plasnu

welbil: Wow,
I'm impressed; 464 comments (and counting) within a few hours of posting!

Much of it idle speculation from folks who have never even seen the gear. There's a lot of spare time out there!

I guess Nikon will be pleased. "There's no such thing as bad publicity".

burnymeister: I think people are missing the point on this camera. $1200 isn't that bad when you consider what you're getting. For under $3k you can get a system that covers the focal range of 18-800mm with pretty good features and small enough to fit in a backpack.

How is this not a great thing? 800mm in any other system will either result in a horrible unbalanced mess or $11k just for the lens and will be so heavy you won't hike it anywhere. This is the first time I'm interested in the 1 series. I think Nikon's finally coming through.

Poweruser: Hasselblad hast lost all credibility for me as a camera maker with their rebranded, overpriced SONY line. Wonder how overpriced their medium format stuff really is...

sean000: Ever since Google bought Nik I've thought, "They're going after Adobe." Pretty soon Google photo tools like Google + with Picasa will be more powerful and competitive with Lightroom. For photography enthusiasts Lightroom has the edge for now, but Picasa and Google + are improving and becoming increasingly attractive to photography enthusiasts. Meanwhile Adobe's subscription based licensing is driving away some long-time customers. I still can't imagine leaving Lightroom, but I'm keeping an eye on Google. For people who don't need some of Lightroom's more powerful features, and who just want Snapseed like features and a free way to organize and share photos that look great online... why wouldn't they use Google +? Oh yeah, because all their friends and family are on Facebook ;-)

mike earussi: The question unanswered is are they replacing using the new improved shutters from the D610 or just putting more faulty D600 shutters back in?

greypixelz: that's a bunch of bull! "pushing the envelope", wack! more like giving it a new spin, but Olympus is certainly NOT pushing any envelope in the imaging dept.
even though I am not a fan, I reckon only Sigma is really pushing the envelope here against a considerable pull-back from the mainstream and with relative success.
truth be told, Olympus is just another speck of dust in the canon-nikon-sony comet which currently lead the mainstream.

BennoFG: It seems the argument here is the big camera crowd saying:"this is why FF/35mm is better" and the m43 crowd saying "but this is why I bought m43 and didn't buy FF/35mm"

rince repeat.

I'll join in. I am so stoked with m43. I do freelance travel photography. I moved from Nikon to m4/3 two years ago. So The big cameras were near on perfect until I had a comparison. I notice the EM-5 with a panny 20mm 1.7 gives a beautiful shallow portrait, but doesn't take away the natural smile on people facing a guy with a camera. The EM-1 gets pulled out in stiking jungle humidity with a 2.8 zoom that's also safely weatherproofed.

Those cameras are no longer insured. The price vs features required makes it affordable to risk having to replace a camera. I am saving money.

The size and weight benefits are appreciated no-end and the difference in image quality non-existant. really, the last 7 of 8 projects have been for digital end-use. I have not had to adjust to anything more than the button latout.

personally, m43 was godsend.
Great interview! Keep pumping those high end bodies and lenses out Olympus, I'll keep buying them.

plasnu: Another nice documentary with Mamiya 7. Mamiya 7 has already established a classic status for documentary photography.

Wye Photography: Personal view to which I am entitled - don't bite my head off.

I find it mildly amusing that thousands upon thousands of people abandoned film in their absolute droves and "made the switch to digital", spent $1000's (the $ is there for the benefit of my American brothers) on the new gear, computers, software only then to mimic film. If I could understand irony, I think that could be ironic.

I use digital, I also use film (B&W, just started to self process colour), I can tell you those "film packs" are just a waste of money esp BW. I can process Tri-X in D76, HC-110, Prescysol and Perceptol and have four different results.

With colour, I get a slightly different colour and rendition from my old Canon kit as I do from my RTS (and those sublime Carl Zeiss T* lenses) kit.

Personally, I think all these film sim profiles, albeit free from Adobe, are a gimmick. Quality film kit is cheap as chips thanks to digital. Buy some, have a go, do if for real. You'll enjoy it!