Joerg V: 98% Otus @ 25% price? Shut up and take my money!
I can't think of any Sigma lenses that render images as nicely as a good Zeiss. Why should this one be any different?
Not that we all can (or should) pay the price difference, but there's no way it's going to be 98% or 101% of the OTUS to an artistic eye.
Still, as beautiful as the OTUS' tones, foregrounds, and backgrounds are, I'm not 100% sold on the appearance of the light circles in its bokeh (for $4000 I can be a bit picky, can't I?). So no lens is perfect, but some produce really beautiful photos, and I'd easily pick the OTUS over the Sigma at the same price.
jeangenie: I sold lots of S800s, even to people that had smart phones. The sensor/lens isn't nearly as good as you'd get on a P330/P340/etc., but it still took pretty solid photos with a decent zoom, and a lot of people appreciate having all their photos apps on-camera, rather than muddying up their phones.
Problem was, almost all of them came back. The S800 had a long start-up time, being that it had to load Android. To avoid waiting over a minute to use the camera, Nikon designed it to go into 'sleep' mode like a cell phone. And like a cell phone, you had to charge it almost every night. That's fine for a device that you use every day, but is totally unacceptable for a device that may go several days between uses.
Every single complaint was about this. Believe it or not, that's the only gripe I heard.
Unless this camera has a much faster start-up time, I don't see how it will be any different. If Nikon makes me carry these, I plan on putting them on eBay immediately.
Interesting story - makes sense. It shows what really matters to most of us, and there's nothing wrong with this. If it's not practical, you don't use it!
I hope Nikon can overcome this problem.
semorg: I think the biggest advantage of this camera over Nikon D7100 is the built-in image stabilizer. Sadly, DPreview didn't seem to mention that in their conclusion. I guess their tests are just confined to studio setup images.
@Leandros S - Please see EdBov's comment above mine - I was responding to that (sorry I didn't make a direct reference to that post).
Master Yoda: First, the new Canon M and now this new Nikon 1 . . . both "NOT FOR SALE IN THE USA". Personally, I wouldn't buy either one but it would seem they are waiving the white flag with the USA with these kind of cameras and probably doing us a favor LOL. Meanwhile, Fuji, Oly and Panny continue to move forward.
Mark, does such a poor national self-image hail only from AK, or are you actually "above" the rest of the country there?
It may have its uses, but it would be much more useful with LTE connectivity.
Still, real-time Android photo/video apps can make such a camera much more powerful that it would usually be.
Dezzza: Who will take this camera to shoot with JPG? It'a not a smartphone.
Perhaps the same kind of people who shoot JPEGs on Canon and Nikon? You know, pros who need to quickly submit photos taken on their Nikon D4s at the Olympics and other major events?
Shooting JPEGs is not a joke, but trying to shoot quality action photos on a smartphone is.
Just Ed: Know that DP likes to beat the drum for the "little guy" but in Sacramento, CA no one carries them (DSLR).
Not Fry's, nor BB, nor the two actual camera stores.
It would be of concern to anyone seeking to adopt the P
Unfortunately we just lost Calumet, and they won't be the last to go. The reality is online sales are big for every brand. While camera stores can serve as showrooms (and hopefully, also points of sale), I think a lack of presence in stores is more of a disadvantage for the manufacturer than the consumer, these days. But it's still an unfortunate situation that Ricoh is slowly working to correct. Pentax K-50s have reportedly been appearing in some Target stores, for whatever that may be worth.
Because ... exactly what's wrong with Olympus and Fuji cameras and the significant improvements they keep making?
Giving them a fair review doesn't somehow make a Pentax review unfair. And as much as I'm embarrassed by Pentax whiners (and I wish they'd stop), they don't represent all Pentaxians, and you can't really "punish them" with a poor review, even if that's what you (almost justifiably) fell like doing.
Having said that, I think Pentax' effective in-body SR is still a key differentiator. Even though the technology has been around for a while, Canon and Nikon shooters still have to live with many lenses that can't benefit from any form of IS or VR. It's a Pentax advantage that many (most?) shooters experience daily. And I've found Pentax' SR performance has further improved beyond the K-5. So it should be highlighted.
Agalliac: Only boys of Canikon need autofocus because they operate their cameras on automatic. Who cares about the video module. I have a camcorder that costs U$20.000 . What interests me is the quality of the image , the sharpness . In terms of image quality, the only camera capable of rivalling with my Pentax K- 3 is my PhaseOne. Sorry DPR but you review are tendentious .
Nevertheless, Phase One produces outstanding IQ, so if "wealthy mega dude" chooses the K-3 as the only smaller-sized alternative, that says something good.
In the brief time I used the K-3 for real-life shooting I thought it produced beautiful output - more pleasing than the K-5 IIs before it. But either camera with one of the better Pentax lenses produces output that's more dimensional and alive than a typical, flatter-looking Canon or Nikon shot.
