instamatic: I generally agree with Richard. I also think, than unless we have a camera that is Android (or iOS) based, fully connected via a cellular network (yes cellular, not only WI-FI) I don't see this market going anywhere but into further erosion.
The smartphone has pretty much significantly subdued, or even killed this market, and smartphone photos look excellent nowadays (I only have iPhone experience). The typical image-maker these days does not care about interchangeable lenses, and rarely knows (or cares for that matter) what depth-of-field, or lens wide-angle distortion is, so it does not matter to them, as long as they are happy with what their smartphone gives them.
I understand what you're saying, though iPhone does have a tactile control: the side Volume +/- buttons function as a shutter release for the camera. Exposure-wise iPhone pretty much nails it every time for snapshots, so I don't see a need for more controls. However for something like you mention: 20fps with autofocus, is a different need than mine, and the J series makes sense. How often do you use the feature?
I have a Nikon J1 originally bought to complement my DSLRs. But I have to admit, the primary reasons that turn me away from the J1 are 1) lack of AE-Lock Hold feature, 2) even with face detection, the AF does not get eyes perfectly sharp in portraits. I expect a true, accurate and brisk point-and-snap performance, with subjectively good auto-exposure, from a camera with face detection.
I'm not mentioning the lack of connectivity because it is somewhat solved on newer models.
Maybe the J5 addresses my concerns though?
I generally agree with Richard. I also think, than unless we have a camera that is Android (or iOS) based, fully connected via a cellular network (yes cellular, not only WI-FI) I don't see this market going anywhere but into further erosion.
firstname.lastname@example.org: I also loved Aperture, but am learning to like Lightroom. It's raw conversion is quite good. I'm manually converting 800,000 images from A to LR and enjoying the process of revisiting older images.
I license CaptureOne and can attest that it produces an outstanding image quality and detail. I prefer the output to that from Lightroom 5 and Aperture. The drawback is a slightly slower performance and a user interface that is less intuitive than that of Lightroom or Aperture requiring more clicks to get things done. To balance, however, CaptureOne can be operated very well with a keyboard, and new keystrokes can be easily defined for common tasks that are applicable to my workflow. I also license PhotoNinja which I think has better image quality still and one-of-a-kind noise reduction over CaptureOne, but it's slow on my aging computer. In my opinion though Aperture and Lightroom have the most efficient user interfaces. Out of all those tools, I currently opt to do RAW conversions using CaptureOne, as I think it provides the best quality with optimal, though not best, efficiency.
MikeFairbanks: Oh, brother! Here we go again.
I've never liked Apple's iOS versions of photo management. They make you have certain folders (favorites is one) and your camera roll (or whatever it's called right now) stays at the top and all photos have to remain in that folder.
Just let me organize my folders and photos how I wish, please.
I'm still an Apple user (my phone) and am going to purchase an iPad soon (but nothing with a mere 1 gb of RAM), but all this changing of the native photo app is annoying.
Just ask your customers what they want.
And while you're at it, please make Safari on iOS a better browser. It has very few custom features.
A lot of the time Apple wants you to do things one way, and of course their way.
It can be argued that from user interface usability standpoint this can be beneficial, but in the case of photos in iOS, this seems to get in the way and creates more problems than it solves unfortunately, especially when you're using other apps that edit photos in the Photostream.
That's just sad. Nobody to my knowledge currently has the very useful Auto Curve function of Aperture. More specifically nobody has one that works as 'smartly' and adaptively as the one in Aperture. No Lightroom, no Capture One, no PhotoNinja.
But then again the bulk of Apple's profit is not from Aperture, nor even from selling Macs for that matter.
In this day and age we are mostly at the mercy of Apple, Adobe, and other companies when it comes to efficient workflow or high quality processed output done efficiently. There is much room still to streamline and improve workflow, and some of it seems like low hanging fruit, but alas that innovation is not being made even when new versions of software are released. This is probably because lucrative profit is already being made from what's currently offered and it may seem like it's not viable to innovate beyond recycling the old tried and true formula from several years back and calling it new versions.
