Conclusion - Good, But Not Good Enough.
One thing that really disappoints is lack of innovation from Nikon. The Df reminds me of an Eva character from an animated movie "Igor" - a charming monster slapped together from everything that was laying around in the lab of an evil scientist. But unlike Df, Eva at least had one unique quality that no other "creation" in the story did - Life. The Df, on the other hand, has absolutely nothing unique, nothing revolutionary, nothing that never existed before. Same old sensor, same old AF, in the same old body. It looks like it was a home project of Nikon's Marketing Department without any help from R&D. Sigh.
This is how ALL DSLRs should have looked like from the get-go IMO.
Hope there were a less expensive DF version from Nikon though. There is already a Sony A7 and I am sure other competitors will follow with something similar and less expensive but I just don't like the hustle of changing brands too much...
The IQ of the samples is just horrible even by the small sensor standards.
Superb. I wish there was a video showing how he actually does it ...
I was surprised to see how aged their equipment is; by the look it is probably from the 80's. No wonder they have to test every lens. Still koodos to Sigma for producing some nice lenses on such dated equipment.
Why so many comments regarding creating filters? The beauty and uniqueness of these images is that their effect is achieved without applying any creative filters (except probably for Barbara Cole, which for that reason I would exclude from this category). Most likely most of them are oversaturated to a certain degree, but that's about it. The rest is just a rare moment of visual illusion created purely by sunlight, and not by some cheap, disposable, mass-produced, "fast-food" filters.
Larger sensor, larger pixels, faster lens, two-tone flash, instant multiple exposures, 10 frames per second burst, panorama with adjustable exposure, slow-mo video, very clever processing - I think it will be a great snap tool.
Good for a snapper on a budget with realistic expectations about IQ.
The IQ is just at the average small-sensor P&S (and even some smartphones) level. Plus all FZ models (maybe except FZ50) exhibit this annoying "lack of luminance" in their images making them too dull for my liking. It becomes noticeable only when comparing to other cameras but once you notice it, it become a real distraction. I do have FZ150 but only use it for video because of this "grey cast effect" as I would call it. I see the same quality but less sharpness in pictures from FZ70.
A sad story of creating a product that nobody needs. Hope their patents will find the way in some industry, if not in consumer photography. And I have a feel that all this talk about exciting new products is just a smokescreen to save their faces in front of investors...
The majority of Nikon customers are still waiting for D400... Hopelessly?
Nice features paired with rather mediocre lens IMO. Although the IQ still should be MUCH better than a smartphone. Depending on the price, this might be a good alternative to a phone for a casual shooter.
My next purchase will be not a lens but probably something like RX100 which will replace D300+midrange zoom as a family walk-around solution. D300 or its successor will be reserved for things like sprots, macro, ultra wideangle, etc.
Canon should fire its camera designer if they even have one...
They probably decided to make it in Russia because Zenit's equipment is about from the same era as the original Petzval lens.
VadymA: I think by the time they get to production Petzval effect will be in every PP plug-in like Topaz, Nik, etc... And after looking at some examples on the web, I don't think I like that effect at all; I find it rather distracting to be honest.
Ironically, those are examples that I didn't like. It might be very subjective, but the spinning effect makes me rather "dizzy" or "sea-sick"; almost forcing me to look away from the image. I think the examples in the video are MUCH more subtle; to the point that I even didn't understand what was it all about. But images on the web are either overdone or simply this effect is not for everyone.
I think by the time they get to production Petzval effect will be in every PP plug-in like Topaz, Nik, etc... And after looking at some examples on the web, I don't think I like that effect at all; I find it rather distracting to be honest.
Hasselblad version of BEAUTY IN DISGUISEChapter 1: LunarChapter 2: Stellar
If you are thinking about investing in Sony RX100 but afraid of it being stolen, buy Hasselblad version! Its stellar "do-it-yourself" appearance will keep those thieves at bay guaranteed!
mpgxsvcd: I bet this announcement hits 500 comments really quickly.
And I bet there will be not a single complain about lack of a viewfinder :)))