User Name
Password
AppleNova Forums » Third-Party Products »

Digital Camera Chat


Register Members List Calendar Search FAQ Posting Guidelines
Digital Camera Chat
Page 103 of 114 First Previous 99 100 101 102 [103] 104 105 106 107  Next Last Thread Tools
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2014-09-17, 08:29

I'd like to see it head to head with Canon's G1X Mk2. Both need about 50% more pixels to be just about right. The Canon has a bigger sensor, but the lens is a little slower too. The Panasonic crops away about 1/4 of the pixels in any given aspect ratio in order to spec a smaller lens, same trick as the Canon. Now though the Canon lens is a stop slower on the long end, it goes out to a 120mm equivalent, while the Panasonic stops at 75mm. The Canon also has a tilt screen which is convenient. The Panasonic has a built in EVF on it's side. Canon has a built in flash. Panasonic needs an accessory flash; Canon an Accessory EVF. Panasonic might shoot faster bursts with full AF and metering. Might be difficult to cross shop these two when you get down to it.

I've handled the Canon and really like the feel - chunky but good. The Panasonic is about 1cm shorter and 1cm thinner, not sure if that's enough to move it into shirt pocket territory.

I'd like to see a version of the Canon using the new dual Pixel AF system, maybe the MK3...

The Panasonic uses a lens profile trick to tell the contrast Detect AF how far to move forward or back. Reviews of the system on m43 cams say it works well at increasing speed and reducing hunting, but the AF in the camera has to recognize the lens and have a profile for it - so it may hunt around more than desired if you fit a w-con or t-con to the front of it.
  quote
Dorian Gray
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Paris, France
 
2014-09-17, 08:34

I think waiting a few months makes a lot of sense with Panasonic cameras (and most cameras, for that matter). The prices almost inevitably tumble significantly a few months after launch. The LX100 will have significant initial demand but at the end of the day Sony’s three 1"-type cameras won’t disappear overnight and Canon’s new G7 X will steal a lot of sales because it’s a Canon and also pretty impressive in its own right. So there’s no reason to think the LX100 will still be selling for $1000 in six months.

I am torn on these new large-sensor zoom compacts. They are no doubt extraordinarily capable, vastly more so than the 1/1.7"-type compacts of yore, but at the same time they really are a lot bigger (and pricier!) than those old compacts. My LX5 is just over half the weight and much smaller than the LX100. Admittedly it’s frustratingly slow (except for focus and shutter-lag, which are good), the small sensor shows at any ISO setting, and it doesn’t shoot Full HD video much less 4K. But it is genuinely small.

There are always trade-offs, and these new 1"-type and 4/3"-type sensor cameras don’t truly change that. They just introduce new trade-offs more in line with new expectations of image quality in a camera-phone world.

•••

I know we’re not all Leica fans, but I think we’d all agree the little company put out a impressive array of new products at this year’s Photokina. Everything from a redone M3 to a new medium-format S that shoots 4K video, via significant new lenses for all systems and a new range of binoculars. Crazy!

The new Summarits are interesting to me, not only because they’re tiny and beautiful but because they suggest Leica is aware that some people want affordable Leicas for practical photography.

The rich Russians remain well-catered for with the new silver Noctilux, etc.

… engrossed in such factional acts as dreaming different dreams.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2014-09-17, 08:53

4k medium format might just find its way into some high end studio productions. There's nothing in the digital world that will look like that ...
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2014-09-17, 10:20

Unless the implantation is better than the Pentax 645Z, I wouldn't expect to see many movies using the 4k from medium format cameras. For some reason the medium format sensors don't seem to do well with video. Now that could just be a Pentax problem, but Leica isn't exactly known for high quality video output either.

RE: LX100/G1X MK2 etc. I would be willing to pay $799-849 for the Panasonic, max. Considering that one could simply get a real M4/3s camera and a decent prime for less, the LX100 is priced too high. Now I realize it has a nice lens ($400-500 value alone no doubt), so the price is somewhat understandable. I still think if I was going to spend more than $900 it would have to be a camera with an APS-C sensor.

