Have Your Say: Best Gear of 2016

I think the Nikon 105mm f1.4 makes sense to be a winner. That took some balls on Nikon's part. It's good to see companies doing stuff like that. I hope they make a 42mm f1.0 next. (They can do that if they can make a 105mm f1.4, can't they?)

Dec 27, 2016permalink

dmiley

And it is impossible to vote for the Pentax K1 for any category. Apparently the highest resolution for still objects (full frame pixel shift) short of the top end Nikon and 5 stops of in camera anti-shake are just not terribly interesting. And at a price under $2000. Apparently too much related to actually taking pictures instead of scrolling through menus. Well just rock on. . .

Dec 27, 2016permalink

It should be the camera of the year, but I rarely hear about it. It's shameful, isn't it? Pentax should be applauded . . . and I'm sure they are by Pentaxians . . . but I guess it took too long. Pentax is certainly late to the party. Maybe they'll keep at it and build a following akin to what Sony has done. I hope so. The more the merrier, in my opinion.

So did it come out in 2016 or 2015? (If it came out in 2015 it doesn't get a place in the running, because this competition is for 2016 products only.)

Dec 27, 2016*permalink

dmiley

No it was 2016.

Dec 31, 2016permalink

Mac McCreery

Out with the old, in with the slightly refined old.

Dec 26, 2016permalink

Flowchart

Easy one for me; the Nikon D500. Been waiting for years for a camera like this.

Dec 26, 2016permalink

Me too . . . so long in fact that I wish it has a 30 MP sensor rather than a 20 MP sensor. But it's for sports, and the D5 is a 20 MP camera too, so I understand why they did it. After-all, the Canon 7 D Mk II is 20 MP too, right?

Dec 27, 2016permalink

tecnoworld

Scottely, if you want close to 30mp, get a samsung nx1 if you can find one ;)

Jan 3, 2017permalink

Bob A L

How did the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 get to be a compact camera? It's larger than several APSC DSLR's.

Dec 25, 2016permalink

zxaar

i guess they are comparing with equivalent lens on and not just body.

Dec 27, 2016permalink

(unknown member)

The new Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8 FL isn't among the choices?

Dec 24, 2016permalink

It was in the first round of voting but didn't receive a big enough share of the vote to make it into the final poll.

Dec 25, 2016permalink

alcaher

Im also suprised the pentax k-1 didnt make it to the final shortlist. But the k-1 and d500 users are the true winners of 2016. After an ´´almost forever´´ waiting, they finally got the camera they wanted, and both cameras are delivering. Cant wait to get d500 next year when it gets alittle bit cheaper i hope.

Dec 21, 2016permalink

CaPi

Don't hope too long
Nikon rumors state prices are to go up for certain models by February.

Dec 22, 2016permalink

The Pentaxians have been waiting far longer for a full-frame camera than the Nikonians have been waiting for a D500.

Dec 27, 2016permalink

win39

I voted for the X-T2 for many of the same reasons Richard Butler notes in his recent commentary. The reason is even more personal. I waited and waited for the D400 to replace my D300. Finally I succumbed to Nikon's bombardment of messages to upgrade to full frame and got a D800 and replaced a bunch(for me) of lenses. Wonderful camera, but just a little clumsy and certainly not travel friendly. Decided I needed a travel camera and got an X-T1. It was everything I would have wanted in a D400 except smaller and maybe not such sophisticated focusing. Then the X-T2 which gives me images which are difficult to distinguish from the D800. I know the D810 is better. But I am not about to dump my Nikon lenses again for a D500 no matter how wonderful it is.

Dec 21, 2016permalink

welshwizard

Is this competition sponsored by Sony?

Surprised that Pentax's finest didn't make the shortlist, for Pentax users it is a new concept, virtual for nearly 15 year, now real.

Magnificent thought the D500 is (I know I have one but hand on heart I am a Pentax fanboy) it's the camera Nikon should've bought out years ago...rather than the D7*00 half effort

Dec 21, 2016permalink

Richard Butler

This list is made up of the two highest-placed products from each of the original voting categories. The K-1 was included in one of those categories but came 4th in the vote, so didn't make it through.

The options in this poll were decided by DPReview's readers, not the staff.

