I see Amazon is being more clear about warranty status. Interestingly, the Import costs more in this case,
Peter62: What a major step BACKWARDS for Nikon!
This camera is made for beginners, but costs more than most semi-pro DSLRs!
Nikon, where are you going? Believe me: next year this 1V3 will be sold for € 299 - including the lens!
Ain't that the truth. Nikon and value equation don't fit in the same sentence, I guess.
Guy Parsons: Good to see people willing to do things the hard way.
Wet plate was the only way in the olde days and an "extreme" photographic collection of wet plates from then is the Holtermann Collection held in Sydney, Australia, http://blog.sl.nsw.gov.au/holtermann/ for info and links.
Amazing things done back then, his largest wet plates measured an amazing 1,36 x 0,95 metres, yes, metres. That's about 53 x 37 inches.
The detail in those old Holtermann plates is superb, basically grainless and limited only by the lenses of the day. Get into zoom mode in a few of them and see the detail.
Yup. I have scanned many a 5x7 and 8x10 glass negative. Marvelous detail, tonality, information capture with what would be considered "primitive" lenses but are hardly that.
Danny: Looking at the subjects chosen, these could just be old Ambrotypes. Great to bring back this process to the present, so why not choosing contemporary subjects instead of 19th century buildings..? The pictures themselves are pretty boring and uninspiring. Start taking pictures of Tokyo or NY or something, rockets, the plane graveyard in arizona, you name it, then the contrast between subject and medium becomes very interesting.
Agreed. See what the discipline of wet collodion impresses on other sujects.
Thanks for posting. Many in the US are practicing wet plate photography, as well as the full range of alternative processes for print out. With exercises like this, it is not simply the final result that counts, but the preparation, thought, routine, pace that goes into the total process, just as it would be using 120 B&W film in a TLR these days.
bzanchet: The Studio shots as Always doesn't mean anything.
Real life are very very diferent.
We understand the goals of a test scene. Color discrimination and accuracy, resolution, image quality at the center versus periphery, centering, etc. But this scene always looks like a parody. Not moved by pictures of pictures. I'll take some real-world, 3-dimensional objects lit in an interesting way.
Today's Wall Street Journal (5/21/13) gave Samsung NX30 highest rating of five cameras compared for "How They Work Connected." Competition was Canon 70D, Sony A6000, Leica C and Nikon D5300.
Silver fine. Although negatives are somewhat weak, but if video is lacking that's a reasonable dig. Samsung does have world class ergonomics and a superior form gestalt. That to me is worth much more than a bit higher ISO performance. Great lens lineup at a semi-reasonable price.
Good work as usual, but instead of dribbling out the reviews so you can list a camera in Gear Shop, why not streamline the review process. I see you are adding writers-good-Amazon has the assets to go first class with this web site.
Decent price for the black body, but another $150 for kit lens?
b craw: Boy, I am so tired of the term "fanboy" - I really wish we could agree to temper its usage. It imparts about as much insight into the dialog as does the banter of insecure 13 year old boys in the schoolyard. Of course, some degree of brand loyalty and bias is a given among a good percentage of photographers, as it is with any consumer really. I think most can recognize extreme bias and simply ignore that information. No real need to call it out.
Most Samsung users with even a relatively modest level of photography experience have used other cameras, Nikon and Canon most likely. As an art photographer and teacher, my opinion, having used a number of cameras over the years, is informed by such diversity, and I have been impressed with Samsung overall (I own a NX300). I think many loyalists to many other brands have not used Samsung, particularly recent models. They all come with shortcomings, but performance and image quality (with the exception of high ISO JPEG's) are very good. Lens quality definitely underrated. And I've shot with Leica and other cameras with quality builds, but have been pleasantly surprised with the Samsung feel (but that is mostly based on the NX300). Samsung has an uphill battle of sorts in the camera game based on a number of factors. And, as someone alluded to, being Korean comes with a perception challenge. But this is based on a dated stereotype. Evidence Hyundai and its rapid improvements in quality, argued by some independent sources as exceeding Japanese makers - in any case, a tremendous value. [Yes, I realize Samsung manufactures in China, but standards are dictated by Samsung and seem decent]
I have a bit of a wait-and-see attitude about the NX3000. Some are a bit baffled at the fact that its specs are almost across the board inferior to the NX3000 - a step down model, yet is roughly the price of an NX300. Well, that is comparing a initial release price to a street price of a model that is almost a year and a half old - that is a tricky calculus. If the JPEG's are improved at high ISO and the tweeks in ergonomics are well received - coupled with hopefully Samsung's increased traction perceived as a viable camera maker - the NX3000 could do relatively well, particularly if Sony's cache wanes.
Samsung builds an outstanding coherent camera.
Beautiful camera. Excellent sensor. Great focus accuracy. World-class ergonomics. AND a great kit focal length.
It never fails. The number and metal awarded are not supported by the quite substantial and honest Negatives in the conclusion. Canon doesn't try hard enough-for $800.
Let's realize that virtually all modern digital cameras are quite good. It's even hard to imagine where cameras will go. High ISO, video, connectivity. Are there any frontiers left to cross.
That said. Samsung makes a fine photographer-centric camera with outstanding ergonomics.
Most all these cameras are like each other, in any event, clearly built on common subassemblies, right down to menu systems.
Price the zoom lens model for $400 and I think it could boost Samsung's profile.
A+++++++++ to DPReview for posting this information.
It doesn't fit the newer cameras but a new version of the Digipower-9000 would be great. I use one to power all my vintage digitals-remember the ones that would eat 4AA batteries of any kind in short time. We see hundreds of new camera accessories and nothing like that.
These cameras are so refined, full-featured, technolgically advanced. What's the "end game" of the modern camera?
Wonderful focal length. Why anyone would use 135mm equivalent for portraits is beyond me.
David Myers: As someone who has worked in design all their life I would buy one just to look at - it's a stunning camera design, beautifully executed and brilliantly functional. If you don't 'get it' then it's probably not for you but don't draw price and feature comparisons or throw insults, it's pointless!
With the best lenses I can get stunning results from the 'no AA filter' APS-C sensors in my Nikons so I'll just get rid of some old full frame Leica gear and go Leica T (plus the M adapter and finder)!
It's nice but hardly earth-shattering. This is what Sony and Samsung, in particular, have been working with for some time. No one has or really can rethink the camera. Even this carved from a block camera relies on pre-determined subassemblies. It reminds of the Samsung NX1000 and NV cameras before.