Sony RX100III just got its butt kicked!
peevee1: That is one powerful camera. I wish they have learned from Fuji the design and firmware support practices though.DPR, how about a complete review, including AF-C test at 15 fps?
... make that Nikon design, Oly jpeg engine, Pany Video.
I don't have any clue about Samsungs camera quality and performance, but those are killer specs!
If I hadn't purchased the GH4 recently, I would give that NX1 a serious consideration.
A bit pricey, but for the first time I am not totally shocked when I hear the price for a new Olympus lens. It better shows a stellar Performance like the 75mm
Is the lens collar fixed or can it be removed?
I was hoping the 7-14 f2.8 would be released first :-(
wow, a silver body. That's way better and important than 4k video or noise improvement
MikeF4Black: The moaners are out in force. Why? Nikon now has a full frame line-up like no other camera maker. Quite an achievement.
Let's hope it doesn't turn Coolpix-like. Hardly any difference except the price tag
TimK5: No 4k Video? Nikon must be living under a rock. 4k is here to stay. At last weeks IFA everything was about 4k (and the first 8k outlook)
When is Nikon going to catch up? When the others release 8k?
yeah, it's always a good idea to stay behind the curve
olyflyer: I know what the label says, it says D750, but is this really going to get all those people who absolutely DEMANDED a D700 replacement? I doubt it. This camera is a D650, not a D750. Nikon made a mistake when they printed the label, or...
...they had a D650 under production and made a last minute change decision, suddenly realizing the demand for a D700 and believing that they can fool everyone and decided to change the label to D750 to satisfy the market.
No AF-ON in a sports oriented camera? Maximum shutter activation at this low count in a high frame rate, sports camera? Maximum shutter speed 1/4000s? Flash sync speed 1/200s? Layout and design of D610?
How can they call this a D750? The only thing which resembles the D750 is the AF system.
The should have taken the sensor from the insanely overpriced Df, plug it in the D750 body, Limit the fps (compared to the D4s), enable video and they would have had a winner.
No 4k Video? Nikon must be living under a rock. 4k is here to stay. At last weeks IFA everything was about 4k (and the first 8k outlook)
It should do at least 10 frames/hour, otherwise I'm not interested!
MatijaK: I did not buy my E-3 because it was compact - I bought it because it was just the right size and had many useful buttons available without being able to press any of them by accident.
Then I added a grip and realized I was sorely mistaken, because only with the grip is the E-3 the right size.
I don't want a compact DSLR. I want a big E-7 that can use my existing grip (or has one built-in), I want it to be heavy, sturdy, reliable and a confidence-inspiring workhorse that I can beat a wild bear with if it attacks me. I can buy an E-720 or an E-M5 if I want more compact.
I've been happily and patiently hanging onto 4/3 and my many lenses, and the only thing that can push me away is a small camera body. If they screw up by making the E-7 small, I'll have to switch systems, despite considering a 3:2 aspect ratio with a 1.5x crop factor to be the spawn of Satan (135 "full frame" being Satan itself).
In a nutshell, you want a Nikon D4!
Thoughts: The way Olympus charges premiums on lens hood, black version lens and has been reluctant to offer black lenses may suggest it is quite a arrogant company, I would be careful to buy into their system. Thankfully, Micro 4/3 has other contributing companies to make the system attractive.
I have to admit though, Olympus has better know-how about lenses, good looking lenses too (even better in black in my opinion)!
Yep, that lens hood charge is outrageous!!!
The 150 F2.8 sounds great, but I'd rather see Olympus develop those type of lenses.
What about a m.Zuiko 300f4?
My dream would be an 8-18f4 that takes filters and a 100-400f4.
"the benefit of Micro Four Thirds and Four Thirds is compact size"
So, why continue develop 43rd? A total waste of resources! I would never buy a 43rd cam, but I got an OM-D. The only reason was small size and weight. If 43rd were the only choice I'd stick with a standard DSLR. For me, to abandon DSLR completely, the next OM-D must not be larger and heavier than the current model and needs serious improvement in high ISO and cont. AF performance! And 20+ MP would be great.
IMO the old 75-300 is quite ok in terms of picture quality. The only thing I care about is wether the new one is better optically.
And I just wonder how big - or rather small - would be the Nikon 800 f5,6 equivalent in the m43 world (400 f5,6) ...
How many gazillion lenses in the 14-42(5) mm range are they going to release?
What about a 9-18 mm update?
No VR on the 18-35?
Nikon, please, stop wasting money and resources on futile projects. Reroute them to the R&D department!
I couldn't care less about the design and look of a camera, otherwise I wouldn't use an OM-D.
australopithecus: One small comment. I've toted daypacks about (hiking/cycling) for decades and I get the impression that the camera-gear bag manufacturers pay too little attention to the straps, hip-belts and especially the airflow between one's back and the bag. They could all learn from Deuter who make world-class day-packs. Deuter's "Air-Flow" system is ideal.
That's the reason I don't use and own a dedicated photo backpack. I'm using a regular (Deuter) backpack, because of great straps, back support and airflow, although it is somewhat cumbersume to access the gear out in the field.
... and that Kata rucksack looks like another failure!