peevee1: How long before Nikon breaks compatibility again?
So how did the change of making 3rd party lenses incompatible "make its products work more efficiently"?
rfsIII: I find it very interesting that so many people now say they need to buy two camera systems, one for "serious" shooting and one for casual shooting as though you could split the two.
But my real question is whether this is a genuine need or something that we've been coaxed into believing by the camera industry. And why? Isn't one system enough? Presuming you're not a full-time professional, what is the unfulfilled psychological need we're addressing by owning two camera systems rather than one? I love new gear, and love that we have so many choices, but this seems excessive.
Simply put, if I'm making the theoretical leap to saying I "need" any camera at all, then yes, there is a "need", in my use, for a second camera.
My SLR system gives me every option imaginable, and is adaptable, customizable, and as a system, I can upgrade it to keep current with modern technological improvements. It's anything and everything I need it to be as far as photographic capabilities.
The one thing I can't do with it is put it in a pocket. Taking my system with me requires planning and certain necessities to accommodate it. This simple drawback of size is what splits my photography needs, not serious/casual. It's the difference between planning to make photography the main purpose, and having a capable camera available.
That's where an advanced compact or light system comes in for many people...it's filling a need just like a specialty lens.
You wouldn't say "Why get a macro lens? The camera industry is telling you you need it." Same goes for a small camera.
peevee1: That is one piece of information for those who think that Nikon and Canon has large lens systems when talking about their APS-C lines. No they do not, native systems are pretty poor. And 3rd party is not much help because camera firmwares do not support them, do not autocorrect vignetting, situation, CA, and might not even focus right and break compatibility at any time.Do they have good systems? Yes, for FF. Can you use the lenses on APS-C? Kind of - at the wrong angles (like superexpensive UWA zooms are not UWA anymore), at the wrong sharpness profile (most FF lenses are not sharp enough in the center for higher pixel density of APS-C), at the wrong size, weight and cost.Compare to m43, which is a standard - nobody has to reverse-engineer it, everything just works, and the system is much bigger than Nikon DX or Canon EF-S already, and all the lenses are of right size and weight, although not all have right price. ;)
APS is not a standard but m43 is?
Okay buddy...whatever you say...
Samuel Dilworth: Nikon should compete with Sigma by improving the choice, quality, and prices of its lenses, not by breaking compatibility with third-party lenses at every opportunity.
That should be perfectly doable, since a Nikon user will gravitate to Nikon lenses unless the third-party ones are much more attractive.
So I read this below-the-belt move by Nikon as admission that it isn’t too confident in beating back Sigma with good marketing and engineering. Disappointing.
First paragraph sums it up. Couldn't agree more with you on that.
Second paragraph, idk. I think many casual photographers (those the D5300 is aimed at) are driven by price first and performance second. They're willing to trade a bit of IQ for a bit of $. Sigma is claiming a market that Nikon barely satisfies (where's those wide angle DX primes?). I'd imagine Nikon doesn't like it, but there's no easy way to get Sigma out of the picture.
...or is there?
Certainly seems like a little of that thinking is going on here, with a firmware from Nikon that reduces functionality for third-party lenses with no discernible benefit or necessity driving the change.
I think this is an extremely unwise move on the part of Nikon if that was the only goal. Sure, they might succeed in getting further new buyers hooked into the OEM only lens buying model...but I think the vast majority will come into it, compare the products, and see that Canon offers third party support and Nikon doesn't.
Lab D: I can't believe how small the thing is! Imagine carring it in one pocket with a couple pancake lenses in another. With the 20mm F/1.7 it would be a great P&S camera to compliment a different micro four thirds camera.
Yes, because there were clearly no great cameras until the advent of digital and IS.
CFynn: Some people prefer to use sailing boats, others power boats.
If some people want to use a full frame camera where they have to set everything manually for each shot, maybe even manually focus, no harm in Nikon providing such a camera.
I think it'd be a bit too absurd/anachronistic to include a shutter cocking mechanism. Perhaps a power switch that resembles a film advance lever, that folds flush with the body in the "off" position, then flips out to a comfortable, familiar angle to turn the camera on?
That said, this could be the beginning of a new era for Nikon, keeping its DX & FX lines of bodies going strong, but also offering, in the future, a 3 tier DF line, focusing on stripping away all the "tech nerd" aspects of camera specs.
Give me a dedicated on/off switch, shutter speed and EV comp dials, aperture ring and DoF scale on small metal primes with long focus throws, and an all-metal FM2 styled body with leatherette, in black and silver only, and I'll be a happy camper. Focus peaking, and a hybrid viewfinder would be all I really want. Though it wouldn't be likely, I'd even welcome manual-focus-only operation.
PenPix: I own a modern D-SLR and a "retro" mirrorless camera.
My D700 is the workhorse. Responsive, customizable, and with a plethora of accessories. It's also large, heavy, and complicated.
In contrast my X-E1 is small and light… and simple. If I want aperture priority, I turn the aperture ring.
This simplicity is why I enjoy using the X-E1. I don't worry about the settings as much, like when I honed my skills with my father's Canon FP.
Anyone that learned photography on a old-school film camera will appreciate this simplicity... but with the conveniences that come with modern digital camera (I hope!) I think that is what the DF will bring to Nikon users.
Size and weight are another consideration. FX mean big glass, something I do not enjoy hiking up a mountain with. This is why most of my photography is with the X-E1 now.
