James JC: I don’t know if it was intentional or an oversight nor do I care.Why should Nikon be responsible for supporting knock off products? Third party manufacturers should consider themselves lucky they are not being sued. Just ask Polaroid…
So is Sigma a knockoff product too ? The few ART lenses that they have beat Nikon in all manners that count and the ones that Sigma are going to come out with will probably do the same. Nikon should care because buyers of knock off lenses also buy camera bodies.
BRPWS: I think this article at ByThom says it all:http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/the-nikon-sigma-kerfuffle.html
Thanks. I missed this. The key phrases that resume the whole article for me are: "Sigma didn't take something into account when reverse engineering the mount communications, or Nikon changed something deliberately hoping to break compatibility." So what is it ?He goes on to write : "Nikon, as usual, won't comment." That's the sad part. Nikon never comments. They never say anything. Not saying anything will only compound suspicion.
BRPWS: Batteries as well as many other accessories are profit makers for camera manufacturers. In the past off brand batteries as they are called did not perform as well as OEM batteries. Of course OEM is misleading because let's face it, Nikon does not make the majority of their own accessories and for sure they do not make their own batteries. Perhaps there is some hidden technology in the battery which helps the camera determine how much battery is left.
These extra's are highly profitable for camera manufacturers and they will protect their market share and make such off brand accessories not function if it possible to do so.
For the longest time electronic cable releases have been a nightmare for the consumer. In many cases that mysel and the staff have observed at our workshops, would malfunction causing the cameras to lock up.
This is not a new issue. But now with software and firmware the way it is I am sure they can lock out whoever they want to. In the case of Sigma
With careful research, any third party accessory will work just like the original. The problem is that a lot of people buy the cheapest knock off they can find.As for Nikon vs Sigma, it's very clear that Nikon is scared to death of the upcoming ART lenses that Sigma has in store. They know now that Sigma can beat them in IQ and price and not by a small margin. What really gets to me is that Nikon should strive to do even better (they have the means to do so) but instead they choose to artificially block the competition. This will only hurt their reputation in the long term. It's starting to look like monopolistic practices to me.
Amnon G: Before the onslaught on Nikon begins...It is possible this is an oversight (i.e. testing at Nikon happens only with 1st party batteries).Claiming evil with no proof is just childish. It's unfortunate for sure, but hopefully will get resolved with another update shortly.I'm relating to reactions I've seen on different sites - I think that the step function reaction is a bit childish and assuming people don't know what they're doing (even though the person making the bold name calling doesn't have even a fraction of the data to make such claims) is irrelevant.Nikon's actions in the next few months will be the determining factor whether this was an oversight in good faith or really a silly attempt at making more money.
You could be right but I doubt it. I just wish they could be more transparent with their customers. I've been shooting Nikon almost since the beginning of their DSLR production line and although I really like the cameras that I have used, if there is one word that comes to mind when I think of Nikon it's arrogance. This article doesn't help me change my mind.
razadaz: Perhaps they are taking a leaf out of the Adobe Photoshop philosophy, using software to control and restrict the products use. Ten years from now we might have to rent all our cameras and lenses instead of buying them.
Yes but if they are smart enough to invent new ways of stopping people from using third party stuff, there are even smarter people to break the firmware. It's a question of time before "hacked" firmware starts being available on the net.
Nikon is making a potentially dangerous move here. Some third party lenses and accessories are hurting their sales and instead of motivating themselves to do better and at more competitive prices, they take the short and brutal route of attempting to completely stifle the competition and obligate their loyal buyers to stick with the house brand. I'm just glad I never updated to the latest firmware as I do have a few Sigma lenses and third party batteries. Shame on you Nikon ! Competition is good !
Frank_BR: Nano coating? Oh, no, another manufacturer who tries to tell other version of the same old fairy tale about lens coating!
It all started in the '60s when Asahi Pentax created a hype with SMC (Super Multi-Coating). Since then, the world has had to hear all this blah blah blah about the magical qualities of the various types of coating used in photographic lenses.
Some acronyms created since then by the fertile imagination of the lens manufacturers:SMC PentaxEBC: FujiT*: ZeissMC: Pentacon, CZJ, TokinaSSC: CanonC: NikonN: NikonSHMC: HoyaUMC: SamyangVMC: Vivitar
I've used many Nikon lenses without nano and their nano counterparts and I much prefer the ones that are nano coated even if the makeup of the lens elements is exactly the same. Nano makes a difference in IQ and it goes beyond controlling flare or fringing. The coatings on a lens can have a very definite influence on color rendition for example. I'll admit that the names are silly though.
Wait for the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART. It's going to trounce it for far less money. For the investment involved, I'm not overly impressed.
gtphoto: I think this is excellent work and I can (and will) review the photographers website for hours. The treatment to the photos seems appropriate if you think about the lighting available in the scenes. These images NEEDED to be tonemapped to bring out all that amazing decay (that is what these images are all about - decay of what was once beautiful) in the shadows and reveal the mystery of the rooms. I find myself thinking about the last day the original occupants were there, and why they left in the hurried fashion it appears they had. As for those who commented on "staged" scenes and trespassing, here are my thoughts. A respectable Urbex follows 3 rules - don't touch anything, don't take anything and don't get caught. If a location is unused, not maintained and unoccupied, it's "open" for exploring at your own risk. I'm jealous that I'll never stand where the photographer stood.
