Seventeen hours? Good luck to guess the correct exposure at the natural environment.
Although it is obviously demanding more work, I think it is safer to go to multi shot and postprocessing them conveniently.
Combine higher technological complexity and price pressure resulting more complex industrial manufacturer process at their supply chain, it is almost a miracle so low level of issues!
Even high grade multi-billion military and aerospace projects presents eventually critical issues (just to name one, one o-ring for the US space shuttle program).
Unfortunately there is no way to be sure any manufactured stuff is problem free. No way. Period... and if you run at a budget, the things are simply worse.
Why bashing Canon?
There is much more for tools than technology stuff.
It looks me professionals are making more money with Canon equipment than any other brand, so it is logical professionals looking for them. There are good reasons for that.
It is obvious the total photography experience most amateurs, either beginner or advanced, is very positive as Canon outsells any other brands for that segment.
So, why to be so harsh with Canon? They are not my chosen brand but it looks me they are making a good job. Do I have to bash them only because they are not offering exactly what I personally am looking for? Ok... it is Internet...
dosdan: Cary, I understand you only had a few hours to use the camera. But there's some nice features in Pentax cameras that make the shooter's life easier.
For example, in your "Pentax K-1 Pixel Shift Resolution demo" video, you zoomed in repeatedly to check the effect of the pixel-shifting. If this camera is like earlier Pentaxes, when the review image appears on the back LCD, you can just turn the rear dial (now used for zooming) 1 click to the right.
Rather than going 2x, 2.8x, 4x ... 16x to check the focus, you can preset the first-click amount. On my K-3, I've set it to 8.3x (100%). So I get a very convenient jump to 100% pixel-peeping for focusing accuracy. Once there, left-turning the dial zooms out (8x, 5.6x etc), while right-turning zooms in (11x, 16x), and pressing the OK button on the back returns you to 1x.
Your current zoom level & panning position (e.g. lower-right corner) holds as you use the front dial to move through reviewing shots.
All very sensible.
@dosdan: Nikon cameras when programed to zoom in at a ratio (it can be 100% or other values) allows you to change to next/previous picture maintaining zoom ratio and picture position. If you click again you zoom out to full screen mode.
Besides newer cameras as my D810, it works also for older cameras as my D300s and even D200, if my memory isn't failing.
Sigma SD Quattro is 8% wider and 11% shorter than Nikon D7200.Sigma SD Quattro is 19% thicker than Nikon D7200.Sigma SD Quattro [625 g] weights 18% (140 grams) less than Nikon D7200.
Sigma SD Quattro dimensions: 147x95.1x90.8 mm (it is ML!)Nikon D7200 dimensions: 135.5x106.5x76 mm (it is DSLR!)
My Acratech Ultimate has seem a lot of work in the last twelve years... as well a lot of abuse, and is performing very well yet.
I am considering to go to a GP ballhead in the next couple of years... Thanks for the comparison.
Dimit: The 18-50 compared to the other two,will sell 10:1 !!!
Well, not for my taste. Thanks. No interest on the WA or superzoom version, but I am seriously considerring the 24-85 version.
jpeghorror: The pedants are out as usual, boring everyone with their twaddle.
In the world of urban photography, these discreet little wonders with their super-fast AF are going to kick ass, EVF or not.
One of the strong points I saw to migrate from P7100 to P7800 and disconsider the P7700 was the EVF as I consider myself a "viewfinder guy".
For my surprise just a minority of my 10,000+ shots from P7800 was made using the viewfinder...
Anyway I would consider seriously to buy the optional EVF if I decide to go to that camera. :-)
Ken Aisin: DL18-50 is the one I would get if it came with an EVF.
According nikonusa site the optional EVF is 2.4Mpixel... If it can reflesh fast and good color, IMO it is worth...
