses incompatible? Does anybody know? Does this have anything to do with the lawsuit brought up by Nikon that Sigma infringed on their OS/VR design?
Optimal Prime: Bloated ugly monster...
": it's no big "monster" cam."
But the SONY A7 is about half the weight/size. The Nikon has too many redundant dials and switches.
$3,000 for a still only camera? How can this camera be possibly almost x2 more expensive than the D610? They must be out of their minds! I would hope that Nikon can begin to build a mirrorless FF camera in the style of the FM that is simple/lighter to use, a niche not quite served by their DSPR offerings. I hope that this camera is as small as the FM2 but has decent videos. It does not need the same AF-tracking ability of their dSLRs but fast enough for most single AF shots. It will arrive with a 24-85 slow zoom, plus a three-prime kit, consists of 28/2.8 ($400), 50/1.8 ($200), and 85/1.8 ($400). It would be even better if they can build a 45/1.8 pancake for ($300). This will be the camera kit for those who do not need the AF-tracking ability of their pro dSLR cameras, but a need a relatively light package for the best IQ. I love the concept of the SONY a7, but $900 for a 50 mm lens?
G1Houston: The typical SONY story— a very interesting camera but without a good selection of lens. They don't have a cheap 50 mm f1.8 lens at introduction? Who will buy this system? Any pro using Nikon or Canon FF won't switch over it b/c the cost of buying fast lenses is just too high and the kit lens is not even a constant f4. For general consumers, these Zeiss lenses are too much lens both in terms of cost and quality for them. This just makes no sense. Imagine at launch, they have a three prime kit, 50/1.8, 28/2.8, and 85/1.8, each for $2-400 dollars ...
"Now, can YOU politely point all of us here to a newly introduced system by any manufacturer that, at launch, had anywhere near as many lenses available?"
What is not polite about my original post? Why being so defensive? You want an example? How about the Panasonic 20/1.7 lens for $350 for the m4/3 system at launch? Fuju XF 35/1.4 for $600, etc Not to mention the $200 35/1.8 for the Nikon APS-C camera. For FF cameras they have the $200 50/1.8 and the $400 50/1.4 lens. In the old SLR days, a 50/1.8 lens is THE kit lens. If SONY wishes to attract people from other brands, adapters for SONY lenses do not count, plus there is the issue of how well the AF system in the A7 will work with adapted lens.
The typical SONY story— a very interesting camera but without a good selection of lens. They don't have a cheap 50 mm f1.8 lens at introduction? Who will buy this system? Any pro using Nikon or Canon FF won't switch over it b/c the cost of buying fast lenses is just too high and the kit lens is not even a constant f4. For general consumers, these Zeiss lenses are too much lens both in terms of cost and quality for them. This just makes no sense. Imagine at launch, they have a three prime kit, 50/1.8, 28/2.8, and 85/1.8, each for $2-400 dollars ...
Are the AF points lockable?
This is a main complaint many have had since the first 5100 came along but Dpreview never once mentioned it. Without the AF-lock button, because the camera is much smaller than say D90 or D7100, if you hold the camera with one hand, your palm will hit the 4-Way controller to bump the AF points around. It is very annoying.
ryansholl: Between all of the comments that a curved phone is more difficult than a flat phone to fit in a pocket, I've deduced that this is one seriously overweight forum.
"I've deduced that this is one seriously overweight forum."
When a phone is curve, it appears thicker when you measure its height from the lowest point to the highest.
Ferling: Did they check to see if Apple patented "curved", yet?
It has been reported that Apple has patented a "wrap around" display that can, for example, go around your wrist. While there is no telling if Apple is serious in making a device for the wrist, a curve display on the wrist makes much more sense than a curved phone, which among others is more difficult to fit in a pocket.
Jacques Cornell: Zune brown. The color of failure.
"I believe that Samsung Galaxy phones out sell the iPhone."
But with much lower profit margins. Cheaper phones will get sold more in volume, there is no surprise there.
WT21: I like how, when you push down on one side, it takes 2-3 seconds to show you the time. Really cutting edge stuff there!
