Tony Northrup: Perhaps you guys could start providing the full-frame equivalent apertures if you provide the full-frame equivalent focal lengths? This video explains why. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5zN6NVx-hY
The SH-1 has about a 5.5x crop factor. The lens is physically 4.5-108mm f/3.0-6.9, so the 35mm equivalent is 25-600mm f/16-38 in terms of total light gathered by the sensor, light gathered by each pixel, and depth-of-field... all the factors that impact final image quality.
" f/16-38 in terms of total light gathered by the sensor"
Didn't you get enough of a smackdown on the 4/3 Rumors site when you posted the exact same incorrect statement?
fuego6: With the new cameras... this is becoming increasingly easy to accomplish.. instant focus and auto-rifle like capture. Just slam the shutter, take 40 photos and cull and enjoy after the fact. Same for milk drops now... no need to expensive equipment and triggered shutter releases... just jam the shutter button and review the results. Love technology!
"It's getting easier to take pictures!!!1!"
Your comment would just as easily apply to any photograph from any photographer in the past 10 years. Therefore, it is worthless.
Surely that can't be the extent of your reaction to these photos? You can't possibly be that vacuous. Or can you?
NCB: I'm fascinated by the number of comments about small chip, etc, when there hasn't been a single test, let alone a comprehensive review, performed with the camera. Are people only interested in specs these days? m4/3 used to suffer for precisely the same reason, and possibly still does.
"Are people only interested in specs these days? m4/3 used to suffer for precisely the same reason, and possibly still does."
Are you suggesting that there haven't been any tests the m4/3 system cameras? Because if so, you're wrong, and if not, your comment is non-sensical.
SRHEdD: Put aside brand and format rivalries for a minute, and realize what this might have potentially been if Nikon had used a m4/3 chip and mount. That's all, just think of where this might have gone, the lens possibilities, the possible combinations of lens and camera, etc.
THAT would have been a breakthrough "enthusiast's" camera.
In one move they would have owned the worldwide small format camera market. Olympus and Panasonic would be relegated to making lenses for a Nikon system.
But then you'd have people using non-Nikon lenses on a Nikon camera, and the most important thing to Nikon is owning every part of the system. This joke of a camera will fail, because they cut off their nose to spite their face.
EcoPix: I see this as a very significant camera. It shows Nikon are serious about the future of the small format camera system and are prepared to take the lead, as they were in 1959. Film shooters preferred medium format, but most of us shot most of our work on 35mm because it was good enough for most uses, including double-page spreads in glossy publications.
That's about where CX is getting now. DX struggled to be as good as 35mm film at first, now it's equalling medium format film. We now need a smaller format that's good enough. The advantages aren't cost per shot now, they're portability, speed, quietness and discretion, and focal length (angle of view/depth of field/physical lens size). Nikon and Sony are the only ones taking this seriously, and Nikon are playing the game for higher stakes than anyone.
" It shows Nikon are serious about the future of the small format camera system and are prepared to take the lead"
How much is Nikon paying you to make such a joke of a statement? They're "taking the lead" by releasing a small camera years after everyone else, and with a small sensor, few lenses, and charging a hefty premium?
To paraphrase Ash: Nikon is leading 2 things right now: Jack and Sh!t, and Jack left town.
joeyv: Good companies plan for the future. Maybe it is hard to see what CX is all about right now. but as sensors improve the CX format advantages will be more obvious. For sure, Nikon will also come out with FF mirrorless someday. I suppose Nikon hopes that having FF + CX will effectively bracket the other formats in-between. I use Nikon Dslrs and I sure am glad CX is there. I can can put my 85/1.4 in the V3 and have effectively a 230 mm/1.4. Or the 200/2.0 and effectively have a 540 mm/2.0. How cool is that!
35mm is itself a small format, relative to much that came before it. So much for your theory.
GodSpeaks: Are you serious. DPR is now doing these idiotic unboxing videos.
I suppose they will start reporting on rumors next. How much further can DPR sink?
@Barney: I'll never understand why DPR insists on feeding the trolls. CONSTANTLY. Do you not get that that's why they're here?
Gesture: Not enough dials and buttons on the back at 20 or so. Can't anyone figure out how to streamline the digital camera interface.
You could easily make any camera fully customizable just by making the interface Android-based, but then all the know-nothings in the DPR forums would be whining about how they "don't want a phone in their camera."
Edymagno: Poor Nikon. They produce a totally outstanding camera just to convert it into a real commercial flop by Micro SD card. Nikon needs desperately a new management.
If you buy a phone without a micro-SD slot (and a replaceable battery), you are a terrible, short-sighted person, and part of the problem with the world today. And a sucker.