Sometimes Pentax will make you work harder for your shot, but when you do, the payoff can be worth it.
hydrospanner: In this section:
Pentax fanboys who've spent the last few months whining about no K-3 review switching over to whining about the K-3 review.
Jeez, for a bunch that wanted so badly to know what the folks at DPR thought of the thing, it really looks like you were only waiting to pick them apart and tell them why they're wrong for disagreeing with you.
For as much as the average Pentax evangelist seems to want to convert Canon & Nikon users, the way they've earned a reputation as the biggest whiners makes me never even want to give Pentax a try if it means I'll turn into that!
I'm slowly starting to figure out what I'll do if/when my D300 kicks the bucket and there's no D400...I was leaning K-3 for a while, but with the way the users seem to be compensating for something, I might rather go m43...they're bad, but they're not AS bad...
You can't win any way you go. You can either be a smug Canikon user, a whiney Pentaxian, or a Sony shooter who keeps getting flipped onto his head because of Sony's rapid, schizophrenic changes.
Carlos Loff: I gave up on Nikon and the D400 - Im one of the many who will get this baby - ASAP
Very true about the Nikon 9300 possibility - it may be the wrong time to jump ship if you're fond of your Nikon glass.
Nevertheless, the K-3 is a very good camera, it has its own nice glass, and it's available now ...
Gary Martin: A fair review. Now Ricoh needs to release a new generation of faster AF pro lenses to match a body of this quality.
Very true. Hopefully this begins with the new * ~70-200 currently on the roadmap (and I suspect it will).
Currently the best AF performance is had with older Pentax screw-drive lenses (primes, especially), a few Tamron and Sigma lenses (notably their 70-200/2.8s), and (to a slightly lesser extent) the DA*300. Some otherwise wonderful lenses like the DA*50-135 (which DPR appropriately threw out of the running) are absolutely atrocious for fast-moving action.
I appreciate DPR's hard work, but they should actually re-test the AF-C with single-point AF using one of the above lenses or an FA135, FA*85, possibly FA77 or DA70 (which may perform differently in this situation), or even an F or FA*300/4.5.
Nevertheless, Pentax' next move should be to release some more current, longer lenses with faster AF.
A200Eric: Thank God. Now we can move from "dpreview hates pentax because they refuse to review the k3" to "dpreview hates pentax because wrote an unfair review." YAY!
Yes, I'll really miss those interruptions in the Comments of unrelated products!
Buying into the fourth of four major DSLR systems [Does Sony still count as a DSLR maker?] requires a buyer to see some specific virtues in that/those products. And this creates a desire not to see those virtues go unheralded. But when you combine this situation with an underdog status or feelings, behavior can begin to look a bit "weird" at times.
I don't think it's a need to justify their purchase so much as a desire not to see the little guy squished, or the company quelled, when they've found it has great merit, unique usefulness, and even drives some of the innovation in the industry. Quite often what we see as the best choice (and for many, it actually is the best choice) gets taken away. That's why, for example, many were happy to see T-mobile stick around.
ozimax: Astonishing images. And just think, it took a Creator God to make these impossibly complex animals. He not only makes things work, He makes them beautiful at the same time.
Kudos to the photographer.
We get our creativity because we are made in the Creator's image. So we are inspired and awed by the beauty, whether or not we cognitively make the connection to creation.
I hope they have the sense not to follow this up with a -1T model.
I think they've already come too close for their own good.
OBI656: Because of this update I purchased A7R and what a pleasant surprise ... If Zeiss optics will proof their reputation I will damp my CANON system.
The A mount.
The Sony Zeiss 135/1.8 will bring tears to your eyes - in a good way. It was kind of embarrassing, because the salesman at the Sony Store was wondering why this guy was getting so emotional over a camera lens! But the images it produced - even of someone you've never met just walking in or out of the store - were so beautiful.
Get an adapter and the 135/1.8 - you won't question their reputation anymore.
Spectro: wow, that is thin. But with a lens attached it still not that pocketable. Maybe if they had a pancake lens.
How can he get the first post if he reads the article?
Zeisschen: When the US Army flies their drones in foreign countries shooting and killing unarmed people the never go to court. A citizen with a little civil drone "shooting" pictures and not harming anyone gets punished. Freedom and justice for all, god bless America...
oeriies: The sample images from this lens posted by Nikon are soft to my eye:http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Nikon1-Lenses/3345/1-NIKKOR-VR-70-300-f%252F4.5-5.6.html#!/media:image:3345_sample-photo_01.jpg
So if you're not going to close the door because of the price the question is going to be how much of a hit in IQ you're going to be willing to accept in exchange for great portability in the super telephoto range..
I've never been impressed by the sample images Nikon (or most manufacturers) put out. So I wouldn't judge by that.
It's odd - you'd think they'd do better, but they don't.