Yikes. I'm all for innovation but if this is really being considered, it may be time to change the bong water.
Dan: Why would you buy this over a D800? I'm seriously asking this because I would like to know.
Well, it is capable of shooting at ISO 1600...so there is that.
Seriously though, Leica makes some of the worlds best glass but once the cameras went digital I can't understand why someone would pay this kind of money. They have gotten a lot of milage out of their old, sturdy mechanical rangefinder's reputation. Purely an emotional purchase.
tkpenalty: Love all the spec-sheet warriors here, because totally, having a max sensitivity of ISO1600 means that the camera is worse than a D800.
Okay sure, it is very expensive and maybe a bit overpriced. But seriously? Comparing it to a D800?
I totally agree. If you have a D800 why would you ever consider spending 4 or 5 times more money on this.
This is a pretty exciting camera. $1000 less than the D800 but still packing a great feature set.
Sergeg: It will be interesting to see if the lower pixel density will result in improved low light performance. The uncompressed HDMI output is a real plus for those who shoot serious video and DX compatibility is also welcome. Well done Nikon, time to come home from the wilderness.
Based on specs alone, would you expect this camera to do better in low light?
Peter Gaunt: Interesting looking camera. Why though does this site, and some others, persist in giving sensor sizes in rather bizarre fractions of an inch such as 1/1.7 (there's even mention of 1/1.63 somewhere in the article). It's so difficult to visualise. What's wrong with simply saying 15mm or 0.6".
I totally agree. These fractional sensor sizes are meaningless to anyone. Everyone can grasp 13.2 x 8.8mm. That being said, I too would like to thank DP for adding the aperture range chart. For me it is the most useful spec when assessing these cameras.
Tape5: What a great compact beautifully designed affordable light and capable piece of garbage.
LOL. thanks! That really made be chuckle.
Microscopic sensor, no viewfinder. Another disposable camera.
IcyVeins: I think DPR loves my contributions to these review threads because in this one for example I am still singlehandedly responsible for one third of the posts, and this is only the apetizer, I guarantee you I'll be in full bwon attack mode when the RX100, NEX-5R, and NEX-6 reviews come out, I'll be ripping Canikon and Samsung to shreds for the inferiority and general ineptitude.
Yeah, and spam makes up 90% of my inbox but you won't see me giving those creatures high-fives. Seriously IcyV, you can't make categorical statements like that without coming off like a flake. DP reviews are unique in the industry and I think they do it without bias and with us, the end users in mind. This review in particular nailed it. Nuff said.
IcyVeins: HOW CAN YOU GIVE THIS A LOWER SCORE THAN THE NX210??? THAT MUST BE WRONG, SONY IS THE BEST
Is there not a link somewhere that will allow me to send IcyVeins a good shock or at least a book on managing puberty?
Camediadude: Thanks .. most intriguing to see other's habits and techniques. (I'll pass on the overpriced and over-hyped apple devices though)
I would hate to re-awaken an already tired argument but in spite of the costs, the Apple systems speed up my workflow in every way. Professionally I have to work with PC and Mac systems but if getting it done quickly and properly is essential, the Mac's will always get my vote.
I totally agree. AA batteries are essential for cameras like this.
I had a friend complain about this phenomena just last weekend. She will be glad to see this update.
Sam Carriere: It would be wonderful is Dpreview left this NASA boondoggle to the newspapers and concentrated on matters of interest to photographers.
A story about NASA's sensor choice is completely appropriate. You have become jaded Sam.
newcameraguy2821: Here are some interesting videos about the D4 Camera:
Nikon D4 Hands-on Reviewhttp://shrt.fm/wyj5fM
Nikon D4 unboxinghttp://shrt.fm/FPMD8f
Nikon D4 Low Light Field Testhttp://shrt.fm/FU56jy
The First D4 link just seems to hang. "Video is now starting" message. Isn't.
Are there any iPhone users that can comment on this gallery compared to what they have shot? Just curious....
zorgon: I wouldn't get one myself, but the 1/2" sensor is definitely an improvement over the standard 1/2.3" sensor typically found on these superzooms. They are useful cameras in bright light. Idea for the stealth beach pervert.
And, it is an 8mm diagonal sensor or just under 1/3 of an inch. Yeah I know, all companies use this anachronistic measurement system that in no way reflects the true size of the sensor but it drives me crazy.
Marty4650: This camera seems to be very similar to the much cheaper Panasonic G1X.... except the G1X gives you built in pop up flash, a built in EVF, digital zoom, and lenses with OIS built into them.
I see Amazon has the G1X down to $559 with the standard (non folding) kit lens.
Canon needs to offer a better value than this one.
I think you've made an accurate assessment. Indeed the G1X is a more well rounded camera. I 've gone through the review a couple times now and it occurred to me that the inspiration for the design was probably the Powershot SX240 HS.
thisisjh: I need viewfinder viewfinder viewfinder....
I agree. In spite of promises of bigger, more detailed and brighter, rear LCDs so far they all completely suck in bright sunlight. No exceptions. I suppose the challenge for Canon now is that even if they offer a nice EVF it will make this a pretty expensive camera.
I was hoping to see Canon take the Fuji XPro 1 and put their own spin on things.
These cameras make sense to me with short pancake lenses but as soon as you strap on anything bigger, you have to wonder why folks don't just pick up something like the T4i/T3i.