I'm sure this will dramatically improve the picture taking (or posing) experience for any Fujfilm X user who considers it important.
However, Fujifilm, you were doing okay without this nonsense, please don't lose the plot. A few of us still take your products seriously.
Amazing performance and stellar optics? Wow, but hold on, this is just another cheap and cheerful compact plastic camera with a relatively short zoom that has a f/5.6 aperture at full tele.
It's probably put together by a sub-contractor and no doubt uses very expensive chipped batteries. The only thing going for this camera, is it's brand name.
For the price, you might as well stick to a manufacturer with a good track record for building quality compacts, such as Panasonic or Sony.
Marty, if there was a charge for visiting a site like DPR, I simply wouldn't bother and I generally take no notice of advertising on any site, or manage to block it.
The problem with advertising is that is has the potential to distort the value of products and the bottom line is that manufacturers and pretty much every other business is only interested in generating profit. Therefore the motives of holding a poll that suggests it is the carefully considered opinion of a wide public audience is very questionable.
It's all too common to see ads displaying car of the year, fridge of the year or holiday deal of the year as if it's some kind of factual statement rather like government statistics that are generally way off the mark in the real world.
If this poll was simply aimed at followers of this site, it would need to be wider in scope, ask for any additional equipment to be taken into account and not concentrate on brand new kit that relatively few of us have any experience with.
I don't entirely disagree with you duckling. However, all the practical concerns are important, because equipment needs to be fit for purpose and reliable. These products are expensive and I might well consider the camera of 2013, to be a cheap Canon DSLR or the Panasonic LX7. Some of the items in this poll like the Sigma lens are unlikely to make better photographers of any average user. Nice to hang around your neck and show off as jewellery but not really needed to produce a range of good work. What does concern me is that the information provided in this poll, will simply be used by the companies in question for advertising purposes and therefore of little genuine use to DPR readers.
How can the average DPReview reader do any more than accept the findings of this site's reviewers (for these products), or comments from other Internet sources? I've certainly not had the chance to test any of these cameras or lenses and do not own any of them. I might think that these cameras look pretty, and probably perform well, but I could easily be unhappy about the price or availability of accessories or chipped batteries. I might also find the company's after sales service second rate - which is not unusual these days. Really, this is not the right way to go about doing a fair polll that has any value or meaning. It needs to be hands-on and retrospective.
Let me add that I have no appreciation for DPR for wasting their time and space on something as stupid as this.
Not sure what the point of this very restricted poll is. Who will benefit from it? Maybe the advertising companies promoting these products, but I really can't see any point in voting.
Yet another cheap and cheerful SLR from Nikon that has little new to offer the serious photographer who is more interesting in taking pictures than simply wearing a camera like a piece of jewellery. No doubt Nikon has already planned a future firmware update for the D3300 that will stop affordable batteries being used. Great stuff!
The batteries Nikon (and other manufacturers) sell for their cameras cost no more to make than the cheaper copies, which are generally of the same quality.
However, Nikon are perfectly willing to rip-off the punters for every last penny and will do their best to maintain sales of their ridiculously overpriced and sometimes not very well made accessories. What's wrong is the fact that Nikon are interfering with other manufacturers products that currently work with their equipment. This seems to be the case with Sigma lenses, which are reasonably priced and in some cases better designed and constructed that Nikon branded products. It really puts you off spending money on Nikon.
I've owned three Canon G series cameras. All were fitted with useless viewfinders which I hardly ever used. Nevertheless, they were reliable, well built cameras with good optical performance, producing very consistent results. I also had an Panasonic LX5 (with no viewfinder), which was okay but lacked satisfactory optical performance. In fact, the last digital camera I owned with an accurate viewfinder was an Olympus 5050. But I've found small VFs to be mostly a waste of time and I prefer the bigger view of an LCD screen. The 7700 is exactly my idea of a good compact (almost) camera. I'd prefer it with a manually operated, non-retracting zoom as this reduces the liklihood of component failure. Unfortunately, this camera's CCD will never provide SLR quality. Apart from that it looks good. My concerns are build quality, reliabilty and lens performance, especially at wider apertures towards the edges. If the test reports are favourable, I might buy one as my next SLR backup.
I didn't find this article fun or well timed. It was just the kind of thing you expect to find in an overpriced newsstand camera magazine at this time of the year.
No substance and no value.
Please stick to good quality camera reviews and technical features
I wouldn't take too much notice of this claim. Top-end pro quality Nikon cameras are very good, and in a different league from the enthusiast market.
However, some of their budget cameras dating back to the days of film have been badly designed and in some cases poorly manufactured by sub contractors.
The G12 is my usual back-up camera and I'm ready for a replacement.
I can do without the largely useless optical viewfinder and the swivel screen could be a touch better, but I would really like a larger sensor and perhaps interchangable lenses.
What's happening Canon?
Nikon may think this is a " revolutionary new digital imaging system built from the ground up to empower users," but it doesn't look particulary special or inspiring to me.
The styling is okay, but not brilliant and it worries me that Nikon are aiming much of this product range at consumers who may consider stupid colours more important than picture taking capability.
The selection of lenses in uninspiring and should Canon produce an interchangeable lens follow-on to their G12, the expensive Nikon 1 camera system will be blown away.
I've been using a Canon MP260 for around 18 months and I'm generally very pleased with it. However, it uses up cartridges at a considerable rate and the cost of replacements can only be described as something of a rip-off.
Unfortunately, there appear to be no substitutes available at present.