Mike FL: It was then:FUJI X100 = Leica M Body + Fuji sensor
Now:Nikon 1 J5 = Pana GM1 body + SONY (?) sensor
But:At least that Fuji's sensor is developed by Fuji self so does Pana.
BTW:Pana GM1's kit zoom is much wide/useful than Nikon, not mention M43 sensor is larger than 1" even (possibly) this J5's body is larger than Pana GM1.
Not bad as a later start.
Sorry Mike, you spend so much time spreading FUD about Nikon it's rather easy to give you a dig. You do set yourself up, you know.
dynaxx: Re the long debate below about DPR's policy on the prioritisation of camera reviews ; what happened to the old pre-commercialisation DPR's aim to be a leader of opinion not a follower ?
When DPR staff/journalists say they are responding to the volume of interest from their followers it is a feeble cop-out when most photography enthusiasts urgently want to know about the groundbreaking/state of the Art cameras to keep in touch with developments in the industry. Devoting all that time and effort to reviewing re-hashed Canikons must be as frustrating for the journalists as it is for the bloggers.
The point is that the lesser lights in terms of camera sales ( Sigma, Samsung, Pentax, etc. ) have no choice but to innovate to grow their market shares forcing them to differentiate their products by innovating.
( when this comment finds its way into the DPR stat's it will give another "tick" to Nikon !!! )
Like it or Not, Canon and Nikon drive a much higher rate of hits. Business is business, you publish what the most people want to see. I think DPR does an excellent job reviewing all brands. Sony is third in DSLR sales and yet had more camera reviews than Canon and Nikon last year.
dfsaqwe: I recently sold an EM1 kit looking to downgrade to something more midrange (life+priority changes, etc). Was hoping to look back into a Nikon but I'm just thoroughly unimpressed. The technology seems almost a generation or two behind what I left behind on m43.
Also being spoiled by 5 axis sensor IS ...
Maybe so, but which of them will have better IQ and AF for the same price?
Kinda stepped in it there, didn't ya Mike. Oh well, your used to it by now.
Brucies Heroes: Incredible to see the noise performance of this 24 MP sensor. I would say all in all that is currently the best APS-C sensor on the market.
Looking at the NX1 low light raw iso 3200, the Nikon is clearly showing more detail, and a bit more noise, the samsung is loosing some detail, looks like the samsung has some default NR going on in raw.
Finally, they look to have gotten the right camera at the right price. Now if the sensor is the Sony, it maybe will live up to the hype.
Vegetable Police: I actually like the camera. I kind of wish it was a fixed lens compact though like the rx100 or g7x. Those kit lenses aren't looking so fun.
I just picked up a coolpix A for about $300. Terrific little camera.
mosc: I still think the main issue with the 1 system is the lenses. They're all too slow and too expensive. If they were cheaper and faster the entire system would look different. They should offer f1.4 to f2.0 pancake primes for <$300 at 8mm, 10mm, 13mm, and 19mm. That 10-100 zoom aught to be f4.0 and cost ~$500. Adding a few ounces of glass and cutting some profit margin would make these things fly off the shelf.
ogl: Such system with 1" sensors needs faster lenses. 3.5-5.6 is no good at all.
There are fast lens.
captura: Maybe the X100S and T should compared to their APS-C rivals, the Ricoh GR and the Nikon Coolpix 'A.'
Richard, pull up the D7000 (same sensor) and compare it to the Fuji in the review. In jpg, the Fuji appears a bit cleaner and sharper. Apply the same NR and sharpening to the Nikon A and they would be very close, this can be seen comparing the raw files where the Nikon pulls ahead in noise and sharpness . Now feature wise, the Fuji is way ahead, some would also like 35 over 28. But for the $329 price that you can get the A for today, its a sweet camera. Superb lens and sensor, not bad battery, full manual capability and 4 fps in an actually pocketable camera. And solid magnesium build. Shame Nikon did not price it competitively at introduction. It is still one of the best actual pocket cameras you can buy.
MidnightRider: Installed and tested March 18. Uninstalled and went back to View NX2 March 19. NX2 has more editing options and is easier to use. Thanks, Nikon for the free availability of NXi however NX2 serves my purposes much more efficiently.
Must be machines. On mine it is virtually instant.
monographix: The sensor is again Toshiba, and as rumored the exact 7100 one
It may be a Toshiba, that does not mean its the same. Time marches on.
Pretty sure its not the "Same".
NXI has no editing functions. It's a (very fast) browser. Open images, do your sort thing, hit edit, launches NXd or any other registered editor.Much faster than NX2.
HowaboutRAW: Windows 7 64:
Forces restart before install, then installs correctly after forced restart of computer.
Hangs up a bit unless you force it to look for the Pictures Folder in the Windows Libraries Folder.
For example: Right clicking an NEF (Nikon raw) file and telling Windows to open that raw with ViewNXi causes ViewNXi to stumble, never completing the operation.
But forcing ViewNXi to see the Pictures Folder and NEF files makes ViewNXi work correctly as a viewer.
As others have noted, no real image adjustments, but cntrl E allows processing to jpeg or tiff, so still like ViewNX2 in that regard.
Reverted out of ViewNXi, since it doesn't seem to offer any great advantage over ViewNX2, which is uninstalled with the install of ViewNXi.
Use it in conjunction with NX-D. Open NX-I, do your view sort thing, click edit, launches NX-D very quickly. Of course, you can launch any registered editor.NX-I is VERY fast,opens thumbnails almost instantly, even a folder with more than 100. This won't replace my adobe setup, but a casual user would find NX-I and NX-D very usable.
Gosman: Still not the D400. Still not like the Pentax K-3 that has been out a year and a half!
rugosa: It's free and works well. As usual mostly bitching in the comments section!
So in other words Stephen, your guessing.
It does work well, and its free. It's not photoshop, but then it does not have to be.The reason thet Nikon dumped Capture was the company that owned it decided not to support/distribute it any more. Nikon was not given an option. The new software is made by silky-Pix I believe. It certainly seems at least on par with any of the other freeware that camera makers distribute. I still wouldnt dump photoshop/lightroom for it, but I wouldn't do that for capture either.
Runs fine on a win7, I7-2600, 16gb, 500gb ssd. Seems pretty fast. Seems to work ok with NX-D.
Wont replace my current tool setup of PS and lightroom, but for someone that has a fast machine and does not want to spend lots of money it would be adequate.