Stephan Def: Overall I think there will have to be a convergence in Smartphones and Digital Cameras. So in the longer run of things this Camera is one of the last Dinosaurs.
Why am I saying that? Well, there is a whole Laundry list of reasons, too many to list here. The established Digital Camera Industry is just not getting it what the average consumer really needs. The average consumer wants many many really cool functions and features and a slim design, the established Industry is not going to give him that, there is not enough real creativity there. Much of it boils down to a software developement problem, and there needs to be a disrupting force, as it happened with smartphones.
<< It is a physical fact that bigger lenses and sensors will be better than smaller ones. >>
You are not factoring in the practical limitations. You have real cost, size and weight limitations in any practical application. So bigger is not always going to be better.
It may not be possible to change the rules of physics, but you don't actually have to. You only have to change the ground rules of exposure and how you process that data.
Take for example: multi-frame noise reduction. That concept is quite a serious innovation, it opens up all kinds of new doors and avenues in producing better exposures. This only became possible with microprocessors and better software and that takes you right back to good old moore's law. Think about it.
I am not a physics expert but I am sure there is enormous potential in just varying the exposure parameters while doing multiple exposures in rapid succession and the then computing that information into an optimal exposure.
Well for one thing there is the form factor and that is already changing a lot, mirrorboxes are not necessarily needed anymore. Have a look where mirrorless is going. Focus technology changing as well.
There are a lot of things that I can do with a smartphone that I can't do with todays digial cameras. Foremost they are programmable and open to third party Applications. Media & communication.
Ask your wife or your girlfriend what she would rather take with here to here next Art exhibition, a DSLR with a 16-85mm Zoom or if she would prefer something less bulky, something significantly more compact with a slim and elegant design, unobtrusive however without sacrificing any functionality or image quality.
Overall I think there will have to be a convergence in Smartphones and Digital Cameras. So in the longer run of things this Camera is one of the last Dinosaurs.
zos xavius: I don't get it. This is the same sensor as the D3200 right? Is this the same sensor as nex-7? If you ask me nex-7 looks bad from 1600 and up compared to the d7000/K-5 sensor. I do realize it has 9 million more pixels, but that brings up another point. If people are finding it hard to match lenses to their d800 that can outresolve the sensor, won't people run into the same problems here? My k-5 outresolves glass pretty easily. At 24mp, I know I would be pushing past the limits of all but my best primes. It just seems like a lesser base image for more resolution that you will have a hard time achieving with consumer level zooms, which is likely what a lot of people buying this camera will be using. Dxomark rates it as the same level of sensitivity to the d7000. Coming from a k-5 users perspective, I find this hard to believe. One of the biggest nex7 complaints was noise. Can anyone say this is now the best aps sensor? It doesn't seem to be if iq is your top priority.
I agree that this 24MP Sensor has been and still is a questionable proposition in terms of image quality.
The 16 MP Exmoor Sensor (D5100) has excellent image quality up to 1600 ISO. So if indeed you are using kit lenses that perform best at f8 to f11 and you are in a suboptimal light situation than that extra ISO performance would make a big difference. Whats more if you are an Auto-ISO shooter, which definately makes sense in longer focal ranges up to 200-300, then you are not going to be staying at 100-200 ISO a lot of the time.
gsum: I have one of "the more expensive "professional" models". It has no focussing problems.Stephan Def is putting out misinformation.
I classify your comment as a Troll-comment for the simple reason that you don't state which Model you are refering to that you are claiming "has no focussing problems". So your comment is actually non-factual. But it begs the question why others then are switching to hybrid-focusing systems.
I base my PDAF comments on an independent test that was run 2 times in Colorfoto a well respected Photography Journal in Central Europe. The results of their tests was really an eye opener in regard to the defective quality and performance of PDAF focusing systems.
Stephan Def: NIKON PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT YOUR CUSTOMERS ARE ASKING FOR!
... I don't know what Nikon is thinking: NOBODY was asking for more Megapixels.
I would have considered buying one if it had a motodrive for older Lenses, if it had a manual focus peaking feature for older lenses. Whats also needed is state of the art AF. Everybody knows PDAF does not work by now, the hybrid-AF systems are the future.
So what will I do? ... Buy a Sony Nex Mirrorless for christmas and use my old Nikon Lenses on it (with an adapter) and then I will even have focus peaking.
Nikons Marketing department has a serious Personell problem and it should better be fixed pronto otherwise it will continue to impact their business ability.
why no factual arguments?
Stephan Def: so what good are more Megapixels if PDAF keeps missing the focus as is the case even on the more expensive "professional" models?
"Interestingly, the D5200 is equipped with a significantly upgraded AF system, based around the same Multi-Cam 4800DX AF sensor that is used in the D7000"
The AF on the D7000 was one of the most problematic functions of that camera, read the forums and the independent tests, massive complaints about missed focus. So if the new D5200 has the focus functionality of the D7000 how is that an improvement?
"Why are you worried about auto-focus ?" OK good question.
I am worried about it because on APS-C format PDAF is more like Auto-out-of-focus. The problem is aggravated by the shallow depth of field on that format.
What worries me is that no one is telling the unsuspecting consumers about it, who are spending thousands of bucks on this equipment. And it is a huge problem. Instead camera salesmen are suggesting the problem is not the camera but rather the photographer, which adds insult to injury. Yes I am upset about it.
And actually its true, if you have the time you are better off focusing manually using some decent focus assist technology like focus peaking. Instead of playing roulette with PDAF where you may find that only every 2nd shot is in focus with some luck. And that applies to all systems, some are worse than others.
so what good are more Megapixels if PDAF keeps missing the focus as is the case even on the more expensive "professional" models?
delusional yes? Lets see the methodology by which Nikon is determining what the masses want. Ohh ... its not there?
NIKON PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT YOUR CUSTOMERS ARE ASKING FOR!
OK that wooden Grip is worth about €5000 , I guess...
But I am willing to bet Rollex could do an even better package of the Nex 7 and ask for much more ...
Cameras entering an age of pure decadence?
Maybe its time apple or google got into this business and give them some serious disruption.