Torstein Wold: No touchscreen. Hard to belive. Sony still only use touch on their toy cameras.
I don`t care if it has the fastest AF in the world if the camera gives me such a hard time choosing what to focus on!
gsum: ...and when the camera picks the wrong thing to focus on and the moment is gone because the camera makes it far too difficult and slow to tell it where to focus - what then? Oh well, find another shot?
"While the progress in technology is impressive, lack of true weather sealing, a touchscreen, or direct AF point selection with a dedicated joystick or control will continue to be problematic for some."
"There's also no quick way to switch between having the camera automatically select a starting AF point vs manually selecting one in continuous AF tracking (AI Servo with iTR). Instead you have to dig through the menus to specify this."
Really?! Seriously, this would drive me nuts, and I'm no pro, that's for sure. I guess the pros on the sidelines never take it out of AI Servo/iTR?
photoshack: It is confusing to me why they would have an Ethernet port versus build in fast wireless. If this camera is a sport shooter rig, tethering makes little sense anyway right? While tethered to Ethernet may be useful to map hotfolders easily, just seems like Wifi would be more useful.
The camera has an all magnesium-alloy body that would act as a Faraday cage and trap wi-fi signals. The little bump on the top for the GPS is no doubt outside the frame, so my guess is either Canon found this more important, or the wi-fi would have been larger and added too much to the hump.
Raziel Orlando: The D5 seems to be more exciting for me than this 1DXII .
Nikon has lower pro market share since 1987 because Canon came out with the brand new EF mount and AF, and Nikon stuck too long with manual focus. Canon has simply held serve ever since. The D3/D700/D300 actually took market share from Canon, but, perhaps because of the Tsunami destroying their factories, weren't able to keep up the momentum.
beavertown: So D5000 D5100 D5200 D7000 won't work with AF-P DX 18-55mm F3.5-56 lenses?
Why these cameras are not included?
They might not be able to take advantage of features such as VR on/off in the menus, but I'm pretty sure they will otherwise work just fine.
Robemo: Well Richard, I think you make it all a bit too easy for yourself by stating that "howls of outrage at the cameras we recommended" is explained by "post-purchase justification". So it's all cognitive dissonance? I don't think so.Maybe you can explain to your readers how you determine the status 'best camera' in your roundups by letting people vote on gear that most of them never owned or used. What is the science behind that? Is that the objectivity DPReview is looking for? I think it would be a bit insulting to your readers to let them buy into that.Explain to us who benefits from such an approach .. I think you and I know, Why not tell the readers?
...says the Canon shooter who howls in rage when his camera isn't picked...
PVCdroid: Can these even accept a regular SD card?
John Barkley: On the D5 and D500, does anyone know if there is a "focus peaking" function on the LCD in video mode? Sorry if this is posted, I can't find it.
jtan... that's brutal. I rarely shoot video with my DSLR, and never record out the HDMI port, so I've never seen that bizarre behaviour. I can't imagine the point of that.
You can zoom in on live view to aid focus, if I'm not mistaken.
davids8560: Okay, so here's what I don't understand about selectable focus points:
How is it optically (physically) possible to tell a clear piece of glass what point in the field of view to make more sharp than others? Is it processing wizardry, or a function of the lens?
Or maybe I just don't get what is actually being done. Is it really focusing more clearly on the point you select? Why would we want that? Don't we want the whole photo in focus? I mean, unless it's a desired blurry background/depth of field thing, right?
Hmm. Not arguing, just unsure what it's really about.
Let's consider two race cars on an elevated curve. You want the closer one to the left of the frame (just saying as an example) in focus, but NOT the right one? There's probably better examples, right? Like a long train on a curve? Or a guy with a big nose, and you want his eyes in focus, not the tip of his nose? Can't aperture/DOF manage that?
Are lenses unevenly focused by nature?
Well thanks. Been up all night.
I'm guessing you're not joking. So here goes:
By selecting the chosen focus point, you are telling the lens at what distance to set its focus plane. What you just selected should fall on that same plane.
Why you would want this is to draw attention to the object/person in focus. See some of the portrait examples in the gallery above: the subject is in focus, and the background is out of focus, drawing your attention to where the photographer wants it to be.
b0k3h: A B&W specialist camera....without color channel control for optimal tonal shaping for best monochrome results....
