Also, why not just take the D800, stick this 16MP sensor in it, increase FPS to 8, add WI-FI, name it D800h, and call it a day?
I have a feeling that Nikon targeted this camera more at the collectors than photographers just needing a full-featured, full-frame camera. The high price is one indicator of that, and I have no qualms about stating that in this day and age - this price is indeed steep for a full-frame camera - that also does not come with built-in WI-FI. The focusing screen remains a big question here as well, and I think a lack of split-screen prism would confirm that the serious manual focus photographers continue to be left out. I for one sold my 50mm f/1.2 AI-S only because accurately focusing with it was next to impossible on the D700 because it's focusing screen is only viable for something like f/2.8 lenses and darker. Otherwise one has to rely on the green dot rangefinder indicator which I found not to work as well as I would want it. I'm hoping that the Df addresses that. Bottom line, I'm disappointed - but of course I haven't used this camera yet.
ThomasSwitzerland: Nikon: Are you sleeping?
I don’t need a „look-a-like“ of the Olympus retro mistake. Nikon, I need from you a real mirrorless innovative hi-end camera in order to avoid buying the Sony, and I want to have less weight without plastic lenses.
I think it's great that this retro camera is coming out. It certainly got me interested. That said, I think Nikon needs to rethink it's mirrorless offerings. In my opinion, and I'm sure many will agree, that mirrorless camera needs to have a DX or FX sensor - at least to be attractive to the North American consumer. I personally also think that it needs to behave like an iPhone - what can be easier? Touch a point on screen to focus there. Hold the finger on a spot on screen to do AE-L on that spot. How hard would it be to implement this? Also WI-FI is a must, so is live histogram, and a nice screen for true WYSIWYG touchscreen composition. The camera must fully support CLS wireless flash control, and can mount any Nikon flash like the SB-800 or newer. Really. That's where I see the future of photography going. So far as far as I'm seeing nobody is able to deliver on that front, but Panasonic is getting awfully close with some of their m4/3 offerings.
leschnyhan: As a photography instructor, I'd like all my students to start with a film SLR with basic manual controls. However, since I teach in some programs that don't have darkroom facilities, I often end up teaching intro DSLR classes to people who don't have any experience with a simple film SLR. The Nikon DF, together with an older Nikon lens with an aperture ring, would be an ideal kit for a student learning to use manual exposure--not too many bells and whistles to complicate things, and (maybe?) fewer automatic features like scene modes (which become a crutch and don't help people to understand exposure). It looks fairly sturdy, too, which means it might be a good camera for school photography departments or rental facilities (where equipment is often handled roughly). Unfortunately, I think it will come with a price tag that will put it out of reach for many beginning students who want to own (rather than borrow) a camera.
Let's just hope the rumored price tag is not true.
It would have been a hit if such camera has been introduced possibly 3 years ago. Of course market reaction will show if and how much demand there really is for it today. I might be interested, but if the price will really be $3000, it would simply be imprudent for me to buy it. I'm actually slowly starting to look at Panasonic m4/3 offerings, as they are getting to the point where they work like smart phone cameras but offer a much larger m4/3 sensor. For one I find WYSIWYG composition and exposure setting on a live view touchscreen an impressive feature, and I believe this is where the digital cameras are headed in the near future. Until that happens, or Nikon does something really impressive, and "uncrippled", I'm content with my D700. At the same time, I'm still a bit hopeful for Nikon, but that sentiment has much diminished. Did Nikon shoot themselves in the foot with the D700 - now that 6 years later people are expecting an equally impressive camera and not getting one?
So why Nikon didn't build a camera like this in the first place? To me the Sakar camera looks like what the Nikon 1 should have been. Let's see, it has a body with a programmable operating system, and WI-FI built in. It has replaceable sensors since they are integrated into the lenses. Looks like a very innovative idea (and why we still don't have it in the mainstream cameras?). It makes one keep the body while updating the software, and only replacing the lens/sensor modules as newer and better ones are released, and needed by the photographer.
magneto shot: having used android phones in my sony Acro S and also the Nokia 808. i still went and preferred the iphone.
The reason is that the overall usage is rock solid. Fast to shoot and supports shooting with the headset volume buttons, tons of 3rd party casing and tripod mounting and apps like Hipstamatic/Oggl.
Overall, for mobile photography, its the overall availability of it. Other phones often lags for no apparent reasons when invoking the camera apps lacks 3rd party accessories like mcam lens etc.
If i wanted the best quality, well, the e-p5 and the nikon d4 would fulfill my needs, but for an everyday "camera with me". Its the iphone.
Well said. That's exactly what it is.
kriztian: Why don´t you all have a look at this shootout between iphone 5s and lumia 1020. http://www.businessinsider.com/iphone-camera-compared-to-nokia-1020-2013-9It´s redicoulous to see how some people try to elevate the iphone 5 S when its not deserved. There are practically no change at all in pic-quality from iphone 5
Because you know, iPhone can do everyday tasks that one expects from a smartphone very well and very smoothly with very little bad surprises, and that includes taking sufficiently nice photos that have excellent contrast and color. So iPhone is liked because it's pleasing to use and helps people to get things done. And that's it's value. Way too many people and reviewers also compare iPhone to other phones by looking at technical specifications, but this is totally wrong way to compare them. Few if any actually compare them on the ability and ease of getting things done by using them.
JohnLL: To me, at these standard settings, the only material difference I can see, besides the moiré issue, is that PN seems to have more saturated colours and slightly higher contrast than ACR. I think these issues, if you regard them as such, could be fixed in ACR without much difficulty.
