Until they offer pro grade fast zooms and primes for this lens mount, I can't see this as more than an expensive toy. 24-70mm f2.8, 70-200mm f2.8, etc.
As a pro, I don't hate the idea of the smaller body, as long as the ergonomics (buttons for quick adjustments like other pro bodies) and lens lineup are strong...
Photos is a novice app, sadly.
I fell for Apple's foray into pro photo with Aperture 1.0, back in the day of the iPhone 1.0, and have stuck with it - mainly out of indecision between the superior RAW conversion in Capture NX2 and Phase One's Capture One Pro 8, and Lightroom's superior organization, flexibility and general robustness.
It seems to me the smart path (of least brain damage/pain) is to choose Lightroom 6, whenever it becomes available, as the real problem as a pro photog is having to convert a massive library and learn how to achieve high efficiency and impactful results with a new software system. I don't want to have to keep doing that, and my feeling is Lightroom will be around in twenty years, where Capture One Pro and Capture NX may or may not be around. I can continue to use NX on special photos, but it makes sense to make Lightroom the go-to for dependable, long-term library organization.
Sarge_: I just wish there were a way to convert the optical effects to what you would see from a medium or large format sensor, to eliminate the distortion.
As a pro who shoots a lot of architecture, that's my biggest beef with shooting wide on a 35mm body; there's not much value as things get so ridiculously distorted.
Has anyone found any filters or software in general that can overcome the 'wide angle' distortion from these wide lenses?
When you use a larger sensor, you can use a narrower lens to achieve the same angle of view. A 24mm lens on a 6x4.5 sensor/film gives an equivalent field of view to a 14mm lens on a 35mm camera.
I just wish there were a way to convert the optical effects to what you would see from a medium or large format sensor, to eliminate the distortion.
To me, you either buy into the APS-C formatted Sony NEX cameras, step down to the smaller M43, or get the RX100.
The Nikon isn't even on my radar (except for the new waterproof model). The Sony NEX cameras are roughly as pocketable (NEX-5, etc) as this V3, and NEX produces better IQ, especially at higher ISO. If video is a priority, I'd look at the Panasonic GH4, and if pocketability/size were a factor I'd have the Sony RX100.
I love my Nikon D800, but Nikon really disappointed me with the sensor size in this camera system, and there's no 'fixing' that, as even if this sensor gets better, so too will the larger APS-C sensors...
As a professional photographer who shoots a lot of architecture and landscapes, I wish someone would come out with something affordable in medium format. No pricing, but I'm guessing this is not the product I'm wishing for...
jackgreen: Great, that Sony is really in close co-operation with Zeiss, unlike Canon, who treat 3rd party makes as competition.
No, It's because Sony owns Zeiss.
Fixx: Does this work with RAW-photos or does the processing produce JPEG-files? That is, if I have distortion control enabled in my camera, do I get corrected NEF-files to my Lightroom library?
That's a bummer. I don't shoot jpeg on my D800... Does anyone?
Octane: Let me get this straight, you expected users to be upset, but went ahead anyways.
You saw a decrease in people upgrading their software because you ran out of creative ideas for new features that people consider worth paying for. So instead of making your products better and come up with new features, you force everyone to upgrade whether they need it or not.
You increase the cost to keep software up to date, yet disowning the buyer completely and effectively holding their work hostage when they don't pay the subscription any more because the software won't even run and open your files.
Adobe, I hear the message loud and clear, you can't come up with product improvements to generate enough income so you force people into a more expensive subscription plan.
Stop being such a whiny Communist.
But, yeah. You nailed it.
John Mason: I'm sorry. But I wonder how many people out there are like me and we just simply don't do cloud.
I don't do Iphone cloud on my phone, I don't do google cloud on my tablet, I don't use internet based backups, I certainly don't run my apps in a cloud dependent way.
I started with Photoshop with version 3 years ago and as the competition has come up, while I've upgraded over the years, I'm finding I just don't use it much more because the competitive raw converters have added so many features and the workflow is superior.
I have C1, DXO and Lightroom and for my needs I'm using C1 most of the time unless I need lens corrections then It's DXO.
The problem is, I use PS so seldom now that there is little incentive to join the cloud. MS is pushing this with Office 365 which has pushed most my clients to OpenOffice, because, they like me, just don't want to live in a cloud.
