exifnotfound: Another cheap zoom...This is needed about as much as the new P&S that got announced along with it.
For DX users, they'd be far better off with some more dedicated DX primes like the 35 1.8G.
If it must be another zoom, how about replacing the 17-55 f/2.8.I haven't used one before but I can say with absolute confidence that optical improvements wouldn't go astray.Like all Nikon zooms, distortion and soft edges at the wide end are standard.
Or the 24 f/1.4 G DX - oops.
NorthwestF: Panasonic were so influenced by Sony that they even copied the naming system (i,e Nexx7). Where is GX2, GX3 --- GX6? Sony inherited the naming system from Minolta where 7 series were higher end enthusiast and 5 series were lower specs than 7 Series. And Minolta also had 9 for professional cameras, i.e Minolta Maxxum 9000 (same system that Sony inherited, A900, A99, etc).
Sony bought Minolta, but I can't see why Panasonic would choose to call it 7, unless they have just decided that they are going to follow the same Minolta naming system.
At least Nikon's not afraid of the 4 - just the 400, I guess.
Lots to like here. Kudos to Panasonic for this effort. If it's as good in real life as it is on paper, it should be a big seller to enthusiasts.
Together with the still growing range of lenses available,this camera creates a strong pull from Nikon DX (which is also hampered by a long-eclipsed sensor in the top-of-the-line camera) for my everyday shooting. After 13 years of DX-format cameras, Nikon still doesn't give me a complete system like I'm used to, including f/1.4 normal and 35mm-equivalent wide lenses designed for the format. These have been basic lenses for all the major 35mm systems since the 70s, and shouldn't have to weigh more and cost more than their FX equivalents and have a lot of unncessary bulk and complex expensive glass required to cover more than double the image circle area of what should be a lighter and more compact format.
Joseph S Wisniewski: Seriously, $32 US for single way (sideways on the camera) generic extruded plate, when the same money will get you a Sunway or Benro fully machined plate with a square biridectional ARCA tenon and a top that's machined for a specific camera.
And $130 for a low tolerance cast clamp bundled with that extruded plate? Subtract the plate, and that means they want $98 for a cast clamp, when Acratech, Kirk, RRS will sell you the best fully machined clamps in the world for that, and Sunway or Benro will get you a basic machined clamp for $40.
Manfrotto has totally lost the plot, here.
That doesn't look like spray-on cast finish on that clamp base - it looks very much like a standard Manfrotto genuine casting to me from the photo.
About time they went to the standard.
I always considered it a nuisance to get some Manfrotto hardware that there wasn't a good substitute for, and have to toss the various different plates and mounts and get a 3rd-party Arca adapter or converter to fit it to my L-plates.
Perhaps the geared head I was looking at will now come with this instead of yet another throwaway part requiring a retrofit.
This looks like an awkward mashup, opportunity to drop and break both devices if you're not careful. In an effort to find the next great thing, not a path leading to success, I think.
backayonder: The Nikon D400 is an absolute pearl of a camera in fact I will go further and say it is the best camera I have ever owned. It was well worth the wait.
What I really appreciated is that they filled out the missing DX wide primes with the intro, so it's actually a complete system camera now. Both the 24mm f/1.4 DX and 16mm f/2 DX were stellar, and the 12mm f/2.8 has very low distortion for a 90-degree lens. Kudos to Nikon for this triumph.
hindesite: Awesome, we have a new unit of comparison:
Just a little less than a fewlth and more than a bunchlth, to put it in the context of more familiar units.As we move to organic materials, we begin to use units used in cooking. Of course, we are talking Imperial ratios here - I'm not sure what the cgs equivalents are.
PatMann: The new opening in the box appears to reveal a finder. Whether it's an X with an optical or hybrid finder, or full-frame digltal CL, that's certainly more what I'd like to see than what's shown in the mockup photo that heads this announcement.
On closer examination, what seemed like a finder window is just the inside of the box above what looks like the contents. Wishful thinking on my part.
The new opening in the box appears to reveal a finder. Whether it's an X with an optical or hybrid finder, or full-frame digltal CL, that's certainly more what I'd like to see than what's shown in the mockup photo that heads this announcement.
No, this is not what's in the box.
itsastickup: I'm really quite perplexed. There's no real testing for moré here.
Both the face (corner of eye) and the globe clearly show more pronounced moire in the 7100. On the other hand, the much greater contrast in small dark features (where the 5200's filter puts light into these areas) is obvious in the 7100.
Vitruvius: The 100% crop of the globe seem to have a more pronounced finger print or wave type pattern on the shot with the 7100. Is this some sort of pattern on the actual globe itself or something else?
