This , now sounds more like it, let see how it actually come about
Rocky Mtn Old Boy: $150 with a pinhole lens?I'd rather buy a used Zone VI, Wista, Graphlex, Calumet, etc etc etc off of ebay... there are a zillion more capable 4x5 bodies from $50 on up that one can play with that have swings/tilts (something interesting).
There might be a niche group that will find this of interest... Lomography fans.
That said, in a few years, the Wanderlust will be nothing more than a footnote in the annals of photographic history. Sorry Wanderlust... but really.
Affordable 4x5 digital back for the win.
A brand new holga 6X12 pinhole cost only about what at best $40.00 and it can take good old 120 film , probably a lot more useful if I just want something along that
Well well, prove that there's really nothing new under the sun. Such simple box camera is anything but new. That design dated way back to the time when Brass Lens are common. And there's literally hundreds of camera models of this design ..
Thematic: Before anyone rants - this is a stunning value (as is the new BM cam). S35, Global shutter and a form factor perfect for its intended market. Fantastic work if they can get to market fast.
Would not disagree , but still, they matter not to the mass. There is still no real true 4K for 4K solution , and even if there's one its still perhaps too expensive to most. The liberation of the Video / Cine market really mirror that of the still photography. When solution become such that even mere mortals and amateur can afford truly workable but yet still quality solution then we will see explosion of development and talents.
And that's pretty much why the Panasonic GH4, the Sony A7s are more important to the big picture than these wonder machine we have from BM, RED, AJA, Arri, JVC or alike.
MrTaikitso: I wonder how long before Sony join Micro4/3? With the IQ difference between their larger sensor formats (NEX/Alpha) and 4/3rds slowly diminishing as technology progresses, and Sony being experts in miniaturisation, the Panasonic GM1 proves that you can only produce a compact body AND lens kit with 4/3rds, but NOT with NEX/Alpha. (I had an NEX 5R and even with a prime, it was much wider than the GM1 and not pocketable.)
And who better to make sexy do it all compact 4/3rds than Sony? They did it with the RX100, so have the ability.
Won't happen. The E mount is pretty healthy and M4/3 really do not bring benefit to Sony. On the other hand the E mount give Sony all the edge ( no less the FF as used by Sony in the A7 and super 35 for the others right up to F55 ) The RX 's 1" sensor is their Super-16 and that pretty much round out the crop.
And don't get hung over the compact nature too much, if they want it , the Mfr can made really petite mirrorless or compact alright. but its not all that matter. That's why the GM1 is only part of the lineup and why GX7 is made that way it is
I guess its more like JVC adopt the M4/3 mount and leverage on the lens thus available more than actually developing product for M4/3 the system. If we take careful scrutiny of the latest Cine market development, the real deal is Super 35 sensor which made sense as it really inherit the 35mm Cine film format and also the sensor size pretty much allow the various adaptation. This really bore out in this JVC cam, and the like of ( even ) Panasonic's own highend / production 4K platform ( its a super 35 sensored, with Pl mount and not M4/3 ).
Really only RED, Canon and Sony had something else. And the game they are gaming is FF but that again is just something of an extension as FF can easily be used as Super 35 which in any case that's what many FF cinematographer do anyway taking advantage of the sensor to freely crop ( not all film are made to display on HD ratio )
NAB is a great show but to most of us who are not into production its somewhat overkill.
VARS ... that's really ... really funny ... ( if you don't got it, try Google or Wiki search VAR )
am not sure after the like of RX100, or even simply the older XZ series, not to mention their own M4/3 or any of the large sensor mirrorless / compacts that I can tolerate the limited performance the 1/2.3" sensor impose.
I would rather accept the burden of a less compact setup for the long term benefit of it bringing back better captures
Anzere08: Let's see, how many times are they going to try to clean the sensor (which we know is only a temporary fix) before replacing the shutter? NIKON writes: "...we will continue to offer users of the D600 a special service with which cameras are inspected, cleaned, and IF NECESSARY, shutter and related components are replaced free of charge". I think they are betting on buyers not sending their cameras back for cleaning too many times, hoping they'll give up. I thought the shutter would be replaced if I sent my D600 back, but apparently they are going to try to only clean it an indefinite amount of times first. Apparently they haven't learned their lesson yet.
If they knew only some cameras had the issue, they should be able to give a serial number range before they fixed the issue in production. It sounds like they didn't even try to fix the issue (or they would be able to say, after serial ##### , the issue has been fixed).
