NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Camera Talk => Topic started by: ArendV on February 23, 2016, 09:50:38
-
http://www.nikon.com/news/2016/0223_premium_01.htm (http://www.nikon.com/news/2016/0223_premium_01.htm)
Especially the DL18-50 f/1.8-2.8 looks interesting with substantial wide angle in a small body, unfortunately no built-in viewfinder.
-
These "DL" cameras are allegedly the same CX format as their 1 Nikon relatives, but the similarities end right there. The specifications are "equivalenced" into FX terminology no doubt to produce impressing figures. Thus a reference to "24-500 f/2.8-5.6" should manifest itself into a big, imposing lens weighing in the multiple kg range, not a tiny toy !!
I simply don't know what audience such products are aimed at, or who they thick they can dupe with such specifications.
-
saw this early this morning. this just baffles me :o :o :o
-
Well, it is common that compact cameras are marked with the 35mm equivalent focal lengths, so I doubt anyone would be fooled into thinking they're something they're not. It is silly to use incorrect notation but not very important in the grand scheme of things.
The cameras seem to have much of Nikon 1 functionality, i.e. PDAF/CDAF, 20fps with AF, etc. The sensor size seems appropriate for a compact camera. I recall the (previous) latest version (BSI) in the J5 already got quite favourable reviews for its image quality.
IMO providing an EVF as an optional accessory is fine. Most people will be using the smaller two cameras at arm's length anyway, not wanting to look through a hole, so it's understandable that a superfluous feature (for the user base) is omitted as standard and is available as an accessory for those who need it. I tried the V3's accessory EVF and it was already quite good (in so far as such things go) in normal daylight. I won't be buying one because I don't want an enlarged view of an image that causes me a feeling of nausea; this feeling is avoided when looking at a small LCD some distance away (since it occupies only a small part of the visual field). For short focal lengths this is fine. For hand held tele shooting, a viewfinder is necessary and as a standard feature on the relevant model.
These cameras support snapbridge and will transfer images to a mobile device in the background even when not turned on (if it is like the D500), this seems the right approach to wireless connectivity if it doesn't require user intervention after the connection is first initialized (once for a pair of devices). Current cameras such as the D750 require the connection to be re-established after turning the camera off or when the connection is lost for some reason. I am in the habit of turning the camera off while not shooting so it is a pain to use the old system. Hopefully snapbridge will be fluid to use i.e. is completely in the background without user intervention. Otherwise people will just use mobile phone cameras for most of their social media needs even if they'd like to use a better camera.
-
Not 'silly notation', but highly misleading marketing. Why use an 'equivalence' that really is a nonsensical reference for the targeted user group anyway? Just playing a number's game probably.
Shooting with arms stretched out in front of you is possibly the worst manner in which to hold a camera steady .... No amount of in-camera stabilisation can change this simple fact.
-
Not 'silly notation', but highly misleading marketing. Why use an 'equivalence' that really is a nonsensical reference for the targeted user group anyway? Just playing a number's game probably.
Just about everyone seems to convert to 35mm equivalent focal lengths when discussing lenses instead of thinking about the format size and angle of view. It's a commonly used way of speaking so the manufacturers give the users what they want to know instead of insisting on correct notation. The target market is likely the former Coolpix market whom Nikon lost (to the smartphone) and now they're trying to regain some of it (by offering a larger sensor size, fast AF, high fps, variable focal length and effortless connectivity).
Shooting with arms stretched out in front of you is possibly the worst manner in which to hold a camera steady .... No amount of in-camera stabilisation can change this simple fact.
