peevee1: " full-frame DSLR with the sensor and processing guts of the company's flagship D4"
It has the sensor, but not the processor of D4. D4 is able to process 12 frames per second off that sensor, not just 5.5.Cheap sensor from 2y/o D4.Cheap internals from 1.5 y/o D600, with "economized" to non-existence video codec and ports, microphones and flash.Cheap battery from D3200 and Coolpix P7100.New retro body and cut-down firmware.
$999 camera which is so limited that they decided they would not be able to sell enough of them to break even with fixed costs at this price, so decided to overprice it for much more limited market.
Then show then and stop bull$hitting
lmtfa: Nikon, first a laughable UW camera now this. Where's my Yashica TL Super and Nikonos IV?
Just a photo:
Yes I must be a troll since 2006, idiot. AW1, great UW for girlie men. Try taking that down to 110 feet.
Nikon, first a laughable UW camera now this. Where's my Yashica TL Super and Nikonos IV?
Of course you read that somewhere. It's obvious you never had one in your hands. I wish you experts would footnote your statements and not pretend you have a D700 in your cabinet. That means you HAR,
Even Rodan is laughing.
Does it come in teal?
Any news on NEX? Who cares, I have the NEX 6, kit lens and two other lenses that work for me. I'm done building systems ie Nikons and great glass. Too old to carry a camera body with the inevitable 300mm lens. Those Sonys are exciting but their for enthusiasts with deep pockets. Good for them reminds me of me. I'm a snapshot guy now with a 15k + lens assortment that I'll eventually sell and make money that will go to my grand kids.
This will appeal to the snorkeling crowd. When they build a real UW camera that say can go to 110ft like the Nikonos IV with plenty left to go deeper, that will turn scuba divers heads.
Why do they have to put so many buttons. By the time you snap a picture of a barracuda, it will be snacking on your arm! Still kudos to you Nikon.
The 18-105 looks to be like the Nikon CX 10-100, the original. Heavy! Now, a more sensible lens is the 16-70. At $1000 I will wait until after my Colonoscopy.
mpgxsvcd: Crack! Did you hear that? That was Sony hitting a home run off of Canon's washed up pitcher.
Nikon wasn't even in the game and Olympus and Panasonic were playing against each-other on the Pee-wee field.
Hasselbad was in the stands cheering on Sony and Pentax was absolutely dominating a game of tether-ball that no one cared to watch.
Fuji was artistically creating a master piece at a beautiful pond nearby. However, their brush broke and they spilled the paint everywhere which just made a huge mess.
The Fujifilm comment is just too funny. Was that "Walden Pond".
As a former Floridian all I can say is go Gators.
Hip replacement or buy this?
Did Nikon give the convicted execs from Olympus jobs? Next time I read Nikon bitc/ing about camera sales and practically announcing the end of the 1 system, this creepy camera is why. Would the Nikon D4 with a 70-200mm lens or this nightmare camera in purple draw more attention in public? If only I could carry my D700 with two lenses plus accessories, I'd get down on my bad knees and give thanks.
A sensible article. Wow, the Sony RX100II sure makes some nice photos. Its so expensive though @ $749 or even getting the older brother RX100 @ $629.
lmtfa: Their are more "CONS" listed here than their are in Pelican Bay Prison. And it still gets an 81% + Gold Award. So it has been decided by those in charge, make a "Retro" looking camera and name it Fujifilm and bingo it's a world class winner. I wish I had my Brownie that I got from Kellogg's Corn Flakes box tops. It surely would garner a 83% and don't call me Shirley:-))
@chaking. To each his own. I have my arsenal and I'm fond of my Nex 6. Maybe its a bias against Sony, who knows. To me at least I enjoy the noise free stunning photos I get. The AF is accurate and fast. Yes Sony really needs to put more lenses out. I learned the camera with the kit lens (16-50) and now Im using the 35 Prime and the 10-18 much better than the 24 Zeiss. Last if it goes on sale I may go long with the 55-200. Thats it.
ddtwenty: I hope he didn't put the ants in to fight, I used to do that before.That's no good. : (
@ddtwenty. WHAT THE HECK IS YOUR PROBLEM
Their are more "CONS" listed here than their are in Pelican Bay Prison. And it still gets an 81% + Gold Award. So it has been decided by those in charge, make a "Retro" looking camera and name it Fujifilm and bingo it's a world class winner. I wish I had my Brownie that I got from Kellogg's Corn Flakes box tops. It surely would garner a 83% and don't call me Shirley:-))
The bridge builders, then and now, must have testicles the size of bowling balls.
Manfrotto manufactures good reliable products. I have a bunch of their products that make your camera feel safe on your tripod. Their not pretty, take a look at the 808RC4 3 Way Pan and Tilt. But attached to your tripod and the camera to it, it's like the USS New Jersey, steaming off the coast of some country ready to dish out sme hurt.
The limiting factor like the battleship it was not up to date. No Arca-Swiss compatibility but its reliability and price made up in a way for that. No upgrade for me, I don't throw good money after bad.
The piece with the girl lying on the floor is in a way erotic, in a subtle way. You have to think about the message and their is one. She's lying down, holding a sheet of paper with what looks like a blank stare. For me it reminds me of a girl who got a letter from her boyfriend. She hasn't seen him for a long time and she is getting turned on. Notice the position of the hand and its closeness to her inner thigh. This was taken at the very start of the 80's so take that into your interpretation.
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review