Never say never. If they try to beat a $5000 camera with a $5000 camera, no. But if they beat a $5000 camera with a $2500 camera, maybe. Someday we may be looking at Sony, Samsung and Pansonic fighting for a declining market instead of Canon and Nikon and Sony and Fuji.
3dreal: Leica had a 135/1.4 prototype for R some decades ago.
Spiratone sold a 135/1.8 around 1975. It was a stinker, with a sticky diaphragm but they go for good money on eBay.
I'll miss that great Chinese quality.
Xentinus: They have sold faulty cameras,but gracious Nikon has decided to make a favor to its customer.So,they must be happy?!HowaboutTHAT?
I think it's from Airplane II. Lloyd Bridges asks Chuck Connors "What's your point?" and Chuck replies "I have no point!" Inept as Nikon's customer relations may be, they're not childish enough to engage in "Canon does it, too." Although it would be amusing if they did!
Clear as Crystal: Can't believe people are trying to turn this into a negative story about Nikon build quality. Was there ever a camera that received absolutely no negative comments and absolutely no reported issues? Nothing is perfect, Nikon seem to be really trying to change the image that they don't respond to build quality issues.
Also this is about Nikon addressing concerns, why the hell is anyone even mentioning Canon, Pentax or Sony? If you really need to justify your choice of system you desperately need:a, a lifeb, to actually take some photosc, more confidence in your own ability to choose ord, less of a Napoleon complex
Incidentally this is coming from and admittedly amateur Canon and Fuji user.
You're confusing two different things. There has never been a camera that didn't receive negative comments because there will always be things people do or don't like.
As for reported issues, the miracle is that most digital cameras, even complex high end ones, arrive defect-free. But since perfection cannot be guaranteed, Nikon is doing the right and smart thing. I am 100% certain that their quick and thorough response is the result of the D600 situation. This could be the start of a new era in Nikon customer service. Hope so.
Papi61: This is what I don't understand; why do you *HAVE TO* sell all your DX lenses when you buy a full-frame camera? This is what manufacturers would want us to do, but it's not a rational choice, especially now that lenses aren't selling on EBay as well as they did a decade ago. You'd be taking a huge loss, and for what? What's wrong with using a DX body *AND* and a FF one? A DX body is certainly more useful when you shoot with a long tele (or tele zoom), while your FF camera has the upper hand in low light. In other words, best of both worlds.
I've never known anyone at any manufacturer who pays attention to the used market. No one has the time. The closest would be Nikon with their gray market policy which can trip up potential new customers who might not yet be able to afford new Nikon. They buy something used, and Nikon holds them responsible for the sins of the previous owner.
As far as I can tell, the market for used $1000+ OEM lenses is excellent. It's older digital bodies that you cannot give away. There's simply too much to go wrong.
Skulls: I think that the statement that FF produce better image quality is technically wrong.It's the lenses that limit the performance of the APS-C sensors.
1. APS-C lenses should compensate the crop factor with smaller f-number ie: 24-70 f/2.8 for APS-C should be 16-50 f/1.9 for a Nikon and 15-40 f/1.8 for a Canon.
2. FF lenses usually have greater quality glass and layering which also adds to the problem.
Am I missing something?
What you're missing is that it's a moving target. When a point is reached where a small sensor camera system has identical capability (which includes lens availability and quality) to full frame there will be no reason for FF to exist. So manufacturers have to move the goal posts. The problem is, hardly anybody has a use for 200 megapixels.
APS has an odd history. I remember being at PMA when it was shown and promptly dubbed "Another piece of s… from Kodak." Kodak's idea was to get more money from less film while giving the user features they neither needed nor wanted.
Now that cameras are consumer electronics, it's impossible to have features nobody wants. Someone will find a use for them. APS may be sold on compactness but the real reason remains that FF sensors are still too expensive. If this wasn't the case, APS and 4/3 bodies would cost more than big, heavy FF.
Nikon and Canon have a situation. They need to raise prices, but if a refurb D610 with a plastic lens costs about the same as APS, the only solution is to make APS cheaper. OTOH, if they don't offer a reasonably priced FF, "upgraders" will switch to Sony, since their APS lenses will need to be replaced anyway. Once again, technology working itself out of a job.
Andrew Butterfield: For people who STILL associate the Kodak name with quality and innovation... Did anyone ever have that association?
I would agree, this Kodaphone looks even less interesting than a typical phone but it doesn't have anything to do with Kodak other than the name.
And yes, people associated Kodak with high quality and to say otherwise gives away your age. In fact the quality control required to make a roll of color film is pretty impressive.
ttran88: Nikon gots to stop protecting it's higher models, this AF system is really dated, A6000 will focus track better. Live view autofocus on the Nikon will be pitiful at best. Really defeats the purpose of flippy and touch screen. Face detection, autofocus point metering these features are so common and useful for this segment of users but there're still missing from Nikon. . A6000 is a Gold award camera in it's market segment, Nikon's offer is at best Silver Award like the D5300. ( only good going for D5500 which was actually already in the D5300 is the AA filterless sensor). It's already 2015 Nikon
Nope. It's a gold award. Care to wager?
Looks nice and they're smart to go after the very young (cell phone) market. The price seems high but having a Nikon is hugely important to some people.
Flashback: Pop-up flash yet again. ugh...
Is it just me, or does anybody else think the over hanging flash, just completely spoils the look of a fine camera?
Pop-up flash is very convenient and also encourages users to buy additional flash units since they're super easy to trigger remotely without the need to buy anything else.
From your mouth to Ken Rockwell's ear. (This was supposed to be in response to the comment about saying nothing about something vs. something about nothing. Or maybe it was nothing about nothing.) Anyway, I'm glad to see more SLRs coming and hope this will ease the shortage.
mpgxsvcd: Saying nothing about something is better than saying something about nothing. Just ask Canon.
From your mouth to Ken Rockwell's ear.
Well, you can't miss with glaciers. But as so often happens, these are as much about location as anything else. A guy who lives in Dayton, Ohio and doesn't get to travel the world can have a D810 and an Otus and he still won't get anything like these.
I vote for England 1939. Other than that, I would have picked different things. Olympus continued making cameras (not a value judgment on their excellent products, just financial reality), Nikon offered users free replacement cameras and Sigma went from being a bargain brand to making some of the best lenses ever made by anybody. Wow. Who could have predicted these things?
Lovely. There is more specific how-to information in the first 3 paragraphs than in many long articles. And it's not obvious stuff, either. Who would have known not to use LEDs?
Sooner or later every manufacturer has a camera with a problem they didn't catch. Talking about lawsuits, airbag recalls and other nonsense is not relevant. What is important is how the manufacturer responds and some companies are much better than others. Nikon has the advantage, you could say, of knowing what happens when you don't respond.
Just my opinion but good customer service, no warranty hassles, support and fast turnaround are every bit as important as megapixel count, dynamic range and noise levels.
These are nice and it's hard to argue with a photographer who points out that anybody can do it. I suppose Sony could have been left off the title but really, what difference does it make? All but the very cheapest digital cameras are great, which is why they all get gold awards from DPR.
Happy holidays, DPR! In an area with so much nonsense--customers feeling sorry for their favorite corporation, videos showing how to open the box, rumors and conspiracy theories--you have kept things measured and sane. Like most of the cameras reviewed, I think DPR deserves a gold award and some combat pay as well.
My wish for next year, besides a Canon body with a low noise sensor, is for photography to become more difficult. Why? Because it will reduce the number of experts and professionals, and those who remain will really know their stuff.
Best wishes, DPR! And hopes for an interesting 2015.