That may be if they're trying to hold the camera steady (assumption implied: that they should care about stability or sharpness), but this is what most casual camera users do irrespective of whether it makes sense from a technical point of view, or not. What's good about this approach is that you can see the subject with your own eyes at the same time by looking past the camera, so you are not affected by the EVF/LCD screen delays when timing shots. Anyway for me using a camera at arm's length is more comfortable than using an EVF. Of course for cameras that have an optical viewfinder, I use that as primary method of framing and timing shots, but a lot of people who are not everyday photographers find that uncomfortable, having to squeeze their eye close to the camera and press it against their face. I see now a lot of people who once used film cameras with viewfinders are insisisting on using the arm's length approach even when I recommend them to use the viewfinder. They don't want to, and will not. This is why most compact cameras don't have EVFs.
Now, if using a long lens this becomes a totally different situation and the arm's length approach doesn't work (at all).
-
The 1 Nikons provide the real data on their lenses. So the company or their marketing department speaks with forked tongues here.
Besides, we should not forget that for most people today, a reference "equivalenced" to FX/135/24x36 format is just a meaningless number that holds no significance whatsoever.
-
I think that Nikon has found a good balance of features and options with their new DL cameras, for the intended target audience. The rest of us will just have to bear with some ad hoc notation from Nikon. :o
The smallest of the three DLs look interesting. :)
-
The 1 Nikons provide the real data on their lenses. So the company or their marketing department speaks with forked tongues here.
The focal length of the lens is correctly given on the front of the lens in the DL cameras as well. It's just the names of the cameras which refer to 35mm equivalents and, curiously enough, the numbers on the zoom ring. Quite confusing it is, but it's not the first time in compact cameras.
Anyway I think I may buy this type of a camera (probably the middle one) because I want a camera with snapbridge functionality and it may take quite some time before my DSLRs have it (I have no plans on purchasing the D500). I would actually like to see Nikon continue making a DX format compact camera but for now, the Coolpix A has no immediate successor.
-
I have ordered the Nikon D500 and thus avoided any traps laid to my door by Nikon marketing :D
Any Snapbridge 'feature' will of course be turned permanently off.
-
It is a pity that lenses are not simply labelled as to the field of view that they deliver for their intended format size. I guess that we cannot roll time back over a 150 years of photographic practice.
-
Just have them labelled with the actual focal length will suffice. The remainder of the equation is determined when we mount the lens on a given camera.
As the marketing departments play a number's game, why not use 8x10" cameras as a reference ?? Then people will have truly massive equivalenced 'focal lengths' ....
-
why not use 8x10" cameras as a reference ?? Then people will have truly massive equivalenced 'focal lengths' ....
Maybe to avoid the "inflated" model names. A standard zoom like 150-600/3.5-5.6 would sound crazy. :D
-
The 1 Nikons provide the real data on their lenses.
As does the DL series.
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/premium-compact-cameras/dl18-50-f%252f1.8-2.8.html#tab-ProductDetail-ProductTabs-TechSpecs
The difference is in the press release, where the 1 Nikkor lenses were called by their actual data then.
http://nikon.com/news/2013/0108_lens_02.htm
A few interesting attributes (DL18-50):
4k video recording maintains photo focal range (unlike D5)
Slow motion in 1280x720 by 240p (8x slower).
Elimination of rolling shutter issues in video recording
manual shutter available (until 1/2000s)
SDXC cards again (I don't like the micro-SD cards of the J5)
same battery like the J5 (EN-EL24)
The 6.7mm wide end is much faster than the 1 Nikkor 6.7-13mm (f1.8 vs f3.5), approx. 2 f-stops faster
The 10mm setting might be faster than the 1 Nikkor 10mm/2.8 (tbc)
The 18.5mm setting is a bit more than one stop slower than the 1 Nikkor 18.5mm/1.8
ergonomics seem to be better than the J5 (tbc with actual usage)
normal sized flash hot shoe (finally)
nano coat (iirc, only 1 Nikkor 32mm/1.2 and 70-300mm have nano coating)
flourine coat (n/a on 1 Nikkor)
MFD: 3cm at wide end
Will be interesting to see, how it performs.
rgds,
Andy
-
I would actually like to see Nikon continue making a DX format compact camera but for now, the Coolpix A has no immediate successor.
