I honestly thought of a Photoshop job when I saw the first picture of this camera.
jorden mosley: Of the ones listed, I picked the k-3. It just had so many more impressive innovations than any of the cameras on the list. The x100s, rx100 II and em1 seem to be glorified updates of previous models (x100, rx100 and em5 respectively). The Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 is indeed a engineering marvel, but the application of it with it's odd focal length range is a drawback. I'm no Pentax fanboy (NEX/M43 user) but I gotta give them props for going all out with the k-3.
It has a bigger buffer than the Nikon D71000. ;)
Are there any bokeh comparisons with the Sigma available? AFAIK, it had the best 50 mm bokeh until the Nikon arrived.
Peter Lacus: about the only thing Apple really needs to do, is to enable RAW, everything else is first class already...
Nikon uses Sony sensors in several of its DSLRs which are direct competitors of Sony DSLRs. Same sensor but different raw formats for each brand.
Marty4650: There is a real problem when you try to treat cell phones like cameras.
You can always replace a camera with a better one, but you can't upgrade your cell phone unless your contract is up or you are willing to pay a huge penalty.
At least, that's the way it works in the USA, We are pretty much locked into a phone for two years.
I have another idea: Take out a two-year $400 consumer loan and buy the phone outright. You'll have lower monthly charges even after adding the monthly rates on the loan. If you want to get a new phone but don't want to increase your monthly rates, you have to re-pay the loan at once (with some extra fees). All-in-all, this is still cheaper than the early termination fees. Now, if the carrier that covers your region (well enough) doesn't offer cheaper rates if you don't get a subsidised phone, there might a MVNO using the same network that does and if not just account the subsidy as a loan in your personal accounting and treat the early termination fee as an early loan repayment. You don't have to change anything, you just have to give the various elements different names. The notion of being locked in is just a psychological one, not a real one.The only problem is the lack of a resale value because nobody needs a used phone because they are forced to get one with their contract.
jst13: Why no Fuji X-E2
What is half-hearted about it? Apple developed a completely new de-mosaic algorithm. The developer of Iridient declared it to better than Adobe's.
Treeshade: Lens mount: Canon EF, Canon EF-M, Fujifilm X, Nikon F (DX), Four Thirds, Micro Four Thirds, Pentax KAF, Sony Alpha, Sony E (NEX), Samsung NX
This 2.8 wide-angle would fill the long-overdue APS-C prime range. Even EOS M got some love. Now everybody is happy!
@tkbsic It's a prime and thus by definition smaller and lighter than a zoom and therefore preferred over a zoom. (But then it doesn't stick to that definition but that's an unimportant detail.) ;)
jpr2: Again NO built-in EVF? which means again a DOA - what a pity and what a joke :( !!
Like the Panasonic GM1 is a joke?
This is welcome, though 16 bit is overkill. Take for example the Nikon P330 pixel of 1.8 μm size (most smartphone pixels are smaller than this) and it gets less than 12 stops of engineering dynamic range with a very flat read noise curve and a very high QE of 75% (possibly somewhat a calculation artefact). I haven't done the math but I would estimate that a 1 μm pixel with a QE of 100% and a read noise of zero wouldn't get more than 12 stops of DR.Add one bit for over-encoding, hey even two, and anything more than 14 bit is just encoding noise. And for real sensors with a QE of less than 100% and some read noise, a 12 bit encoding is very likely completely sufficient.
AndreyT: At first one wonders what was the point of reposting these images again, after we have seen them hundreds of times already (they were making rounds around the Net for a few years now). But then one notices that there's an obvious political bias in the selection of these images: out of all those well-known Lego photo recreation pictures only the ones were cherry picked that fit certain propaganda-censorship agenda. And then a few "neutral" pictures were added to masquerade the original intent. Apparently someone at "dpreview staff" saw this veiled trolling opportunity and took it.
@thomasw333 & HobbiesAreFunYou have to see it the other way around, everything published that doesn't contain accusations about 'agendas' by definition has an agenda. Anything not openly trying to get a message across must actually be trying to secretly do this.
noirdesir: I think this photo would be even better without the blue sky as a blue sky doesn't match the lighting of the ground (I'd probably cut off the top). At least that's my 2 cents.
And somewhat off-topic, what was the reason to build the road elevated on some sort of a dam? Ground not stable enough, needed a thick layer of gravel or such? Torrential rains not washing onto the road?
Maybe I am just more into abstracted shapes and compositions such that I evaluate photos more like graphic art.
