pretty soon it will only be the big online giants.
I think this is sad, but who can afford to pay 20-50% more to support the little guys?
RedFox88: Does this mean you will actually review it or just make studio comparison photos?
Like you are going to buy one anyway.....
Waldo Nell: Never understood the significance in showing an unboxing experience. Watching paint dry is more exciting. Except for Apple products where they spend months designing just the packaging.
I don't think it is super exciting, but there are a lot of people that do. There are people that make a comfortable living shooting unboxing videos for youtube channels.
Retzius: For those who are confused as to why this lens is relevant, compared to the Nikon equivalent it is smaller, lighter, and much cheaper, with equal to better optical performance.
It is not targeted at your average Dpreview brick wall shooter who examines his sensor for dust particles. It is targeted at a first time Dslr shooter with an intro level body who doesn't want to change lenses that often.
And they sell alot of these
$300 mount conversion service on a $400 lens? Nice! :)
And if it was about looks, then just update the 18-250 and call it a day. Still no reason to have an 18-200 and 18-250 on the shelves together when there is nothing significant seperating them.
corbus: If DPR are a serious team I suggest you spend more of your working time to test cameras and lenses instead of producing "unboxing" presentations...
Yes, I agree, this must have stolen literally scores of seconds from their day.
Nikon's still delusional on price. Otherwise, it looks nice.
tkbslc: I know people think this is evil big Nikon picking on the little guy. But you would be a careless and irresponsible company to not protect your R+D and investors if you didn't fight hard for your technology and patents. I would expect any well managed company to do the same.
I am sure the size of the award is in line with the level of infringement. Blatant obvious infringement would generally result in halt of sales of the products and large awards.
sdh: What is even the point of this lens? Sigma's 18-250 is still pretty new, far from obsolete. Is this new 18-200 supposed to be better? Or just cheaper? But the 18-250 is hardly expensive. I have the 18-250, bought it for ~$100 more than it currently goes for, and Im very happy with it.
What's the point of this new 18-200??
Not sure why it exists, either. 18-250 macro is pretty good and has similar specs and price but has more zoom range.
naththo: Terribly overexposed and washed out. Some are too soft or out of focus. I think it is human error.
Mostly it's the overcast day, I think. Even pictures shot with Zeiss primes can look "blah" on a flat overcast day unless processed well.
teos: I hate superzoom lenses because of low picture quality, big, heavy and expensive. Instead, I'd buy a bridge camera with half the price of superzoom.
Bridge cameras have even lower picture quality at both the sensor and lens and leave you without the DSLR's focus and shutter performance. Also, the latest superzoom lenses are barely bigger than an 18-55 kit zoom, so not sure where your big and heavy comments are coming from.
Doesn't sound like a great plan, but to each their own.
waxwaine: Still not very good borders, but a lot better center than my Sigma 18-200mm DC at 200mm and f6.3. Strangely my Pentax SMC-K 135mm f2.5 has more reach(frame) than my Sigma at 200mm.
When comparing "reach" are you focusing to near infinity? Focal lengths are generally calculated at infinity focus. Lenses with wider zoom and/or focusing ranges often change apparent focal length as you focus closer.
I know people think this is evil big Nikon picking on the little guy. But you would be a careless and irresponsible company to not protect your R+D and investors if you didn't fight hard for your technology and patents. I would expect any well managed company to do the same.
SushiEater: It is not even a drop in the ocean!!!!!
Yeah, 15% profit.
Henry M. Hertz: that´s 10 times what they will earn with the DF.... lol.
I think you forgot a zero. 4000 units at $3000 = 12 million, not 1.2 million. However, it's probably more like 18 weeks if we are using profits.
mrdancer: While some will poo-poo these phone cameras due to their sensor size, they really are on the cutting edge of camera technology, particularly with respect to software enhancements. This can serve as a guide of what is to come in standalone cameras. Expect to see these features on m43 in a year or two, and in DSLRs a year or two after that.
I don't know about DSLR or pro cameras. Most of these features depend on outputting JPEG, not RAW files.
Cool, just ordered one yesterday. New features before I even get it!
3dreal: This will easily be compensated when the Quattros and the DSLR-equivalent are ready.
They'd be lucky to make $15 million in revenue on the Quattro, much less profits. THat's an incredibly niche product.
Carsten Pauer 2: Only 720p Video instead 8K ?
They didn't gigapan the behind-the-scenes, man! :)
Crazy this only has only 30-something comments after 12 hours while a new camera can have thousands. Shows we care far more about gear than photography on this site. This is an amazing piece of work and something none of us could ever hope to photograph. Sad more people don't appreciate it on a site that is frequented by photographers.
"More than anything, when people see this photo, I hope they appreciate being brought somewhere that they can't go"
I for one definitely do. Good work.