+1
My Coolpix A has its issues but I fixed that with a Voigtländer optical viewfinder and the MF ring where I know AF will let me down, but the pictures it produces are of great quality.
-
So why use the "equivalenced" figures in model designations and labels?? This is just a mess.
-
I have ordered the Nikon D500 and thus avoided any traps laid to my door by Nikon marketing :D
Any Snapbridge 'feature' will of course be turned permanently off.
I've also ordered the D500...so we ought to rendesvouz to do joint exploration of its features.
Snapbridge will be your friend when you get a smartphone 😁
-
No Bear can keep their Fierceness with a 'smart'phone ....
-
I agree that the different numbers on one camera - actual focal length and 35mm equivalent - are confusing.
But in the end I guess we all do our equivalence calculations if we own camera's with different sensor sizes.
Having started with 35mm film, that is the reference for me and so I calculate field of view accordingly.
But if we look at aperture/F-numbers the equivalence can go wild.
E.g. for depth-of-field the DL18-50 f/1.8-2.8 is actually a DL18-50 f4.9-7.6 in 35mm equivalence.
-
I have ordered the Nikon D500 and thus avoided any traps laid to my door by Nikon marketing :D
:)
Don't underestimate the power of marketeers....
They introduced in the DL the Expeed 6A (now with a with new quad-core design! :) ) even before they shipped the previous fastest Expeed 5 in the D5 and D500.
Thinking about cancelling my D500 order - seems to be outdated technology when it becomes available. According to Nikon marketing. :)
rgds, Andy
-
Certainly not something I'll consider buying
With that sensor I'm still happy with my V1 and exchangeable lenses
I do like the regular flash hotshoe
With such announcement it would seem Nikon has plenty of development resources, but the direction they get seems a bit odd
-
Certainly not something I'll consider buying
With that sensor I'm still happy with my V1 and exchangeable lenses
I do like the regular flash hotshoe
Same here. Sure, the V1 has a pretty quirky and at times annoying interface. But it has interchangeable lenses, and with the FT1 I can use my regular Nikkor lenses for some reach. It also has a (useable) EVF I need in many situations, especially with long lenses. The only things I'd really wish for are better results at higher ISO and a regular hotshoe.
In fact, I like the V1 so much I just bought a second body. Used, is nearly mint condition, with just over 8000 clicks, for under 100 euros. And a second FT1, for 80 euros. Updated the firmware, and I'm ready to go.
Hermann
-
:)
Don't underestimate the power of marketeers....
They introduced in the DL the Expeed 6A (now with a with new quad-core design! :) ) even before they shipped the previous fastest Expeed 5 in the D5 and D500.
Thinking about cancelling my D500 order - seems to be outdated technology when it becomes available. According to Nikon marketing. :)
rgds, Andy
The fast development of new sensor tech is actually minute incremental steps towards a slightly better sensor than 10 years ago. The last few days I have been comparing 11 years old jpeg taken in normal lighting (from sunrise to sunset) with the latest sensor tech (web size 1600 pixels longest side). I see no difference!!! I've been butt@&"!ed for more than a decade!! I am embarassed to admit that the marketing people fool me every time. The quest for the picture have been replaced with the race to aquire the latest and best technology :-[
-
Interesting cameras... but it is strange that they come with fixed zooms which are significantly faster, or with greater range than any of the interchangeable CX lenses. For example the 8.8-31.3/1.8-2.8 (aka 24-85) is significantly more interesting than the CX 10-30 and 11-27.5, offering greater zoom range in both directions and two stops faster at the long end...
-
@BW,
10 years ago? This was the time of the D2Xs/D2Hs/D200.