Dec 21, 2016permalink

barrym1966

Not sure it's sponsored by Sony 😊
Can't wait to see next year's results with the a99ii beating the d5 ☺

Dec 22, 2016permalink

MrALLCAPS

So it wasn't the staff, it was just the Sony Fanboys.

Dec 28, 2016permalink

peterwr

Interesting that so many people seem to have dismissed the RX10iii - so much so that it's not even mentioned (so far) in the comments.

Full-frame it may not be, nor have interchangeable lenses, but bang-per-buck, this is by far the most versatile camera to so far come on the market. 24-600mme? Check. f2.8 - f4? Check (that's f4 at 600mme, don't forget). Zeiss? Check. Weather sealing? Check (hey, that's *important* in the UK ;). 4K video with slo-mo (at 1080)? Check. Photos printable up to 24x36? Check. For fifteen hundred quid, that's about as good as it gets.

If I could only have one camera, that'd be the one.

Dec 21, 2016permalink

Adam007

I have one, and agree it's fantastic. I rapidly moved on to a FF for most of my shooting, but can't find a great reason to get rid of the Sony - that 600mm lens is very handy, and no assembly required.

Dec 21, 2016permalink

AshMills

Olympus EM1-Mk2

Dec 21, 2016permalink

The Squire

DPReview why you no include YI M1?

So bias.

etc.
etc.

Dec 21, 2016permalink

belle100

Right after the feature article of "Gear of the Year 2016 - Barney's choice: Nikon D500", I am sure there is some hidden hypnotic messages written on voters' mind. Surely there is some unfair advantages on Nikon.

Dec 21, 2016permalink

Richard Butler

Was my Gear of the Year write-up of the X-T2 not as persuasive?

Dec 21, 2016permalink

beavertown

NIkon has been doing so badly in recent years, give them an award to save them please.

Dec 21, 2016permalink

FantasticMrFox

Nikon has been churning out the best cameras over the past years. The D810 was, for a long time, the best landscape FF money can buy, the D500 is the most capable action and sports camera ...

Dec 24, 2016permalink

wed7

No Pentax K-1? Kidding.. we (the consumers) are always the winner for these outstanding products (assuming we can afford them).

Dec 21, 2016*permalink

kevinertia

Even with only a brief hands-on session with the D500 at a store, it immediately made me long to be a Nikon shooter. Incredible camera for the price (especially with the rampant bundles and refurb deals at the moment). I can only imagine how much more satisfying it is to use under more challenging circumstances.

Dec 21, 2016permalink

Douglas F Watt

How is it that the Sony A 99 II is not even on this list?

Dec 21, 2016permalink

Because not enough of you guys voted for it in the first round of voting!

Dec 21, 2016permalink

Douglas F Watt

Haa! That explains it. It is seriously under everyone's radar then. That's fine with us.

Dec 21, 2016permalink

MrGubrz

barney we were all busy yelling at amazon to ship them! ;D

Dec 21, 2016permalink

Mared

They did - I have mine

Dec 21, 2016permalink

Reilly Diefenbach

The D500 isn't the video camera of the year, but its 4K output is very nice indeed. Happy!

Dec 21, 2016permalink

It does have much better 4K video quality than most people realize. It's a filmmaking horse. The crop upon record is the only glitch. But Colours, resolution, dynamic range, skin tones, compression quality, lowlight, Flat Gamma, it's a wonderful image.

When you want shallower depth of field switch to 1080p which is actually really really impressive and with a little sharpening cuts beautifully with the 4K footage.

I'd shoot video on it vs a modern em-1II GH4/5 despite the great stabilization (I have VR) for it's bigger sensor matching S35 in 1080p, and better DR and lowlight in 4K and from what I see, smoother colour.

If someone is looking for a sturdy-as-hell video camera at that price I'd point him to Nikon. EM1-XT2-7DII all great sturdy video cameras but not as good.

For those interested, these lenses are perfect for it:

-Tokina 11-16:20mm f/2.8 for ultra wide 4K
-35mm f/1.8 for standard shallow prime
-50mm f/1.4 (or 1.2 ai-s) for a shallow close-up lens.
-18-55mm for VR shots (glidecam/ronin/daylight etc)

I am talking about filmmaking here, other types of video that require simple lens, AF, SOOC picture, unlimited record times, an 80D + 18-135mm does wonders in AF and reachand IS in your hand. The C100 is selling for 1700$ too!

