marike6: Do you think DPR can find a more dusty demo camera to photograph? :) On- camera flash and product photography don't mix.
Not sure how image 1 and 4 made the cut, but OK.
vermaden: Nikon is stupid.
They have NIKON 1 system, why not add 18-50/1.8-2.8 and 24-85/1.8-2.8 lenses for that system?
Why not introduce 4K capable body for that system?
With announcement of this DL trio NIKON 1 system is officially dead.
david vella, Obviously you care. Not sure why because for all your chest puffing camera snobbery I can't find a single "real" image from you online.
Do you think DPR can find a more dusty demo camera to photograph? :) On- camera flash and product photography don't mix.
Maybe it is not Nikon who is stupid as the only camera with more buzz online is the K-1. So clearly your view is an outlier. Re: why running a DSLR and ILC side-by-side makes ZERO sense because lenses costs a small fortune. A fixed lens camera with a nice bright zoom lens can cover most bases. Re: 4K, the Nikon 1 J5 shoots 4K at 15 fps, obviously in the future we'll see more 4K at 30 fps in a J5, V4 or whatever.
david vella: Pointless toys. Nikon should leave this arena to the electronics companies .
M4/3s have this base covered. Nikon wasting R and D resources yet again.
When is their real mirrorless system going to appear, a worthy competitor to the XPro 2 plus lenses?
Nikon have become schizophrenic with their confused mission/ product lines .
Fuketa must be spinning in his grave !
Give it up. Nobody is making money with mirrorless cameras, Sony 's camera division lost 23% of its business in 2015. Nikon and Canon sell more cameras than anyone else in the world. There is nothing that m43 or the RX100 can do that these new DL cameras can't. If you don't like it, don't buy it. Nobody cares.
Samuel Dilworth: The DL18-50 is astonishing, but they’re all interesting. Success will come down to whether the lenses are as good as their paper specs.
Looks like Nikon is going to go down kicking! I didn’t think they had this kind of innovation in them. Good to see.
Canon and Nikon continue to sell more cameras than any other vendor. With pro press, sports and nature shooters, they have the market locked down tight. Smartphones aren't going to change this fact.
Re: innovation: the Nikon 1 had phase detection AF on sensor years before any other mirrorless vendor.
This K-1 beauty got a tepid "Worth the Wait?" headline, and the new Sony A6300 crop sensor got an exuberant "Wow" headline? Now that's funny. All that aside, the Pentax 67 style prism housing looks awesome, looks like a dream camera, this K-1 is easily one of the most interesting releases on a long time. Can we please have a reviewer who won't write that "bulky" nonsense as a con? Many of us want cameras that handle well, and don't care if they fit in our skinny jeans. :-)
biza43: Interesting, but ultimately, nothing new. Travel photogs have been taking "wide angle portraits" (or more correctly, portraits of people surrounded by their environment) for decades. Just look at NatGeo stuff.
@biza43 FWIW, I live in the New York, we have some of the best museums and galleries in the world, and you suggest I broaden my horizons by looking at pics in a magazine that had it's heyday 30 years ago. lol. I get it. You are one of those photography dudes who think being insightful is name dropping National Geographic for the zillionth time.
Why is there always a BUT on DPR comments? The photography in this feature was first rate, and it was refreshing change from the usual "you should really buy this" gear talk. If the photography had been strange, avant-garde images - new for the sake of being new - there would have been lots more BUT comments and way less clients for Mr. Sanyal.
Mike FL: If users are looking for a small walk around camera with:- faster + decent lens - zoom - EVF - better AF system- etc
SONY RX100.M3/M4 and Pana LX100 are sharper than any FUJI P&S namely this X70, X100S, or X100T:
The RX100.M3/4 and LX100 Low-light IQ should be as good as SONY's aged 16MP sensor inside of all FUJI as RX100.M3/4 and LX100 has faster lens.
Yikes. I hope Sony and Panasonic are paying because trying to convince others what camera to use is totally lame. Buy whatever camera you want and let others decide what camera suits them.
Oh wow, another Sony NEX E-mount body for almost double the price of the A6000, the same atrociously bad kit lens and perhaps the least inspiring lens lineup ever produced.
shigzeo: This looks nothing like a 1960's rangefinder. It looks like a re-thought Pen F, which was an SLR.
