AliRoust: You 'll get killed by vignetting wide open and you won't get the background blur cause a 1.2 is really a 2.8 on m 4/3. I had a real bad experience with the Panasonic leica 50 m 1.4. Plus it looks cheap.
LOL at people who think 135-format is king of bokeh.
Now back to my Hasselblad.
dark goob: Anyone who says the OM-D is not full frame is retarded. It is full frame, by definition.
retarded: slow or limited in intellectual or emotional development or academic progress
Let me say that your understanding of the industry is retarded if you think "full frame" is a relevant term. And yes, there are formats that are smaller than Micro Four Thirds. Note: Nikon 1 series, Pentax Q.
Technically it would be possible to adapt a Four Thirds lens to a Nikon 1 body, in which case, the field of view of the Four Thirds lens would be cropped. However if the Four Thirds lens is on a Four Thirds body, this is a full frame relationship.
You are all idiots.
Actually, 135 format is the proper name for 135 format. Calling it "full frame" no longer serves a relevant purpose. If you cannot revise your use of language to reflect reality then you are indeed retarded, intellectually. That's not meant to insult people who are actually mentally handicapped. It's just meant to state a fact, using language in the way it is meant to be used: in accordance with the actual meaning of the words, instead of speaking in colloquialisms, slang, and jargon, as you would that we do.
Anyone who says the OM-D is not full frame is retarded. It is full frame, by definition.
This guy obviously thinks he's "cool"
Just because you argue a point, doesn't mean you're right, or even close to right.
Starting off with an ad hominem attack (calling the people who disagree with you snobs) does not start your argument off well, either.
Could it be that crappy, low resolution phone pictures are never as good as the same exact picture if taken with a better camera?
Anyone remember the Fisher Price audio-cassette-based toy video camera craze from a few years back, which was another one of these hipster-fueled manias where crappy quality somehow became cool? Why not go ahead and argue that 10FPS 320x200 bad video from these phones is also an art form.
really needs a video
LOL that looks terrible
Conveniently did not mention price. haha
I'm guessing six figures for all components in that picture?
Goodbye Canon. It was nice to know you.
Hammer. Officially. Thrown. Down.
57even: I drive an ugly car (by most peoples reckoning) but it's the only one that meets all my functional needs, fits in my undersized garage and can still cruise economically all day at 80MPH when I head to the South of France.
This camera has a unique blend of function, size and performance. If it's what you need, its looks don't matter. For a lot of family photographers this is just about perfect - everything from kids sports to holiday snaps and family videos without needing an SLR or a camcorder.
None of the other CSC cameras come close to Nikon 1's abilities regarding action photography and few match it's all-round video capability either.
Sure, it may not meet any of YOUR needs, but why is that interesting?
It remains to be seen if it actually works for action. J1/V1 were only so-so for continuous AF accuracy, and the tracking AF interface was very kludgy (have to press OK multiple times on the back to engage tracking every time). I found the Sony A37 or A57 to be MUCH better at sports/action continuous AF accuracy, not even close, even though they're bigger cameras. If that's what you're shooting then you should get something at the same price that does the job, not compromise just to save an ounce.
But where the J1/V1 beats anything is shooting video with electronic zoom control with the 10-100mm, having the ability to shoot full res stills during the video could be huge for some purposes. The V1 also has better battery life than any other CSC due to having a massive EN-EL15. For $500 it's a good deal.
V2 is interesting but I'll reserve my judgement till I can test how accurate that AF actually is, not just what they claim...
These are great for video and casual stills. The slowdown feature is really sweet. Different market category than other mirrorless cams, not sure why everyone feels compelled to compare it to OM-D or NEX-7 since they are totally different market segments.
I always put my photos on retina iPad first, then they go to the desktop computer. iPad is the fastest way to find 'blurry' shots and delete them, owing to its combo of fast SSD storage and super-high-res display.
The downsides? Unfortunately, I have found that there are many...
1) There is no way to rate pictures on the iPad or organize them into subfolders.
