Well, this Canon user is impressed. It eats my 5d classic for breakfast, even with out of camera jpegs versus my raw edits. I liked the range of shots, and was bowled over by the dynamic range on show.

I am thinking of buying it for the wider autofocus sensor area but that's just my personal shooting style. And, I need to sell my current camera before the value falls too much further. As for megapixelage, I guess it depends on how much you retouch. More megapixels makes it easier to fix skin problems which is always nice.

And there you have it: the economics are different for everyone.
I would love to booze it up day and night like the DPR editors and go out to lavish lunches with my friends, but those cost huge money and I love cameras more than either people and the delightful feeling of being drunk.

I'm willing to endure the hell of white-knuckle sobriety and brown-bag peanut butter sandwiches so I can save up for a new camera body once in a while. My other sacrifice is that I constantly risk camera failure because I only own one body at a time.
You're much smarter than me to own three bodies, but my liver is healthier.
It's all tradeoffs.

I have a slight advantage over most people. No wife and no kids. It makes it a little easier to justify my purchases, at least to myself. However it has taken some time to obtain this set, it was not all bought on the same day. Approximately 10 years for all the lenses, flash equipment and cameras, upgraded from D200 and D70, and D300 to D7000 to D610/D7200 so I'm in it for the long haul. Interesting side point, the D70 is STILL going strong and taking great photos. And why Nikon? Because I have some rather expensive Nikon glass that I'm not willing to part with. If I was starting from scratch and had the money, I would probably go with Sony.

The D70 is a great camera. CCD sensors had something that CMOS just can't equal. Plus it has a great sensor for high-speed sync IIRC.

My dream is to sell everything and roam the world with just a D700 and the Nikon 35mm 1.4.

It ain't critique as critique is never negative but positive.

Everyone can talk/write negatively, but only skilled can write positively even from a downside. That is why a being critic is a profession based to talent, not to mouthwash everything by opinions.

For as much as this camera was hyped, we have every right to be extremely critical of it.

Sounds like it's about the same as other cameras with the same pixel density, like the D500. If it isn't a significant increase in IQ over what's already out there (D810, D750, D500...) then it's not worth it to me.

I will third. Pictures are simply excellent. He has a very good eye.

I had the same thought, lovely photos and that smile made me feel so happy!

Hi don-bosco - - - very well said! Actually not just competing brands. I find lacking details in shadows that would not happen with the proper setting of HDR or D-Lighting.

NOT a troll here since I only use Nikon / Nikkor cameras - lenses for 55 years.
Currently own and use two D800, D5100, D5300, and D500.

I've downloaded a few of the RAWs and have played around with them in LR. They seem to respond well to processing. I posted one example over here:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4204564

I encourage others play with the RAWs in their preferred software. I looked at one of the earlier landscape shots in samples, and thought the jpeg lacked sharpness and detail. The RAW was much better. Bottom line is, we really shouldn't be judging IQ based on jpegs.

I agree with Harvey. I think it would be best to work from the raw files, then to do the raw to jpg conversion in the end.

I look at the current crop of cameras like a car enthusiast looks at the latest Corvettes, Mustangs, et. al.—the electronic engine, transmission, braking, and traction controls in high-performance cars think and respond far faster than I ever could so why not use them.
Sure the electronics mean I'll never be able to drive a Corvette at 10/10ths of its capabilities but using them I can get very close to 9/10ths. Without them I might only be able to ever use 5/10ths of the car's potential, so all in all, it's a net win just as it is with cameras.

Did you shoot any under florescent lighting to see the horrible banding Nikon are well known for?

I wonder how much more detail we can realistically expect to see? Is it maybe that this sensor is out-resolving most lenses?

Nice to know that you all know to do it better than the man with the actual body in hand.
Your imagination what might have been done outreaches time and dimension of any first impression.
Can people actually breathe in your presence?

MoiMoi, what you say reminds me of those people who buy a fancy camera for that trip people saved a lifetime to go on so they could capture the best pictures ever only to find they have no idea how to use that new camera and come back disappointed.

Agree - not the best samples for showing off this camera. @ Harvey - I'm sure there's a study of it somewhere, but my suspicion is that the camera is not out resolving the lenses they're using.

Moimoi, that EF 35mm glass is one heck of a glass. it's in my wishlist.
coming back to your comment, yeah we need to get out of the hype phase and do an objective test. I saw one famous reviewer did a youtube review of D850 against A7R2 and GH5 and kind of gave a perception that D850 is better in video than the Sony/Pana. I just laughed and thought that even review sites/person are human after all... we are somehow biased on something.
About the resolving part. i was contemplating on whether to get the 5DS or 5D4 and decided to go with 5D4. the 30 Mpx is more forgiving than the 50Mpx. Plus i liked the output except felt sometimes 5D4 over exposes stuff... exposure needs to be turned down. Many would argue that the extra Mpx is like a backup plan. after testing the 5Ds and 5D4 i could not agree with that perception with respect to my use and lens collection.

Carey , could you shoot one with the lens cap on and lift the shadows by +100 to show the sensor noise/banding?

NarrBL, sorry but you came off as a post-modern, non-humanized, blacked-out, expanded-breadth fool with this post. Apologies if I left out any clichés...

Wow, just... wow. You seriously need to work on your bedside manner.

Of course, @John Koerner. I mean, the nerve of them. What they should have done is contacted you to show them how it's really done. No doubt you would be able to do justice to the camera's capabilities. Add to that the artistic genius of your compositions and we have the best-kept secret on this site.

On a more serious note, I thought the photos accomplished their task. They were not meant to be artsy or blow your little midget-mind, but you didn't get that.

At the very least, you could tell they weren't all taken in a half hour. I mean, maybe if I was the Flash...