arhmatic: Not advocating for retro, but anyone can tell why the content of this camera cannot fit into a Nikon F2 sized body?
I know it's digital, but no sarcasm... serious question. Thanks!
That was my attempt at funny. Obviously it wasn't. :( LOL.
But personal preference is personal preference. If you don't like it, you don't like it. 'doesn't mean others shouldn't like it though.
And IMHO regardless of whether you are "impressed or not", this camera will probably bang out a pretty darn good picture, even in tough shooting conditions.
Me personally, I take one look at the D500 and it seems to be similar in size to either my D7000 or D750 which I find perfectly usable for the shooting that I do.
And having used a bunch of cameras, I've really come to respect the ergonomics of the Nikon dSLR cameras. To me, they really do seem well thought out. Especially after using them for so long, and quite intensely.
To me, it's not about the "styling", its about how usable it is and if I get the pictures I want out of it.
Take care & Happy Shooting!:)
@Mosswings,+1. I guess I was typing as you were posting. I did not see your post before I started typing.
@arhmaticI think they'd slimmed down since the 1st "portable" dSLR.
Is anything thinking, depending on how good high-iso is indoors, that a Nikon 24-105mm f4 lens stuck on the front of this thing would make a killer indoor sports camera?
jtan163: Nikon's numbering system has finally bitten them.Why is the D500 less costly than the D600? (Im assumng it will be more expensive - if not it should fall off the shelves!)Why is the high end D500 named lower than the low end D600...?
They can get one more out with D500s. ;)
Don't forget about the AF system and the battery to power all of this. :)
Holger Bargen: When I saw the features of the camera, first, I thought it would be a very nice camera. But I had the option to see some results from that camera - and I was dissappointed. I did expect much more - and it was not the photographer as I know from photos she took with her old gear that she is very gifted. So much noise! Colours could be better ...
Yes. Lots of Fujifilm XP shots. But that last one is with an ancient Olympus 850SW. :) And I've shot with the Olympus TG-1 and Olympus TG-830. They are all really practical cameras and fun for vacation.
If you like the Nikon 1 J1, then they have the Nikon 1 AW1 which is in that series and waterproof. But . . . its big compared to these compact size cameras.
The thing with the compact camera size cameras is that you can toss them in your pocket and forget about them.
If I am at the beach with the girls and they decide to go further into the water, I don't have to run back to shore to keep my cellphone dry. I just swim out into the lake with them.
Or if skiing and it starts to snow, I don't have to worry about that either.
It's a lot more convenient / hassle-free to keep one of these things for vacation.
IMHO, a waterproof camera's biggest advantage is one of perspective.
They are so small and rugged, you can have them with you more of the time.
When all my buddies are putting their cameras away because we are around water or sand or a rough situation (in other words, when we are just about to have some fun), I'm pulling out my waterproof camera.
Because you can get right into the action with these types of cameras, the perspectives you get from them make for dynamic pictures. That, IMHO, over shadows the IQ.
Scottelly: Thanks for the info. What advantages does the TG4 have over the TG-860? (I like the fact that the TG-860 has a fold-out screen, unlike any other waterproof camera that I know about.) http://www.dpreview.com/products/olympus/compacts/oly_tg860
And user settings on the dial. :)
Love this video. Love Benjamin's body of work!!!
I especially love what he says about failure.
"The faster you fail, the faster you improve." And his comments on the acceptance of failure. :)
And the comment he made about, wanting something a little more deeper.
That Canon G9x just made my short list of cameras to get my hands on to try as a replacement for my Canon S90. Looks good so far . . . :)
Mike FL: Ricoh WG-4 and WG-5 are very much using the same lens system and sensor as Oly TGx, but users still prefer TGx even it is at least $100 more.
Ricoh should do a market study to find out "why".
BTW, I know why, and most, if not all, of the users know "why", but Ricoh just does not get it.
Ricoh is in the wrong business.
You can't find Pentax in the US either? :(
Was Pentax in Target in the US?
I know more people are buying cameras on-line.
But there are still a lot of people that just want to run out and buy one of these cameras in this category just before they rush out the door for vacation.
In those cases, whatever is available at their local store becomes the camera they buy.
@ Mike FL
"But then Target pulled out of Canada". Same here is the US.