@shigzeo The overwhelming majority of SLRs are Nikon F style, not Pen F style. They have more pronounced grips and prism housings in the center of the body. "Rangefinder style" refers to the flatter, brick-like shape of the camera body, it has zero to do with the viewfinder other than its placement on the side vs in the center behind the pentaprism. A modern "Rangefinder style" camera like an LX100 or X100 differs on body design from an SLR style like a Canon 5D or Olympus EM5. That the meaning of the phrase "rangefinder style" is obvious to the rest of the world and not you is your issue. The rest of the world understand what vendors mean when they say "rangefinder style body". "Rangefinder style body" describes the physical shape of the camera body, it has zero to do with the viewfinder mechanism and zero to do with a short run, mostly unsuccessful Olympus half frame SLR from the 60s.
These images are quite interesting, the bakery image is quite nice. But who knew that Steve Huff grew a beard?
@shigzeo The fact that the Pen F was an SLR doesn't change the fact that the body style of the new Pen is "rangefinder style" in its design. You know exactly what they mean by the phrase "rangefinder style" but you are being pedantic.
Holy semantics. "Rangefinder style body" which is what it is. Forget about the fact that there is no actual rangefinder, the style and shape of the body is similar to a 70s rangefinder like the Contax G2 in that the body takes a more rectangular form than a typical Canikon style SLR, and the VF is off to the side instead of in the center behind the prism housing like a Canon, Nikon, Pentax 70s style SLR.
LF Photography: Wow! 4K video from a $2000 camera in 2016. Cutting edge stuff...
You do realize that it's a pro grade still camera that happens to shoot video and along with the D5 the second Nikon, and with the Canon 1DC the third DSLR to shoot 4K period? Pentax is still in 2001.
Raist3d: dpreview staff - the reason "all cameras are great now" is a statement that matters is that a lot of people are way too focused on the technology and even switching from perfectly capable cameras to another for no reason than being new.
i agree that differences matter for an individual purchase- to match ergonomics. to match particular preferences. But not to pretend to be a better photographer.
The statement of Ansel could use an iphone to shoot well is also valid- A reminder that its the photograpger that will create the photo- not the camera.
all equipment does is convenience or the ability to express using ones skill in a photographic domain. nothing more. so yes- if you are shooting a lot at night you will need a faster lens/and or better iso performance from a camera to be able to express in that domain. It will NOT make gou a better photographer.
you need a piano to play piano compositions. it will not make yiu by itself a better pianist
@cm71td The point is most cameras today are closer to the Stradivarius than to the junky student violin. Most enthusiast cameras in 2016 are can produce results unthinkable 10 or 15 years ago. So it makes zero sense to sit around all day on forums arguing about subtle differences camera bodies, calculating DOF equivalencies between the various sensors, etc. All the great photographers in history didn't become accomplished via the gear they used. That is a fact.
Totally agree with Raist3d. I play saxophone, I didn't start on a professional Selmer Paris alto saxophone, as a kid I had a student horn. Only long hours of practice improves skill, not the instrument you use. You can give an inexperienced grade schooler an expensive pro instrument they will sound just as bad as they do on their school rental student model. A student violinist with little skill will sound just as bad on a Stradivarius as they do on a student violin. This has been proven over and over again. Switching from my D7100 to my D800 doesn't magically improve my images. Only practice, good technique, careful thought about composition, good lighting and interesting subjects can do that.
Camera choice is irrelevant provided that the brand in question offers good lenses in the focal lengths you need, and accessories like flashes. With endless lens and body talk, discussions about flashes, monolights, reflectors, scrims, stands, softboxes, etc are almost non-existent on the majority of these forums. With good light, camera choice becomes almost irrelevant.
Re: DPR recommendations, the idea that small cameras are inherently better is a major flaw with this website. Handling in the field is WAY more important than convenience of transport, but in review after review we keep reading the word "bulky", even in reference to pro-sumer DSLRs. Fast zooms and telephotos are large, it's physics. So a small NEX or D5500 camera body with a large lens hanging off the front makes handling in the field significantly worse.
Far too much attention is paid to bodies and way too little to lighting. For proof here is an iPhone 6s shoot.