Murat Sahan: I dont know about you guys but Im saving for the 18-50. And if it works with my old SB-400 I´ll be even happier. I long ago gave up the APS-C because of size. I have the past 2 years shoot with an olympus XZ-1 which has served me well but quite often I wanted a wider angel. In fact, the only lens i saved when I sold my camera was the sigma 10-20 mm lens. Now I will happily sell it for a 100 euros and use the money on the new DL. Bravo Nikon.
According to nikonusa site, your SB-400 and my SB-300 will work with those cameras.
Sonyshine: I think these cameras just illustrate how confused Nikon is and how it confuses its customers too.
Why three cameras? Hoping 1 out of 3 will be a hit?
Why are none truly pocketable like the RX100?
If Nikon is going to copy the RX100 at least include a built in EVF!
What does it say about Nikon 1 cameras? Why is a J5 with kit lens cheaper than any of these ?
Why high spec fast lenses here and slower lenses for 1 system?
Sorry Nikon. You are just muddling along without any clear direction - AGAIN!
Simply different people has different tastes.
The WA camera version has no appeal to me... The superzomm is yet worse for me... But they are the great tool for a lot of people.
I like the 24-85 version. They surprised myself as I did not expect such well ballanced P&S. I am seriously considerring to buy it to use in my business travels.
Very well done, Nikon!
Digital Suicide: I do like the look of 15-50 and 24-85. They look sexy, much like LX100. And there is no problem to screw on polarizer or Nd filter, which you can't do with Sony RX100.
DL24-85 with electronic shutter going up to 1/16,000 second in the practice will not need an embedded ND filter (usually 3 f-stop).
Well done, Nikon.
I had forgotten some of the facts DPR brought in that article, but I remind most of them.
Although I like some of the ideas from Pentax and their general camera design I cannot understand why people could put his/her money on Pentax stuff. The company´s track is extremely erratic and IMO it isn´t worth the risk - mainly if you depend from them to bring your daily butter and bread.
It can explain their lower entry price: they are buying market. It is a pity, because it could be different... at that price it will be more difficult to create a decent customer´s support, to get money to R&D and to return something attractive to the investors.
Anyway I desire good luck to them.
Greg VdB: For people interested in how the lens deals with coma in starscapes, Lenstip has a special part on that in their review:http://www.lenstip.com/457.7-Lens_review-Sigma_A_20_mm_f_1.4_DG_HSM_Coma__astigmatism_and_bokeh.html(the uncropped images can be found in the "sample shots" page)It's pretty bad wide open on FF, as with all fast wide lenses, but improves quickly on stopping down.
Thanks. It is good to know that lens isn´t for me... comma looks so bad as in my Sigma 20 f/1.8, unfortunately. :-(
Really? Personally I never had problems to choose my next camera and never had any buyer remorse (yet!).
You just need to take some time to make your homework: Internet research and User´s Manual download and read and preferably study such material.
Perhaps the biggest problem is to get the technical background to clearly state your objectives and to understand the (always present) compromises you assume in your choice. Any choice.
If you are interested in that bag I strongly recommend you also consider Domke F-2... it is USD 90 in the USA and without the bad taste "color detail"...
2003 Nikon SB-800 now with a Fuji wrapping... thirteen years after that... and people says this is an innovative industry...
Trubbtele: Sell all crap and buy D5 & D500, be happy for a long time :-)
...or be happy up to the next camera release... :-)
Let me see: Nikon 300 f/4 PF ED VR is 755 grams at USD 2,000 (in the USA) and the newer Olympus 300 f/4 IS is 1,270 grams at USD 2,500...
I think the price for this new Olympus lens ins´t bad as you consider their production volume is probably lower than Nikon´s lens, but I cannot understand its weight, almost the double of Nikon´s... It was supposed their light weight solution would have lighter lenses (than Nikon FX)...
Anyway I do not have to understand anything about Olympus... I was just wandering...
I think D750 is the best bang for your money currently, although I preferred D810 to replace my old D300S as the handling and feel were very similar.
But if I was going from D7xxx, D5xxx, Dxx cameras, certainly I would go to D750.