Or possibly they can't have a definite answer, that which the problem more a design fault. Which bets the question : how did they these days actually test the equipment before making them retail. Quite clearly they have not do this part right this time or might be they have never been right , just being lucky or .... ???
Personally I am looking forward to the NX-Mini with that 17mm fast standard , if I were to shoot mostly wide the RX100-II might be the one to had, but then why don't I just get the Ricoh GR or Nikon Coolpix A instead.
The RX10 is a rather nice piece of ware , pity Sony spoil the fun with that under par Video. Hey Sony is telling us that we can have 4K inside the smartphone ( that do a zillion of stuff ) and yet a more pricey and dedicated platform like the RX10 don't !!
Black Box: Yet another travesty from Sony. As a prototype exercise to keep the engineers on their toes, it's wonderful! As a consumer product, it really isn't.
This review keeps calling this monster a "compact". But with the weight and the size of a front-loader it's really not that small. Actually, it's just a tad larger than the Moon. And at the price, bulk and weight of the excellent Nikon D7100, why not have... the D7100?
If Sony were a car manufacturer, they'd install a jacuzzi in a Corolla. A BRILLIANT idea, if you don't care about size, weight and fuel economy!
So, again, we have a BRILLIANT product that noone cares about. And all of us who have trusted Sony for years and agreed to pay extra for the quality are becoming less and less happy about paying for Sony's neverending experimenting and get NOTHING in return.
My endless respect for Sony is rapidly coming to an end. I just don't care about them anymore.
Care to find a 16-135mm/2.8 ( constant aperture ) lens for the D7100 ... really sure this cam is not a compact, but different tool for different people and for different need. No need to fuss and fury over something that's right for someone and that which not right for you. And well judging by the result and the market the Rx series , both the current RX-10 and the RX-100-II are actually gathering plenty of traction.
Tapper123: It's kinda nice, but as an RX100 II owner it doesn't make sense to me. It's bigger once lenses are attached, and the lenses are slower. If it had faster lenses and an EVF it would be more attractive.
Not everyone use zoom , and that's where things diverse. RX-100 hit a sweet spot because it's significantly better than the prosumer and smartphone but keep it not quite as much as say NEX or M4/3. The NX-Mini is pretty much the same idea but as a more setup approach. I am looking at that 9mm lens and the 17mm and I say now add that NX adapter and the 30mm/2.0 I am back to the good old classic trio. I like the RX100 also , in fact wanting to buy one but the fixed lens is somewhat limiting still.
dynaxx: Is there any technical reason why they could not have switched to the Micro 4/3rds lens mount ?
Such a wasted opportunity.
If the Samsung lenses are as good as some of the posts below would have us believe, Samsung should be confident they can see off the challenges from Olympus, Lumix and all the third-party lens makers for M43.
Perhaps the Korea / Japan ( Kodak and Leica are/were the only non-Japanese participants in M43 ) aggro is still too powerful.
Why should Samsung go for M4/3, they have their NX and the NX pretty much gunned for the same market the M4/3 had and its not the camera or system that's the hurdle. Its Samsung's own marketing and product placement. It made little sense for Samsung to do M4/3 , it won't differentiate enough against the NX. The NX-Mini though is a good fit betwen the NX and their Galaxy devices. I can see down the road Samsung would quietly but gradually exit the P&S / compact market. That sector is dead for camera Mfr, but there is a demand, not yet met by anybody, but now looks like Samsung trying that with the NX-Mini and they might actually hit it right. At least for me if I am to choose between the very top end prosumer compact today like Samsung's own EX or Panasonic's LX ; I might as well gun for the NX-Mini. Not to discount it also allow me to move up to NX and its distinctly better than the mobile device too while keeping pretty much that form factor in check
Simonsimon: Wish the lens was faster, reminds me too much of my annoying sony nex-5r that I want to get rid of.
I guess its the old dilemma, you want it fast and you want it good, but then of course it won't be light and it won;t be small then ..
well, another mount ... I wonder if Samsung would have an adapter for their larger NX mount lens to be mounted for this NX-M mount If they do not screw up on thier marketing and deliver, it can be an interesting and very viable entry, Ok let's consider, we have for the NX mount already the 16, 20, 30 pancake, and the 60 macro as well as the rather nice 45mm & 85/1.4 .. I would discount the zoom as quite clearly a zoom for this rather smaller coverage ( the sensor ) really would benefit better with a dedicated lens specific to that sensor coverage.