Dec 22, 2016permalink

Frank in Bridgewater

Where's Canon?

Dec 20, 2016permalink

Greg VdB

they were busy selling cameras and lenses...

Dec 21, 2016permalink

The Davinator

Not sure who they were selling them to when no body voted for them in the first round.

Dec 21, 2016permalink

Mared

Where's Canon - we're still waiting for a product worth being on the list. Not some misplaced smug post "busy selling..." wtfc even if they're "selling" unless you're heavily invested in canon stock. If you are invested, your portfolio needs significant help.

Dec 21, 2016permalink

Riku

Canon is busy crippling the video specs on the upcoming 6d2...

Dec 21, 2016permalink

JaredTarzan

I'm surprised none of canon's lenses made the list. But I guess revisions of old lenses aren't that noteworthy.

Dec 21, 2016permalink

MrALLCAPS

In the lab making cameras from 2006, for 2017 & beyond. Their bodies are so behind everyone else. Like, I don't understand why their 5D doesn't have a tilt touch screen, hybrid ovf/EVF like the XPro2, Bluetooth, wifi and something revolutionary sensor-wise. At least for Canon.

What good is making better lenses, yet the bodies aren't doing anything spectacular? Even the K-1 has at least a tiltable screen with led 's and ibis.

Canon is too old fashioned.

Dec 28, 2016permalink

Derek Z photo

I vote for Nikon 105 1.4E
a great but heavy lens

Dec 20, 2016permalink

mgblack74

Lol. Compared to what? Other 105 1.4's?

Dec 21, 2016permalink

Derek Z photo

compared to 85G, they all great lens, enjoy both of them. see my review post here and website. ><

Dec 21, 2016permalink

Mared

mgblack74 - Your post obviously completely misses the point. Simply, It's the product of the year; Not a comparison to other similar products on the market...

Dec 21, 2016*permalink

mgblack74

@Mared. You missed my point. It's not a heavy lens.

Dec 22, 2016permalink

kobakokh

its very interesting why no one make semi-professional grade lens for APS-C like 16-130/4 with fast AF motor? Its will be not too large and heavy! Hey, 1000 USD 16-80/2.8-4 is not enough!

Dec 20, 2016*permalink

Manfred Bachmann

The Sony a6500 have to be in this list, because its maybe the best sony camera yet and we have 2016! What will you tell us in 2017, no 6500 because it was an 2016 camera?

Dec 20, 2016permalink

I think you missed the first round of voting, in the previous five polls...

Dec 20, 2016permalink

meta4one

So DPR readers have judged the a6300 to be superior to the a6500??? No, it is not about the $400 price difference. Had Sony skipped the a6300 and gone directly to the a6500, it would have awarded gold, etc. Apparently, providing more choices and more frequent product updates in a negative for DP Review and its readers.

Dec 21, 2016permalink

Revenant

I think that, for a lot of people, it IS about the $400 price difference.

Dec 21, 2016permalink

meta4one

Maybe so, but the a6500 fixes some of the major gaps in the a6300 release -- buffer lock up, video stopping abruptly, etc. plus adds IBIS. The IBIS is a boon to both video and stills -- and there are many e-mount native lenses that don't have OSS. And, of course, if you are adapting non-native lenses as I do, IBIS is a must-have. The a6300, on the other hand, seems like a minor upgrade to the a6000 at double the price.

More significant than a 10-second poll, the price of used a6300s have dropped precipitously on eBay now that the a6500 has come out. These sellers are willing not only to pay the $400, but take a $250+ loss when they resell the a6300. And no one is stepping to bid up the price of these hardly used a6300s. So that's what the market tells us ...

Dec 21, 2016permalink

Manfred Bachmann

Hi Barney, I have not missed the first round of voting, and thats the point. It´s almost impossible to rate the 6300 over the 6500, or would you? But...your votingsystem managed it to get the 6300 in the "overall product of the year" list, instead of the a6500. Not a big deal of course, but surprising nevertheless!

Dec 21, 2016permalink

It wasn't our voting system, so much as the actual votes. The a6300 and a6500 were in different polls, and the a6500 lost out to other products.

Dec 21, 2016*permalink

captura

Yes, and if it had made this list?
Then surely the A6500 would be tied with the XTII for second place. Which would have made things even more interesting.

