Seems to have gained a stop or so. Good to see.
Can we please have some samples of moving objects? A car, a runner, a bike, anything not standing still?
EricAotearoa: I thought Nikon was a camera manufacturer, I didn't realise they were in to assisting the slaughtering of potential photographic subjects. If someone thinks of him/herself as hunter, yet hides a long distance away and uses high power weaponry in order to kill another living being, that is nothing to be proud of. I see that as plain cowardice. No different to hiding in a building and shooting children playing in the street. If he/she were truely as brave as they think then he/she would not use weapons at all. So, Nikon, why not use your photographic expertise for what it is best at. Building high quality photographic tools. I'd rather see a photo of an animal, that you've got up close to, on your wall rather than the head of an animal that you've killed from miles away. Now I'll just sit back and wait for all the red neck abuse to come my way. ;-)
Too long; didn't read.
kaiser soze: Several comments here claiming that the SL1 obviates mirrorless cameras. Very silly. WxLxH for this camera is 2x the NEX-7, which isn’t Sony’s smallest mirrorless camera. And presently at least, for this camera there is no collapsible lens of the sort that Sony and Panasonic make. Still a big, big difference in compactness. The biggest disadvantage of mirrorless is the high cost of the really good electronic viewfinders. But that changes very soon, now that Epson is in the picture. The advantages are the ability to use the viewfinder when shooting video, live view in the viewfinder, magnification in the viewfinder to aid manual focusing, brighter image in viewfinder for dark subject and/or high f-number, and access to camera menus via the viewfinder. All real advantages. The SL1 is no doubt going to be a nice camera, but it is naive to think that it obviates the advantages of mirrorless cameras.
No rational person would use a Sony body to AF Canon lenses and track a moving subject.
μ4/3 is now irrelevant due to this small SLR body. If an EOS M successor can track sports subjects better and is smaller, OK. NEX is useless. Why? It won't AF Canon lenses. Who will willingly carry two different systems at a special stage?!
If this SLR tracks subjects OK I'll buy a body to carry.
Your tone is insulting and your choice of characterizations has lowered the quality of the discussion.
The street price should be less and the controls look OK. It'd be interesting to see it in person.
This makes me much less interested in μ4/3 bodies. I'd like to see a comparison between this and the OMD, but for a change I'd like to see SPORTS SHOTS rather than a bridge in the samples.
If this is quicker to focus and keeps subjects tracked well, I want one. The lenses aren't an issue, I've got them. I want a small body that can track a moving object. I don't care about scenery shots and buildings etc. Moving objects, focus tracking -- that's it.
Will this beat the μ4/3 bodies at sports shots? If so, I'm in.
tonywong: I really think you guys need to do a 'behind-the-scenes' look at how your in-depth reviews are created and performed. Just wanted to put this in before the usual complaints are fielded.
I think there'd be value in seeing how many hours and work goes into a product that is ostensibly released for 'free.'
I disagree about the "behind-the-scenes" look. I don't visit the site to learn how difficult and time consuming reviews can be. I visit the site for reviews. Doing a "behind-the-scenes" would ostensibly take time; I would prefer that this time be spent actually reviewing a camera instead.
Besides, follow the money. Incremental updates generate hits, and hits mean advertisements are seen by eyeballs (not mine; those that don't or won't filter). It probably makes better financial sense to have incremental updates and delay reviews than it would to put out a review and be done with it.
I'd not pay directly for the site, and I suspect both the site and its advertisers know this. I still want to see lots of reviews. A "behind-the-scenes" article won't change this; it'll just delay a review, making matters worse.
Is it a great site? Yes. Would I like things faster? Yes. Do I enjoy the silly "click here to view our article" double-intro pages that merely generate hits? No. That's life.
rallyfan: The 1.4 looks interesting.
Sigma are odd. They are excellent at pricing lenses, yet when it comes to pricing cameras they can be off by half an order of magnitude, and somehow think adding "Merrill" to a name will make a body sell -- provided it is slow, expensive, and won't do high ISO.
