Gazeomon: I think there are more exciting 'entry level' cameras available than this lame plastic 'iteration of an iteration'. Look @ Fuji, Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Samsung and Pentax.
Lenses LOL! If a person would want a nice (native) 35mm eq. walk around prime on Nikon DX, you can forget about it.
And that's quite a fundamental lens missing in this system.
The watercolor look from this camera is unacceptable (e.g. as shown by Steve Huff).
photo perzon: Have you seen zoom lens sizes for FF?
Have you seen the size of f/2 lenses for four thirds sensors? And those are just f/4 equivalent!
I'm surprised people are still so upset about this sensor spots non-issue. You can just wipe them off with a cleaning kit. It takes 2 seconds.
If I were to complain about the D600, I'd complain about the pathetic APS-C autofocus module, the hunting in low light, the constant missed focus, and how the focus points are all bundled in the middle (there might as well just be one focus point).
And I'd complain about the lack of decent lenses, first an foremost the complete lack of an even borderline decent 50mm Nikon prime.
nathondetroit: Angrily, the truck owner vents to his friend: “I’m so sick of these gas stations. Filthy equipment, rude employees, and I have to stop every 300 miles.”
To which the Nissan Leaf owner responds, “What gas stations?”
@yabokkie: for the same reason people switched to LCD displays instead of CRTs, and for the same reason people switch to solid state storage rather than magnetic discs. The same reason why bulky desktop PCs got replaced by laptops and tablets. The same reason we will all drive electric cars in the future. It's called progress. It's quite common in technology.
Richard3: Nikon you can kiss my Ass , i spent a lot of money on ur gear , and was slapped in the face many time with this camera . i was told that the D600 had no issues that you were aware of now that its a know fact you care about ur customers after so many have invested hard earned money .
I will never buy another nikon product again , not that you care .
I too am fed up with Nikon. Nikon and Canon deliberately cripple their products in order to force their customers to climb their product line. It's bad business practice.
Hubertus Bigend: A camera with a 600mm (eq.) super telephoto lens but no viewfinder (and no connector to attach one of the existing external viewfinders) is like a gun without a sighting device. With none of them you'll manage to even aim at what you want to shoot.
This type of camera is aimed at the kind of people that don't care about that.
burnin: Actually, it reveals Olympus as being dickheads for leaving out 5-axis image stabilization in the OM-D E-M10.
That's just marketing. I wouldn't care to much about it. There's probably almost no difference between the 3-axis of the E-M10 and the 5-axis of the E-M5. They just need to differentiate the products...
GodSpeaks: Ohhhh, a 12mm f2 Samyang in MFT mount. And a 10mm f2.8.
@yabookie the troll: if you need a 24/1.4 then you are looking at the wrong system with m43. A lens of that size is just ridiculous on a compact system.
But until Sony releases a small 24mm for their A7/R (similar to their 35mm), the Olympus 12/2 is the best compact 24mm eq. out there.
Why anyone would buy the Samyang for m43 is beyond me. It is an APS-C lens. It's large and probably nowhere near as good as the Olympus.
Black Box: Yet another travesty from Sony. As a prototype exercise to keep the engineers on their toes, it's wonderful! As a consumer product, it really isn't.
This review keeps calling this monster a "compact". But with the weight and the size of a front-loader it's really not that small. Actually, it's just a tad larger than the Moon. And at the price, bulk and weight of the excellent Nikon D7100, why not have... the D7100?
If Sony were a car manufacturer, they'd install a jacuzzi in a Corolla. A BRILLIANT idea, if you don't care about size, weight and fuel economy!
So, again, we have a BRILLIANT product that noone cares about. And all of us who have trusted Sony for years and agreed to pay extra for the quality are becoming less and less happy about paying for Sony's neverending experimenting and get NOTHING in return.
My endless respect for Sony is rapidly coming to an end. I just don't care about them anymore.
Someone obviously has never held a D7100 with constant aperture zoom.
The Sony is a marvel of technology. How sad is the Nikon 1 system with f3.5-5.6 zooms compared to the RX100 and RX10?
Rmel26: This has just made me consider getting the Panasonic 35-100 F2.8 lens for micro 4 3. Since I already have the micro 4 3 bodies, all I really need is a fast zoom in one body and my 20mm in another. I see the 35-100 now selling below 1000 in EBAY. I think this is a better approach for those with micro 4 3 system
The dirt-cheap (yet excellent) Olympus 40-150mm is equivalent to a f/2.8-4 on a 1" sensor like the RX10.
Nevertheless the RX10 is a really cool camera, and puts the entire Nikon 1 line to shame.
