It seems to be a maintanaince release targeted at the Japan home market where M sales isn't nil. Could as well mean Canon is abandoning the EOSM mount. They must have taken notice of the Sony A7 and its larger sensor format.
Stitzer23: Does dxomark publish reviews done by dpreview?
And I may add: DPReview has the much more meaningful presentation IMHO. DPR, continue the good cooperation, please! I like DxO tests but really dislike their cryptic undocumented score system.
It is a lot heavier and bulkier than an RX100ii, despite its much smaller sensor and similiar zoom.
Ben Herrmann: CAUTION: Be very careful - I just did the firmware update for the Nikon P7700, and now, 3rd party batteries no longer work. The camera will not respond to any of the 3rd party models that I have - including the Wasabi's that are superior. Once you turn off the camera (after firmware update), it will not start up again with a 3rd party battery (at least in my case). But it will function just fine with Nikon batteries. Way to go Nikon!!!! You Tu_ds....another way for you to make an extra buck now having to buy your batteries exclusively.
I guess the new firmware must identify EN-EL14 vs. EN-EL14a and the check fails with a 3rd-party battery. Probably a bug in the new firmware as Nikon may simply have skipped a test for 3rd-party batteries in the lab. Solution would be to fall back to EN-EL14 behaviour in the firmware.
Not sure though if there will ever be another FW update. Nevertheless, I still don't think Nikon did it on purpose or that all 3rd-party batteries cause problems.
Glen Barrington: I can't help but wonder if the soldier was ever identified. This was a great photo, and all. But the soldier died for a cause, he needs to be remembered, for more than being the subject of a cool photo, I think.
Hmmmh, only person killed. This interview has "each time the soldiers moved out they were mowed down". Strange at least.
Maybe, the "several" attempts were on several days. Has this been analyzed?
mrdancer: I was waiting for DPReview to do a full review of the GX7, but I suspect it will be very similar to this review. It looks like Olympus has adopted some of the in-camera features that the GX7 has, such as the color tool and intervalometer.
I've been shooting with a GX7 for a week or so now. It's low-light capabilities have surprised me. The starlight photos are, well, stellar! With shutter set to 60 seconds with the F1.4 lens, I can capture thousands (millions?) of stars in the backdrop of a sharply-focused tree or un-lit building(although the stars appear slightly blurry due to earth's rotation during the 60 seconds - at least they all blur in the same direction!). It even captures stars when there are bright landscape lights on the horizon.
Of course, shorter shutter speeds reduce star movement, but don't quite capture the depth that a million or so stars can create.
millions of stars create millions of white pixels, or a white wall :)
Number of stars visible to a human eye under perfect conditions is about 2000.
The challenge with night photography is to capture the starry night w/o trails and blur. A fast 35mm-equivalent F/1.4 35mm, or F/2.8 14mm, can do the trick. Exposure should be less than 30s, dep. on the focal length.
With a long exposure, any camera can capture the stars.
@anybody commenting on price:
The 3000$ claim was fake, there is nothing known about the price. DPR article has been updated too.
technotic: Any good for D800 in terms of IQ I wonder.
This lens is as heavy and large as a Nikon 24-70/2.8 and the latter is sharp enough for the D800. If the early comments here apply, the Sigma 24-105/4 won't be a match for the D800 and shouldn't be called Art. Chance missed for a LIGHT and sharp 24-70/4 for D800- like cameras on the road.
Well, the Nikon 1.4/58 has 9 elements (2 asph), the Zeiss 1.4/55 has 12 elements (1 asph, 6 ED). The published ZEISS optical MTF figures quote MTF for 40 lp/mm to stay at or above 50% across the entire image field and for *ALL* apertures (before diffraction hits), right into the corners. That's quite stunning and probably not matched by the Nikon.
OTOH, the Nikon has AF, is cheaper and may still be good enough to bring true medium format quality to the D800E. Will be interesting to watch :)
Looked up MTF figures on Nikon USA website: I was correct, it cannot compete with the ZEISS. Nikon publishes MTF at less challenging 30 lp/mm to be down to 25% in the corners. So wide open, the Zeiss seems to be *much* better in the corners.
The main difference is: the Nikon still is a rather traditional symmetrical design while the ZEISS is a rather challenging retrofocus design.
falconeyes: I mark this day in my calendar!
DPR, for the first time and eventually, seems to understand the notion of equivalent aperture.
I can only hope that NEVER AGAIN will DPR quote equivalent focal lengths mixed with non-equivalent aperture figures. I really really hope this nonsense will now come to an end.
@don_van_vliet: Both.Most people ignore that actual ISO must be adjusted to reflect same equivalent ISO (aka same noise level) too.