I think this photo would be even better without the blue sky as a blue sky doesn't match the lighting of the ground (I'd probably cut off the top). At least that's my 2 cents.
HaroldC3: Dang and I was hoping for a 200-400mm f4 from Tamron ;)
It's the FF equivalent of the APS-C usage of a 200-400 mm f/4 lens.
yabokkie: 5.5 fps
does it mean D600's shutter?
And/or D600 mirror mechanism (apart from the sensor read out electronics which for a D4 sensor aren't limiting here, shutter and mirror movement are what limits frame rates).
spiderhunter: I am thrilled as it brings back the nostagia of a time gone by. For me, my romance with photography is suddenly resurrected. I miss photographing with the old style era camera.
But having divorced Nikon since 2005 (used the film system professionally since 1973) when I dumped Nikon DSLRs in favor of the Canon, this is the first that my heart started to race when I saw a Nikon new model. Since 2005, I have since invested heavily in Canon and sold every single Nikon lens I owned ... But I felt I was never really back into photography. It was as if something went missing. Now I know, it was all those missing manual dials that made me feel that way.
My first thought was: how good is the AF tracking system? Is it as good as the D4 minus the FPS? 5.5 is ok.
However, I do wish that they have made it thinner and slightly smaller. In any case, if it can fulfill my needs, I will buy one.
The frame rate however is D600 not D610 (I guess all the D600 shutters they haven't sold yet have to go somewhere).
falconeyes: @anybody commenting on price:
The 3000$ claim was fake, there is nothing known about the price. DPR article has been updated too.
Yeah, but there are rumours that come from trusted sources (ie, those that have in past provided correct information about not-yet-released products and have done this multiple times) and those that come from a new unknown person.
The difficulty when publishing rumours is figuring out which are made up and which are real. And if you are not ready to put a reasonable effort behind separating the wheat from the chaff, you'd better don't publish any.
And if you see this not as publishing rumours but merely as reporting what important public figures (ie, the Nikonrumors editor) have published, it is not good journalism when a person you are referring to has put out a correction and not amend your article.
HeyItsJoel: I think I read somewhere that 58mm is closer to 'normal' point of view than 50mm. Can someone confirm or deny this?
The only aspect in which 58 mm is closer to 'normal' is that it is the focal length for which it is the easiest to design a lens on a Nikon F-mount in front of a FF sensor. The reason the Noct was 58 mm was that it was easier to design a high quality lens at 58 mm than at 50 mm.
Scripps23: If Nikon wanted to make this new lens in the tradition of the retired Nikon 58mm "Noct" lens, as its press release states, then it should have made it an f/1.2 lens. To charge almost $1,700 for a 58mm f/1.4 lens when you can buy a Nikon 50mm f/1.4 lens for $439.00 is a joke! This new $1,700 lens will certainly separate the rational photographers from the fools and obessed collectors.
To charge $1700 when Zeiss is only charging $4000 is simply outrageous.
GeraldW: My first thought is that Mr. Butler should not be calling this a "superzoom". 200 mm does not qualify. What it is, is a "bridge" camera in the same sense as it was applied back in 2004 to the pro 1, 828, C-8080, etc. With that out of the way, I like it!
The price is high; but fair for what you get. To get similar performance, the ILC's and DSLR's are going to have to use lenses that are faster than f/4-5.6 (thinking of the Panasonic 14-140 or the Canon 18-135 f/3.5-5.6).
Yes, it's pricey; but the old Canon Pro 1 and Sony 828 were in the $1000 range in 2004.
OK, it's not pocketable; but you are allowed to own more than one camera. And it's not long enough for wildlife; so I'll have to keep my FZ200 (which really is a "superzoom")
Any fixed lens camera that exceeds a certain size (essentially thickness), and has a lens that has a wide zoom range is a superzoom to me. The key parameter is camera size for me (which makes the Leica X vario an odd camera.
IKnowin: DMC-G6 Compact System Camera with 14-140mm Lenses, HD 60p 1080 - Larger Sensor, same sort of size, lower price and interchangeable lenses.
I love my Sony RX100 because the quality is up there with many DSLRs but the real reason for the love is this quality comes in a pocket sized camera - as soon as you can't pocket a camera the alternative options are endless and it doesn't help when this camera appears to be over priced by a factor of 2.
Not sure who'll buy it. Too big for the most, too small for the rest and costs at least 50% more than better competition. IMO
The RX10 is still about a stop faster at the long end (f/5.6 on 14-140 on m43 sensor vs. f/2.8 with the RX10 on 1" sensor).