Please reevaluate your morality.
pwilly: Comparing Apples to Apples, the tiny sensor comments are just uninformed. A tiny sensor like a 1/3.6” has a 5mm diagonal. 35mm has a 43.3 diagonal, APS-C is 30mm 4/3 is 22.5mm and 1’ is 16mm. Micro 4/3 folks frequently claim that there is little advantage to FF vs. 4/3 in most photos and that is true. Unless you are looking for extreme low light, or very narrow DOF an equivalent photo can be taken with 4/3. So with just about half the diagonal 4/3 is sufficient.The Nikon 1 sensor has 71% of the diagonal of 4/3. Once again if we are talking equivalent photos the Nikon 1 sensor can take the same photo, but then add the stunning AF tracking and for action there is nothing like it.
I shoot in m4/3, and find that *just barely* adequate in low light, and that's with very bright lenses.
This Nikon is a non-starter for anyone shooting in anything but great light.
pgphoto_ca: Dam Nikon! Why they can't design something better :)
Better/bigger grip, bigger sensor, "classic" aperture and speed dial...
Another mirrorless fail :) dam
The chief engineer should be fire....!!! Is that so difficult to look what make the competition great and better....? like the OM1 ....
They could easily design something better, which is why there are already MUCH better camera systems available for the money.
But they don't want to cannibalize their DSLR business.
This is aimed at 2 groups:1) Those who worship Nikon and will buy anything they produce.2) Those who know nothing about cameras and think they're getting "Nikon quality" in a small package.
Ednaz: I'm excited, I've found that blue cameras are much sharper than black ones.
@Just a Photographer : It was clearly a joke. Nothing to get your panties all bunched up over.
gerard boulanger: "smartphones, not enemy.." I think that statement is absolutely wrong.
Not that smartphones are capable of technically challenge high end DSLRs, but they already swallow the worldwide P&S business and they will continue to eat market of entry level DSLR and mirorless cameras in the near future.
To me the real threat for all the photography industry is that one day the IQ from very small sensors will be more than enough to share, publish even print 4x6 pictures without carrying another device, most of the time bulky and heavy.
Sony understood the trend with its Q series. Not a success now indeed, but the idea is there.
The last time I went on the golden gate bridge (last month), more than 50% of photos were made with a smartphone...
The statement is obviously wrong, but really, there's no story here. Canon executives HAVE to say that there's no competition, or their stock price would plummet.
ALL executives of every company -- good and bad -- say the same things about every competing technology.
shaocaholica: Where's Apple?
Apple wants ease of use, not awesome features that <5% of users will actually use.
This flexibility is why I use Android; it's only a matter of time before Android offers RAW.
oselimg: Ok, Nokia raw gives slightly better DR but slightly grainier/noisy look than Nokia jpeg, it's a trade off. But how about technically comparing it to an ordinary DSLR or M4/3? I can't imagine people suddenly shedding their cameras for Nokia phones even as hobbyists. Another gimmick for wannabes.
Yes, anyone who wants to take decent snapshots on their phone is a "wannabe."
A wannabe what, though?
ChrisKramer1: I was looking at them all today - Olympus, Panasonic and Fuji - all new models well over a thousand Euros. In fact, Fuji's models with lenses were all above a thousand. That new teensy weensy little Lumix m/43 was over a thousand with the handgrip (what handgrip? LOL!) and the Olympus OMDs too. The OMD5 was priced well into the stratosphere and placed so high up on the display I could hardly see it anyway.
Just who is going to buy this stuff? The market is saturated! (And, of course, you can buy a full-frame cam for that price anyway.)
"That new teensy weensy little Lumix m/43 was over a thousand ..."
Wow, it's almost like it costs more to have great image quality in a very small package. One might even start to think that the people buying these cameras are doing so -- and paying a premium -- because of their small size!
With your amazing observations, you should be a techwriter or something.
Gesture: Closer to EOS-M. Wonder how video will be. But bring something like this home closer to $500. Which is still a lot of money. Where is the value proposition.
@ Menneisyys : In 6 months or less, a refurb will be $500. At that point, I'll have to decide between this and the Olympus E-M10 (which will probably be $400, refurbed).
Rod McD: University of life : Water resistance is better than no water resistance, but..... - All fabric backpacks and bags leak. Sooner or later.- No fabric bag offers crush resistance worthy of the term.- Cameras in a backpack are behind you and on your back.I haven't found a better solution (for me) than hard shell cases, but they aren't perfect either. Only very few models can be worn over the shoulder and opened to work from without putting them down.....
I've been backpacking in the Grand Canyon with no bag at all - the camera around my neck and lenses in the backpack pockets and easily accessible.
Life's too short to use nothing but hard bags.