phazelag: It seems you either get these cameras or you don't. I finally dipped my toe in the DP waters with a DP3 Merrill and I love it. The images are worth it and the shooting experience is pure photography. I want this series. I will get all three eventually.
"Never give a sucker an even break"W.C. Fields
The continuing sheer absurdity of this line shows up the irrational market for photographic products .
Joe Ogiba: The Samyang 85mm F1.4 costs less than the NJ 7% sales tax on this lens .
The Samyang lens is also probably 93% as good. I think that Zeiss should have named this lens range "Priapus" rather than "Otus".
Simon97: These lenses will cost you deep in the purse. You shall have the better of them and I shall have the worst.
Unfortunately, like the rest of us, you're getting older: the quote is from "Matty Groves", not "Tam Lin". Both songs rendered wonderfully by Fairport Convention in their prime. Is it just me that feels that Richard Thompson has hardly written a memorable song since leaving them?
cgarrard: Cool camera for cat shots.
":) Maybe its Schrodinger's cat ?"Possibly: the camera certainly uses a "Heisenberg" sensor.
Having been creating spherical panos for many years - quite a bit of it commercially, I'll believe this works properly when I see it. Unless it defeats the laws of optics - namely parallax errors - it's impossible to get accurate stitches if there are foreground elements. To do so requires rotation around, or at least close to, the no-parallax point of the lens. Even with the best stitchers such as PTGui or Autopano this is required.No doubt this will work after a fashion, with horrible stitching errors visible, which may well satisfy the selfie obsessed knuckle-draggers.
I'd buy this without hesitation for its unparalleled shallow DOF ability were it not for the fact that nowadays I shoot MFT and I think that adding an adaptor would make the whole rig a bit unwieldy.
Looks to me like a ludicrously expensive way of creating a fairly small amount of RAID storage in a cosmetic package. I can see that some people might need this for highly critical location work but it doesn't take a lot of thought to figure out ways of getting the job done at a fraction of the cost.
Well, whoever's responsible is certainly going to give it a rest for a while now that the news is being broadcast that Mr. Plod's on their trail. They can then resume once the hue and cry has died down...
Barend: Reading all the comments I think that my Nikon D700 still does a decent job.
" once you get used to the "fat" files from the D800 there is no going back :-)"So don't bother going "forward" then.
stevo23: Innovation is when someone provides a solution to a known issue. Like Polaroid - provided instant images on paper. People wanted that. Like automatic transmissions (I don't use one) - people didn't have to fiddle with shifting gears. Like autofocus - people realized that they could get more keepers and better focus if somehow the camera could do it.
It's usually something that people thought about but didn't think was possible. But I can't think of anyone ever thinking it would be cool to be able to change the focus point of an image after it's captured - and that with sub-critical focus and poor image quality. It's not an innovation, it's just a novel idea but with no real market interest. It's not solving anything that people were looking for and it replaces nothing.
This is not the future for photographers. It's a novel idea looking for an interested party. I can't really think of anyone or any application for this that makes it invaluable. Can you?
That's about right. The almost complete failure of 3D TV in favour of higher resolution, and hence larger screens, is a similar phenomenon. However if demand existed solely for what is actually useful, there's be a lot less junk out there. However demand is often created when there's something to be sold.
SeeRoy: The camera market is simply evolving to resemble many other sectors of the consumer goods market - watches would be a typical example. The function of any given watch is almost identical to any other. An inexpensive quartz watch is likely to be more accurate than the most expensive chronometer-grade mechanical example from Rolex, Patek or Omega. No one questions this any more. These products are primarily signifiers and their function secondary.
Function. All watches are timepieces. They're only incidentally male jewellery (we're talking men's watches, in the main.) All the other differentiation (mechanical complexity) is a way of justifying high prices. I own a few old mechanical watches - back to the 1920s - and they're all usable but need periodic and expensive servicing. Practicality or better fitness for purpose isn't their justification.The average new Rolex - to take a single typical example - is manufactured in huge numbers and depreciates by about 50% as the punter leaves the shop.Cars, TVs, furniture, clothing all would have equally been examples of the decadence in the consumer goods marketplace. Essentially identical items differentiated by advertising in order to appeal to an artificially stimulated status anxiety.
Retzius: "All components are packaged in a box designed exclusively for this product."
Trific unboxing-thrill factor...
The camera market is simply evolving to resemble many other sectors of the consumer goods market - watches would be a typical example. The function of any given watch is almost identical to any other. An inexpensive quartz watch is likely to be more accurate than the most expensive chronometer-grade mechanical example from Rolex, Patek or Omega. No one questions this any more. These products are primarily signifiers and their function secondary.
electrophoto: My dentist still loves it. He says it goes well with his Porsche Cayenne GTS...
Also likely to prove very popular amongst proctologists and spelunkers.
Bobby Handal: meanwhile in real life, owners of the V1 , V2 or V3 series know exactly how good these cameras really are, even though Nikon is not doing a good job in Marketing and some issues (like auto bracketing, Auto ISO WTF?, ITTL Wireless) - but Pricing Specially . This is the only compact mirrorless system that allows you to go over 800mm natively , that alone is a major selling point, if you add the silent shutter, and the good optics available, it is a no brainer.
Lin Evans:You're bashing your head against a brick wall - trying to apply rationality to a case of mass psychosis. This series of cameras, overpriced as they are, seems to induce it.
qianp2k: Will be free or you need to pay for a prod version when it's officially released?
But DPR wrote:"Nikon will continue.... while the beta version of Capture NX-D is available. Once the official version of Capture NX-D is released....To download the beta version of Nikon’s Capture NX-D..."Which would seem to contradict your statement - twice!
An absolutely hilarious product. Testament to a luxury goods marketplace that can best be described as decadent.
Bobby Handal: The only bad thing about the camera is the pricing. Nikon has put together a system that is great for wildlife, without breaking your back ! lightweight and responsive. Slap on a 70-200mm f/2.8 and its a 540mm f/2.8, and with the new lens that nikon (70-300mm) is selling you have a compact 840mm lens that is able to grab birds in flight easily , again , in a compact package.
Far too rational a comment. There's no denying that the launch price is very steep but no doubt the manufacturer has done the sums based on the previous models' price profiles.I am "invested" in MFT and FF gear but were I not I'd buy this camera and the 70-300 as soon as the price has declined.
larrytusaz: Why does anybody care about the video specifications of this high-grade stills camera? If I had $3000 to drop on this I'd do so for the amazing pictures it can take, not the Vimeo or YouTube clips it can record. It's an SLR, not a camcorder.
It's a still (DSLR) camera which can be used to shoot video. Providing you don't mind abysmal ergonomics and jury-rigged Heath Robinson clusters of ancillary equipment. Then there's the lenses.