Aperture's very powerful auto curves feature, as well as the mid-tone contrast slider of the shadows and highlights brick is what I'll be missing. These two things are essential to my workflow. After using Aperture for about 2 years now, I distinctly prefer it to LR. It works differently and I needed some time to adjust, but after I did, I observed how smart it's auto features are, and the adjustments felt more subtle and precise.
I hope Apple delivers a good replacement. I would be disappointed with an application that's only useful for minor edits of photos taken with an "iDevice".
Nikon sales must really be hurting so they launched this campaign. Good, but too little and too late.
I hope Nikon is not oblivious to the notion that DSLRs are slowly progressing on a way to extinction. In my opinion it's not only about rebuilding user confidence in the brand, but also about deciding where to take the company next.
Hint: The Nikon 1 system is great in hands-on practice, but poorly marketed, and unappealing to the Western consumer. Why? The Western consumer wants large numbers, i.e. large sensors, large ISO values, large etc., and at the same time he wants full manual control. Actually none of those things are needed in practice because Nikon 1 is so surprisingly smart in taking photos in auto mode, but the consumer won't know this until they use the camera, and to use it they need to buy it - because now cameras are mostly bought online not in a brick and mortar store when they can be tried first. Nikon 1 is expensive - the consumer concludes to skip it.
instamatic: This is impressive. A small, APS-C camera with broad wireless transfer options. Take pictures and selfies, and post almost instantly to social network sites and more importantly: to cloud galleries. This time the image quality will beat that of smartphones too. Smartphones killed the compact cameras, and actually paper prints as well for the most part. Samsung appears to embrace this inevitable trend very well - much better than the competition in my opinion.
Looking at the lens selection, it appears that all the prime lenses are there, including ultra wides (sorely missing today from the major camera brands).
A revolutionary, and much needed, mold-breaking product, and at a decent price too.
All I'm saying is that the industry has moved, it's just that very few people noticed that. Indeed we currently have many WI-FI enabled cameras but they cost a lot of money, if you want APS-C sensors or better, with all the connectivity, in a small form factor at this price, where do you go?. I don't currently own any Samsung cameras or phones, or tablets. I'm basing my observations on what I see, and the potential of this particular product.
Regarding the transition of the industry. My eye opening moment was when I moved some of my photos to Apple's iCloud photo stream. I can view them on my iPhone, my iPad, and on my flat screen TV via Apple TV, with very little effort. They will always be there unless iCloud goes away. To me that signalizes the end of most paper prints, except for the few that are enlarged and hanged on walls.
This is impressive. A small, APS-C camera with broad wireless transfer options. Take pictures and selfies, and post almost instantly to social network sites and more importantly: to cloud galleries. This time the image quality will beat that of smartphones too. Smartphones killed the compact cameras, and actually paper prints as well for the most part. Samsung appears to embrace this inevitable trend very well - much better than the competition in my opinion.
Having used Exposure 3 through 5 now as well as other plugins, I am compelled to say that Exposure is one of the best plugins out there. It actually can run standalone as well. It is very fast compared to some other similar software packages that do similar things. I'm not comparing it to actual film colors as there are variation in scanning methods, etc. But overall it produces excellent results and gives images a certain taste - speeding up workflow as it's very good with batch processing. Additionally it's sharpening algorithm is very very good. I'm glad that bokeh will now be included, as I have that as well and use it more often than not.
Danlo: I sooo wish Nikon would read these comments, bur looking at their linup, you know they never do. Like where is the FF-sensor in a d3300 body? I wouldnt even care about other companies mirrorless-offerings it they just released that.
I would be interested in a full-frame sensor in a Nikon N65 style body. Just the basics, no gimmicks. It would not have to even have a pentaprism, a pentamirror would do. They could resurrect the CAM900 AF module for it, or perhaps the CAM1300 from the F100. Give it a nice flash sync of 1/250 sec, plus FP and it's a great camera. I don't care for video personally for this kind of body, but to be "competitive" I guess the camera would have to have it.
