These "DP top picks" are really shameles and laughable.
The "How are these lens chosen" should read: based on what is most convenient for us.
The Samyang 35 f1.4 is an absolute optical marvel and the undisputed champion £ for £ and yet is missing from the list.
These "Top Picks" are nothing but shameless retail sale catalogs disguised as objective reviews.
dannyboy5400: I will wait for the fire sale on this just like the Nikon 1 series fire sale. $799 and I am so there.
Although it semms it may go that way there is one reason I think it won't: I doubt Nikon had grossly overestimated demand this time around.
Sure, there will be very limited demand, but surely very limited supply as well. There will be no shelves of DF cameras to clear.
DP reviewer: "Ok guys, Just finished. Quick, we need something negative to say about the camera? Anyone?
Guy 1: "well, maybe we can say that the Interface and controls can be overwhelming"
Guy 2: "All interfaces and controls at this level are. We should add **initially**"
DP reviewwer: "Great. We need more"
Guy 1: "we can say... (pause)..."
Guy 2: "... that the In-camera Raw conversion interface is somewhat unintuitive!!!"
DP reviewer: "You are a god-send!!! What else!? What else!?"
Guy 1: "We can say that Auto focus with Four Thirds lenses is slow"
Guy 2: "but it is not"
DP reviewer: "Let's add **in dim conditions with tricky subjects**"
Guy 1: "What are tricky subjects??"
DP reviewer: "Stay focused, damn it! We need to say negative things!! got it?? Got it??"
Guy 2: "If that's the case why not that the "Multi-screen live view interface looks very dated"
DP reviewer: perfect, we are almost done.
It seems that I'm in the slow group... because for the speculation so far -aside from the reduced size- I don't quite see how this camera is any better than the D700/D800.
atamola: On my D700/800 (and other Nikons too) I can use knobs and rings to set- Aperture- Shutter speed- ISO- focus
At the moment few cameras can compete with the D800 in terms of IQ
Sorry guys. I just don't get it.
That in part is my point. I get it, having a nice-looking camera may entice some people -but we are no longer concerned with photography.
What matters is that camera contributes to better pictures. An unassuming black x100 helps you to get closer without disturbing your subjects. But it's not the looks. Those subjects are equally undisturbed by other looks.
Nothing in what it's being discussed tells me that it's going to be a better camera to take pictures -as oppose to brag about or satisfy the lust for a new purchase for the sake of purchasing.
If Nikon comes with a better camera in the proper sense and charges accordingly -am all for it.
On the other hand, if it is mostly cosmetics -well, count me out.
At the moment nothing makes think that they are about to release a better camera -from the perspective of photography that is.
I have an X100, a 50 year-old Voigtländer, and a Nikon F100. I use them all.
The biggest advantage of the X100 is size for the image quality and the 1/4000 sync speed. That’s real value.
On my D700/800 (and other Nikons too) I can use knobs and rings to set- Aperture- Shutter speed- ISO- focus
5 minutes with the new firmware: absolutely brilliant.
If somebody from Fuji is reading this: that's the way to go. Fuji is now #1 in customer support as far as I'm concerned.
"Don't worry, pal -I've got you covered" (Fujifilm)
With all these new innovations it's time (for me) to start thinking if it's a good idea to switch systems.
IQ outside Nikon/Canon is excellent and the usability factor is clearly tilting the balance towards mirrorless.
I no longer have to sacrifice IQ to get lower weight and better portability.
Why, why?going over the specs... nice...nice... good... very good ... and bang! sync speed 1/180!! why Ricoh why?Just that point. Puzzling to me.
The fuzzy boundaries between mirrorless and SLR cameras are a good thing for all of us –irrespective of whether you are a professional or keen amateur.Until recently, if you wanted D3X image quality you had to pay almost $6000. Today, you can have that for a fraction of the price and weight.Until recently, the only one offering a relatively “compact” full frame camera was Leica and you had to pay around $7000 for it. Today you have the Sony-Zeiss combo in the RX1 for 40% of that price.OMD, PEN, GX, X-… series did not exist.Pick whatever suits you and carry on –let others pick whatever they want.
