In D7K teardown Cicala said: "I’m pretty comfortable saying there’s at least as much profit in the $700 mirrorless as in the $1200 SLR, probably more". Looking at this one (and having a7R pricing in mind), just tinkering how difficult it is to justify the price tag put on some new mirrorless cameras. Apart from the sensor and the shutter, not much more is left.... On the second thought, I may not be the only one expecting something substantial and 'more complicated' for the money, thus growing skepticism if this is supposed to last or will get discarded/abandoned by manufacturer like 2 years old smartphone...As a conclusion (apart from being nice shiny new thing that works nicely), if it is really that simpler to make (and maintain, adjust, calibrate etc) than the traditional DSLR, why does it bear the DSLR counterpart price? Oh, I think I know - because THEY can....
brianj: Does a photo need to be about some sort of violence to draw people's attention?
Sadly - yes. The news are rarely about something nice: murder, bombing, terrorists, shootings and any kind of human tragedy makes the news. Always have, always will.
ray07: Sony A7 well done.......
Sony is really overdoing NR (and sharpening), which is pity. 7r is even more aggressive than 7....sometimes I don't get why Sony does this on this class of cameras. For bottom range it's sort of understandable - but if one needs 7/7r than my guess is he/she knows a tad more about photography. Yes, there is always raw, but...
Good work, DPR and I think it's fair as well, considering being hard to pick among all listed cameras - they are excellent cameras.Of course, there will never be a consensus about "the best of the best" as each of us has own preferences. Image quality wise, one cannot go wrong with either. Looking forward to see the rest of the round-ups in the pipeline.
(unknown member): I've always wondered: If any of the OEM manufacturers wanted to play hardball with the Tamrons and Sigmas, etc., why wouldn't they encode their cameras to just make it next to impossible to use anything except their own lenses on their cameras? I would think it would not be hard for Canon or Nikon to include code that would make life very difficult for aftermarket lenses (or flashes for that matter).
Perhaps this (from Wiki): United States antitrust law is a collection of federal and state government laws, which regulates the conduct and organization of business corporations, generally to promote fair competition for the benefit of consumers. The main statutes are the Sherman Act 1890, the Clayton Act 1914 and the Federal Trade Commission Act 1914. These Acts, first, restrict the formation of cartels and prohibit other collusive practices regarded as being in restraint of trade. Second, they restrict the mergers and acquisitions of organizations which could substantially lessen competition. Third, they prohibit the creation of a monopoly and the abuse of monopoly power"And other countries may have it the same way, so to feed the wolves and keep all the sheep... just throw the junior Sheppard in the story...
Are we supposed to be surprised about this? Some of us had been pointing "something going on" since D80, the first model that had issues with Sigma OS HSM lenses. Back then, the first lot of D80s had problem even with Nikon VR lenses - they update Firmware. D90 came, again FW update for power module. With D7K it was obvious that power module has been tweaked not to provide enough juice for Sigma OS HSM lenses in particular in LV, where the power consumption on camera itself gets higher. I own D7100 but no longer have any OS sigma, nor dare to get any. I would eventually consider 50-150 OS or perhaps 70-200 OS but I KNOW sooner or later there could be a problem. The way I see it that Sigma, with its improved quality and lens choice, poses as significant treat to Nikon own lens lineup. As long as Tamron keeps low profile, they are safe...but bet my last $5 Nikon would play them the same...For the sake of consumers I hope Sigma resolves this alone..
If course it's wrong when done by Nikon, that 'right' is reserved for smaller players like Olympus or Pentax. We knew it would be chunkier than original FM or whatever it is meant to represent. What attracts me is the obvious quality of workmanship put into digital SLR, something seen not so often today, It has a price tag to reflect that and may I just say (the black version) is perhaps the first collectors SLR camera since film era. I'm pleased Nikon did it and immediately made retro "un-cool". Would I buy it if money is not an issue? You bet I would, I'm sucker for 'old looking things' (and cable release). It represents in its own right what (digital) Leica represents in rangefinder world - so why questioning the price tag?
HBowman: Nikon ... on the late Hasselblad road !
You want pure photography in digital world ?
>> Tame a DPmerril and you will know it. This is THE day were SIGMA as a more valuable image than Nikon lol. Bushido spirit !
wrong mate, no wood involved
I reckon it doesn't have Hassy price tag as the grip is not the actual solid burl, just veneer (albeit whoever tried to handle bur(or burl) would know it's a hard wood to work with). As for colour, it reminds me of the "hammered" finish old Russian microscopes had. At least Ricoh created "collector's" item at reasonable price tag - though I don't quite understand the concept of something being disposable battery operated and being collector's item at the same time. IMO it was already "retro" enough...
Then Sakar should sue Sony for their QX clip-on camera... so Nikon settles with Sony...what a nonsense. It just looks as white as Nikon 1 series and that is where the similarity ends.
ChrisKramer1: Why all the fanfares? The Samsung Galaxy S4 has an excellent panorama function as well. Was there an article entitled "Why I can't stop taking Galaxy S4 Panoramas?"
