Thematic: Uh oh. Very disappointing image quality.
I was praising this camera because 2 friends own it and said the picture quality was as good as the FF Nikon D750. These pictures, and the RAWs they sent me are underwhelming.
At the end of the say its a tool for speed and the 1.5x crop people need but I can't image anyone shooting portraits, fine art, macro, landscape, architecture etc using this over a cheaper Pentax K-1 or the Nikon D750.
As for the price people are complaining about - No issue with me there, Pentax is the value champ but the Nikon mount is great for their lineup and Zeiss Milvus options.
Next up is Sonys a9 and the Canon 5DMK4.
Just don't compare it to a full frame camera and it will look fine :)
Interesting tech. My mind boggles at the thought that more light sensitivity in a black and white image can help when combined with a color image. I guess at low light levels things look monochrome already so there is not as much color "lost" by combining. Boost saturation on the color image and average out the two? Cool.
Well I didn't need a camera bag, but seeing as they come in different colors I've ordered a couple. :p
robmanueb: This is fish eye lens not a wide-angle lens.Subtle yet important difference if your into photography...
I like to think a fish eye is a type of wide-angle lens, but being a subset thereof. When I see a photography article with "wide-angle lens" in the title I don't expect to find a story about a fisheye lens. It wasn't the biggest shock in the world, as I know there is overlap between the two designs. Would just have saved me the bother of trying to read it if they had included the term fisheye in the title. Me being fussy.
This is fish eye lens not a wide-angle lens.Subtle yet important difference if your into photography...
What do they use to stick them back together?
Retzius: These 'enthusiast compacts' are nothing more than cash cows. They are cheap to produce, quick to obsolescence, and way overpriced.
Don't forget image quality that would have embarrassed a SLR from a few years prior. IE Canon G7X beats a Nikon D300 on DXO.
Correction man: Designed with Audi .. why ! I wouldn't buy a car designed by a Camera company so what idiot would buy a Camera designed by a CAR company ?????
Frank C.: GoPro is getting trampled on by the larger players like Sony, Apple just like Tesla will get (is getting) trampled on by GM, BMW etc...
So Tesla stock is around $200 a share. If your dire prediction comes true it will be worth $100, three times what GM is currently trading for. I guess if the price of oil continues to drop Tesla will become more marginal. In the meantime Model X is going out the door as fast as they can make them.
Good luck with GM taking on Tesla's business model. http://www.profitconfidential.com/stock/forget-tsla-stock-trolls-heres-why-the-bears-are-wrong-on-tesla/
Don't know what GoPro's problems are but Tesla sure as hell doesn't look like a company getting trampled. http://www.thestreet.com/story/13424660/1/one-reason-why-tesla-tsla-stock-is-gaining-today.html
Roland Karlsson: Those are probably two very capable cameras. Probably better than the previous generation. But, can anyone tell me why this strong enthusiasm? Any groundbreaking news that I have missed?
I wont speak for the D5 but the D500 is a sign that DX will be supported in lenses and future bodies. This cements the entire consumer Nikon SLR range. Hopefully we will see Nikon putting greater emphasis on developing pro DX lenses, though just having the D500 body will inspire Sigma and Tokina to keep up the good work they have been doing in this regard.
robmanueb: Good on Nikon for leading the way with the DF, great to see Leica having the common sense to follow. Now if Nikon can build the mythical D400 without video and keep the price down, I would have all my previous faith in them validated.
The Df had a couple of features that were used to sell it, retro styling, simplicity IE lack of video, ease of use, lightness as well as your mentioned compatibility with older Nikkor lenses. I applaud Leica for not having a video function and can only hope that other companies see fit to do the same in the future. Looks like Ken R scored twice this week with Reuters demanding JPGs as well as this move from Leica.
Nikon released the DF a couple of years ago, a premium full frame SLR that has no video function. Its price while not inconsiderable was far less than its video capable counterpart the D4. If Nikon were to build a D400 (APS size sensor professional SLR) without video and keep the price low, I would be impressed. Impressed for two reasons, firstly that they can look after the customers waiting for a pro APS SLR and secondly that the could offer another SLR sans video.
Good on Nikon for leading the way with the DF, great to see Leica having the common sense to follow. Now if Nikon can build the mythical D400 without video and keep the price down, I would have all my previous faith in them validated.
koolbreez: You are all missing the reason for this, to speed up submissions. In this very competitive field speed of submission is extremely critical, and the time it takes to process RAW files greatly hinders submission time. Plenty of cameras now offer the ability to send pictures directly from camera via wifi, and do minor post processing of the JGP, but they do not offer the ability to in-camera post process RAW files. Reuters is just trying to get it across to their extensive list of freelancers that anything to speed up the submission process must be incorporated into their workflow. As most freelancers are under the impression that RAW files are best, they have to be forcefully trained to break that frame of thought, when "best" is not a priority in breaking news photography. JGPs meet the OOC quality requirements just fine, and the difference of minutes, and seconds, in submission speed can make the difference between a sale, or no sale, and that is what it is all about.
Having to keep up to date on RAW converters must be a pain in the a#$e for them. Especially with photogs always wanting to have the latest camera, they must have run into problems more than a few times.
2eyesee: Weird decision. My experience has been that it takes no more time to edit a RAW file than it does a JPEG.
RAW files have to processed one way or another before they can be used, JPEGs don't. It is a skipping of a step that will simplify life for publishers.