Everything indicates that this is a pretty awful, pointless piece of equipment that has little to offer anyone who is serious about taking pictures using a modern digital camera body. At £480, they are having a bit of a laugh I'd say!
When putting something over the front of your Leica's lens, make sure you rub the back of the camera against a rough wooden worktop at the same time. Glad it's not my equipment!
Excellent video. Before I started watching, the questions in my mind were lenses and reflection control. Both were well answered. I wonder what would happen in an emergency if you were carrying two substantial cameras in such a confined space? Would they get in the way of an ejection or escape?
Lokio: Is this going to be an extra special review?
It might be if the control dial was properly indented, the lens had a more adequate focal length range, the camera felt better in your hands and the price was lower. A larger basic SLR can be had for far less money and it has many advantages. The Sony is for people with too much disposable income, who are more interested in flashy gear than photography.
Yawn, no. It's just another veiled promotion for this quite nice, but somewhat flawed and seriously overpriced camera. Please move on DP review!
DigiMatt: DPReview are you or will you be paid by Sony to promote this camera? Your Sony marketing machine seems to be in overdrive.
Digimatt, you have literally taken the words right out of my mouth and I have just come on to say exactly the same thing. Why is DP Review wasting so much time on this overpriced pocket camera? Do they have some kind of a hidden arrangement with Sony?
As a picture taking tool, it's not as good as several considerably cheaper DSLR cameras. It is also way too expensive. No doubt the new version has the same very annoying control wheel with no indents and the short zoom is ridiculous.
This camera really only has size going for it. For all you well-heeled photo equipment buyers who are more concerned with the appearance of gear than actually taking pictures,, enjoy! I think I'll pass.
This might be an okay camera for some users depending on price, but it's unlikely to make any inroads against existing 4/3 products. As somebody else said, it's made by an obscure company and trades on a hollow name.
In reality, Kodak missed the boat about 15 years ago and they couldn't see the writing on the wall. They are virtually a deceased company who now belong to photographic history.
In the UK, it's your right to take pictures of anything in a public place, including the police, celebs and children. However, common sense should tell you that in this paranoid age, it's never a good idea to specifically take pictures of other people's kids.
There are a couple of exceptions to taking pictures in UK public places such as certain birds and the police in some circumstances, where they can later prove you were engaged in an act of terrorism.
This is the way things should be in any country that passes as a democracy.
It should be the same in the USA, which used to be the land of the free, but things have changed for the worse in recent years, as Redred Photo points out and it's surprising that he's on this site when he so dislikes photography in public places. Most picture taking in public places is usually not for profit, but so what? Who gives a toss? I assume RR Photo is also against all forms of security surveillance and video monitoring?
It's fairly clear from recent TV documentaries that Hungary is a backward country. Not only in financial trouble but also in the grip of fairly extreme right wing elements Why Hungary and for that matter Romania were ever invited to join the EU is a complete mystery and sadly, I can't see any good reason why anyone would want to visit these places, especially keen photographers. Perhaps it's not surprising that so many Eastern Europeans want to live in Western Europe?
I suppose this law applies to various types of traffic cameras and all forms of video surveillance?
It looks as if Nikon has actually produced a worthwhile non-SLR for once.
However, Nikon must offer a better (affordable) standard zoom as the 10-30mm is limited in range with a poor maximum aperture. The accessories seem rather overpriced. It remains to be seen what the build quality and reliablility of the V3 are like and the remarks by Jeff Keller about the control dials are a little off-putting.
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.