Mike . . . are you saying that Target pulled out of the US market and closed all their stores in the entire country, like they did here in Canada?
I would suspect that distribution (and perhaps marketing) are at issue.
It's not the cameras themselves. Pentax (and now Pentax / Ricoh) know how to make cameras.
I live near Toronto, Canada.
Big city, but I could probably count how many places have Pentax or Ricoh cameras on the fingers of my two hands. :(
Target was carrying Ricoh waterproof cameras! :)
But then Target pulled out of Canada. :(
Where as I can walk into a Best Buy and pick up an Olympus waterproof camera no problem.
Well . . . Talbot definitely made a better mousetrap . . . in my books anyway. :)
I read things like this and I think . . . you can't sell a camera to someone that doesn't want a camera. Maybe some people want an image maker, and that's it.
It kinda reminds me of the Kodak Brownie. That camera was designed to sell more film. Perhaps the smart cell phone was designed to sell more bandwidth and digital downloads. The fact that it takes pictures is kinda a side effect. LOL.
But a cell phone has a lot of things right for a parent taking a vacation. Take a picture. Sort pictures. Post pictures. Share pictures. Save memories. A complete all-in-one solution that is convenient and effective.
How do you sell an additional piece of equipment to that market?
There better be a pretty good reason to buy an additional piece of equipment.
And it better be really easy to integrate with what you do with the cell phone. Not only easy, but better. Clearly more powerful that I couldn't imagine living without it. LOL.
McCool69: I am slightly amused at the amount of people that seem to think the point of this is to make an exact measurement of how much Instagram degrades an image.
Of course it isn't - it is first and foremost an art project that also points out something that a lot of people (I'm talking non-photographers and casual users here...) are not aware of.
I think it is an excellent idea that gives the artist tons of exposure. Would have loved to come up with it myself.
David Hockney did his polaroid work, which I thought was super, super cool. I guess presentation wise the repetition of the frames, but concept was different.
But most recently I love what he is doing with iPads.
Mike FL: It would be nice to have PASM, TG-5 may be.
OR PS without AM are fine too, but "Aperture Priority"? No kidding?! get real!!!!
OR, get an real Aperture.
Thanks for the reference. Is there another reference to confirm this?
I went to the Olympus website and found this reference about the aperture priority mode on the Olympus TG-2.
"The Stylus Tough features an Aperture priority Mode to allow greater depth-of-field and Microscopic Macro Mode that enables shooting closeups 1 centimeter from a subject."
Olympus has put that using aperture priority mode can increase depth-of-field. My understanding is that this is only possible if you actually use a smaller aperture / stop size. [Besides the stacking mode.]
Is Olympus wrong on their website or is the Neocamera website incorrect in their review?
If the aperture priority mode on the TG-2 isn't affecting the size of the aperture, but just putting the ND filter in / out, wouldn't it make more sense to just have a function / menu item to move the ND filter in / out of place? . . . Like on my Pentax Q.
Is there a reference to the Olympus TG-1/2/3/4 having a fixed aperture?
I'm curious with stuff like that.
It is possible that the shutter is acting like a variable aperture. Such as a shutter that is made of 2 pieces of metal that can be opened to varying degrees.
[I actually opened up an old non-working Sony T1 once that someone had given me. It had a 2 part shutter where I could see that it could be possible to open up the shutter at varying distances to form an aperture of different size. But then again, I remember opening up old 35mm focus-free film cameras and seeing that the aperture was a fixed size and the shutter was a single piece of plastic, so no variable aperture possible there.]
But it doesn't have PASM on the dial!!!
Oh, wait. It has PSAM on the dial. ;)
Ok. I want one! :)
cptobvious: Is this what camera previews have become - camera companies giving out free vacations to reviewers? Olympus gives out free trips to Ireland and Bermuda, and now Samsung gives out Hawaii trips.
Certainly these cameras can be reviewed competently by just giving loaner review copies, but perks like these just smell like desperate attempts to influence reviewers.
It's not like other industries don't do the same thing. Just think cars! :) Car reviewers point out that the manufacturer has brought writers from all over to test drive their new car on some gorgeous road so that great reviews get written about it.
If a camera manufacturer can entice a camera reviewer to test the camera out in a nice location where the resulting "test shots" end up looking great . . . how is that any different?
BTW . . . DPReview staff . . . please keep up the great work! :)