Also it may be difficult to fit a 3 inch screen on such a small body, but I wouldn't care. The screen could be smaller for my needs, however I could appreciate live histogram in live view, plus exposure compensation preview in live view.
Insertable cartridges? Could it be that this camera will have replaceable sensor modules? Perhaps user-replaceable? That would be super nice and quite innovative.
Solutions like these are the future, but it seems that Apple is a bit late to the game with this one.
mpgxsvcd: How is this better than a Panasonic LX7? You get a brighter lens with a bigger zoom range for a lot less money. Sure it has a bigger sensor than the Panasonic. However, the Panasonic's lens is much brighter(More than 2 stops).
No exactly. Currently owning the LX7, and using it most often at aperture f/2.0 or brighter, you can still cause the background to blur, naturally not to the same level as when using a DSLR.
The only thing the LX7 is practically missing is an IR remote control. Otherwise it's a fantastic camera that can fit in a jacket pocket.
Looking at the price, it is probably another Nikon 1 product that won't sell well. I think Nikon continues to be confused about what people expect and for how much, and where the photography market really is these days.
I'm also surprised that they thought to aim Nikon 1 at "soccer moms". Like someone said below, most of them are just fine with their smartphones, and those who want to turn their photography into a business, already buy Canon Rebels or go directly for the 5D series. And why Canon? Because other "soccer moms" or startup family photographers already use Canon cameras for the most part.
D 503: You could tell when Olympus was in trouble by the introduction of plastic lens mounts and the culling of professional software. When a company like Nikon starts to cut costs and raise prices it gets you thinking.
Interesting that you bring up cost cutting and price raising. Price raising on already highly priced products would be synonymous with a company that tries to bolster it's image as a premium brand, regardless if the underlying engineering and manufacturing costs are cut. However for a brand to be perceived as a premium brand, it has to offer stellar, and I stress stellar - not "good enough" customer service. People come back for more to a company that they perceive is reliable and responsive to their needs and questions.
I spent a good part of last evening playing with NX-D and while it isn't really a huge disappointment, I would expect better.
The good thing is that Nikon colors are now easier to obtain. NX-D is significantly faster than NX2, except that it is still quite slow at rendering previews - and this rendering seems to happen after you make any adjustment to the image. Why is this so slow? I imagine this could easily be improved. How about optimizing that code, and letting the hardware GPU handle the rendering to screen?
I still likely save time using NX-D, than using an elaborate process to achieve a look I like with other software and plugins. NX-D would be a major change in my workflow, but I would get nice or nicer results IMO. While this may be true, it's not what the market expects.
Also, you need to do a lot of clicking to get things done, less it seems than in NX2, but still more than needed. Lightroom and Aperture get this right - all sliders and tools in one place.
Provia_fan: Nikon should be applauded, for keeping the resolution to a sensible pixel count for what this camera is going to be mostly used for. Although I think that High ISO settings are getting ridiculously high for some time now. Until the tradeoffs are sorted of course. But I am sure it will have its uses.
This is indeed true. The current breed of 24-36 MP DSLRs really means you also need to be upgrading your computer with your camera purchase to handle their large files unless you have a very recent one. How many megapixels do you practically need day-to-day?
Vegasus: Oh Nikon,... why dont you put BUILT IN WIFI instead? THUNDERBOLT 2 connector, and 2 sd card slots not XQD. why no XQD? is sony stuff, usually doesnt last long, next time sony will make XQD type-2 with different shape again.
Probably because that would mean making the camera buffer even deeper to allow for continuous framerate at high speed, as SD cards tend to be slower than CF and XQD cards as of today. Added buffer memory adds costs to making the camera.
write2alan: Question: Do I need a router to transfer the images to a desktop or phone?
No you don't. You may need internet connection for initial configuration though.