BUT it allows the (flat) pictures to be sharper!!!...so the 2-cent streetographers can jack up the contrast, add fake grain, and throw on artificial vignettes in the end....
B&W photographers would use proper filters on their lenses to get the effects they desire, no?
Debankur Mukherjee: Waiting for a D750 and D810 update with all these features........
File sizes have nothing to do with sensor size. It's totally a function of Mp and bit depth.
ChrisH37: Over $1000 for the kit seems excessive.
Also, I assume 16-80mm 2.8 is a typo, missing the '-4'.
The Sigma 17-70 C is priced around 50% of the new Nikon 16-80 - the exact price Mr. Petzold said the Nikon should be - which is why I referred to it. Everybody says the Nikon is overpriced, yet I have yet to read anywhere that the Sigma is a better lens. And I own the Sigma and think it is a great walkaround lens. It rarely comes off my D7000. I'm rather curious why there are so few reviews and comparisons of this lens. Maybe it isn't as important as I imagine it to be.
I haven't seen any credible reviews on the new 16-80 yet. There was one European review that was negative, but very suspect. The conclusions and comments were directly contradicting the sample photos, tests and article text. It read like they had concluded what to say before a single photo was taken. Frankly, I doubt they ever tested it, as it came out a week or so after the launch.
Thom Hogan has said it is a very good lens, but hasn't published his review yet. Others have written glowing reviews, but without tests and numbers. I'm waiting for some more credible tests and comparisons to Sigma's 17-70 C before I believe cries it should be priced the same.
ThePhilips: "Push the Boundaries" - or more of the same.
Frankly, after the NX1 and the 7D2 I have expected more from the D500.
Yes. 20 FPS. Still remarkable. And unmatched, really.
You yourself said, referring to the N1 60 FPS: "Rrright. At 2MP (1080p) resolution only, with all the limitations of the video shooting."
Clearly false. True, you get ~1sec bursts at that frame rate, but with careful timing, it could definitely be useful in capturing things like a full golf swing, or a hummingbird's wings in just the right position, etc.
We should also point out that the N1 manages to do these frame rates while maintaining a constant live feed on the display. Why can't anyone else manage this? It would remove probably the single largest complaint about EVFs for capturing action.
The Nikon 1 system's frame rate with full auto focus is very impressive, but let's not forget it's on a 1" sensor, which is much more forgiving of focus due to the increased depth of field. I think the achievement of Nikon and Canon with the 1Dx and D5 of 12 FPS with full, accurate autofocus on a 35mm frame is at least as impressive.
The Phillips:The Nikon 1 cameras shoot 60 FPS bursts at FULL RESOLUTION (10, 14 or 20 Mp, depending on the generation) with fixed focus; 30 FPS bursts at FULL RESOLUTION with continuous auto focus tracking using on sensor PDAF.
Thom Hogan has wondered for years why he doesn't see more sports shooters using them. For example: imagine the golf swing images you could generate.
pictureAngst: Great to see Nikon innovating again - can only be good for the industry and for us
supersport100:The 70D uses dual pixel PDAF in video mode. It focuses very well.
The D500 will shoot 4k video in a 2.2 crop mode (the same as the GH4, by the way). I video mode, it will autofocus using contrast detect - the same as most other DSLRs. Most serious video shooters prefer to manual focus, anyway.
Trubbtele: A7R II are to small for my hands. And use mirrorless Sony in nature is not right element for that camera either. Who cares about the size, I use digital Hasselblad in the forrest for years, so for me DSLRs are quite small,from my point of view :-)
The future IS mirrorless. But it's not here yet. There isn't a mirrorless camera in existence that can compete with a D5/500 or 1DX/7D2 for action photography. People who shoot those for a living can't afford to miss shots while the EVF lag has them pointing the camera in the wrong direction.
pew pew: the marketing on nikon 4k is very deceiving.. the d500 has a 1.5 extra crop on 4k so around 2.2 crop in video and the d5 records 3 minutes clip max and can´t even record it at Full Frame only at 1.5x crop factor..
Hm. The D500 has a crop factor of 2.2 ....or about exactly the same crop as a GH4. Work out a Bayer array for a 4k frame and see if you can come up with the answer why that is.
I agree that the 3min limit for 4k video on the D5 is very odd. I hope there is a technical reason for it, but I can't imagine what it is.