Keep in mind, pocketable is not my primary goal here, so the smaller Sony X100 MKIII and Canon G7X aren't in the running. I'm looking more for something that has serious controls, without the size for non-photo centric outings. No Canon, I because I'm not fond of the output from Canon cameras, I don't know what it is about it though. It think it might just be the way Canon processes them (the in camera, out of the users hands type processing). No Sony because, I just don't like the interface. I know those are nitpick things, but hey it's my money.

Last edited by PB PM : 2014-09-17 at 10:31.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2014-09-18, 08:52

I haven't seen the 4k output from pentax 645, I can see that big sensor having a hard time with rolling shutters, but there will be some kinds of shots where it's going to look impressive.

For the most part Canon real world output looks better than teat site output. They don't have a bottomless reserve of shadow detail, but no smaller sensor does really.

Micro43 is looking more attractive every day. It's not FX output, but fewer and fewer people care about that. And they have compelling lenses.

There was a rumour some time ago about nikon doing a 1" sensor compact with a collapsible f/1.8-f2.8 design, and there were a number of patent registrations with variable (but relatively faster) aperture standard zoom variations. I think they should just make this lens for the 1 system.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2014-09-18, 11:33

Pentax-Ricoh announced a full frame 135 camera, due next year. I'm sort of hopeful they will reintroduce the world to the concept of a small SLR. They also have a stable of suitable primes, and a nice full frame camera, reasonably priced might show Nikon and Canon what can be done with a traditional SLR mount.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2014-09-18, 19:37

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matsu View Post
For the most part Canon real world output looks better than teat site output. They don't have a bottomless reserve of shadow detail, but no smaller sensor does really.
I'm not talking about what you see on test sites, I've owned and used a few Canon cameras, and just never liked the output. It's not that there is anything wrong with the cameras or the lenses, the files just take more work to get them the way I want them. Thus I stuck with Nikon three and half years ago, when I had the option of switching to the 5D MKII.
  quote
Eugene
careful with axes
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
 
2014-09-18, 21:16

With Canon, I've always noticed more cyan/magenta smearing in areas I expect to be black/gray/white.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2014-09-19, 09:36

Haha. I wrote teat site instead of test site. iOS doesn't like my fat fingers. Funny you mention the magenta cast. I can usually pic out most wedding photographers by Canon's magenta tones. I don't think anyone white balances any more. My wife's data monitors drive me nuts. They're so bright and blue looking. Same thing with most peoples TV sets. Then you get casual and professional photographers raving about the colour on certain cameras. The tones the tones of one camera or another... I wonder if a few decades under fluorescent lights and "daylight" bulbs and LCD screens has permanently skewed the way most city dwellers perceive lights. Even the lamp posts in new areas are changing to something whiter but more monochromatic in my view, like it has clear RGB spikes.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2014-09-19, 09:53

White balance is kind of murky area. I'm not one of those people who carries a gray card, and I use auto white balance 95% of the time. Simply put, for the things that I tend to shoot, setting white balance in camera is just a pain and would often need to be corrected in post anyway. As for artificial lighting, that is something else all together. If it was up to me, all the lights in our home would be daylight adjusted bulbs, but it's not. Local street lighting is a real mix of older yellow halogens, some bluish halogens and then fewer still white. Not a big deal to me, since I don't shoot on the street locally. My personal pet peeve is lighting at sports events, and the falloff of the massive fluorescent lights they use.

I've also only done software monitor calibration (aka Apple's utility), so I'm sure the LCD isn't perfect. Now I do know that the colour is mostly right, because I've done some tests, but if I started to do my own printing I'd want to hardware calibrate for sure.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2014-09-20, 17:08

I haven't done a proper calibration of the iMac, or my HP screen, but they're not far off each other. I like my displays a little warm though, compared to most people who keep them very very blue.

Last edited by Matsu : 2014-09-20 at 17:26.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2014-09-30, 08:11

Here's a quick look at the D750 from a wedding shooter.

http://www.rossharvey.com/reviews/nikon-d750-review

I think the comparison of the D750 with 35mm f/1.8 vs the D3s with 35mm f/1.4 tells a story that nikon really should be paying more attention too. That's a big difference.