Dec 23, 2016permalink

Greg VdB

My Gear of the Year are the cameras, lenses, and accessories that I've bought two years plus ago, and am still happily using. I know, I don't play by the rules ;-)

Dec 20, 2016permalink

Michael Ma

I would have voted for the GX85 if it was on the list. I have more capable cameras when it comes to dynamic range, noise performance, IQ, however, GX85 is the camera I have with me because of it's small unassuming size and discreetly fast and silent continuous shutter.

Dec 20, 2016permalink

jwinberg11

Michael:

I feel exactly the same! And I have (too many) other cameras. It is so quiet, handy and effective - love it!

Jack Winberg

Dec 21, 2016permalink

Everlast66

I am surprised so many people are into these Fuji retro fallacies. I would be interested in their cameras if they had a bit more "modern" design.

And I do appreciate the original designs from the 70s and 80s and own several Pentax, Olympus cameras (MX, ME, OM1, OM2 and more) just because they are beautifully designed and made.

But in 2016 I would expect something new and a bit more experimental, not only with the internal technology, but also the design and ergonomics.

Dec 20, 2016permalink

Favorable Exponynt

You've missed the Sigma Quattro's?

Dec 20, 2016permalink

Gear_junkie

I think the actual point of the camera is to have controls that are reminiscent of the past, and though the body may emulate a film camera, the amount of tech they through into something that small is impressive. The luxury of today is we have so many brands to choose from. If you want experimental internally and externally, give the sigma cameras a try, though new and experimental isn't always good. One way or the other, give me something I can fall in love with.

Dec 20, 2016permalink

I don'f oen or shoot s retro-style digital camera. I use Canon DSLRs.

You how long have the conpanies went on improving upon every little design tweak to make our cameras ERGONOMIC.

They have reached that.

Canon definitely and Nikon making improvements over the traditional SLR by adding curves.

But Fuji and Olympus ARE ergonomic. Of courss we csn find a little nipticking but they simply ars, sboot one for a week. The design and user interface with the camera is just as any well designed DSLR. So what's the issue, they just have flat curves vs Canon/Nikons, and the design is perfectly accepted by all photographers now and before.

It's a freaking viewfinder on top, a grip to hald the damn camera with bottons on the back near the thumb. And an LCD.

Basically all cameras on the market follow that exact same design because IT WORKS.

What would you suggest? A viewfinder on bottom, lcd no grip, touch LCD and forget buttons, what? This is the proper camera design..

If you want to call out companies making form over function go after Digital Bolex, Nikon DF, hasselblad sony rebrands etc..

But fuji/olympus/canon/nikom/pentax? They all make pretty good ergonomic digital camerss as they always have....

Dec 20, 2016permalink

King Penguin

Hey, I use a Nikon Df and OK it's a retro design but having used it now for a while.....it handles (for me) brilliantly and If they bring out a Df 2, I'll be on it like a shot......and no, I don't sport a hipsta beard!

I can't remember the last time I went into it's menus, all the controls are to hand....brilliant. I can set Them all without even switching the camera on.

OK, the grip 'ain't as big and curvy as my last Nikon FF DSLR but i don't find it a problem, like I didn't find it a problem using my Nikon film SLRs all those years ago; plus in street, pub & social situations, people don't get so freaked out when I get it out of my bag.

No gizmos, no video, just pure photography.....which just me just fine.....😀

Dec 20, 2016permalink

rafaelinux

Sadly I can't agree with that, I don't use DSLRs because they're way too huge for my hands to sit comfortably on them, plus they're on the heavy side, so, well, they're not portable enough.

Dec 20, 2016permalink

King Penguin

That's the lovely thing at the mo....there's so much choice, there's a camera model out there to suit everyone.....merry Xmas :)

Dec 21, 2016permalink

The Nikon DF is a fine camera. Great lowlight shooter and sturdy well sculptured body. I wish I could spare some money to buy a used one.

However it does choose form over function in a couple of obvious ways: omission of the video mode which is absolutely unexplainable by beinh "pure". It has an 422 Uncompressed HDMI out! And also the Top dials are not well designed, but for looking good. They really never come close to that feel-touch functionality. And the grip is unnecissaarily flat, also sacrificing function over form.

She looks a beat though.

We buy cars for looks, cloth, phones, laptops, tablets, TVs, watches, shoes, virually everything

Dec 22, 2016permalink

Favorable Exponynt

My gear of the year is King No. 1 already.

