halothane: In the UK, the Sony RX10 is now widely available for £649 ( with £50 cash back on £699) and the Panasonic is £749. ($1100 & $1250 respectively). At those prices your choice will depend on what compromises you are willing to make - I have always been suspicious of bridge cameras, as they seem to promise much, but don't always deliver.
Alternatives with 1 inch sensors are limited to the Nikon 1, which with the evf kit would be not far off the price of Both these cameras together! So at present is a poor value comparison. For a similar size / weight, and £100 more, a Canon 100D and Tamron 16 - 300 would be a possible alternative; bigger sensor, better range but smaller apertures.
I would be happy to be given either the Sony or the Panasonic; but if I was buying one, I would choose the Sony, as it has a degree of weather sealing. YMMV!
Enjoy you photography!
Tripods, like camping gear, all look great new. Scientific tests are fine, but there is nothing like real use--stuff designers never dreamed of.
Let's see what these guys look like after a few trips and lots of lousy weather.
At least they are not apologizing for having it in stock.
The press release above is pretty awful.I guess you have to do what you can to gin up some excitement even if the product you promoting is not exciting.
Retzius: Nikon should officially apologize for Brazil's football team.
David Luiz can be their spokesman.
Nikon and Team Brazil: "We have you covered"
I wonder if camera buyers have noticed?
DavidOB: If I get this camera will I suddenly become a great photographer?
Given its price, It will certainly give you plenty of time to work on it as you will have very little pocket money left for anything else.
For those of us into nostalgia, the name "Kodak" evokes some mixed memories.
Growing up our family had a Kodak 126 instamatic camera. Drop the film in and insert the flash cube. Convenient and built for the consumer market. Photos were what they were. It wasn't great but it was sure small and convenient. It was the late 1960s. Get in the 1963 Plymouth Valiant stationwagon and take a trip
Later, my dad purchased a nice Minolta 35mm camera. Kodak 400 film was awesome. Beautiful imaages were produced with that film.
When I saw this camera, it reminded me of the instamatic and not the film. I wonder if this was their intent?
ntsan: I guess Pana and Olympus is giving the low end market to Kodak since Panasonic is going to discontinue G/GF series and the only Oly camera coming this year is E-PL7 (no E-PM3).
The problem the camera makers have with product differentiation is that people want to carry a single device that meets all of their needs.
Cell phones and some tablets do that--pictures, phone, data, and storage. Cameras do not. They are at a huge disadvantage. I was at Yosemite recently, the tablets were every where. All sorts of age groups. The cameras still are the majority, but I was surprised by the numbers of imagining devices that were not traditional cameras. It has change a lot in a very short time. Happily there were a group of artists with pencils, paints, brushes and paper, so I didn't feel completely out of place with two DSLRs
Hetzer: The white/grey design is very fresh, I wish my Sony alpha looked more like this. Kodak is a brand name, nice to see it again, no matter who the owner is. More players in the 4/3 makes the standard more attractive, also good for Panasonic and Olympus.
I am not sure if the market can support the nice group of body makers over the long haul.
fatdeeman: Apparently it's going to cost $499.
"Regularly $499, now on sale for $299".
It is going to be "on sale" every day at $299.
The only way this thing flies is with very aggressive pricing.
There are serious questions about what remains of the low-end market. The i-phone is killing (killed) Point and Shoot and the low-end market for interchangeable lens cameras is next. There have been some nice offerings such as the Olympus Stylus and others offering a decent camera with a built in lens. This seems to be the competition for this camera.
If I decide to upgrade my i-phone, what next? I don't know if this camera is the answer. It is a question of where the price settles and it has a ways to go.
"Pricing is still to be confirmed, but should be very competitive with similarly-specified entry-level mirrorless cameras. "
The price has to be cheap, very cheap, for this to work. Close in terms of price with panny or oly won't make this viable. It needs to compete with disposible cameras.
10 great reasons to visit a US National Park
demunseed: I am the drone pilot that shot one of the first Drone videos over Yosemite. (on YouTube at "DEMUNSEED"). While I sympathize with those that do not want a "drone" (UAV) flying over their heads while they're communing with nature, the National Parks need to set aside 3-4 days per year for videographers like myself to come out and create "our art" with drones. I create these "aerial tour" videos to show an entirely different perspective of our National Parks and also for those that might not ever get to visit the Park. I'm an artist, and my drone is my "paintbrush". Please allow me to create MY art. Jimbowers@foothill.net
No, thank you.
FoolyCooly: Great! Now if we can only ban old farts with tripods next! Photographers are ruining the peaceful atmosphere of the park with their bags of gear and loud shutter clicks.
Cameras are passe'. Everyone uses an I-Pad now.
I would like to ban the jets from Yosemite airspace. Contrails always seem to appear in my photos of Yosemite.
Craig from Nevada: A step in the right direction.
The Yosemite Valley is one of the most overused pieces of national park in the US. They should ban automobiles and tour busses from the valley as the next step.
If you want an aerial view, go hike to Cloud's Rest or North Dome.
Yup. Particularly, in August.
Paul JM: Great pity. I am sure that some outstanding photographic and video opportunities will now be lost for ever. I dont at all buy this business of 'its a wilderness..' If that is the case, then why not just ban anyone from going there at all, and risking leaving rubbish, interfering with wild life etc. It is really just a matter of where you draw the line, so I dont think that people want to be too judgemental about where that line is drawn. There are plenty of people who are prepared and committed to the responsible use of unmanned copters etc for aerial photography.It seems to me rather odd to ban the use of drones in Yosemite, but to allow firearms !http://www.nps.gov/yose/planyourvisit/weapons.htm
LOL. "A handful of responsibly controlled drones"? Been to Yosemite, Paul? In the Yosemite Valley, nothing is done by the handful. Typically, it is done by the car and motorcoach filled to capacity. As for responsible, there is a shortage of that.