@yabookie: the m43 policy has been to make compact lenses. My favorites are the 12/2 and 75/1.8, which are 24/4 and 150/3.6 equivalent. You can't find anything that compact yet that sharp on full frame, let alone APS-C.
itsastickup: No bokeh no buy.
You have to pay a bomb to get anywhere near the bokeh of an APS-C 35/1.8.
m4/3 is fine for many purposes, but without affordable bokeh it's off many of our radars.
That 25/1.2 should be a maximum $200.
Who are they kidding. Grow up, Olympus. Get some cojones and do what you know you have to do.
If you are referring to the Nikon 35mm f/1.8G, that lens has the worst bokeh of all the lenses I've ever used.
itsastickup: It's a beautiful camera.
Show me the bokeh, show me the bokeh, show me the bokeh!!!
And not at $900, FFS. These clowns won't crack mirroless until they realise that the common man wants everything but his kid's face out of focus. And he gets it from APS-C for less than $200
More whining from people who don't know what they are talking about.
The cheap Olympus 45/1.8 provides the same amount of background blur as a Canikon 50/1.8 but the bokeh is far, far better. And I don't know a single APS-C lens that has bokeh as beautiful as the Olympus primes.
BBking83: So... 10 years ago when the first 4/3 camera came out, no one complained about the lack of bokeh. The Olympus E-1.
I can guarantee that all the "no bokeh, no buy" spokes people never knew this and will refuse to recognise or accept that it's the SAME SIZE (regarding sensor) as this.
And every other m4/3 camera.
My Leica 25/1.4, Olympus 45/1.8, Olympus 75/1.8 and Olympus 40-150mm all provide plenty of bokeh.
The 75/1.8 is competitive with full frame. It's like carrying a 150/3.6 IS. And it's tiny. It's awesome.
People are a bunch of whiners...
Everyone wants cheap cameras that deliver miracles, and then whine and whine about oil spots, shutter shock and light leaks... acting like little kids.
*** If you want professional performance, don't buy an entry-level camera ***
My D7000 had oil spots all the time. I just wiped them off with a simple lens cleaner kit. It takes 2 seconds. The D7000 is still regarded as one of the best APS-C DSLRs of all time.
And with all the effort in the world I cannot reproduce the E-P5 shutter shock nor the A7 light leak problems that everyone is whining about. Instead, I'm shocked by the level of technology I can purchase at such low prices.
I bet those engineers at Nikon had the most ambitious of hopes with the Nikon 1 system. Then I imagine some meetings where annoying Nikon executives kept pushing down the sensor size for it not to cannibalize DSLR sales.
I imagine those people arguing that even 4/3 sensors are too close to DSLRs, the sensor must be made smaller!
What a shame.
DonSantos: Well I'm about so sell my "gold" award x-e2 with the awesome fuji 35mm 1.4 and upgrade the the "silver" sony a7 + zeiss 55mm 1.8.
Am I crazy?
Smart move. The Fuji 35/1.4 is nice, but the Zeiss 55/1.8 is another league.
I don't understand the light leak issue. The instructions to test for it instruct you to tape over all the gaps on the lens and lens cap, and then shoot a long exposure at ISO 25600. When I take pictures, I usually take off the lens cap. Wouldn't infinitely more light enter through the lens than through the 'light leak'?
bzanchet: Canon g1xII, fuji xm1 or olympus em10? Hard to decide! I have a sony rx100 and I am considering to replace it.
Why do people use this mindset?
Chose which lens(es) you need, then get the matching camera. If you will be using kit lenses I don't think there's a need to replace your rx100.
If the output of this camera at ISO 200 is "not good", "unacceptable", "noisy", blah, blah, blah, as so many posters claim, and there are two stops difference between m43 and FF, does that mean that the output of Nikon FF cameras at ISO 800 is "not good", "unacceptable", and "noisy"?
No, it means that the Olympus camera is missing native ISO 25, 50 and 100 in order to compete with ISO 100, 200 and 400 on full frame cameras.
I still fail to understand why these ISO modes are not available on micro four thirds...
cantsin: All currently available Micro Four Thirds cameras suffer from too many/too small pixels on their sensors, resulting in worse signal-nosie-ratios and limited high ISO/dynamic range compared to its APS-C competitors. In these days, there's not even a size or cost advantage of Olympus OM-D series over Sony's, Fuji's and Samsung's mirrorless offerings.
MFT could be much more competitive if Megapixels were cut. An MFT camera with a 9 Megapixel sensor could be as good in color, dynamic range and high ISO as a Nikon D800 with its 36 Megapixels (if one considers that MFT has 25% of full frame's sensor surface).
@Marty4650: my Sony FE 35/2.8 is about the same size and weight as my Olympus 17/1.8 (35/3.6 equivalent). Guess which lens renders nicer images?