Dec 20, 2016permalink

Zoom lens surprised me quite a bit. Useful focal range and doubtless very sharp, but very, very expensive for a 4/3 zoom and as DPReview seems so fond of equivalence, this one if equivalent to an f8. f8 for light gathering and f8 for limiting DoF [which for me is the real kicker].

When there's already a decent stabilised 14-140 f3.5-5.6 in the shape of the Panny. OK that's going out to equivalence of f11 at maximum range, but it is a good deal longer, it's lighter and it's a fraction of the price. I can't see how Olympus can sell many of those, let alone at going on for a grand.

Dec 20, 2016permalink

ShatteredSky

Wth should it be "very, very expensive" for a m43 zoom (because it uses less volume of glass or less length of wires?)? Would it appear less expensive if it was an APS-C lens? I do not think it is (much) less expensive to manufacture than a larger / larger format lens (but of course I may be wrong). Though I would not mind it to be a less costly ... like everyone else. Lots of it might have to do with a lower anticipated sales volume I guess than e.g. for Canon lenses.

Dec 20, 2016permalink

The light gathering and exposure is F/4 don't worry about thay. It's just the depth of field that is equivalent to f/8.

Which is pretty narrow really. For a diffused background in a scene I'd have to set the lens to F/4 and shoot from afar at 80/100mm. It WILL get shallow DOF. But only on the long end.

It's however not a problem for landscape/familly/travel as you want sharp F8 anyway even on a FF camera.

It had its use, but a 50mm f/1.8 on APS-C or FF will achieve a look simply worlds away from 50mm f/8 on m43s chip. Not better. Different.

I like shallow.

Dec 20, 2016permalink

I think it's reasonable to compare it [in terms of manufacture] to something covering the same absolute focal range [except there's nothing]. The nearest you might look at is the Canon 24-105L f4, but that isn't very close, although it's obviously much larger and therefore has a lot more material cost to it [probably]. The closest equivalent I can think of is the one I've cited which is far cheaper and would have a broadly similar potential marketplace [Pany lenses not known for being cheap].

The Olympus Pro lenses certainly 'feel' like they're better constructed, but I'm not sure how that actually is of any practical advantage. That extra weight and bulk attached to my 12-40 for example simply resulted in exposing the flimsiness of the mount as a drop of a mere 3ft resulted in the screws securing the mount sheering. I hope they [Olympus] have now addressed that as an issue, but the solidity and weight actually contributed to damage you wouldn't expect even on a cheap lens.

Dec 20, 2016permalink

TBH I don't think this lens would have that much appeal to me were it half its price. If you're shooting landscapes/objects in decent light you could stop down the 14-140 and get something reasonably sharp. If you're shooting people, or want a bit more control over DoF - well that's the reason there are so many fast primes available for MFT. I just struggle to work out why this is such a great lens and given that it's relatively slow [especially for the format] why it should be so popular.

Personally I would really hope that Sigma might consider doing something akin to their APSc based 16-35 f1.8 for MFT - I've even considered buying one with a metabones adapter, but I think a similar native optic [it would still be relatively large even with a smaller imaging circle] might be a real winner. They're what

Dec 20, 2016permalink

@ Ebrahim Saadawi
"The light gathering and exposure is F/4 don't worry about thay. It's just the depth of field that is equivalent to f/8."

Well actually it's not - because the sensor is only capturing 1/4 of the light [because it's only 1/4 the size], the light gathering is approximately 2 stops less - which is about the difference you'll get in ISO levels all things being equal. But that isn't [to me] so important because it only makes a big difference in extremis. DoF control is more of an issue because it's one of the main creative influences you have on a finished image - and like you, I like shallow. [So I'm largely agreeing with you].

Dec 20, 2016*permalink

ShatteredSky

Anyway, for landscapes 14 mm does not always cut it, even 12 mm. That is why I am more interested in the announced 8-18/2.8-4, though I wish they would have considered a 9-25/2.8.

Dec 20, 2016permalink

obsolescence

@Chris2210 -- One thing to consider with an adapted and/or non-native lens is whether it's supported by Raw processing software. That can make a big difference in ease and efficiency of corrections (especially of WA lenses). For example, DxO OP only supports the 19, 30, and 60mm Sigma lenses for MFT.

Dec 23, 2016permalink