If I wait for an 18-600mm F1.4 OIS zoom, razor sharp wide open, am I being too picky?
Wow! Imagine how shallow that DOF would be with an F2!
Those wide angles are just too wide for my taste.
When your drone crashes onto your supermodel's head, you better run and hide.
Wow, this looks like the perfect camera! I assume it's full frame with a super sharp lens and a super clean noise-free image at ISO 3200! I'm so totally excited.I'm getting one today before it's all sold out.
If you want to dazzle and impress people, why not use a huge bizarre, weird orange or green lens with nothing inside - just a dummy lens barrel with strange buttons and levers that do nothing.
This is all very nice, groovy, neat and fantabulous but, for the record, I used to do this sort of stuff back in 1978 just for fun. And I'm sure there were other photographers that did this even before me.
For me there's nothing better than a "good" product that's been further refined and improved. Version 2.5 of anything is usually 10x better than version 1.0. A dramatic new camera design may be exciting, but it always comes with issues and problems. This new Nikon looks to me like a machine that's been polished to near perfection and it surprises me to see so many negative comments.
In my opinion this camera is an absolute gem - a breath of fresh air! It's super cute, impressive image quality, and everything a young photographer would need. And some of those images look better than kit-lens equipped Nikons and Canons.
Three thumbs up from me.
PhilTate: I know very little about optics, but it seems that eventually the image will wind up on a flat surface, either as a print or on a computer screen. Won’t it take some doing to get the curved image flattened?
Very simple with today's processors.
What I find funny is dishing out any money for a wide angle lens with soft and/or distorted corners. If your corners are soft and/or distorted then what's the point of even using wide angle? Now if you take a portrait of a single face then soft and/or distorted corners can be acceptable, but what idiot would use wide angle for a face shot? And for a group photo such a lens would only be acceptable if you hate the subjects on either side and want them to be soft and/or distorted on purpose. And for architecture and landscapes... don't even get me started.
This doesn't add up - makes no sense. How in hell can a tiny smartphone camera produce images at least twice as good as a dedicated "tough" camera that's 10x the size?
Last time I took a journey to the center of the Earth all my camera lenses melted and I snapped in anger because I couldn't bear the pressure.
Nice video. But if I'm not mistaken, a rocket will need to go a bit higher and even a little bit faster in order to reach Mars.
wilsonlaidlaw: The thing that impresses me is the heat resistance of the landing legs. I assume they must be covered in some sort of ablative material, such as tantalum hafnium carbide, but even so, to retain their structural rigidity after that extreme cooking, is amazing. They may be actively cooled by circulation of some of the rocket fuel through them.
The landing legs are probably made of wood. My guess would be white pine. Oak is too expensive.
ryansholl: I have no intentions of every buying a 4k TV, if I'm given the choice, anyway. I feel like we've definitely reached the point of overkill.
I am excited to see what this puts out at 1080p. A compact low light machine that can finally lay down some incredible 1080p video would be more than welcome.
I have no intentions of ever buying a 386pc. A 286 with a 10MB hard drive is all I will ever need. Anything above that is overkill and a waste of money.
I had to mute the video because that music was so irritating. On the plus side, that quad copter shadow was really cute.
If I entered this contest I would have won. I took a photo of Godzilla tearing down the Eiffel Tower.
They should have named it "R2" or "R1 mark 2".
maxnimo: From the sample pics I saw, that nikon zoom lens belongs in a toy store. To use such a lens in a test simply destroys the credibility of this site.
I see your reasoning, but it's still beyond my comprehension how any hobby photographer would buy a relatively high-quality camera such as this and use it with such an awful lens.