JanRob3174: The rate at which consumers post either positive or negative comments, initial reactions and early reviews for each Nikon product bring released is enough to make Nikon execs realize they should just go on developing for the sake of photography and less about 'competition'.
999 = rate of intelligence of people who don't buy this paperweight that will be worth $0 USD in 8–12 months.
Sangster: Nikon will sell more units to upgraders if they offered body only at around $300-350.
"some countries" = not USA = not where dealers aren't stupid
MFiftysomething: Nikon continue their pursuit of speed over image quality I suspect. 20megapix and lots of PDAF all on a 1" ?
If Sony can do what? Sell a P&S camera for $750 that is obsolete in year?
Photoman: Great, another Nikon 1 failure. It will be half price in 3-6 months time at Amazon/B&H.
No 1/3rd price ;p
captura: And the DPR review is when?
Papi61: 4K @15 fps?
Come on Nikon, who are you kidding? Might as well be 5 fps, useless anyway.
Yep. Nikon and Barnum and Bailey.
JackM: Only a fool would buy this camera
This is the only accurate post on this thread. Bravo, sir, bravo.
brownie314: No selfie mode - me not buy. Oh wait - it has it - check.
Because people are REALLY gonna pack a crappy Nikon J camera around to take selphies instead of an iPhone. Really.
zodiacfml: Why bash the camera, it has a reasonable price at launch. It has a price of a Sony RX100 with good specs and looks. This might be larger than the compact but this is insanely fast.
I criticized the previous 1 series cameras because they were priced in a vacuum, as though, they don't have competition with the same format and larger formats.
Pixel peeping this would be fun too as it might approach m4/3. We will see.
Hell no. It will not "approach M43" any more than Micro FourThirds will approach a 36x24mm frame size, anymore than 36x24mm will approach Medium Format Digital (which is the real full-frame and pwns it like a boss).
Nikon 1 is, and always will be, a joke, perpetrated by drunken greedy bastards, against an unsuspecting public, who, in their ignorance, get swindled by salespeople bribed by Nikon spiffs to sell this garbage to them. Sorry. But it's true.
rallyfan: I think the pricing is actually bad news for J fans and Nikon 1 fans.
In the past, the 1s were priced a bit high IMO and they didn't seem to sell very well. Maybe I'm mistaken but that's the impression I got. Then, 1s would show up at deep discounts and there were bargains to be had.
As a result I learned that this is a nice system. It's very small and has great burst/AF performance compared to other small MILCs, and with the deep discounts previously available it was very compelling.
The new J seems nice. Granted, the 4K/15fps thing seems silly at first (upon closer examination, it's borderline idiotic, but oh, well -- the other features are great). However the new cam is priced well from the start, and may sell better, meaning there may not be deep discounts.
I hope it flops and is sold off in fire sales, because I think this is a great camera! I can get by with a single battery and sell the lens anyway.
Your mistake is to assume there are "Nikon 1 fans." There aren't. There are "Nikon 1 sufferers" and "Nikon 1 victims."
Sorry, but it's true.
pew pew: seems a good camera, and priced nicely
No. Do not be fooled. It's a terrible camera, way over-priced.
HSway: With this camera the J series makes sense for the first time to me. But the ambition of J 5 design in N1 concept, although likeable, is very bold, so bold that it borders on naive. But this naivety or boldness makes sense from Nikon. And what makes sense can succeed somewhat. But mainly it makes some sense and it even seems to have got a little seed of mission in it. When something makes sense it keeps its dignity.
Well you didn't say "Nikon 1"... nevermind you are off the hook.
You actually said "dignity" in the same paragraph as "Nikon 1". No. Just... no.
Don't fool yourself. Nikon 1 cameras are, and will always be, JUNK.
My dad shot over 100,000 slides of butterflies and wildlife through his career at UT, it's how I got into photography. The idea of part of his life's work becoming available makes me very proud and happy indeed. The work of publicly funded scientists should be public property.