(http://www.pbase.com/andrease/image/133469172/original.jpg)
Agree, that with 1600px resolution during daylight the improvements weren't as visible, but don't forget the increase in Dynamic Range we got since then. (a bit more than 3 EV)
http://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D200,Nikon%20D810
At the "edge of the envelope" (dawn/night), I would say, that we got decent improvement over the last 10 years (comparing mentally the D800E with the D200). This is actually only 7 years of progress. See how old the D800E already is :)
Another dimension of visible progress is resolution. When the D1 was introduced, its image size was larger than any (reasonable) monitor on the market of that time. Today, with 40" 4k display's for a few hundred $, the native resolution of the D1/D1h only covers 31% of the available screen real estate :)
rgds,
Andy
PS: The image of a D1h in full/native resolution on a 4k monitor
-
I have no problems with the naming of the cameras and am not negatively impressed by the fact that they are not interchangeable lenses.
I have owned an RX100 for three years and have enjoyed using it despite its sub-par AF and not very useful controls.
The RX100 IV got my attention for various interesting improvements bust still no hybrid AF and same controls that I don't like very much.
The new Nikons (the small ones) seem to have reasonable controls at least for a compact camera and if the AF is like the Nikon 1 cameras it is good enough for me.
My only bone so far is that these two cameras are about 100g heavier than I'd like them to be. Oh well...
If they are as good as they promise and no major issues are discovered, once the hype is over I'll probably get at least one to replace the RX100, if I can grab a bargain.
-
Exactly my point! Technology keeps improving at an incredible rate, but 99,5% of the end use results are covered by a clear margin, with 10 year old technology. My pictures are viewed by most people on a SRGB screen with limited resolution or end up with 10x15 prints in my album. I have sold prints up to 60x40cm with 12 mp cameras, had rollups made by cropped files from 10 mp cameras, several meters in size. Most of the time I stich photos together with a software if I need a high resolution file of scene. If I ask the client what kind of size, file type and color space they want, they usually dont have a clue. Professional print services sometimes have a limit for file size wich they can download. On several occasions I have had to physically hand them a memory stick with the files, because of email restrictions on attachment size. Most people dont have broadband internet service. Photographers care about such things, but they are never clients. Clients dont know squat about these things, all they care about is the picture. On the other hand, me as a photographer, love high resolution, acutance of detail and lack of distortion. I pride my self to deliver the best possible work I can achieve and waste hours of my life behind a computer screen on details, no one will ever notice. I guess I'm the one who walks willingly into the trap laid out of the nikon marketing people ??? End of rant and off topic ;)
-
Some hands on experience and pictures by one of the campaign photographers
http://www.thepassionatephotographer.com/first-look-the-new-nikon-compact-dl-24-85-f1-8-2-8-and-dl18-50-f1-8-2-8-cameras-are-here/
rgds,
Andy
-
I find the DL18-50 very interesting but... why do not just give us a 6.7-18.5mm f1.8-2.8 lens for the 1 system at half the price?
-
Independent of the price you desire:
The faster lens of the DL18-50 retracts its elements to the internal space where the 1 Nikon has its mount.
You can't have both (interchangeable lens and a compact size).
rgds, Andy
-
Surely one of the advantages of mirrorless is that lenses can be designed very close to the sensor. Doesn't matter if the lens is interchangeable or fixed, so surely an interchangeable version of the 18-50 would still fit a 1 Nikon camera?
I agree an equivalent interchangeable lens would be bigger...
-
DL models are on display along with D5/D500 at CP+2016:
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20160225_745345.html
-
No Bear can keep their Fierceness with a 'smart'phone ....
;D ;D ;D
-
Surely one of the advantages of mirrorless is that lenses can be designed very close to the sensor. Doesn't matter if the lens is interchangeable or fixed, so surely an interchangeable version of the 18-50 would still fit a 1 Nikon camera?
I agree an equivalent interchangeable lens would be bigger...
Not necessarily true the same design can be done with the 1 Nikons. These cameras do have the camera bayonet spaced well ahead of their sensor (register distance is 17 mm). Thus the mentioned zoom lens will have to be a retrofocus design and that in itself adds to the bulk and size.
