I'm usually critical of pricing, but considering what the D7200 goes for, I'd concede that at $2,000 (and likely to go down), the D500 is an attractive proposition. Too bad Nikon is slow in many areas, but no doubt the higher end DSLRs are exceptional cameras.
trungtran: If only DSLRs had apps, this could be done easily in software to fine tune a lens to body.
The app could guide the process with prompts and save the settings directly into the camera.
It would work as simply racking through the different focal lengths in a zoom and having targets at different distances.
Start at the wide end, focus on minimum distance. Camera would be in phase detect, get focus. Switch over to sensor detect get focus, calculate difference. Save setting in camera database.
Next would be to move target further away, repeat the process until you get to infinity, then move to the next focal length. It would be a tedious process but if you wanted ultimate accuracy these settings need to be done.
Each zoom lens could have fine tuning for up to 5 focal lengths and 5 distances. 25 checks, can be possibly done in 1 to 2 hours.
The "computer" potential of our modern cameras has clearly never been realized. There's been starts with the WiFi and other networking features, but disappointing overall.
ABOUT TIME. This is where the old giants (and, really, the entire photographic industry) move so slowly and cautiously. The camera body is a computer; the lens is a computer. Make it possible to program these devices in meaningful ways. I can program my Kodak DC290-then the concept was dropped for decades. Yes, props to Sigma for the lens dock.
webber15: Seriously cannot believe some of the aggressive and pathetic comments here attacking Nikon...if fact it just shows those posters up as "mentally challenged" in my view...
Has Nikon been conservative in its elder years. Yes. But it is still one of the world's most recognized and trusted brands and does, I believe, stand for quality. As do, or have, Canon, Fuji, Konica, Minolta, Pentax, Olympus, Mamiya, the list goes on.
rodderslw: Lovely little camera but I just sold my Ricoh GR because I realised I really like to frame my shots with a OVF or EVF. Because its a fixed lens a basic OVF would not be too hard to incorporate? I shall wait.
Something like that shouldn't cost more than $50.
Daniel Lauring: Looks like an also ran to the Ricoh GR and Nikon A. Fuji should have stepped it up with an EV and next generation sensor. It is really disappointing that Fuji, known for it's excellent glass, didn't do a better job with the optics too. Fuji missed an opportunity here and as such it will sell mostly to Fuji fanatics.
Good thoughts. A small, integral EVF like what Panasonic is so good at would have been great.
brownie314: Should have put in the hybrid viewfinder. Then could have been a digital canonette. As it is, pretty good. But anyone who wanted this style of camera probably already bought either the Ricoh or CpA.
Exactly. Or charge $500.
Here's a nice blog post, with some splendid black and white images:
turvyT: The review can be disappointing (for some) and the image quality test not satisfactory, and the sensor old, and the video crap, but the image gallery is very very nice, with more interesting images than many others taken by maybe sharper devices with newer sensors. I guess usability and fun of use makes you a better photographer too.
Carey < Samsuel, Rishi doing some nice images.
Raist3d: Though I dont agree with dpreview about xtrans lacking detail (please see xt10 jpegs or use a better raw converter than Adobes stuff), I agree with the score of this particular fuji model. No ND filter tp shoot wide open (electronic shutter easily prone to rolling shutter on paning round)- the ricoh gr has a better leaf shutter speed.
The fuji lens here is definitively not as good as the Ricoh. I wish Fuji would have gone for another focal- 18mm is already pretty covered.
Great comments. Almost the first questions I had was "does this have a ND filter."
Actually did great with 4 similar cameras with fixed focal length-the DP Qs.
Outstanding review and presentation. At this level of effort and cost-image quality should be superb.
Great. Want to see more and more promotion by photography companies like this to support expression.
Mateus1: Great camera but... I played in store with Pen-F and found back buttons far too small for comfortable use, very hard to use them, and lack of back AF button is a real pain. The front dial with filters is a waste oportunity, I would love to have it as AF mode switch or metering mode switch. So Pen-F is a nice cam but with a few serious issues.
The Canon EOS-M has a lot of flaws, but one nice feature is that you can program so that one dial direction press can be used to focus. I never use continuous AF. Just focus this way an d hold.
Great lesson, here. Just ask Danny Lyons, Mary Ellen Mark, Bruce Davidson, Larry Clark, W. Eugene Smith. The photograph is the last thing you take. It's all about establishing rapport; being part of your element; being trusted.
Best thing about DPReview. Keeping a couple score photo enthusiasts employed.
timo: I agree with other posters about the folly of using FF equivalent focal lengths. That really is confusing.
I note also that DPR acknowledges Olympus's support for the video. I know that manufacturers do supply review cameras, but this is taking sponsorship further. Most websites are commercially driven to some extent, but DPR's status as an objective commentator on cameras and photography seems in ever-greater danger of being compromised.
The video is quite nice, and the content atmospheric, but I'm not sure how much it really told us about the camera, apart from a few recitations from the spec sheet.
Yes. But those disclaimers could run a bit longer. You almost have to know they are there to catch them.
DPReview strives for authenticity over immediacy. They expect these reviews to be referenced for many years.
Always amazes me how what seem like significant shortcomings get glossed over when we get to the conclusions of a review.
Lens is soft wide open, especially near wide-angleConfusing autofocus modes; limited AF tracking capabilityUnsophisticated Auto ISO systemNoise reduction a little heavy-handed in JPEGs
caravan: This is loaded with useless gimmicks,4k video,touchscreen.
But consider what they are competing with. The people I see using smart phones I don't expect are interested in fiddling with a camera-for good or bad.
The OEMs are refining some exceptional machines. There's nearly a dozen new cameras out there I would love to own. But no one is taking the steps to make the cameras not just more powerful but also, SIMPLER. Everyone is tied in to existing subassemblies and no one is working off a clean sheet. This is one reason the Nikon 1 didn't do as well as it might-it still was a complex camera.
Neat. For $1,500, I want an APS-C sensor.