Valiant Thor: Proof that it's not about photographic excellence, it's about the message and the agenda.
Yep. And IMO the success of the shot can mainly be attributed to the drama that is already present in the scene.
Apewithacamera: I would buy this camera anyday over the D600! It is that good!
Thanks for your input.
Adrian Joseph Roy: Meanwhile, cameras like the OM-D and NEX-7 are sporting blazingly accurate and fast AF, superb high ISO, offering up a host of really attractive prime lenses, and all for somewhat reasonable price tags.
Canon, I've been with you since my first EOS-3 SLR. It's been an awesome ride so far. But you're breaking my f*%#ing heart over here.
They will probably still sell loads of them.
Tomas_X: Why the D300 owner does not want D7000. I can hold my D300 whole day in my hands, but 3 hours holding D7000 results in right hand pain. Bad grip and smaller discomfort body.I know the differences between AF MultiCAM 3500 DX (D300/D3/D4/D800) and 4800 DX (D7000/D600). The AF in D300(s) is bettter than the one in D7000. And the reason is not 51 points versus 39 points. I want the fastness, reaction, buffer, framerate of D300 successor, not the D7000 effort. I want 8-10 fps of the further D400. I want 3/5/7/9 steps exposure bracketing, I could not make this photo with D7000: http://www.tomx.eu/Foto/Vylety_Cechy_a_Morava/Vyhlidka_Maj_2011/slides/Vyhlidka_Maj_03.html . I want D300 strategy of exposure metering, not D7000 burned highlites. I want to connect big flash lights to D300 body connector which D7000 does not have. I want D300 material quality, not D7000 problems well known. I want AF-ON, D300/D4 features of AF, not reducted D7000 sets. I want lossless NEF compression.
Just quickly, the D7000 is a great camera although it does have a few quirks. Metering and AF the main ones IMO. I own one, enjoy using it but understand why people would go for the D300s over it for the aforementioned reasons.
Ok, good, now can we get a fully stripped down version? I'm talking like butt naked, bare bones, no $1000 red dot, basic finish, forget bundling with Lightroom, scrap the movie mode. There's gotta be some other stuff you can remove from the body, Leica... :)
David Rosser: Park CamerasD800 £2249D600 £1956If you can afford £1956 you can afford an extra £293. I can't see many people rushing to buy D600 now D800 price is dropping and it is available of the shelf.Nikon have not timed this at all well D600 street price will drop quickly to something under £1700.
Ridiculous. Who the hell would buy one at that price when for a few hundred more you could get a D800? Regardless, I don't even really see £1956 of innovation here. I think they're overestimating how much people really desire a FF body with an intention to shell out a lot of cash.
raztec: Great to see competitiion in this market. Sony and Fuji are really pushing the envelope to provide serious photographers what they've always wanted: An affordable full-frame rangefinder style camera.
Hopefully in the next few years we'll have the same but only with a good viewfinder, interchangeable lenses, and excellent MF capabilities.
Nikon and Canon should wake up and stop playing the marketing game and get their engineers to produce the cameras that serious photographers demand.
Not sure why people refer to these types of cameras as rangefinder style cameras. What is the resemblance to one?
Sweeeet! Now I can take FF shots of my cat without having to worry about lugging around a bag of lenses.
Nice, but I'd like an OVF, no need for flash or mic input, I.... well I guess I should just get an X-Pro 1. :)
xoio: ANOTHER 'wave it about in front of your face like a stupid iphone' camera.Sorry, but this recent 'trend' from numerous manufacturers' of omitting EVFs & OVFs is really S**t!
@h2k Fair enough. Not sure how you see clearly enough in bright sunlight but if it works for you then great.
I also find tucking a camera against my face more stable than holding it outstretched. I also rarely need to hold the thing above crowds or use it to peep around corners or whatever it is one needs an articulating screen for but hey, that's just me.
Yes, but most enthusiast level and upward models retain a viewfinder, as their users would appreciate and no doubt use frequently. These latest compacts, however, don't fit this category.
VivaLasVegas: 24 mp is soft and mushy beyond ISO 800, 1080i as in interlaced, lens noise can be heard during video, LV is slow and outdated, AF and metering not as sophisticated as Canons, only 4 fps, lacks an in-body autofocus motor.......Sony, Pentax and Canon is a better alternative.
@Tap0 Just curious, how is VivaLasVegas a Canon fanboy? He mentioned three genuine alternatives.
Let's hit 1000 wonderful comments.
Gully Foyle: Entry level DSLRs become redundant. From my perspective, none would miss the 650D or the D3200 if an APS-C mirrorless was the entry level camera.
Specifically for the 650D, it looks to me Canon is a generation behind. It barely bests the D3200 (all things considered) and we haven't even seen what D5200 will be like. Not to mention the truly innovative SLTs. More so if you take into account that Canon has used the same mirror technology decades ago, I can't imagine why they weren't the first to reintroduce the technology. Plus, Sony could put their hybrid AF system from the RX-100 into the SLT line, be done with the mirror and step even more forward.I've said it countless times, I'm expecting Nikon to do this with one of their next releases, probably a D5200 without mirror and with an EVF. Or even without, a-la K-01. I, for one, wouldn't mind.
+1. I feel much more comfortable looking through an OVF.
Can we get an anti-name-alias filter for this thing? One model name is sufficient enough.
No point being hung up on the scores – they're just an overall guide. Look at the individual performance results and base your decisions on those. How do people become so misguided?
Given the ridiculous amount of rainfall in London that has limited the ability of many to go out and take photos, this looks like a wonderful workaround for such an issue.
Arrogance at its best. Nice use of their name to justify premium price for average camera. Injurious to their brand, if only all he world could see it.
Hmmm well apparently Leica wasn't originally at the top of the table when it came to premium expensive gear. Their cameras were good quality but essentially made popular by pros like Cartier Bresson, triggering a wave of demand for their well made but affordable products. Now pros will find it difficult to justify the ridiculous price tag which is not, IMHO, directly commensurate with what Leica cameras can offer. There just isn't the competition in this segment of the market.
Louis_Dobson: I'm always ready to jump on people who say "such and such is too expensive!" because all that means is "I can't afford - or am too mean to pay for - such and such" and how is that our problem? Get a better job, poison your rich uncle, or buy something you can afford and shut up.But really, Leica pricing is offensive. It's so insane it is clearly designed to put off actual buyers so that stuff can be sold to a tiny club of people with infinite money and no sense who can then be milked. If Leica sold their probably rather good new lens for $700 there would be endless banging on about it being "too expensive". At seven thousand dollars the value-for-money merchants are stunned into silence, and the sheep are queueing up to be sheered.Which leaves the rational amongst us to tell Leica where they can put their $7,000 50mm f2, but it might hurt a bit. And to howl with laughter at anyone gullible enough to pay for one.The B&W camera, the 7K f2 50mm lens - this is therapy, not photography.
Wow, your tone really changed direction there. Makes for slightly confusing reading.