Exactly! It also seems that one has to be carefully in rolling it to prevent it from flipping over. All of this for checking time? This is just another example of Samsung jamming what ever is new into their phones without thinking throughly what benefits this feature wishes to bring.
Photato: Ugh! people don't get itGuys this is a revolutionary design !!No replaceable battery or memory card!All in an uni-body design. ;-)Its called Dysfunctional Minimalism.If you dont know what that means try to unplug those notoriously slippery Apple USB cables!
"No replaceable battery or memory card!"
There is a switch at the bottom of the camera from which one can open the bottom to access the battery and memory card.
This is just stunning. Beautiful!
EssexAsh: or "why cant dpreview stop posting iPhone articles."
"Really. GX7 First Impressions started back in August, still no full review. PEN E-P5 First Impressions, May, still no full review."They apparently prioritize the review based on impact — if I remember correctly there is no official full review of the Leica M9, by all means a very serious camera. Why? If a million m4/3 cameras can be sold in 3 days, they will get reviewed fast next time. I too use m4/3 and I am perfectly comfortable with this. You should know this before jumping in.
As cell phone cameras become mainstream in how people capture the moment, it would be foolish not to take them seriously. What define a camera or photography and why is the camera in iPhone not a camera to be taken seriously? Guys, it is time to move on!
The last picture of a panorama in a theater is just amazing.
BTW, what do you guys think of the the "two color flash?" Did Apple just reinvented the flash? All the other "traditional" camera makers, shame on you!
jcmarfilph: I'd rather snap with this phone than the mediocre iPhone. At least this camera has the muscles and IQ for a decent photography.
According to Consumer Reports: "The iPhone 5 already has one of the best cameras in our Ratings, and it still takes the best video of any phone we've tested, even beating the 42-megapixel Nokia Lumia 1020."
mpgxsvcd: Olympus never intends to make a lot of money off of selling this camera body. What they want to do is convince their loyal customers to switch from 4/3s to m4/3s and keep their legacy glass but also buy new m4/3s lenses as well.
Olympus doesn't make a lot of money off of cameras. However, they could make a lot of money off of lenses if they can sell enough cameras. Most people stop buying cameras once they find one that fits their needs. There is always room in the bag for more lenses though.
"Olympus never intends to make a lot of money off of selling this camera body."
Based on recent Olympus statement that they are rethinking the idea of selling cheap cameras, which are losing money, they will most likely position themselves to sell higher end models with higher margins so they can still make money without a large market share. I thus think the EM1 is priced to make money. For all other camera makers, the strategy is always to lure you in with an entry model and hope you will buy lenses and "upgrade" to more expensive ones down the road, not the other way around. When the camera is cheap, people will buy out of impulse.
tjbates: I'm one of the many selling my DSLR gear and now enjoying the benefits of m4/3 for capturing people. My 5DMK2 is still in my kit for landscape/ architecture photos, but honestly I really don't need it.
I mostly photograph my kids. Back in 2008 I thought getting the "best" was getting a FF DSLR. To my surprise, a few years later, I discovered for many situations that applied to me, that this not necessarily true. Now with a m4/3 camera, I'm nailing almost all of my shots due to face recognition. Always eye ball sharp. My composition is not compromised due to the silly diamond shaped focus arrangement and my lenses are extremely sharp and contrasty at their widest aperture. Not so for my Canon L glass. No more stopping down to get a sharp shot. For me, the bokeh argument is dead.
And now without doubt, for many who have actually tried m4/3, it is abundantly clear that handling, speed and accuracy is no longer owned by FF. FF and their slapping mirrors are a hang over from film days.
Well said, me too. Moreover, the tiltable screen makes it easy to shoot at their eye levels so we do not have to look down at them.
Anssi Kumpula: I've heard (not used myself) 41 MP on Lumia make the camera to operate NOT instantly. That's what I've prefer on a mobile device. Would be nice to know how much iPhone 5S benefits with its 8 MP operation QUICKNESS-wise.
kriztian: Real photographers are praising the Lumia 1020. Apple doesn´t even come close. Thats a fact. Cheers :)
"Real" photographers don't use "real" camera?