Between CISPA, SOPA, hackers, unreliable internet connections (I may end up with satellite internet in my next home, and have crap service where I am now) - I have precisely a little bit less than ZERO interest in any cloud-based file sharing/storage/licensing/software requirement type of system.
I use Aperture for workflow and mainly NIK and CS6 for post. I'm sure someone will come up with an alternative, that or I'll have to apply some sort of hacker 'patch' so that if I buy CC, it will be set up to remain active indefinitely if it's not connected to the net. I won't store my working files on the cloud either - it's not practical unless you live somewhere with Google fiber, or really good cable service. I have none of those things.
Professional photog here. I'll be strictly using NIK and Aperture once Photoshop CS6 is outmoded. None of this cloud BS for me, thank you very much.
With CISPA and SOPA, along with hackers and so forth, I don't trust the 'cloud' for anything. I also want absolute control on my computer, regardless of whether I'm attached to the 'grid' or not, for however freaking long I want to be off the grid.
Adobe better rethink this.
Nikonworks: Again, I must blow my own horn and thank DPReview for taking my advice on shooting 'Real World' samples.
Only downer is they took my suggestion and ran with it, without a public 'Thank You' to me.
Thanks for the Real World samples.
What are you on about?
DP Review has been providing 'real world' sample images of cameras they test... pretty much forever. For as many years as I've been reading the site.
I'm planning to buy CamRanger for architectural photography. My camera is always crammed into corners, making it very difficult to use the viewfinder. The connection to liveview on Nikon allows me to see things and make adjustments (off angles, staging, etc) that I otherwise might not notice until post. At $300, it's expensive as 'toys' go, but worthwhile for certain professional applications.
Full frame mirrorless, Nikon. Everything else is 'meh'. Most likely, it seems Sony will take my money for that one. I'm a pro Nikon shooter, but for 'walkaround' I'm sold on the Sony NEX series at this point (roughly pocketable, for someone who's 6'2"). Canon has potential, but Sony has the lead in glass at the moment.
Nikon's AF system seems nearly ideal for skiing, but the (sensor) size matters...
The old system was a total shiet-show of life-long pixel-hunting trolls. I hope this one turns out better.
Interesting camera. As a Nikon shooter I wish Nikon had done this instead of the tiny-sensor V1. As it stands, I may end up replacing my NEX-5 with a NEX-7 instead of buying this, mainly for the built-in flash and the equal or better NEX-7 sensor.
For my purposes Canon almost nailed it, but stopped short of 'ideal-walk-around-camera' by leaving out the flash. If they'd included a flash, I might have even switched from Nikon to Canon for the lens compatibility...
Instagram allows people to further characterize photos to reflect the experience the user had in that moment. Filters add 'color' to a scene to better convey the spirit and emotion of the moment. Some people are better at the application of Instagram than others, but to say that it's "destroying photography" is just drama-queen being drama-queen.
This camera changes nothing; Nikon makes the best DSLRs, and Canon makes the best compacts, with Sony leading the 'tween' market with the NEX... With respect to IQ, that is.
Tempting, but the deal killer is you can't upgrade the hard drives. Everything is glued/soldered in place (RAM too). This, I think, will prove to be a mistake that they correct in future versions. That might be fine for ipods and iphones, but this is another matter.
Not being able to upgrade the drives, and contemplating a D800? Not compatible plans, really.
In the prior Macbook Pro's, you could also replace the optical drive with a hard drive, making for up to 2 TB of storage (or 1.2 TB of SSD storage w 600GB x2 drives), and when the battery wears out, it's easy to replace (and/or have a charged backup at the ready).
I'm a fan of Macs overall, but I'm disappointed with the absolute lack of repairability and upgradability of this new machine. Looks like I may scoop up one of the last 17" MBP's before they're gone. Surely Apple will rethink this strategy eventually?
I'm among those who don't see any high ISO advantage to the D4 over the D3.
The video specs look like a big improvement, and the focusing ability is likely improved, but I think I'm more likely to add a D800 to my D3 than trade the D3 for a D4...
Then again, this one single studio shot is just one tiny little piece of the story, though, so I'm withholding judgment until I see a lot more reviews...
PS: Please don't waste everyone's time with inciteful, juvenile, fanboy troll posts. Seek therapy, not negative attention.