klavrack: It should sell well to folks that want DSLR capabilities w/o the weight. On the other hand, we Pentaxians would like to point out the K-30 as a great alternative. From our biased perspective, it's a much more capable camera w/o many relative weaknesses. Good for Canon, though, if it puts pressure on everyone else--competition benefits buyers of all brands.
klavrack, the K-30, (which is a semi-pro model like K20D or K10D), or even the K-r, is quite a bit heavier than the SL1 (Super-Light 1). So I'm not so sure about their "alternative" status. The K-r/K-x/K-m is obviously due for an update.
The SL1 is significant because it is a Canon, and all that goes with that, the lens/flash/accessory choices both 1st and 3rd party, the extensive repair/service network, refined interface and documentation, marketing/distribution/pricing/bundling, software compatibility, resale value...
The blogosphere might eventually wakeup from their love affair with new camera shapes, which isn't necessarily shared by the global consumer. The DSLR, a word that has not lost its charm, offline anyway, is not yet dead.
"He is not yet dead!That's what the geezer said,..."
Heckle me all you want folks, I'm gonna say it anyway:
*Camera of the Year*
And yes, one of the biggest reasons is that it is a Canon.
micahmedia: For those who don't understand why a lack of EVF option is a deal breaker, I offer this: http://camerasize.com/compact/#34,394,375,318,ha,f
Only one of these cameras doesn't offer an EVF option.
For those who say "well, Samsung does offer something with an EVF", note how big the NX20 is. It will never get any smaller. That's the beauty of a detachable EVF--even if the EVF adds bulk, it can be removed to pack smaller.
And also, for those who don't understand the need for an eye-level finder, I offer this explanation: perspective is about camera position. Especially with wide lenses, position is everything. It's inherent to wide angle because of both rectilinear distortion, and the large difference in what's included or excluded in the frame when holding the camera out in front of you. Those couple of feet difference from the position of your eye to the position of the lens are a big deal. Sure, sometimes the arms length thing is just right.
But better is to have both options.
micahmedia, the Samsung offers a significantly larger OLED, obviously.
JEROME NOLAS: So who will buy Nikon 1 now???
Who will buy Nikon 1? People who want small telephoto lenses.
thewhitehawk: I find the lack of wheels on this camera body... disturbing.
On a more serious note, this camera looks more comfortable to hold than most mirrorless cameras, however, I have to say that that large pixel count raises a few yellow flags in my head. Over the years I have observed that whenever Samsung tries to compete with other companies in terms of megapixel count, they tend to sacrifice many other things (see their old Ultra range for reference).
I hope they can prove me wrong, as Samsung tends to be one of the most disruptive companies when it comes to mobile devices, and it would be great to see more competition in the mirrorless camera market. But it will take more than a 3D lens and 20 megapixels to convince me, that's just my opinion.
Don't forget that the wheel on the lenses is assignable (iFn). And of course there is a touchscreen now.
showmetheprime: I think the word I'm looking for is "meh".............
Why should this guy get slammed for expressing his feeling about the camera?
LOL - right on - I admittedly pine for the OM-D for exactly this reason ... it reminds me of the ME Super
Unfortunate grammar error in the title of the press release ... "Samsung's Grows"?
These seem like good prices if the performance holds up.
Mattoid: So its not a phone. You got my hopes up.
b534202: texting usually means receiving SMS messages, which requires a phone number... so how would you text with this?
Jman13: Where do you put your thumb?
I am so tempted to make a smart reply to this, but I won't.
The best camera is the camera that you use.
These online features will get people to use their cameras more. It's a good thing!
Michael Barker: Seems as if it is mostly for folks who either are not enthusiasts or who don't mind owning two expensive cameras.
Exactly:"enthusiasts looking for a secondary (or third?) camera that fits in a shirt/jeans pocket." == "folks who don't mind owning two expensive cameras"
Seems as if it is mostly for folks who either are not enthusiasts or who don't mind owning two expensive cameras.
disasterpiece: I'm in for my first DSLR and this seems quite a treat - near D7000-like sensor (or maybe better) for less than 2/3 of its price. I'm only concerned about optics I'll be using.
Seems to me that the results are noticeably /better/ than the D7000.
Azfar: I can not, for the life of me, fathom this 'slr-like' class of cameras. Whats the point, really. They all have the small P&S sensors for crying out loud. Whats 'SLR-Like' about them...the body? then where does the 'bridge camera' gimmick come in? seriously. If anything, a large body must be required to house that zoom lenses but for all intent and purposes they should 'only' be called super zooms and nothing more.
Well, lots of people can use a 22-560mm range and would like it in a small package.Lots of people know what an SLR looks like and what to do with the eyepiece without knowing what SLR stands for. SLR-like tells people the expected way to use the object.
dgreene196: Reminds me of Samsung's 20-50 mm for their NX cameras. More compact, less range, no IS. If the lens performs pretty well, it might appeal to those who want the absolutely smallest possible kit.
I think that this lens has a place, and Nikon knows what they are doing. The point of these mirrorless systems, to me, is that they fill multiple uses. With one lens the camera is compact but limited in zoom range. With another lens it is not pocketable but has more range. As high ISO performance increases, the usefulness of IS in still photography decreases, especially if one is concerned with "good enough" image quality and not have the best possible image quality just for the sake of having the best. RX100 cannot match Nikon 1 system versatility, and DSLRs and larger sensor mirrorless systems cannot match Nikon 1's portability with a telephoto zoom attached. And this lens is cheaper than Panasonic's PZ 14-42mm. Zooming with your feet isn't always possible or quick, and can change perspective and point of view, and digital zoom or cropping isn't much of an option with 10 megapixels.
stanic042: based on photozone review, this lens has bad reputation among some pentaxians, but this could be to sample variationI like the results
It certainly seems fair to compare the DA 18-135mm with a newly released Canon lens, as the Pentax is still the latest and greatest. Until Pentax revises their lens, the many edge-soft examples will continue to make people hesitate, those who care about such things, anyway. It's all the more disappointing because K-30 + 18-135mm WR seems like such a "right" package.
Apparently it is required to use the word "bespoke" in camera press releases now. LOL
I think they are part of the language, that's all. Neither good nor bad.