-
I find the DL18-50 very interesting but... why do not just give us a 6.7-18.5mm f1.8-2.8 lens for the 1 system at half the price?
Interchangeable and compact too would be nice, yes, but I was considering the "exploded" dimension of the DL18-50 lens, which is what I get when "in use". ;)
An Interchangeable 6.7-18.5mm f1.8-2.8 lens shouldn't be so much bigger... and maybe heavier too. I wouldn't bother a few extra millimeters or grams...
-
Interchangeable and compact too would be nice, yes, but I was considering the "exploded" dimension of the DL18-50 lens, which is what I get when "in use". ;)
An Interchangeable 6.7-18.5mm f1.8-2.8 lens shouldn't be so much bigger... and maybe heavier too. I wouldn't bother a few extra millimeters or grams...
(Disclaimer: I had a chance to fiddle around with preproduction units for half an hour. Please keep all the associated conditions and consequences in mind. No pictures allowed to be stored on cards, things might change, no final software, potentially not final components/hardware. Me not understanding things correctly, me not communicating correctly, etc, etc, ...)
wrt to the DL18-50:
There are 2 positions of the lens,when the camera is turned off, and when the camera is powered on. While I would agree that in the powered-on position the lens/camera combo's are about similar in size, the larger difference is in the power-off mode. It looks like the DL retract the extensible "tubes" of the lens into the space, where the 1 Nikon has it mount mechanics. Makes a difference carrying around in turned-off state, less so in turned-on state.
Overall, the DL 18-50 made a very good first impression. Especially the lens. Looking forward when the final version will be available.
rgds,
Andy
-
Andy - did you get to play with the PC feature?
-
I doubt this will change the trend of most people shooting with their mobile phones.
-
I doubt this will change the trend of most people shooting with their mobile phones.
With phones selling well above 1 billion pcs/year, no camera manufacturer will likely be in a position to change this broader societal trend. But Nikon seems to test out with the DL, how they can improve the conversion rates from this large untapped user base.
For most of this audience the step towards D-SLR is to big of a step - this market doesn't grow overall.
Traditional compact cameras are too close in their capabilities to the abilities of smartphones. Smartphone user seem to put their compact camera more and more to rest. Let's take the overall camera market development as an indication about this development.
So, Nikon is introducing a premium compact line. As usual, the market will ultimately decide if this approach will be successful.
rgds,
Andy
-
Andy - did you get to play with the PC feature?
Chip,
sorry no, I did not test out the PC feature - I simple forgot. I was too busy checking out basic stuff, like AF performance, handling, flexibility, low light, macro, IQ in different light conditions, etc ... Spend most of my time with the DL18-50, then DL24-85 and almost nothing with the DL24-500 (I am not a target user for this category).
rgds, Andy
-
... Makes a difference carrying around in turned-off state, less so in turned-on state.
Overall, the DL 18-50 made a very good first impression. Especially the lens. Looking forward when the final version will be available.
...
I Agree.
-
No GPS ?? Not interested.
-
No GPS ?? Not interested.
GPS is not relevant to me, so I didn't ask for it.
But I would guess GPS data could be added via the SnapBridge App for those interested in location data (tbc).
From Nikon's website:
SnapBridge uses Bluetooth® low energy (BLE) technology to maintain a constant connection with a compatible smart device.This communication isn’t just one way either: time and location information from your smartphone can be tagged to each photo. This connection is unaffected by using email, texting, web browsing or any other smart device apps, and photo transfers continue even when the phone is in a pocket or purse.
rgds, Andy
-
Not interested in Snapbridge either. I want GPS support.
Oh wait a sec. Not interested in the DL range at all. Now, that was the answer I searched for :D
I have ordered a D500 and with that camera, GPS support is provided. (and whatever Snapbridge it purports to have will of course be removed immediately).
-
The DL. Videos later tonight :o :o :o
Poor thing kept hanging. Pre production model firmware
-
For those who are interested, a few first impressions from the pre-production units:
Initially I played with all 3 DL models, but quickly centered my attention to the DL 18-50. Which is the most interesting for me.
