Marty4650: Let's see if I understand this....
Nikon "apologizes" for not making the V3 fast enough to meet demand... and this took all of three weeks. But it took Nikon two full years to apologize for dust and oil on the D600 sensor, after denying the problem existed, claiming the camera was "within spec" and blaming their customers for having unreasonable expectations from a $2,000 camera.
Remind me again. Did Olympus ever apologize for Shutter Shock, or offer their customers a full refund?
naththo: JPEG processing looks average joe, bit too much sharpening and not enough coloiurs in some of outdoor bright sunny day eg grass supposed to be greener than that. Skin tones are pretty good I must say. The noise reduction is somewhat too aggressive to me like the shopping mall you took pic with rather high iso, I see very soft to it. Focus accuracy from what I noticed is not that perfect. I guess review will tell why.
That's entirely subjective.
I actually like the Samsung JPEG engine. Colours are very subdued, the sharpening and contrast are somewhat restrained compared to most of the other manufacturers.
Marty4650: I don't think Nikon gets it.
Small MILC cameras exist because they are tiny, and perfect for street shooters and travelers. They are great for a large pocket or purse and are perfect for social events, or any time you want to travel light or be discreet.
They work best with fast primes and pancake zoom lenses.
Birders and wildlife photographers don't need tiny cameras. They need image quality and reach. Do you really need a tiny camera if you are already hauling an eight pound tripod around with you?
So... along comes Nikon with a camera twice as big and twice as expensive as a Panasonic GM1. And it has a sensor half as large. But they saved you a whopping 1 gram of weight by using a memory card designed for a cell phone!
Exactly what is the point?
Nikon has created yet another overpriced MILC camera that will sit on the shelves and end up being sold at clearance prices six months from now. And this will validate their decision to keep making DSLRs for another 50 years.
The "point" of this camera is the AF performance and operating speed, where it should have a huge advantage over any other mirrorless.
If you want a compact high-performance camera for sports, action and wildlife this is it.
Panasonic has apparently found their niche with still/video hybrid cameras.
Nikon can't have it both ways.
A big selling point with their camera bodies is the wide array of available 3rd party lenses and flashes, and yet Nikon continues to break the interface for 3rd party manufacturers.
Yanko Kitanov: "Ground-breaking" news....Nikon seems to continue "milking old cows" the way Canon does for several years already...
It's a pity - Nikon could use the brand new Sony 24mp from the Pentax K-3 (instead of using Pentax coloring LOL) and skip the Toshiba sensor with its proven downsides.
The "banding" issue is complete online forum rubbish.
I guess some of the prices will vary widely depending on where you are.
I just got a new Nikon D7100 body for $999, and you can get a D7000 body for $799 here in Canada.
Meanwhile, the price of the Lumix GX1 hasn't fallen through the floor here like it has in other places. It's still around $399 for the body only.
starwolfy: I would rather buy the superb Samsung NX300 with all pancake lenses than this.
Yeah, the X-M1 looks an awful lot like my Samsung NX210, which is even smaller and lighter, and has some nice pancake lenses available.
That said, I think this camera is aimed at a slightly different crowd.
That is a very attractive price.
I thought it was going to be in the $1,200 to $1,500 range.
Ybor: Canon has won this battle for several models now. Both would seem to have a very specific audience now as larger sized sensor cameras can be purchased for the same, or less than either. For example, NX210 is priced at $439 or less with 18-55 sharp lens (even if slower than G15's). No contest.
Having said that, I would buy either at $299.
You can get a Nikon 1 J1 with a pancake zoom for the same money, and it's about the same size and weight as the G15 or the Coolpix P7700.
I agree that a lot of the mirrorless cameras are ridiculously overpriced, but there's also a lot of them that sell for much less than $1,000 and are a huge upgrade over a high-end point & shoot.
That's just it. Neither of these cameras represents a whole lot of value when you can get a pretty good mirrorless for a little bit more money.
HowaboutRAW: And still no Samsung NX cameras.
AfterShot does not support the NX210, which is a bit of a drag because I like to do everything in Linux.
I'm also not entirely convinced that Corel is continuing development of the product.
MrTritium: 420g with battery?! The Nex-6 and X-E1 weigh only 350g, and the nex-3n 269g. Is this camera made of LEAD?
Compact size and low weight is the whole point of owning a mirrorless. And there's nothing magical about the build quality of Olympus compared to e.g. Canon, Nikon, Sony or even Samsung. Even if there were, whatever camera body you own now is going to be out of date three years from now anyway.
My Samsung NX210 weighs a little more than 300g with the battery and the 30mm pancake attached. And it sports a larger APS-C sensor.
Here in Canada we're constantly force-fed Brian Adams' photography, and quite frankly the guy's portraits are not very good.
A good portrait evokes a sense of who the subject is. Adams does the opposite: he masks his subject with phoney costumes, make-up and backgrounds, then clobbers the entire image with harsh, one-dimensional lighting.
trac63: I think the price, size and weight are going to be deal-breakers for me.
Quite frankly, if I were in the market for something like this I would spend the extra money for the Nikon 24mm f/1.4, and I'm not even a Nikon snob or anything. Two of my favourite lenses are Tamrons.
I'm just saying: an 18-35 zoom range is nothing to write home about. May as well get the fixed focal length 24mm that's 2/3 stops faster, as well as being smaller, lighter and (probably) optically superior.
I think the price, size and weight are going to be deal-breakers for me.
Panasonicus: I downsized to a Panasonic G3 from a Canon 450d to save a lot of weight and bulk. Seems like the GH3 is moving too close to DSLR territory which appears to defeat one of the main purposes of MICRO 4/3rds. Even the new G5 is bigger and heavier than the G3. Is the market confused? With travel by air these days limiting you to a tiny 5kg carry on and that is all--cameras need to be smaller and lighter and not the other way around. Panasonic might just as well go the whole hog and move into FX territory.
At 550g the G3 is almost exactly the same size and weight as the Nikon D5200. If I'm going to carry around that much bulk I may as well use a real DSLR.