I use Photo Ninja to process most of my RAW photos. For me there is no going back elsewhere unless there is a really compelling reason to do so. The main benefit of Photo Ninja is it's outstanding ability to recover highlights, where other converters just cannot pull them, making the software suitable to process some of the most challenging RAW files quickly and effectively. I don't think the examples in the article below make this clear enough. On the flip side, you'll need a recent and powerful computer to run Photo Ninja fast - however my 4 year old Mac Book Pro with 8GB of ram and pure SSD based workflow does just fine for me.
I'm not sure what this camera is trying to achieve from a marketing/strategic standpoint. No WI-FI built-in? Looks dead-on-arrival to me.
What would be good for Nikon to sell perhaps would be a compact camera of similar size with f/1.8-2.4 (25-90mm equiv.) zoom lens, WI-FI built in, full touchscreen control of focus and exposure (like iPhone), and RAW capability for those who want it. It should be priced no more than $250. Perhaps that would be marketable.
Or perhaps Nikon should simply build a nice iPhone zoom lens that's not priced over $100, and complement it with an app that allows RAW - again for those who want it.
Joseph Mama: Who is gonna buy this crap? The RX100 equivalent is HUGE and difficult to pocket. Look at the picture of it...it sticks wayy out. It lacks obvious features such as ISO control and even a freaking SHUTTER PRIORITY mode... and NO RAW! No HD video either...all MPEG4. And they want 500 bucks??
Does the iPhone have any of those features? No. It has touch based exposure and focus control only. It's a different paradigm of photography that way. iPhone's in-camera postprocessing also results in surprisingly good color and contrast, so the need for RAW is virtually eliminated. I think this new Sony addition addresses the iPhone's few photographic deficiencies. I just hope it's in-camera processing matches or surpasses that of the iPhone. The target audience of this product can be anyone, but I suspect it's the blogging, snapping, FB posting folks that are considered the primary customers. For me personally this would be a great travel snapshot camera.
So Nikon only now realizes that FB is the most people's online picture album? Can they be any more late to the game than this?
And how about they introduce a zoom lens attachment for the iPhone? My iPhone takes better pictures in terms of exposure and color than a recent Nikon compact camera that I purchased about 6 months ago. Not to mention, I can easily edit them and publish directly from the iPhone. The one thing that I'm really missing on the iPhone is a zoom lens.
Apple, are you reading this?
instamatic: This is the future both for consumer use and professional event photography. I didn't expect it to come from Samsung, but hey here we are.
HowaboutRAW, I'm not saying this is the camera to do it, but generally wi-fi sharing and fast delivery is where we are headed. This appears to be the new workflow paradigm.
Anepo, why so bitter? Imagine the possibilities. You take pictures with a camera employing such or similar technology and automatically keep uploading them to your company's servers while your post-production staff is working on processing them as the event unfolds. You are done by the end of the day, and so is your post-production work. Your clients check their email the next day to find a link to their finished password-protected gallery. Done.
This may also be the beginning of the end of RAW photography...or at last large RAW. Why? Bandwidth first, but then, the cameras released in the last couple of years produce better JPGs than those from 5 years ago, and dramatically better JPGs than those from 7 years ago or more, both in color quality and especially dynamic range.
This is the future both for consumer use and professional event photography. I didn't expect it to come from Samsung, but hey here we are.
These cards are quite innovative and the times of "same-day-edit" are here already. I think this technology is on the verge of becoming ubiquitous with camera makers also embracing wi-fi now. This is probably the major workflow revolution coming.
Neil2112: Using Aperture here for small shoots, cataloging and I/O.For serious work (1500 shot weddings) Lr4 is a must have. No debate.
It comes as a significant disappointment that in a field where Apple should outright dominate, they're a big fat nowhere. Why go to all the pain of producing a fabulous new laptop and then cede the market to Adobe with such a weak app?
Honestly, I really want to use Aperture, but it is nowhere close to the raw energy and power of Lightroom. Apple, if you ever want to step up your game and kick Adobe's keister, now would be a nice time to do it.I'm waiting.
I second that opinion: try both Lightroom and Aperture for a significant amount of time, and then draw your conclusions which one is better for your particular cameras, style, and processing needs.
Remember, while on the outside they may look similar, but after a closer look you will likely find that they actually work quite differently, but in the end are designed to help you manage and process your photos.
When working with two products like these, we run a risk of bringing our biases acquired with one tool to the other, which is not correct. For example Lightroom 3's curves tool is very simple and I rarely use it, but the curves tool in Aperture 3 gives you more options and more precision, and is one of my favorite tools to use there. So we should not be discouraged to try all the tools and options before drawing conclusions in favor of one tool or the other.
It's only getting better, which is great, even though the price is a premium. I've been working on a Mac for the last 6 years, and processing photos on it for the last 3. The value of a Mac is not in the verbatim specifications, but in the overall experience and efficiency of working with it - once you learn how to use it "the Mac way", as it works quite differently when you get down to the operational details.
In my opinion Aperture 3 on a MacBook Pro is one of the most productive and useful tools in a photographer's toolbox. This new high resolution screen is bound to help see detail in photos that previously needed to be zoomed-in closer. All in all I can only see this saving time during postprocessing. Yeah, there you have it, call me an Apple fanboy ;-)
qwertyasdf: Pentax, you don't need a Marc Nelson (?) or whatever he's called, not too worthy of remembering anyways...to help you design...becoz you just do GREATTTTTTTTT!!!!!!
I really like the bold new design. The one in blue is very nice.
With all the discussion about megapixels, high ISO, wireless transmission, and video, I have a different question:
Can this camera do an accurate live view preview of set exposure compensation / or manual exposure settings, together with a live RGB histogram that updates itself on the fly as those settings or WB adjustments are changed?
This is just what I need, as long it is crisp at f/2.0 in practical use.