The fact is, the Iphone looks nice but enthusiasts need a bigger screen and image stablisation. On a recent visit to Russia, I used my Samsung S4 more than my Sony NEX5n but really, image stablisation is a must in low light. The only problem with the Lumia 1020 / 925 is that the apps are so sparse. Why no Snapseed, Photoshop Touch etc? Tragic...
Sony Xperia Arc had it almost two years ago when we bought it and it works great - this may be excitement for iPhone users but proves they obviously missed a lot... OK, they now have that feature so they can enjoy it. Good for them.
Narupol: I used to plan to do something like this but with my iPad.
Don't know how thick is the glass in the front of the actual panel, but you might try getting a "contact copy" printing, paper directly on the screen...If that works, someone will make even more money developing the app for it :"safelight" overlay to put the paper, "timer" for exposure of inverted image and then blackout back to safelight.... just for a stupid fun, if nothing else...I guess someone has already tried this.
ZorSy: sad and concerning if their authorities consider this a "solution" for the problem....
The problem I see it is the fact that these billboards don't convey the message "we have to do something to get this view back". Instead they offer the cheap alternative for tourists to get the shot they want and move on. Assuming the tourists come from environmentally concerned countries (like mine), how ignorant we should really be to get over this issue and actually use these as a background for our holiday photo (without thinking)? It''s shame on us accepting "it's their pollution, not my problem". Whether it's masking construction site or not - without action the view will never be as depicted... Zvonimir T. said it well. Cheap at whatever the cost: and sadly we buy it as it's good for us. What about them?
sad and concerning if their authorities consider this a "solution" for the problem....
bdcolen: I cannot help but laugh at the breathless excitement over doing "serious" photography with an iPhone, with or without any gimmicky filters. Yes, of course, the best camera is the camera you have with you. But imagine for a moment that someone told this or any serious - photographer, 'no, don't take your state-of-the-art cameras with you on assignment; do your work with this crappy 2004 point-and-shoot." The response from anyone not looking for publicity for doing something weird, would be, 'are you out of your mind, mate?' (And well it should be.) Yet today we have serious photographers, including some leading photo journalists, doing assignments with crappy 2004 point-and-shoots called iPhones, making the resulting photos technically even worse by using gimmick filters and post processing add-ons that produce the look of badly processed, fadded, color films from the 1970s.
Camera of choice? Results to be celebrated? For anything other than art(sy fartsy) photography? Not really.
Misho, if you are on the assignment-or if photojournalism is your JOB, wouldn't you carry a TOOL for doing that job decently? I tend to agree with bdcolen , these hipsters are doing it purposefully to promote the brand/idea. They want to be "in" or blend in to a faceless mass of FB generation.
#30. It’s hard to tell the difference between a mobile, digital and film print (up to A3). Hmmm, are you absolutely sure about that one, in particular A3 size? Unless it's a bad printer or a poor eyesight.
"In the coming days and weeks, we'll be working with all editorial employees to train and outfit you as much as possible to produce the content we need." - OK, so if the CS-T laid off photographers as redundant, in no time they won't have to pay the remaining lot a cent of redundancy package as they will all get fired for 'incompetency'. That's how it works at (still) my workplace... And poor suckers will have to take this task as directed by their management (until the last day). I can visualise what's it like being there at the moment - the work 'morale' is on its highest point. And everybody already feels sorry for themselves apart from the stupid ones...I'm generally happy with the local newspaper delivered every Wednesday for free in our letterboxes: worth what I paid for. They might use freelance guy but at least he is a PHOTOGRAPHER.
tabloid: All very nice...but its done to a jpg.It would be much nicer if all this could be done to a raw image, and then once corrected (in raw) converted to a jpg as a final finished image.
I wish there was a 'Photoshop Raw' with all the same menus that the ordinary photoshop has for jpg manipulation.
What you are wishing for has a name: CNX2. You start there and finish in Photoshop....at least I do it that way.
ZorSy: "We were impressed by the phone's low light capabilities while shooting some samples at Nokia's launch event in London. We managed to get a recognizable image in a set-piece shot where both an iPhone 4S and a Canon 6D with Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC lens had problems.". Hmmm, how do we take this? 6D with a fast lens is easily outperformed by a phone camera? Comparing phones to phones is fine, this comparison is bold (and rather brave) statement IMO...
Thanks Lars, that's why I actually pointed this out: without some technical background in reporting, it may sound a bit confusing. In short, combined FL+aperture/sensor size (AF DOF)+OS+ISO works well at low light....I think it's reasonable to expect that OS would gain its effectiveness the smaller the sensor/optics becomes, which matters for static low light scenes and handheld.
"We were impressed by the phone's low light capabilities while shooting some samples at Nokia's launch event in London. We managed to get a recognizable image in a set-piece shot where both an iPhone 4S and a Canon 6D with Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC lens had problems.". Hmmm, how do we take this? 6D with a fast lens is easily outperformed by a phone camera? Comparing phones to phones is fine, this comparison is bold (and rather brave) statement IMO...