NAwlins Contrarian: The table on the first page comparing the GM1, GM5, and RX100 Mk. III is misleading in an important respect. For some purposes (weight, zoom range) the Panasonic M4/3s are listed with their kit lens, but for other purposes (depth), they're listed without it. As your pictures on page 2 show, put on the kit lens and the package becomes more like 3 inches (75mm) deep. An RX100 Mk. III is pocketable in most reasonable pants pockets; with the Panasonics and their kit lens, forget it unless you have cargo pockets.
Also, since we routinely list lenses with focal lengths as "35mm equivalent", can we please routinely do the same thing with apertures? For some purposes it's convenient to see that the 12-32mm kit lens is an f/7-11 equivalent and the RX100 Mk. III's lens is an f/4.9-7.6 equivalent. IOW, (1) the Sony can achieve shallower depth of field, and (2) in low light, its much brighter lens will tend to more than compensate for its somewhat smaller sensor.
Pocketing cameras just means lint, which has jammed more P&S powered zooms than anything else.
For the market intended, I don't think a "fight to the bottom of the price-pile" was Nikon's best move. The D600/610 should never have existed, it's like a entry-level 60's muscle car, all engine (sensor) inadequately supported by a mediocre body and suspension. Similarly, the D7000 should have been the D400 with a D300-esq body.
Mike FL: You want Phone news? Here is the one:
"Xiaomi's new flagship smartphone sold out in 3 minutes"
Yes, it is not TYPO about "sold out in 3 minutes" for:
"The total number of units sold has not been revealed, but a Xiaomi VP said on Monday that there were 220 million reservations for the device."
"Build cheaper rubbish and the world will beat a path to your door."
RichRMA: I don't know. Phone reviews before plenty of good real cameras have been reviewed? Might as well review restaurants or movies.
Phone reviews here are a Trojan Horse that is helping destroy the camera market, at least for people who care more about convenience than results.
I don't know. Phone reviews before plenty of good real cameras have been reviewed? Might as well review restaurants or movies.
Simple man: How many people here have actually made a camera? Even a simple pinhole camera?
I doubt very seriously that many people have done so. (Yes I have).
How many have completely built a digital camera?
Comparitivly fewer than have built pinholes for sure.( I haven't).
It's just unreal to see constant complaint about everything on this website. Why don't all you people with better ideas get together and build a camera, tripod, backpack, processor, printer......
Nikon is fixing the issue. DPReview made a comment about it. You people complaining about DPreview and its staff. What the hell? It's their house. If you came to my house talking smack..... I'd boot your ass.
I built my first digital camera from plans using a diminutive Texas Instruments TC-211 CCD. It was fascinating. Having said that, people have the right to criticize the constant stream of flawed, expensive cameras that have come from Nikon in the last four years.
Chuck selfie LCD articulation, add EVF. Problem solved.
David V: Honestly, these were disappointing samples, IMO. I think Sony is making the most impressive bodies out there, but their lenses do little to exploit that goodness.
I have been itching to pull the trigger on an A7II to add a FF mirrorless camera to my lineup but I think I will stick with just my Fuji X-System cameras/lenses for now.
I am interested to see what Sony does to follow up to the RX1R, which is a fantastic camera.
Sony's Zeiss lenses are as good or better than any of the Fuji lenses. What exactly is wrong with the images that you saw?
gftphoto: What a great little camera. If only it had a viewfinder I would jump at the chance to own one.
Fuji's 16-55 is probably a lot better than Sony's kit lens and the kit lens is likely what most buyers of this camera will have.. The 18-70mm Sony DSLR lens was probably the worst kit lens of all time. Like their 16mm prime.
"The seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air, and out of The Temple came a loud voice from The Throne, saying, "It is done!"
Trivia: In the 1970's and 80's, over 110 companies put names on generic 135mm lenses. It had to be the focal length with the most name-plates.
One response to the title of the article: CRINGE!
Debankur Mukherjee: These design flaws have become a standard for Nikon Cameras, but at least it is nice of them that they are addressing the issue quiet fast........and not denying like they did with the P7000 and D600 bodies........
People don't remember the D800 focusing debacle and the way it dragged on, courtesy of Nikon.
We've gotten to the point where computer design, and other innovations in lens manufacturing should allow what used to produce horrible results (add-on lenses) to produce respectable images today. Vignetting on macros is no big problem since most macros rarely include the whole field of view anyway.
RichRMA: Very good shots. Big cats are being poached by hunters working for places like China and Vietnam where tiger gall bladders, etc, are used in quack medicine. It's a good idea to find alternative areas for them to live, like perhaps wild areas in North America because where they are living is not longer viable.
Read up on the re-introduction of the wolf to Yellowstone park.100,000 elephants, rhinos, tigers, jaguars, and other rare animals are being killed a year in Africa, Asia and South America. These are not fast-breeding rats. Most of them will be lucky if their species lasts 5-10 more years outside of zoos.
The performance of their NX1 seems to be very good so even though people are loath to try new things, the market may shift somewhat, the way it did for Nikon DSLR's when they started using CMOS instead of CCD's and their performance improved.
Very good shots. Big cats are being poached by hunters working for places like China and Vietnam where tiger gall bladders, etc, are used in quack medicine. It's a good idea to find alternative areas for them to live, like perhaps wild areas in North America because where they are living is not longer viable.
What WILL be interesting is if (and companies are loath to do this) they actually identify exactly why the situation happened, what about the body caused it.
AlanVia: First reaction looking at them as a group and individually, lenses look huge....
Big focus motors probably. You look at Zeiss OTUS lenses and they are massive, because they are uncompromised for optical quality. Then you look at manual Voigtlander range-finder lenses and the are very small, yet high quality.
RichRMA: They'll service their defect for free. How generous of them.
Not those filled with Nikon yes-men and apologists.