Sergey Borachev: It is interesting to see how Sony changes directions often and running in various directions like a headless chook, from DSLR to SLT, NEX, A, fixed lens cameras, ... and in various formats APS-C, 1-inch and FF mirrorless but not really advancing at all its bleeding camera business in spite of all such brave efforts and its vast resources and engineering know-how, its great sensors and electronics, the access to variuos technology/support (Minolta, Zeiss, Tamron, Olympus), and in spite of advantages like manufacturing capability, and outlets, when compared to other smaller camera makers.
@Ale1210: Disruptive innovation appears to me as a retrospective term, cannot be used in planning or setting strategies. If its is applicable to Sony, it is applicable to their own products.
@ Frenetic Pony: Message to SONY: focus to improve UX, focus to innovate AF (A7r reviews talk about leisurely AF - shyly at best), focus to protect consumer investment in the system (A mount lenses). If they can make a better UI than Olympus, Fuji, and Canikon, than make it. If not: follow them. Is it enough?
kadardr: NEX series gets abandoned. Nice learning about Sony.
It means Sony left buyers with cognitive dissonance about an established brand, plus they also left behind a lot of investment in NEX image etc. In strategic marketing it is more than a sin: it is a serious mistake. Confused buyer may leave the system altogether. Anyway, I will.
NEX series gets abandoned. Nice learning about Sony.
SeeRoy: Since probably less than 5% of these lenses go to professional users - in any sense of the word "professional" - they are primarily a luxury purchase to make the buyer feel special. It happens in all sectors of the consumer durables market. Yer pays yer money (or not) and yer takes yer choice. Personally I feel that knowing how to use the camera and what it's pointed at are about 95% of what's required to get decent results. But we all fall for this marketing nonsense to some degree.
Price is the product
EvilTed: I got one from B&H.The box was covered in finger prints, as was the camera.The camera had 932 actuation's!
As for the camera, the thing is a toy compared to other DSLRs.Flimsy and nowehre near as stylish as some think.I thought it quite badly executed and cheap looking and feeling.
It was shipped right back to B&H for a refund.
Don`t deal with B&H. You see! They ruined the experience...
camerosity: If Canon came out with something similar, dpreview.com would be creaming their pants all over it, giving it a Highly Recommended Gold Award...how dumb do you think we are?
but they did not, canon did not. thus no cream in the pants at dpr
It seems to me the market is ready for a D710 with the D4 sensor. Please Mr. Nikon do make it happen.
kadardr: I used to be a marketing guy and one of the anticompetitive strategies was repositioning the competitor product. From the pros and cons Df is much worse than D610, lame, out of style, there is an imbalance of sensor, processor, and af speed and coverage, it is out of anything, especially of scope. Cheap selection of materials, bad handling, too expensive.From the review I envisage Nikon Df to be a camera for meticulous old farts with a bunch of old Nikon lenses. This vision simply cannot be true. There is no company on earth that want to put such a product on the market.
It is obvious that this time the review went too far.
I wanted to say that I do not believe Nikon wanted to screw up everything of this camera. I do not believe that the AF is failure. Simply too much criticism only to bring the df down.
I used to be a marketing guy and one of the anticompetitive strategies was repositioning the competitor product. From the pros and cons Df is much worse than D610, lame, out of style, there is an imbalance of sensor, processor, and af speed and coverage, it is out of anything, especially of scope. Cheap selection of materials, bad handling, too expensive.From the review I envisage Nikon Df to be a camera for meticulous old farts with a bunch of old Nikon lenses. This vision simply cannot be true. There is no company on earth that want to put such a product on the market.
After reading the discussions like the one below on DPReview comments for a long time, I more and more sympathize with Ken Rockwell. Compared to this, that is quality.
The sample images show that this 28-50 equivalent lens may not bring much excitement for the viewer (and the shooter). Something like a 14-30 mm APS-C zoom would be more desirable. OOps, there goes the Pentax 12-24mm F4.0, or the Sony 16-35mm F2.8. Well, these already also exist. F1.8 may not be the most important parameter.
SalmanH: Reading all the full frame fan boy comments here it would appear that there is little more to good photography than shallow depth of field. In reality a lot of the time shallow depth of field merely hides bad or lazy composition, making a poor photo look a little better.
DOF is a function of the distance of the object (the closer the shallower), the f number (the lower number the shallower) and the focal length of the lens (the higher length - in absolute mm and not relative to sensor size - the shallower DOF).
It actually says nothing about sensor size or lens size. BUT with smaller sensor it is more difficult anyways.
D1N0: Too bad it doesn't have a Full frame sensor.
The main trick of E-M1 is that it can take the pro fourthird lenses. Please always consider this when judging this camera.
Nikon A? Ricoh GR?
I buy second hand...
Cal22: Be honest, Allison, it's the look of the GM1 you couldn't withstand; that's why it's your Gear of the Year! This tiny thing is like a gem that wakes desire, isn't it?
The GM1 is the beauty queen of the compacts - and yet it allows interchangeable lenses. These technical features it houses are impressive indeed, but will it keep what it promises? Will this small camera prove fiddly when it comes to shooting? Is it prone to shake because it's a lightweight? Many customers will likely be happy with a GM1 as a point and shoot only. But Panasonic should not ignore the needs of serious photographers and therefore improve the camera if necessary. An optional (silver?) EVF would be nice, too.
Yes, this little gem is cute. You can keep the kit zoom and buy one or two more Olympus primes. For that price you could also have a Nikon d3200 or a Canon Rebel System (with 3 lenses).
CraigArnold: I quite like the Df. I mean it's ugly, and it's not really a MF camera, more 1985 retro than 1960 retro. But still it's kinda nice and probably takes good pics.
And yet, look at the street prices of FF cameras in the UK:Nikon D3x £5249Canon 1DX £4845Nikon D4 £4239Nikon Df £2749Nikon D800E £2349Canon 5D3 £2329Sony A99 £2149Nikon D800 £1802Nikon D610 £1799Sony A7R £1699Canon 6D £1475Sony A7 £1299
Is there any conceivable reason to prefer it to the list of less expensive cameras below it?
Very comprehensive list. Financially I may have to stick with another retro camera, the 6D. Or wait another 3 years for a used Df.
Retro does not mean dated. This Df is the Harley-Davidson (with liquid cooling) of cameras . More a techno-industrial piece, if you like. High cool and laid back factor. Leisure camera. If you want dated buy Canon. If you want pure techno buy Sony.
Jeffa4444: Personally I have an Olympus E PM-1, Olympus E-520, Canon 550d, Canon 7d, Canon 6d. The Olympus E PM-1 is a great shove it in your pocket camera that I can use all the digital Zuiko lenses with an adaptor, the Olympus E-520 is light but gives full creative control, the Canon 550d enabled me to use my EF lenses from the film days & got me back into Canon. The Canon 7d is great for sport & wildlife but not as good for critical landscape where I use the Canon 6d. Horses for courses.
Good for you! It may get even better for many when the Nikon and Sony FF offers force Canon 6D price down