A Sigma lens on a mainstream body can be a great value; a Sigma body though... Pitty...
Anyway, hoping the 1.4 is as great as it sounds.
Sorry this is an APS-C lens though.
If focus is quick this should sell.
Pack price not bad. Best for a vest rather than belt. I suspect the Sony mount will be the newer type(?).
The 1.4 looks interesting.
Those comparing Nikon and Zuiko lenses here seem to have a problem with this lens. Their actual problem is they've lost the plot.
If you have a Nikon lens that's better, and a Nikon body, you don't need this so it doesn't matter how it compares. Likewise for the Zuiko fans.
Conversely, if you don't have a body from another brand it doesn't matter how good that Zuiko or Nikon lens is; you won't be using it.
If you love your oh so special primes why are you considering a zoom? Don't buy it, maybe you'll keep retail prices lower. Go talk about your amazing talent and gear on some comment section for a prime, with the other armchair prize winners.
Is it loneliness or trolling then?
Blessed are the poor in spirit...
I would go for weather sealing any day. The one drawback with this lens is that the prior version works just fine. If/when that fails, we'll see. Not much Canon can do about that.
Where are all the deluded Sigma fans to point out the... "advantages" of their Merrill or whatever Sigma are calling them now?...
I'm no Nikon admirer but I see nothing wrong with the camera save for the price, that will correct itself soon enough.
Can it compete with NEX et al.? I don't know. People will pay not only for actual, but also perceived versatility whether they use it or not I suspect.
EDIT: Scratch that, there is something missing: VR! Oops! This is a real shame. I'd not even considered that Nikon would release something in 2013 without VR. Wow.
rallyfan: Poor AF performance is a real disappointment. Shame.
Do you have some sports pictures we could see? I shoot rally and football outdoors, athletics in and outdoors (indoors it's mostly high jump etc., outdoors it's that plus throwing). I'm also interested in motos.
Silver looks best.
Files do not depart from the known performance.
A very decent option at the price point.
rallyfan: Could an actual owner please comment on AF and burst performance? I shoot outdoor sports.
The reviews generally lack action shots.
How is it? Which lens did you shoot?
Thank you for the detailed response, I appreciate it!
Could an actual owner please comment on AF and burst performance? I shoot outdoor sports.
The sample images elsewhere honestly look terrific, and ISO 800 is good enough to make money.
This seems to be a very serious camera!
For whom? Some have said this would suit wedding photographers as a backup. They are wrong.
Since it takes fantastic shots provided the subject doesn't move, since it's a dreary black, and since it's so expensive only someone that doesn't care about life at all would pay retail for it, this is an ideal funeral camera. Low light, dead subject, dead marketing and distribution channels for the gear, dead skin tones.
If you are also on your way out, all the better I suppose; you can't take the $1000 USD with you.
Seriously - $1000. Sigma maintain their sense of humour (recall the idiotic SD1 pricing...).
The 70-400 looks very interesting. I hope it has good AF and optics; at this stage I'd trade some of the latter to gain some of the former, frankly. Looking forward to a full test.
Poor AF performance is a real disappointment. Shame.
The samples look great, and the body seems it will take at least some exposure to the elements. This plus the crop factor makes it very useful.
I tried reading a few of the comments below and they're discouraging. People believe their wishes and gripes matter. Clueless.
Nikon aren't interested in customer service (they've proven this repeatedly in two countries in which I have "tested" them) and they're certainly not interested in "future" customer wishes; they're interested in selling cameras.
This could sell, so Nikon are OK.
Canon, OTOH, are not interested in all the above, plus they're not interested in Nikon. If you doubt this, by all means ring your rep and ask.
Since next to nobody cares about Pentax (when did you last see one in the wild, and how many bodies and lenses did that person carry?), I can't DPR fault for ignoring them, though personally I am a fan and would like to see the K series tested immediately, one by one, a year before release! Only ads matter.