Also, shadow detail and high ISO DR seem to be really good, likely better than anything short of a D4. He likes the AF system.

But back to the size argument. Nikon has an even smaller chassis that could fit an FX sensor, the D5xxx/D3xxx class cameras, add a set of primes and that becomes a very compelling "small camera - big sensor" option.

EDIT: I'd argue, for working gigs, this would be much better than any comparable (FX) mirrorless, if only for the battery life advantages - for the time being at least. And, though this is a matter of preference, the OVF has it's advantages too. As do EVF's, but you have a flippy LCD for that.

So, Nikon, maybe you drop the D610 er long, and shrink the D650 to D5300 size - though with a bigger viewfinder.

.........................................

Last edited by Matsu : 2014-09-30 at 10:45.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2014-09-30, 09:42

That is a very promising review for the D750.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2014-10-01, 09:48

Now they just need to shrink it down to A7 size and we're in business.

I found this the other day in my correspondence with a rather well known pundit and sent it to over as an example of what's achievable in F mount.

http://www.talkemount.com/showthread.php?t=5591

Another party to the discussion commented that actually it's wholly possible to make an F mount DSLR about the same size as an A6000 (just thicker), which might be a bit too small, even for F/1.8 primes.

.........................................
  quote
Dorian Gray
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Paris, France
 
2014-10-21, 06:39

There’s a new Panasonic video about the LX100 here, showing Bernie DeChant fiddling with the camera. Definitely looks like it would be fun to use.

But the price is off-putting. Speaking realistically, I would not pay £700 for this camera, nice as it seems. That’s a lot of money. You could almost get an old Leica M8 for that, which would feel better value to me (naturally, not to everyone).

Another camera that appeals to me but feels expensive is the Panasonic GM5. What do we all think of that one? It seems to pack everything I liked about the GM1, plus a hot shoe and a rudimentary viewfinder, into a package nearly as small.



The GM1 and GM5 have a few restrictions related to their miniaturised motor-driven shutters (1/500 s top speed, 1/50 s flash-synch speed, various electronic-shutter limitations above 1/500 s). But I don’t use speeds over 1/500 s very often. I could probably live with that.

The nice thing about Panasonic cameras is that the core features – metering, autofocus, responsiveness – are rock solid, which is more than can be said about the Sony mirrorless cameras (which have their own appeal, of course).

I suppose I’m starting to think about what it would be like to own a mirrorless system camera. Nikon’s SLRs are becoming less attractive to me with each iteration. Canon’s SLRs are slightly more in line with my wishes, but not nearly better enough to warrant switching (and Canon’s sensors are weaker).

However, if I had to guess, I would say Nikon will produce an F-mount FX mirrorless camera within three years. If that has a good EVF and focus aids for manual-focus lenses (and it probably will), I will probably get one. That seems the most likely path towards good manual focus in a Nikon, since Nikon is plainly not interested in releasing an SLR with a focus-friendly viewfinder. So I intend to keep my Nikon system no matter what else I do.

I should clarify that I have no special fondness for the size and particular set of compromises of the full-frame sensor per se. I just favour full-frame because it matches the image circle of my favourite lenses.

In the meantime:
  • I don’t want a Sony A7 system because it would interfere with any future Nikon FX mirrorless and it has loads of usability problems (e.g. insanely slow start-up times)
  • I don’t want an APS-C mirrorless like the Fujifilm because I don’t gel with those cameras (too retro) and the lenses are big and heavy
  • I am starting to lean towards a Micro Four Thirds system, with the plan to eventually use it alongside a future F-mount mirrorless system.
I am still doubtful I want to deal with two systems, though.

In fact, perhaps this is all so much pointless pondering. Relatively harmless, though.

