harrisoncac: Retro look, yet slicker price. Well done. How much is the Sony A7?
but not half of the weight or size of this DSLR
wombat661: "as they get older, get married and have babies I expect they will probably want to buy a better camera."
If you want to cater to the new parents crowd, then that better camera would not be a mirrorless. Babies moves very fast you need all the help you can get to get those candid shots. SLR with good focus tracking is very helpful here.New parents thinks their babies will sit still for them to adjust the camera. The optimal window to get the right shot with the right expression is about half a second.Told my in law to get a camera with fast focus. They looked at me like I was nuts. They though babies are so small they do not ever move. A month latter, they told me how frustrated they were with slow focus. Went out and got a SLR.
have you ever heard about hybrid AF in mirrorless cameras ?
My J1 focuses just as fast as my D7000.
BobYIL: This is sign of lack of innovation, desperation of not being able to turn out new products, not being able to cope up with the trend but seeking exclusivity through retro design and high price. Niche products should not be for a mass-production company like Nikon..
it would't be that bad, if it wasn't full of compromises. The D6100 AF system in a $3000 camera ? Seriously ??
photo nerd: this is the worst joke in camera history... wtf is Nikon thinking the price is ridonculously. They did have all the possibility to create a massive Market leader in retro looking camera but instead they made a huge pile of ... *headscratching*.. na I can't say it on here but you all know what I mean.
It's a bit sad to see how Canon and Nikon have fallen behind Sony.I almost wish they would just concentrate on lenses and let Sony make the bodies - they are already better at doing that.
LukeDuciel: The MTF of the Nikon new "noct" has nothing exciting compared to Zeiss Otus 55mm.
Not sure why Nikon built this thing. Probably for the loyal fans?
The Nikon MTF: http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/singlefocal/normal/af-s_nikkor58mmf_14g/index.htm#photo1
Zeiss MTF: http://lenses.zeiss.com/content/dam/Photography/new/pdf/en/downloadcenter/datasheets_otus/otus_1455.pdf
It has AF.
DigitalPlatonist: The front element is deeply recessed. Doesn't that mean they could have made the whole package a lot smaller?
yes, but it would be unusable without a lens hood
TN Args: The 35mm lens weighs 120g. Looks like a brilliant walkaround FF combo.
only if it was at least f2 and had a price of $500...
mario GTI: Kinda ugly, but I'm suspecting top notch IQ and performance.
which is kinda funny, given the reception of the first Sony DSLRs by the photo community..
shaunly: looks like a real winner here. Good job Sony. The 7R seems great for landscape photographer like myself looking to save weight when we go backpacking. With a few right lenses, I may just sell the D800.
Can't wait for the test results!
Yep. If this did not sound the alarms over at Canon & Nikon, they should prepare to be just a 3rd party lens producer in the future.
misha marinsky4: I repeat:
I challenge DPR to a double-blind print test; this Zeiss vs. the Sigma 50/1.4.
Four aperatures: 1.4, 5.6, 8, 16. Print size 16x20.
but of course, since you can't prove your imaginary better high ISO performance (which btw does have nothing to do with a lens, and everything to do with the sensor), you return to your "Zeiss color subtlety" mantra.
Well guess what, if you can't measure the difference, then those are your own subjective preferences so stop claiming nonsense like "Zeiss performs better at high ISO". It does not, because it has the same Transmission number.
Your logic is in the sense of "I like blue cars, so cars having every other color are worse".
Kodachrome200: I know its good but there is a question of diminishing returns. The Nikkor 50 F1.8 G is actually a superlative lens the will out perform most lens being used for by pro photographers today. This is 20x the price. Even if it was 20x better is there a need for a 20x better lens here. I dont doubt its great. but personally Id rather have my light autofocusing nifty fifty on most shoots. We have 50mm lens now because photographers prefer the framing of 50mm lens to 55mm and 58mm lenses. However 55mm lenses have always been better than 50mm so one has to ask how much less would the difference be if nikon made a 55mm 1.4 with autofocus for like $500. Again even if it was 8x better could the human eye tell it was 8x better. I mean at a certain point something has to become sufficent. We also found years ago in photography that photographers preffered 50s even with the diminished image quality. there is no reason to suspect this isnt still true
well, except that Zeiss just adds after-market spoilers and bumper stickers to the Civic, and sells it for a fortune.
It is YOU, who claims that Zeiss lenses perform better at high ISO than every other lenses - so it's YOUR resposibility to prove it.
Prove that f1.4 Zeiss lenses beat the current generation of f1.4 lenses from Nikon/Canon. Or just STFU.
Stanchung: In time, this will become the 'Zotus' range of lenses.
Dreamed of by many.
Some of you may get to fondle one through rentals or at the shop but alas a dream only for many like me.
I still think they should make an AF one. Then, like my dream of buying a Porshe, they will give me reason to buy one when I'm old and a bit blind. [it takes time to save for one!]
white shadow, so I presume you have tried all drugs as well
Yanko Kitanov: This is ridiculous the CoS of this item is TIMES less and when it gets compared to good HQ glass from Sigma, Nikkor and Canon it will even lag behind in terms of IQ....take my word and check DxO in a month...not to mention the ultra fast and accurate AF of the others... Well the farce goes on. ;)The most lovely Tomioka/Cosina 55mm f/1.2 goes for the price of the focusing ring of this 1kg heavy GUN
The difference is not that huge. It's more like one is a Corolla, and the other is a Corolla with aftermarket spoilers.
Spectro: Zeiss, just put an apple logo on it and people will say ""shut up and take my money.""
that's exactly what they are doing, except the Zeiss logo is worth much more than the Apple logo
please provide high ISO RAW examples supporting this Zeiss mantra that you keep repeating.
A 1.4 lens is a 1.4 lens, and since Zeiss lenses have the same Transmission as every other lenses, they provide absolutely no benefit for high ISO shooting over any other lenses with the same max aperture.
Stop comparing f1.4 Zeiss primes to slow $200 kit zooms.
The Photo Ninja: I can buy a heck of a lot of canon L lenses for that. It might be really great, but out of my price range. Also, how come no autofocus? Zeiss has AF on sony.
right, the mysterious fancied "Zeiss color subtlety", that no test can ever measure ...giving the edge to Zeiss lenses ever since marketing was invented.
To most Zeiss owners, the logo on the lens and info in the Exif is all that matters.
Paul Petersen: But will it out resolve the much cheaper Sigma 35 F1.4? I know they are different focal lengths but just saying.
I can make a similar table in Excel with the same credibility as this "LenScore" of yours, that nobody has ever heard of.