DPR didn't seem to get this either prior to publishing this article.
Some day, all enthusiast photo cameras will be like the A7r, i.e., high MP FF mirrorless, more or less. Who will own this market is an open race though.
Photato: FF stand for Fullframe Fixation.The high cost of 36x24mm sensor production will relegate this line of cameras to the niche of affluent enthusiasts and given it a competitive disadvantage.APS-H is the way to go. For 1/3 of the price and almost the same quality.You know, FF backward compatibility is no longer that important, specially with mirrorless much shorter flange distance where it makes a lot of sense to go with the much sharper native glass.
Do yourself a favour and forget about APS-H.
BTW, APS-H has no significant cost advantage anymore. Masks grew to accomodate FF and yield rates have improved to make APS-H a no option.
I mark this day in my calendar!
peevee1: Nikon - how about innovating, paying more to engineers, not lawyers?
It seems they do. Which is why they protect innovations by patents and design work by design patents. Seems Sakar infringed their US design patent. Nikon cannot but sue in such a case. It simply is against the law to infringe design patents. Design patents serve to keep products distinguishable which isn't a bad thing.
IvanM: After just skimming through the article it would seem that once the AF micro adjustment was sorted the 'normal' af was ok and as good as live view dual pixel focussing...so was this test not flawed in that the AF was off to begin with?
Keeping a consistent AF microadjustment table is not a practical option really.
However, I wonder why cameras can't still autoadjust their PDAF system, combining CDAF and PDAF. It could be as easy as pointing the camera towards a suitable target and press a calibrate button ...
It almost looks as if there were no competition anymore in the camera market.
olypan: It's like trying to explain to children why there are no dinosaurs around anymore. They don't want to hear that they were slow, oversized, and failed. They just like that they were big and scary.
Dinosaurs were not slow, oversized, and did not fail. They were massacred by a cosmic catastrophy like most other species. Actually, they dominated all other species until then. Almost like humans do today. Not exactly fail. Not at all. A few mammals and smaller dinosaurs (birds) survived. Assume a catastrophy where only insects survive. Not exactly the humans fault then ...
mpgxsvcd: The 70D is a much better camera than Canon has ever produced. However, if any of the latest m4/3s mirror-less solutions had the issues that the 70D has they would be blasted out of the water in the reviews.
M4/3s was ALWAYS critiqued heavily for not having good AFC during burst. Now they have great AFC during burst(GH3/OMD) and yet the reviews still say that it is not as good as a DSLR.
Canon's latest and greatest camera won't even attempt to do the AFC during burst with its new Dual Pixel feature.
I just don't understand why Canon's cameras are held to a different standard.
It's no different standard. The 70D does have another AF (PDAF) which M4/3s don't.
vladimir vanek: what the...? I mean, what's wrong with the world today? Do we need hundreds of phone models in every tenth of inch of screen diagonal? flat, round, black, red, white, blue, with this and that OS, with all sorts of resolutions. one with LED flash, another one with dual LED, and a third one with bi-color dual LED. oh yes, and a xenon of course. those with 8 mpix, 10 mpix, 13 mpix, a water resistant one, crush resistant, made of plastic, made of metals, made of glass... And most importantly, a new one every few months? why don't they make a flawless design, say in 5 different specs and that's it? cooperation instead of competition? and focus on more important things, like saving the planet, feeding people and living happy lives without all those twitters and facebooks even in our bedrooms? sorry for my essay, I'm just tired of this neverending competition that brings nothing but pulling out some money out of everyone's pocket as often as possible.
Vladimir may be right. But the cure is more challenging tasks to direct talent and capital towards. The current redundancy is a sign that we are running low on vision or goals. Or on mechanisms to fund visions or goals. It used to be a political task, now it is investment banking.
Having said this, I think Samsung's flexible display technology is a break through. Not the phone, but the technology behind.
Now, Jony brought to cameras what he brought to iOS. Jony, please, focus with what you are great at: designing computer hardware.
In an interview ( http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/19/4748572/apple-jony-ive-ios-7-interview ) Jony describes his philosophy ("objects whose forms don't hint at what they do"). And that's the problem, both for a UI and for tools: their forms SHOULD hint at what it does ...
And a camera is a tool.
falconeyes: From the image, the lens would be no more than a 1.8mm aperture. Which is only half the 3.3mm of the Nokia 808's lens, the current smartphone class leader. Therefore, this new device can only capture 1/4 the light of the class leader and won't be that interesting.
F-number is irrelevant for cross-system evaluations. Physical lens diameter is the only parameter left in any equation.