… engrossed in such factional acts as dreaming different dreams.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2014-10-21, 07:11

Maybe 1 stop is not enough difference if/when keeping two systems? Maybe APSC is just right when housed in a right sized mount - ie. not a 35mm DSLR mount which is really meant for 35mm film. Maybe the ideal combination is 135format and m43. 2 stops. Enough of a difference to make smaller cameras really small, and longer glass really long, or conversely big sensors and glass really wide and really fast. At least in comparison to each other.
  quote
Dorian Gray
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Paris, France
 
2014-10-21, 07:28

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matsu View Post
Maybe the ideal combination is 135format and m43. 2 stops.
That’s what I was thinking. On the other hand, one APS-C system may be better than an unwieldy combination of Micro Four Thirds and Nikon FX. I just don’t really like the Fujifilm system, and Sony seems to be abandoning APS-C as a format for keen photographers. And going to APS-C would mean dumping my full-frame F-mount lenses, most of which have no good replacement in any other format.

Full-frame has a mythical aura that sells itself with no need for expensive persuasion, as Sony is finding out with the A7.

The A7 is appealing to me too, but it would always feel like a stop-gap product, since later Sonys will assuredly get much better and Nikon may release an F-mount mirrorless. That said, many people are using the A7 with Nikon or Canon glass – sometimes for reasons I don’t completely understand!

… engrossed in such factional acts as dreaming different dreams.
  quote
Dorian Gray
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Paris, France
 
2014-10-21, 10:48

Jeff Keller and Richard Butler have some harsh words for the new Canon G7 X here (the “Shooting Experience” page, in case those page numbers change as the review gets fleshed out). Doesn’t look promising for a brand new camera from a big maker.

One reason smartphones have killed cheap compacts is that they do everything quickly, from focusing to shot-to-shot times to sharing. People expect cameras to operate quickly in 2014. And rightly so, even if careful photographers can sometimes tolerate slow response when photographing static subjects.

… engrossed in such factional acts as dreaming different dreams.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2014-10-21, 11:25

Interesting. Hogan goes on and on about that very thing, he's right of course, it would probably make sense for camera makers to clean up their post capture image management in-camera and support it with good iOS/Android and cloud apps off-camera... all while keeping the fast direct controls of a good camera. I don't like taking pictures with a phone, but some of that is just habit. Half the time someone hands me a camera to take a group shot I put it up to my eye only to realize there's no VF. At least with a phone I hold it out in front of me, though I don't like that. A friend who teaches photography at a local college. He has a section on phone photography, he claims all his new students take better pictures on their phones than they do with their DSLRs. Probably a big LCD viewfinder has some advantages too.

.........................................
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2014-10-21, 20:18

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorian Gray View Post
The A7 is appealing to me too, but it would always feel like a stop-gap product, since later Sonys will assuredly get much better and Nikon may release an F-mount mirrorless. That said, many people are using the A7 with Nikon or Canon glass – sometimes for reasons I don’t completely understand!
I guess if manual focus is the style of photography that some people can handle that is fine. Not my cup of tea either.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2014-10-23, 06:40

Hogan has some interesting speculation on his site. He thinks both Canon and Nikon will begin killing off APSC DSLRs next year, and he does get some real industry info from time to time, so his speculation can be worth reading for clues.

The question is how? New mount or existing mount? I'm in favour of the existing mount for Nikon, at least for FX cameras. It's been shown that they can be small enough as makes no matter, and once the mirror assembly is gone, new lenses can easily recede into the body where needed, Biogon style. He has a neat idea: put an aperture ring on the body, around the mount throat. Makes the deep body look thinner, like part of the lens barrel is permanently affixed; gives the left hand something to do if you have a crowded small body camera. Make it electromechanical and click-less to be nice to video folks while keeping full compatibility, and make it programable for other lens camera functions, if so inclined.

Because I love camerasize.com comparisons

Two Sony's - One A, One E - and Nikon F. All three similar in size. The Sony has a 135 format sensor, but the other two can easily fit one. The depth difference between the Nikon and the A7 is only 16mm. You can could probably shave another 8-10 from the Nikon if you really wanted to, which is close enough as makes no difference. You could shrink the Sony A7 too, but at some point it'll be just too thin for a viewfinder and grip that balances with either an APSC or 135 format lenses.

