Entertainment photographer for Corbis Images / AP Images, Nikon Digital Field Guide & Concert and Live Music Photography author, Gretsch guitar strangler.
Zeisschen: It's obviously not a camera for those "Pro-wannabe-lookalike" DSLR users that need huge and heavy blobb of black plastic in their hands to feel important.Those cameras are for Asian girls who chose not to look like that. One can always discuss about taste, but those cameras look much nicer than any of (especially) Nikons DSLR. Those and the golden letters on their lenses look much less attractive and way too oldschool to me. It's like running around with a Nokia 3150 when everyone else has a slim and sylish smartphone.
4 women out of 64,862,424. Do you think that knowing what cameras FOUR women shoot is indicative of what a population of almost 65 MILLION women might choose?
Marty4650: This is really no different than what Nikon did with the Df.
Nikon just used styling to appeal to a different demographic (hipsters with too much money) than Pentax did (people who want bright bold colored cameras).
@Marty4650: Do you even know what a hipster is? Or is it just anther pejorative term that you picked up form hanging out on camera forums. I've never seen a hipster with a Df. Hipsters prefer FILM cameras. A Lomo is a more realistic view of what a hipster might use.
Stop jumping on the bandwagon of blaming everything on the so-called hipster market when you really don't know what you're talking about. You're just repeating dumb crap you read on internet forums.
quailoaksphoto: Maybe Nikon will get rid of the AA filter, charge $300 more, and call it D750E. I dislike the AA in my D800. I preordered the D750 and cancelled the order when I discovered it has AA filter.
You can't even COMPREHEND the point. Move along...
Pritzl: So how much do we pay for the pleasure of advertising the red dot?
I'm gonna cry Pritzl...
Being ignored by someone from the interwebs that I've never met is really gonna bother me.
Calm down? Were you peeping through my window as I typed in a rage? I don't get upset over dumb crap like this, but I do like to point out your hypocrisy.
You ARE mistaken actually. The image processing algorithms are different AND the Leica actually offers a 3 year warranty as opposed to a 1 year warranty. Many people pay extra for extended warranties. And just because you don't need Lightroom doesn't mean that's not rolled into the cost. So what you're paying extra for is all that you've listed
Unless you stitch together your own clothes and eat only generic food, you pay for branding on EVERYTHING you buy.
You're a complete DOLT if you think that Leica is the only company fleecing you. And an even better point is YOU DON'T HAVE TO BUY IT!
You pay a premium for the privilege to own a Canon although there are many cameras such as Pentax that have similar or better specs at lower prices.
GPW: If I step up it will be to the Canon 7Dll and screw Nikon!!!
@Timbukto: Yeah, you're right. Over 2 decades of being a professional sports, events, and concert photographer as well as the author of over 20 books hasn't given me ANY real experience. YOU must be the real authority on the subject.
nnanda: Why Nikon kept AA filter? It is throwing that out from all its cameras (at least newer models), then why it is still there? That alone is a deal breaker for me!
@PK24X36NOW: Pixel count and pixel density are not the same because the real estate is not the same.
Let's simplify it so you can understand it better. You have two plots of land, 1 is an acre, the other a 1/2 acre. You put 24 people on each plot. The smaller plot of land is more densely populated because each person has less real estate.
steelhead3: It looks in size and shape like a medium format rangefinder from the last century.
@Zagato: There's no such thing as "full format". What he was referring to was a possible MEDUIM FORMAT (ie. larger than 35mm) camera by Sony and how large it would be.
I doubt that would ever come to fruition however, very implausible.
@beavertown: Cross-type sensors are great for accurate focus, but they also slow focus speed down. And what the hell is a "super-cross"? Marketing BS. Another thing that slows down AF? More focus points. 65 isn't necessarily better that 51.
Have you had a 7DmkII in your hands and tested it against a D4s in a real sports shooting environment? Didn't think so. Leave your conjecture at the door.
And every entry-level Nikon DSLR will out resolve the 7DmkII, so there's that.
Don't get me wrong, the 7DmkII is a great APS-C camera, but it's not the best camera in the world.
@Timbukto: I've got more than 2 decades of evidence and experience that magnesium bodies hold up better. And many other pros will tell you the same. With your statement I can guarantee you've never subjected your cameras to rigorous professional use.
I've dropped plastic cameras and had them shatter exposing the circuitry killing the camera. I've dropped magnesium bodies and had them dent and keep working for years.
If you seriously think that a plastic camera is better than a magnesium one you're deluded.