Olympus nailed it... again
- top-notch IQ from leading-in-class sensor- in-body highly effective IS- Compact body- direct manual control- 1/8000 max shutter speed- 1/320 sync speed- built-in flash- 9 fps
roldxx: really nice! though a little less practical due to short zoom
Well, I guess it depends on how you approch the idea.
If you think that it gives three very useful focal lenght, giving the equv fov of a 28, 35, 50 at f/1.8, then it actually looks pretty good.
And if the IQ comes somewhat nearly close to what they delivered with the 35 f/1.4, then it is a reak kick in Canikon's ass.
My guess is that they tried to find a balance between range, usefulness, distortion, and vigneting.
It it only comes close in performance to the 35mm f/1.4 it will be an absolute winner.
24/25 are interesting from a raw conversion point of view.From the jpg rendition, I would say she's one those pink persons; from the acr one, she looks gingerish now. Completely different. Also, those images show the effort fuji puts in preserving hightlight areas -probably at the expense of shadow detail. As a matter of personal preference, for me the jpg look better than the acr version.
James First 007: O.k. I don't comment very often but please go to www.nikon.com and take a very good look at the limited pictures sample of this new camera...
They are just beyond belief...the IQ is much much better than my RX100 (which I own and like) and much better than the anticipated Fuigi x100s (Period).
Staged shots of happy people in the streets -good concept.
In terms of IQ I see nothing special (although I like the color rendition)
What it is clear from those shots is what a bad idea is to use a 18.5mm lens to make close-up portraits.
Tommygun45: "Coolpix" and "$1100" should not ever be in the same story.
This camera is about $500 over priced. And learn from your competitors. Get a new name. Its the Sony Nex. Not the Sony Cybershot 7. Its the EOS M, not the Cybershot M. If you are going to introduce a new line of camera that is 4x the price of your already inflated compact line you need a new name.
$500 overpriced? I would say $800... and I wouldn't even consider it then.
What the hell are those people at Nikon smoking?
Apparently they haven't registered the V1 fiasco
--------- Lens 28mm f/2.8 ------------(Who the hell was asking for a fixed 28mm f/2.8?!!)- X100/s Fujinon 35mm (equiv) f/2- RX1 Zeiss 35mm f/2- OM-D E-M5 + 34mm (equiv) f/1.8
------- 90% coverage optical viewfinder --------- X100/s leading hybrid viewfinder- RX1 EVF or Zeiss optional - OM-D E-M5 EVF + tilting screen
------- Max Shutter speed 1/2000 ----------- X100/s 1/4000 + Built-in ND- RX1 1/4000- OM-D E-M5 1/4000
-------- Sync speed (???) --------- X100/s 1/4000 !!!!- RX1 1/2000!!!- OM-D E-M5 1/250------ Max FPS: less than 4 ------- X100/s 5/6- RX1 5- OM-D E-M5 9
Bottom-line 1: Not from my pocket.Bottom-line 2: Nikon is completely clueless about what's going on in the market
atamola: I'm a Nikon (mostly) user.
I cannot help but feel that Nikon's strategy is focused on squeezing the customer by offering minor adjustments rather than clear improvements over previous models.
I don't see Nikon delivering something really new/groundbreaking.
Thankfully we now have Sony, Fuji, and Olympus and the mirrorless options.
I think that Nikon's strategy is doomed to succeed in alienating its custormer base.
In my case at least, I'm now starting to seriously consider dumping al my Nikon gear (D700, SB-800s, and lenses) and switch to another system with a more customer oriented oulook.
One thing is clear for me: I don't see a compelling reason to put another dime in Nikon's pocket.
joejack951, I actually bought a V1 mostly for my wife to use it as a point-and-shot instead of her iphone.
I did so when it hit the right price of $299 - that is, at a 67% discount from the original release price.
And even at $299 seems a little expensive.