.........................................
  quote
Dorian Gray
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Paris, France
 
2014-10-23, 09:13

These articles about the mirrorless future are Thom Hogan at his best, I feel. He makes a pretty compelling case for Nikon sticking with the F-mount. And I’m glad to hear it.

The aperture-ring idea is smart and topical. I think we’ll see it.

Dumping the DCF file system is something I haven’t thought about, but I’m sure someone with a good imagination could come up with many reasons it makes sense.

By the way, I think a mirrorless F-mount FX camera could lose much more than half an inch in height (I realise he was mostly talking about DX there, though even there more than half an inch is doable).

But increasingly, I think mirrorless cameras will solve problems other than size and weight of the camera body – though those are themselves biggies. Already it’s easier to manually focus with mirrorless cameras than current SLRs. Some people seem to prefer a live exposure preview in the viewfinder (maybe this preference will become widespread?). Mirrorless cameras also open up the possibility of using lenses with heavy distortion and correcting the distortion for the viewfinder image and the final image in firmware, making much smaller lenses possible. Etc.

… engrossed in such factional acts as dreaming different dreams.

Last edited by Dorian Gray : 2014-10-23 at 13:52. Reason: removed pointless and churlish comment
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2014-10-23, 14:58

He can't sell Photogearfetish trips if he doesn't at least claim to be a working photographer. Still, he makes a living talking and writing about cameras and photography, and he's not a patently bad photographer, just not primarily earning his income there now, if ever.

Biggest thing on-sensor AF can solve is a variety of alignment and calibration issues, along with vastly simplified construction. In fact, if the right sensor existed, this could probably be solved with a pentaprism and mirror still in place. Rather than have a silvered mirror divert light to the AF at the bottom of the mirror box, it could simply let light through to the sensor itself, a bit like a pellicle, but one that still flips out of the way. That would shorten the height of the camera and still preserve OVF functionality for those who want it...

.........................................
  quote
Eugene
careful with axes
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
 
2014-10-25, 05:11

The graph on his other sansmirror.com site says it all. Panasonic is making very compelling mirrorless products in each category within the safety net of the MFT ecosystem, but they have no growth to show for it. Meanwhile the DSLR market is contracting at a pretty even pace. There's definitely room for innovation here, but none of it will stop smartphones from devouring that space from the bottom up.

Since the middle-ground is continually shrinking and Nikon hasn't a chance of competing in the smartphone market, that pretty much leaves the higher-ground as their best bet to stave off shrinking profits. How long until we see Nikon cine and/or medium format hardware?

E: Then again there's that smartphone attachment patent posted on N|R...

Last edited by Eugene : 2014-10-25 at 16:06.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2014-10-25, 10:50

Does anyone think that smartphone add-on devices will really take off (camera wise)? It is possible that in the short term the bluetooth/wifi devices could gain some traction, primarily with enthusiasts who don't want a stand alone camera. Once zoom lenses (liquid lenses) come to smartphones, it's very likely that these devices will go the way of the dodo bird. Of course the size and shape of smartphones will always limit the size of the sensors used (thus final image quality), but considering that smartphone cameras are already good enough for most people that use them, how much farther do they have to go to gobble up even more users?
  quote
Eugene
careful with axes
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
 
2014-10-25, 16:12

Yes, it's dumb and will never take off. It eschews convenience for slightly better photo quality...that's what compacts do and nobody buys those. Sony can't even get rid of its QX cameras.

If Nikon doesn't have the capability of licensing its tech to smartphone camera module makers or building their own, then their future is the professional and/or luxury camera business.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2014-10-25, 19:57

I think the future of cameras is rather high-end, be they compacts or otherwise, simply because everyone has a phone, and they will only get better at video and stills, and for many they are good enough already.

I think I've posted this before, but a camera with really rock solid NFC/wifi/Bluetooth - something that works really well with your phone to get nice looking files up into the cloud really fast, i think that may be very popular. If it somehow organizes photos and tags them according to scene recognition and GPS data in a really intelligent and sophisticated way. Say for example by recognizing faces and locations and dates and applying the appropriate tags right to the file. Eg. Winter, 2014, Paris, fiancé, facing south at Eiffel Tower at sunset or something like that. Cool. Basically using a lot of the power of a smart device, but in a completely photo centric way, that might make for a high demand photo appliance or even a real convenience for more serious photo/camera products.