Robert Lucas: D9300?
I had the Nikon 24-70 before the Sigma. The low-light performance of the Df and D4 are good enough that I don't feel I need the extra stop of light. And the extra reach allows me to carry only one camera at many music festivals. For most stages the 24-105 is perfect. If a stage is really high as some main stages are all I need is a 70-200. I'll probably end up getting the 70-200 f/4 soon as well.
I don't buy Tamron lenses at all. I've had a few and although the IQ can be good, their build is shoddy. Same with Tokina. The Sigma Global lenses may be made out of some sort of polycarbonate, but it's really tough. It gives me confidence in the build. When I pick up a Tamron I just don't feel the same quality.
The 120-300 is something I rarely use, but comes in handy when I have to shoot professional sports or musicians from the soundboard. I once shot the president with it, er I mean, photographed the president...
@ viking79: Nikon doesn't include WiFi in high-end bodies because it's difficult to get a Wi-Fi to connect through magnesium alloy. I mean it's just common sense people. The WU-1a/b costs like $40 refurbed from B&H. That's what I use. Yes, built-in Wi-Fi is nice, but I'd rather have a full magnesium body that can take a beating than built-in Wi-Fi.
If you do some research you notice that Nikon only excludes the AA filter on sensors with high pixel density. Eg. the D810 and D7100. The D750 doesn't have a high enough pixel density and moire will be more pronounced, which would likely cause people on the camera forums to throw a fit complaining about the moire.
If your idea of "stepping up" is to an APS-C sensor camera then by all means...
falconeyes: @DPReview team:
I believe it is a bit unfair to post every news for ZEISS high end DSLR lenses (like Otus 85/1.4) and skip the Photokina news about similiarly priced and performing lenses from another German optics specialist:
- Schneider Makro-Symmar 85/2.4 for Canon and Nikon- Schneider Xenon 35/1.6 for Canon and Nikon- Schneider Xenon 50/1.4 for Canon and Nikon
Never mind, I just found that Schneider-Kreuznach already announced the same 3 lenses at Photokina 2012. Now again. Strange.
@bawbaw: Actually 35mm is a classic lens for a photojournalist. It gives enough space around the subject to show the environment, which is much more important in journalism than a standard head-and-shoulders portrait done with a longer lens.
You would hope a photography journalist knew at least THAT.
Jogger: Is this even a viable market??? i.e. do people really mount non-Leica lenses on $8000+ Leica M bodies??? Wont your fellow 1%ers laugh at you??
I guess the thing that Jogger doesn't understand is that many people that prefer shooting Leica M rangefinders are more concerned about image quality over brand name. We all know that the Zeiss 35/2 is nearly as good, if not as good, as the current 35 Summicron. Even the Voigtlälnder 35mm f/1.2 is sharper than an older 35 Summilux of comparable price when stopped down.
Most of us Leica shooters buy lenses based on characteristics that we like. That's why I have 4 50mm M-mount lenses. Each one is different. If I want a generic 50mm look I'll just pop my 50mm f/1.8G on a Nikon body and roll with it. And for some jobs I'll do exactly that.
I have the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 | S. Now THAT is a lens.
I've also got the 24-105 f/4 for my FX cameras. It's a great lens for shooting music festivals.
Sometimes I use the 18-35 in crop mode on my Df for shooting low-light events where I don't need large files. The AF accuracy on that lens is pretty amazing.
@BarnET: Exactly. I actually sold my Nikon 17-55 f/2.8G because it couldn't handle the D7100 resolution. Replaced it with the Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 | C. Pocketed a good chunk of change with the profits and got better IQ to boot. Not as well-built as the Nikon, but I don't use DX for any heavy work.
I also picked up the 18-35mm f/1.8 and while limited in zoom range it's built well and a stellar performer.
I wouldn''t look for a new pro DX lens from Nikon ever. They're out of the pro DX game.
Great specs, cheap body.
Seriously? Does your car have branding on it? Your pants? Your shoes? You coffeemaker? Your stove? Your refrigerator? Your bottle of beer? Your favorite snack? Your phone? Your glasses?
Just about EVERYTHING has branding on it. Leica isn't the only company that brands it's products.
What camera do you use? I'll bet is has a brand name prominently displayed somewhere. on it.
And to go even further. Leica is the ONLY camera manufacturer that I know that offers a camera that has NO prominent brand display, the Leica M Monocrom only has a tiny 2cm high Leica name engraved on the hot shoe.