Between the Nikon 1 and this NX-M they represent some really forward thinking though it remain to be seen if they can pull it off
EcoPix: I see this as a very significant camera. It shows Nikon are serious about the future of the small format camera system and are prepared to take the lead, as they were in 1959. Film shooters preferred medium format, but most of us shot most of our work on 35mm because it was good enough for most uses, including double-page spreads in glossy publications.
That's about where CX is getting now. DX struggled to be as good as 35mm film at first, now it's equalling medium format film. We now need a smaller format that's good enough. The advantages aren't cost per shot now, they're portability, speed, quietness and discretion, and focal length (angle of view/depth of field/physical lens size). Nikon and Sony are the only ones taking this seriously, and Nikon are playing the game for higher stakes than anyone.
In a fashion I do agree with you, but I have my doubt about the Nikon strategy. Good enough is always a somewhat vague concept. Sony is perhaps a good indication here. Yes the RX series is pretty cool compact. But why is Sony not bring the 1" sensor into the E mount ( they can easily do that ). Of course the answer is in the packagind and then the total expectation. The 1 system, when fashioned as enthusiast oriented is not really smaller than other mirrrorless of Micro 4/3, APS-C by enough of a significant margin, and if they need to provide the quality lens the real dedicated demand then this size / weight / package advantage pretty much disappear.
The 1 system and the 1" sensor can be some real one down the road, but for now, Nikon need to fashion the 1 more inline with their DSLR offering both in UI and in system depth ( and that go for their DX also ) and they need to significantly improve the sensor
Just Ed: There seems to be a much different market for such devices there than here. Obviously the Japanese see something in the Nikon 1 system.
I can fully understand why people here question the approach of the Nikon 1 line, it just seems so overpriced and underwhelming in performance.
Btw, I owned a V1 and just didn't like the noise the sensor produced. Pretty slick overall, but a poor sensor for any kind of low light.
And of course the sad part is its suppose to be performing good at such need. And not to even mention that its DR at anything other than Base ISO is a joke ( even at base ISO its only marginally OK )
elf kerben: This camera have some impressive specs, but in real life mostly it will fail, like the v1 or v2. The limitations you will always see first if you take it out for some weeks. Also the removed always some good stuff from the previous model to the next, the you don't have only one really good lens the 32mm 1.2.
So were are the 24mm f1,8/ - 50mm f1,4 - 85mm f1.8, 135mm f2- equivalent? Where are the SMALL and LIGHT lenses? This would really a plus for the N-System. Look to Fuji, in a short time the released more good stuff, than Nikon in 15 years DX. This is serious and it near the users of small systems.
It also never a professionell series because its crippled always in ergonomics, no future firmware updates. At the Nikon N-system you have always the feeling you will be melked and please buy our next model .. and some new batteries. :)
Can't say it better, over the years many photographic equipment had bring out new and wonderful new System type camera , be it specialist or general. The key word is system and that mean good school of lineup. The Nikon 1 is not one of the better example though
well, am Aisan and in Asia, and we expect the control dial able to do exposure compensation too .. UI with the 1 series is a bit too geared for what seems like nobody but nikon's own vision of what they believe the customer wre.
And speaking of lens, for those price those 2 mentioned are not even good. I certainly do not expect see a simple f/1.8 standard lens to optically perform inferior to the way way older Nikkor 50/1.8D they have for their DSLR ( that lens optical design dated way back to the 70's and yet its still better than the 18.5mm for the 1 system )
One thing miurrorless Mfr need to get a grip[ of. Its OK to offer lens that are tailored for light and slim. But ultimately real demanding enthusiast want their school of OPTICALLY DECENT AND PERFORMING lens. They need to provide that if they seriously want that sector to develop into long term and committed customers. And that is not Nikon Alone either
Look's a logical progression in term of the packaging, that external EVF , grip and all that, the stupidity of not including a standard Nikon SpeedLite friendly standard ISO hot shoe is not by any mean excusable. The newer PDAF on sensor sounds like OK advance though it would remain to be seenn how effective these were, when combined with the CDAF. The tricky part of course is if they work at all in those less than favorable condition. ( All these new cam they can do wonder in af, but once they are in the field, the reality sinks in )
Not sure if the extra MP really worth it. the old sensor already suffer from lack of decent DR ( even at base ISO ) and shown noise. I wonder if all the new technological advance good enough.