Last edited by Matsu : 2014-10-25 at 20:26.
  quote
Eugene
careful with axes
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
 
2014-10-26, 07:38

Right, that was my favorite takeaway from that DPReview Live show. the Ricoh/Pentax guy described exactly that, though he used a ballgame as the setting. The camera is a tool to capture memories, so it should take the next leap and start recording all types of metadata.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2014-10-26, 09:52

Indeed, and I for one won't miss having to manually input keywords! The camera should also allow for user generated keywords as well (beyond the useless "comments"). I have not used an NFC equipped device, but if it is faster than using WIFI for photo transfer it could be useful. I haven't hopped on the, take it, share it instantly bandwagon (never used and don't have Instagram for example) so WIFI/NFC doesn't stand out as a glaring omission to me, but WIFI/GPS built in should just be a given for any camera made in 2015. If the camera makers don't get that, they should just stop now.

As for Nikon, reps at Photokina 2012 noted that they were going to target the higher end market (FX as they have done the last few years), so that strategy is already playing out. The local camera store was telling me that Nikon is set to raise camera/lens prices against before the end of 2014. Hard to believe since we are coming up to the hoilday sale season, but apparently true. That and we've already heard this year that Nikon is moving to make the business less dependent on cameras, so I doubt we'll see any shifts from the current direction the company is going in the photography realm.

That said, I would not be suprised to see a medium format entry, along with high end mirrorless cameras from Nikon by 2017.
  quote
Dorian Gray
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Paris, France
 
2014-10-26, 16:33

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eugene View Post
Since the middle-ground is continually shrinking and Nikon hasn't a chance of competing in the smartphone market, that pretty much leaves the higher-ground as their best bet to stave off shrinking profits. How long until we see Nikon cine and/or medium format hardware?
I can see medium format happening. Not because 135-format sensors have pressing weaknesses – with the right lens they’re good enough for almost any purpose – but because some people would buy medium format anyway and there isn’t much innovation there. Nikon might look positively innovative in that space, which could translate into good profits.

Cine is much harder. It’s packed with established players (Sony, Panasonic, Canon, Zeiss, etc.) and disruptive newcomers (Red, Blackmagic Design, etc.). Nikon has no experience in that area and would be starting from scratch. There isn’t unlimited growth there either.

As for smart cameras using metadata effectively, this sounds useful and inevitable, but it is hard for me to imagine Nikon driving that change. After all, this is a company that developed good (if basic) geotagging software/firmware many years ago but didn’t integrate a GPS into an SLR until very recently (D5300).

This is only one of many failures of imagination that Nikon can be accused of over the last few years. I think Nikon has been insulated from many bad decisions by a couple of very important things it got really right: it bought sensors from the best makers (arguably fortuitous rather than shrewd planning), and it managed to sustain a great lens range while other companies struggled to do that or tried again and again with different mounts.

It’s hard to escape the conclusion that the next few years are going to be hard for Nikon. But perhaps Nikon will play a blinder with its upcoming serious mirrorless platform. This isn’t impossible to imagine, since Nikon has nailed what people wanted many times in its history, e.g. with the original F, the F5, the D1, and the D3. Each of those cameras was perfectly in synch with what photographers wanted at the time. Perhaps the serious mirrorless system will be Nikon’s next ambitious and wildly successful project.

… engrossed in such factional acts as dreaming different dreams.
  quote
Posting Rules Navigation
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Page 103 of 114 First Previous 99 100 101 102 [103] 104 105 106 107  Next Last

Post Reply

Forum Jump
Thread Tools
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
iPad's lack of built-in camera, video chat rdlomas Apple Products 47 2010-02-04 09:37
Good Digital Camera for First Time Digital kieran Purchasing Advice 3 2005-11-18 18:20
New Digital Camera! PowermacG5newbie Genius Bar 2 2005-05-17 23:07


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 13:30.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2024, AppleNova