2) Any "albums" you organize your photos into are lost once they are transferred in via Image Capture. Aperture supports it but I don't know if Lightroom does...
3) Transferring files from iPad to the Mac is a huge, slow chore. You don't get direct Finder-level access to the contents of the iPad. You have to transfer in using an app that's compliant with Apple's PTP standard. The only fully free program included with Mac OS X that does this is Image Capture. It has limited metadata viewing, no filtering options, and I've had it freeze or transfer corrupt files every other time I used it.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Post ranks? Lame, encourages displays of bigotry. User rankings? Lame, encourages forum whores. I don't see any hint you're allowing longer messages or supporting Tapatalk or a custom mobile app or anything else useful.
Craigslist is still my favorite site because it runs lean and mean without all the crappy "web 2.0" frills that always bug out and never behave correctly across all devices. DPreviews old forums were some of the last decent, old school forums, free of stupid ranking systems, post-hiding censorship BS, and all the other nonsense you're adding.
Empowering prejudiced down-voters is no replacement for good community moderators, and just makes them lazy.
The Q&A feature is a rip-off of StackExchange; that's what the photography stackexchange site is for. It has no place being mixed in with your forums.
I am getting the one made from baby skin
PROTIP: Sony *makes the sensor* for D600. They probably agreed beforehand with Nikon on pricepoint etc. before agreeing.
A99 is a completely different camera than this. Rotating screen, much faster, built-in stabilizer, full speed AF during video, do I need to continue?
This is nothing more than an FX-format D7000, people.
kk123: D600 - unfortunately not the answer for replacement of the D300/s -D7000.
- Too low fps 5,5 isn't good enough!- Too low resolution for DX - only 24mp/2,25, not more than 10mp in the DX area.
Nearly useless for bird photos.
Maybe I should buy an old D2X - with 8 fps.
Why on earth isn't Nikon listening to its customers? I refuse to buy D600!
And where is an update of the 80-400mm? And a 300 f4 with stabilizer. And I could use a 500 f5,6. Come on NIKON!!
This is a camera for people upgrading from D5100/D7000, not for people from D300. Wait for the D400!
Henri Nikon: I hoped for a handsome FX-body with a far less heavy sensor than the magnificent D800. The rate of 24 Mp is much but not to much I guess. The light sensibility goes up to ISO 6400 as the D700 already does, but the D3s and D4 are the light champions up to ISO 12.800. The images of the D600 will certainly be very good but for what reason did Nikon mount such an unpractical menu-button/dial on the left side of the body?! This will slow down the work-speed changing ISO values as I continuously do while photographing. Why does this D600 have only 2 SD slots in stead of a CF and a SD as the D300s has?
They need to make a consumer-level 135-format camera if they ever expect 135-format to remain profitable to manufacture and sell. Sony and Nikon are betting together that they can produce X number of 135-format sensors in 2013. If they succeed, it will reduce manufacturing costs for 135-format and allow them to continue to make less and less expensive 135-format cameras. Until then, the sensors are prohibitively expensive.
Unfortunately I don't think $2100 for just the body is cheap enough to push sales. $1500? Maybe... expect to see heavy rebates on this soon, just like we have on the D7000 now. Because Nikon will twist their dealers' arms into buying boatloads of D600, and the dealers will do it because they will think it will sell like the D800, but I would be kinda surprised if it does... because what lenses are you going to put on there? 24-85 crappy version, really?
The RX1 on the other hand will drive sales because every rich person in the world will most certainly buy it.
All my DX lenses will crop on this camera! My 10.5 fisheye will only get a part of the pixels...! When will they finally make a camera that will be full-frame with my DX lenses?! I'm tired of waiting
It's 135 format... Not "full-frame."
X100 is full-frame. So is X10 and every other non-interchangeable lens camera. It goes without saying that the sensor and lens of a non-interchangeable lens camera is full-frame.
Quit calling 135-format "full-frame." where is your journalistic integrity or grasp on language?
OM-D is full-frame. EOS-M is full-frame. They are all full-frame because full-frame describes a relationship, not a size. Use language correctly please!