It looks like a moire pattern from the relation of the frequency of the printing screen used in printing the globe to the sensor frequency of the camera. It's just more subtly rendered with the antialiasing filter of the D5200 - it's the same pattern if you look closely.
The camera phone does just fine with simple form, color, pattern and texture images in which some of the qualities like dynamic range, resolution, vignetting, etc. that occupy most of the tech reviews are pretty much irrelevant. The technology enforces a discipline on the work that can sometimes be liberating, like forcing yourself to shoot with just one prime lens for a while.
You illustrate through your work that very compelling images can be made with this reduction to the basics, further limited by square format and black-and-white, and the resulting images are particularly well suited to the bright illumination and modest resolution of a computer screen. Chase Jarvis is another photographer with a great iPhone album set. Nice work - and thanks.
It's not the gap between the D7100 and the D600 that leaves space for the D400, it's the gap between the D7100 and the D4. The D7100 is a more advanced DX camera than the D600 is as an FX camera - it's more like the D800 of DX.
Whether it leaves enough room for a D400 is really an open question - the long list of missing DX lenses needed to complete a pro DX system combined with this almost-there sort-of-quasi-top-of-the-line effort indicates to me that Nikon has actually written off this format as a dead end, except perhaps for mirrorless.
If Canon continues their commitment to APS-C with a true pro APS-C camera, continuing to advance video to 4k, with wireless and GPS built in, there are going to be a lot more Canon long lenses sold than Nikon long lenses.
I do think the 1.3 +/- crop idea with 24 mp and up sensors may spell the end of the 1.4x optical extender - the optical compromises with an extender are probably a wash with the slight penalty in sensor resolution with the crop.
3systermuser: I want it but I would prefer an interchangeable lens version of this camera.Please put this AF and shutter unit into the X-E1.
The compact Kodak Retina series cameras used a leaf shutter in the camera with an interchangeable lens system with lenses from 28mm to 135mm, so the technology issues have been dealt with before. Tricky perhaps, but possible. Not likely with the current design lenses for the X-E1, however.
Thanks for the gallery and for including the raw images.
I like the look. I like the lens roadmap. The wide zoom and the portait lens they've promised, if they perform well, make this potentially a great system. If the next sensor and camera iterations fulfill their potential (how about that Sony, eh?), this could be a very tempting DSLR supplement, with imaging performance not far behind the D200 (except for DOF, but I DO have an SLR for that). I don't mind carrying it in a small belt bag - my pockets are already full.
I haven't had an SLR backup since my Nikon AF600 failed. That little P&S probably had a smaller envelope than the V2. My SLRs seem to be getting larger rather than smaller, so it would be nice to have a compact again. I require a finder, and like wide lenses, so the interchangeable lens system is a big plus over a P&S.
The ability to put the 70-200 f/4 on this for birding also has strong appeal.
But I still wish Nikon would complete the DX lens lineup first.
Imagefoundry: seeing how people here are requesting FF Xpro2, I feel like I need to stand up and be counted:
please do NOT introduce a new full-frame system.
it will dilute the brand recognition that Fuji achieved with X-pro / X-e1 series, push up prices, slow down R&D and introduction of further XF-mount lenses and X-trans sensor derivatives, etc. etc. Not to mention all the disenfranchised Xpro1/Xe1 owners.
In my humble opinion APS-C is in a sweet spot (ie. quality/performance/price) right now and is likely to stay there for many years to come. I understand the lure of brand extension but historically it hadn't worked all that well for most companies that tried.
DOF made perfect sense to me - in relation to FF it's still got relatively low DOF potential with large apertures compared to smaller sensors while permitting small cameras that are still large enough to fit securely in the hand, and have enough body surface for a good number of direct controls with normal-sized hands, and keep lenses reasonably compact and the whole system lightweight within the normal focal length range, out to about 135mm f/4 - 200mm equivalent. That certainly sounds like the sweet spot for me.
How about some fast wide primes for Nikon DX? Even AF would be OK. Nikon's not doing it. How about an 18 f/2, a 23 f/1.4?Customers waiting.
NomadicVision: I find the focal length choice for these fixed lens full frame cameras odd. A 35mm is not exactly a popular choice for SLRs, so why for this camera? Its an awkward length - not wide enough for scenery and too wide for portraits. I guess its supposed to be for environmental portrait/street photography. Imo, a 24mm or a 85mm would have been more useful.
35mm is a very good choice for a camera with only one lens. 50mm is very limiting in field of view, particularly shooting indoors. 28mm is often too wide unless you're willing to get right up in the face, and gives very distorted faces when used close, compared to 35mm. Nikon made 35mm and 28mm fixed-lens compact cameras in the film days - my own choice would be 28 (compact travel camera for tight urban spaces and interiors), but the 35 was the first to be released and was quite popular by comparison.
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review