My thoughts exactly. I do some urban exploration myself and it's virtually impossible to get enough dynamic range to bring out the needed details that make these locations so interesting without the help of HDR. I do think the photographer could have eased up on the HDR effect somewhat but that's just personal taste.
Meanwhile, where's the D400 ?
GPW: What the HELL is going on at Nikon? Do anyone think that this camera will have a better profit margin than a D400. NIKON seems to have their head up their A#$ when it comes to what their customers really want.
I agree. They seem to be going for the shock factor. In this case it's negative shock. I'm not saying this camera isn't interesting, I'm saying it's not what most Nikon users are expecting.
Zoron: When Sigma update their 50mm 1.4 Art series with OS....this lens is going down!!
Leave the OS out and sell it for less than a grand. That will really hurt the Nikon 58mm.
Ok so when is the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART coming out then ?
IKnowin: DMC-G6 Compact System Camera with 14-140mm Lenses, HD 60p 1080 - Larger Sensor, same sort of size, lower price and interchangeable lenses.
I love my Sony RX100 because the quality is up there with many DSLRs but the real reason for the love is this quality comes in a pocket sized camera - as soon as you can't pocket a camera the alternative options are endless and it doesn't help when this camera appears to be over priced by a factor of 2.
Not sure who'll buy it. Too big for the most, too small for the rest and costs at least 50% more than better competition. IMO
Couldn't agree more. At $300 less perhaps...
Regardless, I'm sure plenty of people will buy it.
peevee1: Fuji X-S1 is dead, completely obliterated by this. Nikon 1 V cameras too, the whole system. Olympus E-M1 and especially Panasonic GH3 are seriously on notice - they'd have to include THEIR f/2.8 zooms as kit at reasonable prices to stay on top. Even APS-C mirrorless with their big and slow zooms (especially slow superzooms) make no sense at all (NX20, Galaxy NX, NEX-7 with 18-200 etc). Smaller mirrorless with pancake zooms are not in that niche, but are hammered with RX100 II instead. :)FZ200 being significantly lighter and cheaper and having advantage at 600mm even after Sony's digital zoom will still have its niche, but as #2 now, meaning prices might to start to come down (no more "I want the best at this in this at any price" market for it).Quite a development, I suspect more significant for the market than A7/A7r.
I really really hope you are being sarcastic.
JJLMD: STOP comparing this camera to other cameras! There are NO competing products out there. Show me another product that provides the IQ of a DSLR, has a 24-200 f2.8 zoom, and has the form factor of a small DSLR.
Many are discounting the IQ based on its sensor size. Big mistake. Consider: its sensor is approximately 35% smaller than a MFT sensor but because of its BSI design it gathers 40% more light than its size would predict. And both DP Review and Steve Huff have stated explicitly that MFT IQ is on a par with APS-C IQ.
My direct experience more than bears this out. I find my RX100m2's IQ superior to my Sony NEX-6 with kit zoom lens and my wife's Nikon D3200 with Nikkor 18-200 f3.5-5.6 lens. It is not, however, as good as my FF Sony RX1 or SLT-a99.
I ordered my RX10 and will sell the NEX-6 and D3200 when it arrives.
I own the RX-100 and though I like it more than any other compact I have owned (at least a dozen), the IQ I get can't compare to what I get with my Nikon APS-C based DSLR's of comparable MP's (D5100 and D7100). Your wife's 18-200mm on the D3200 is the culprit for less favorable IQ, not the body. Put another top lens from Nikon (zoom or otherwise) on that camera and see what happens. The 18-200mm is a very practical but bland lens when it comes to IQ. Personally, I think your decision to buy an RX10 is as impulsive as impulsive gets. I find it interesting but it's pricing is madness.
guamy: A fanny pack will do the job better.. just swing it in front of you in seconds to grab your camera this way faster execution than the backpacks that also hurt your shoulder.
Yeah, try to stuff your fanny pack with a pro body and a 70-200mm lens and see how that works out. Fanny packs are built for a specific purpose, backpacks are built for a totally different purpose.
CameraLabTester: A third layer with a UFO would really smash it!
Come to think of it... a fourth layer would also be good:
Painted on the roof: "Aliens Go Away!"
There you have it. The best reply yet. :)
Ian Leach: There are purists and artists in many hobbies, for example classic cars and custom cars. The difference between them is that artists generally appreciate both final products but purists think everyone should conform to their self-inflicted rules.
Mind you the example above is way too easy. Try a correctly exposed foreground but with a blown sky including a tree line.
Judging by your rules of what is right and wrong, imagination and creativity are sins. Yes ? (replying to Maloy's post)
ManuelVilardeMacedo: People seem to confound two different concepts: manipulation and edition aren't necessarily the same thing. One has the potential to alter the perception of reality, the other just enhances the image. The latter can be used freely: it's a matter of taste. The former, however, imposes ethic boundaries. Unless you wanto to make an abstract image and have no pretence to show it as a literal description of a scene, manipulation is OK. If used wrongly, it can become a lie. Moreover, it poses the question whether a given image can still be considered a photograph.
I agree. I enjoy looking at both kinds of images but I think it would be better if a photographer mentioned when an image is a composite. The boundary between editing and manipulation is getting thinner and thinner though.