I don't think this will ruin any careers for professionals who do macro for a living. There are far too many organisms out there, and the resolution of what UT offers will not likely match anything that's now possible.
Thomas Karlmann: VERY poor! I liked the ability to compare cameras on those graphs -- now that appears to be gone. Along with that, a poor review with bias towards systems that have no lenses -- DPR has lost it. Their focus is now on cell phones only.
Barney is right, it's untrue. They focus on anything Amazon can sell that is related to photography. Maybe someday Amazon will make a profit instead of acting like a vampire that's trying to suck the life out of the whole retail industry.
showmeyourpics: I feel that somehow this review misses the point even if it does mention the overall value of the M4/3 system. With the large choice of diminutive and good-to-excellent lenses, the E-M5 II offers a very well built, weatherized, as small as feasible body with great ergonomics; a sensor that in most conditions would let me print 24x36" fine art quality prints; a very good EVF and fully articulated LCD; the best image stabilization on the market; fast auto-focus and continuous shooting; a breakthrough high resolution mode; and a wealth of features well above its category for around $1,000. There are other cameras that can do some things better but none that can offer the same versatile value for the money. I work in tough environments with two E-M10 bodies, one with the Panasonic 12-32mm f/3.5-5.6 and the other with the 35-100mm f/4-5.6. I believe that today no other system can match their combination of IQ, portability, versatility and cost. The E-M5 II is all that and much more.
@2eyesee: the RX10 is a piece of junk compared to EM-10's, I'm sorry to say. The zoom actuates very slow. The AF is very slow. The rapid fire with AF is very slow. There is bad fringing. The buffer is very limited. The lens is slow. The EVF not very good. And you can't put a prime on it. Am I forgetting anything?
John Banister: It's interesting to me comparing the "Value" scores between this ~$1100 Olympus E-M5 II and the ~$1700 Panasonic DMC-GH4. I have to conclude that DP Review finds high resolution video capability extraordinarily valuable to have in a small ILC/DSLR.
Considering the complaints about the menu system, I think Olympus could make good use of the wireless connectivity by having an "Open Camera Platform" menu mode where a linked smartphone would provide the menu via 3rd party software built with an Olympus SDK. It could be that running the data radio so much would burn through battery too quickly, though.
The noise in relation to sensor size discussion was interesting also. If the Olympus is competing in the same category with cameras having larger sensors, then I have to wonder if those get graded off on requiring bigger, heavier fast primes even as the Olympus gets graded off on noise.
This seems like the kind of thing Oly could address in a firmware update. Besides, the real question is, how does the video compared to other Oly cameras?
This is their first camera with 24P and 60P options, or high bit-rate. I have been holding out for a pro video Olympus and they're getting closer, maybe next year, when their single firmware programmer guy gets around to it.
PlaKen: Why is dpreview so anti-mirrorless and/or anti-Oly?
Check the following review:http://cameras.reviewed.com/content/olympus-om-d-e-m5-mark-ii-digital-camera-review
They're probably anti-Oly because Sony is paying them off. They don't want to give people the impression that a 4/3" sensor is capable of producing just as high quality results as a 135-format sensor. Even though clearly, it is.
Idiots think megapixels is everything. It's not.
thx1138: Why not down sample the 64MP RAWs to 40MP rather than post them at 64MP?
While I can many improvements over the original E-M5, IQ has barely budged and this is my main bugbear with the m4/3 sensors, they seem stuck in a time warp. While I love my E-M5 going forward I'm not sure I'll stay in that ecosystem unless there is a genuine breakthrough on the sensor front soon. But I do love the lenses so hard to give those up.
Also disappointing to see the woeful menu system still in place by Olympus and I guess the manual is still as bad as ever.
People whine and moan about image quality, but they lack IQ, as in intelligence, because what are you doing with your images that requires more than 16 megapixels of resolution? I have a permanent installation shot on the 10-megapixel E-3 that measures 133"x144" in size, and the client loves it. People always comment on and complement it. So you need more than 16 MP? No you don't.