Photography, after all, is about getting the image. How you achieve it is your choice, but enjoy the process.
"FX mean big glass"
Recent bulky FX zooms, sure.
My FM2n is almost always paired up with a svelte little 50/1.8 AI-s that is more the size of many m43 lenses. If Nikon wants to make this one work for them, they should do something similar to their Series E glass: a light, compact, inexpensive range of primes in the most popular lengths: 24, 28, 35, 50, 85, 105, and 200.
Physical aperture rings and a nice long, well-damped focus throw for each.
Granted, most rumors indicate that this will be an expensive, simple camera, not a reasonably priced one, so that lens lineup could be made more like a high end 'retro' line than Series E by adding metal construction, and other fine details.
Mirrorless Crusader: This is nothing more than a lame excuse for Nikon to raise the price.
Ah, so by that rationale, any company releasing any new camera is just a lame excuse to raise the price.
Now I see. Thanks.
"...given its launch at the same $2000 SRP..."
supeyugin1: 15m? They must be joking! It's not a camera for scuba diving. Must be at least 40m. Not a Nikonos at any measure.
Maybe because it's a waterproof, submersible, interchangeable lens camera from Nikon?
And what was the last one to fit that description before this?
Sad Joe: Much as I dislike the Nikon 1 range this one caught me as an interesting surprise - well done Nikon ! But its FAR too expensive at its RRP - perhaps a 50 % discount is coming as with all of the other Nikon 1's ?
It wouldn't surprise me.
Panasonic does similar price crash tactics...I've heard that it's because the Japanese market goes nuts for mirrorless compacts, so they try to make as much money as possible on that initial rush...then readjust the price to suit the more patient/stingy American & European markets a few months later.
"The Nikon 1 AW1 two lens kit with the 11-27.5mm and 10mm lenses will be available in October 2013 for the suggested retail price (SRP) of $999.957."
It's that last seven tenths of a cent that'll get you.
MGJA: Well, well. I was convinced Nikon 1 was nothing for me. And suddenly, if reviews confirm it's half as good as it looks on paper, I probably have my next camera purchase for the vacations.
Pretty clever, Nikon. Better not be any of that QC messing around you allowed yourselves with the FF cams, tho.
Thinking the same thing. This (or, more hopefully, a rugged V-series, to this camera's J3) might just get me to rethink my intentions of going m43.
Jogger: I'd rather have a fixed lens, fixed-focal length APSc camera like the Coolpix A or Ricoh GR in ruggedized form.
That's all well and good, but I suspect you'd be in the minority in the market segment this is aimed pretty squarely toward (that being the outdoor adventurer demographic).
These folks want the best compromise of:
(1) A camera that is light & compact enough to justify bringing it along camping/hiking/kayaking/skiing/fishing/etc.
(2) Within the realm of rule #1, a camera that will stand up to the challenges presented by those environments.
(3) Within the realm of the first two rules, the max. amount of image quality and flexibility to get the shot you want without greatly pushing the limits of the first two.
While fixed-lens/bigger sensor will likely get you better IQ, it's a big hit on flexibility, where a smaller sensor, with interchangeable lenses, lets you pack an extra 1-2 lenses and have a camera that'll do absolutely anything you ask of it, while turning out IQ that is reasonably close to the APS-C for the majority of situations outside of pixel-peeping & large prints.
R Thornton: One more product nobody called for. Like the shape though. Now, Nikon, put something spectacular in it for the price already!
Check out the waterproof S4 Active.
Not saying that this isn't compelling new ground for cameras, just that smartphones are slowly getting there too.
Valentinian: Well done for Nikon, except.... its marketing stinks because you cannot buy just the AW1 and the 10mm (equiv. 27mm) ONLY.Underwater snorkeling I would use the 27mm equivalent ONLY -is that me, or anybody else agrees?(also a flash would be useful)
A flash is in the works.
rhlpetrus: Question (I'm lazy): does it take regular 1 lenses and do these AW lenses work on other 1 bodies?
I'm glad you read.
I agree. This is the first camera I've seen that has made me reconsider getting into m43 in the near future. Until this one, Nikon CX represented a system with nothing to entice me and a lot that I'd never really get much use from.
While I won't likely get *this* model, as, waterproof or not, I don't like the J3's specs, if they make an AW10 that is a high-spec waterproof modeled after the V-series, that might just get me to stop lusting after a GX7.
...that said, I'd probably feel like an idiot after that, when Panny reacts to the sales and releases a waterproof GX7.
Don't be lazy. Read.
As an avid fisherman (I actually fished the French Broad, where this project began, in April.) living in the rust belt, a project like this really speaks to me. Though I rarely fish the big rivers, it's all too common to see the scars (and in some cases open wounds) of industrialization on the streams and creeks that feed the big water.
There are riverbeds dyed orange from decades of industrial dumping and acid mine drainage, and miles of flowing water more or less completely devoid of fish...even so, over the past twenty years, great progress has been made toward undoing that damage, and the recovery has been very promising.
Now, with most of the steel industry a thing of the past, fracking threatens these waters, and I guess only time will tell if the people around here will take a lesson from history.
utomo99: Instead of just rebranding products, why Leica did not do some smarter way ?1. Put Faster Lens. 2. Read the user comments about that cameras and improve it based on that. and other improvements. And I believe people will respect better
Jeez, guyfawkes, smug much?
So it's okay to charge double or more for the same guys for a different faceplate...and anyone that doesn't think so is just jealous?
Get over yourself.