For the DL18-50:
1) The basic operation of the camera is fast (on, off, menue, AF, ...)
2) The lens has 11 elements, 7 of them are special lenses (hri, ED, aspheric, etc .. pls check technical data). The DL18-50 is the only DL model with Nano coating. This lens was the most impressive lens I took from this short encounter. Impressive not by the data, but by IQ (as seen on the monitor and zoomed in)
3) If the macro option is turned on in the menues, the lens focus until 3-4 cm in front to the front lens. Good quality IQ and impressive macro wide angle perspective.
4) If AF is set to AutoAF, AF is very fast. Would not be surprised if as fast as DSLRs with fast lenses.
5) In low light situations (i.e. ISO 6400, f1.8, 1/20 sec ; EV = 0), AutoAF was fast and precise. Could not find a darker spot in the room. The faster lens vs. the 1 Nikkor 6.6-13mm support the operation of AF and sensor. It is approx 2 stops faster.
6) Switching the AF to AFS and 1 AF field, some of the AF performance goes away. It looks like the CPU is fast enough to interpolate AF information when many AF fields are active vs. relying on the info from one AF field (which might find contrast or not).
7) Nice image on monitor when the camera is set to ISO 6400. Again, it could be the faster Expeed, allowing higher quality real time NR algorithms.
8.) Usually small camera zooms are hard pressed with cross light situations. Not this one - I tried intentionally to maximize flare. Good suppression. Nano?
9) Compared to the DL24-85:
The DL18 is more "special" with its focal range. The DL24-85 has more competition. The DL18 is heavier - more glass in the lens. 18mm vs 24mm is significant at the wide end - think rooms/city/street. But 50-85mm is missing then. 18mm & macro is very nice.
Overall, the DL18-50 was the one which triggered more interest with me. Will wait for final models for another quick look and then decide.
My temporary ranking based on this quick encounter:
1) DL 18-50
2) DL 24-85
3) DL 24-500 (pls consider: I have no "need" for this)
cheers,
Andy
-
Thanks for sharing your first impressions Andy !
-
http://richardhaw.com/2016/02/26/cp-2016-pt-1/
some videos that i took for the DL :o :o :o
it is too expensive i think.
-
Thanks for sharing your first impressions Andy !
Arend, you are welcomed.
A few additional observations:
1) Glad, that Nikon discontinued the MicroSD card size from the J5 and went back to SDXC. MicroSD are just too small for frequent handling.
2) No indication, that the camera battery can be charged via the USB port. Allowing to travel without the large MH-31 charger. I'd love to get this USB charging option for all 1 Nikon cameras as well. Even if it would be a bit slower.
3) If the charger is the same as for the J5 (MH-31), it will be about the same size as the camera. Additionally, the European customers have to deal with this awkward connector on top of the US retractable plug connector which is unnecessary hard to get off (same issue with this form of charger with the D3xxx, D5xxx and 1 Nikon series). If you cant get the connector off, its hard to get it in a small bag. Why does these things need to be so large?
4) Filters can be mounted with a 46mm size
5) focal length adjustment is electrical, with 2 modes of operation. Either turning the focal length wheel on the lens, or use the small lever on the upper right side of the camera (W/T).
6) The EV compensation is easy to find and operate. Maybe for some people too easy. As there is no lock lever/knob, some might run into the issue to turn the EV compensation wheel without intention.
rgds,
Andy
-
Richard, you are a famous CP+ reporter ;)
http://nikonrumors.com/2016/02/26/nikon-dl-accessories-and-hands-on-reports-from-cp.aspx/ (http://nikonrumors.com/2016/02/26/nikon-dl-accessories-and-hands-on-reports-from-cp.aspx/)
-
Richard, you are a famous CP+ reporter ;)
http://nikonrumors.com/2016/02/26/nikon-dl-accessories-and-hands-on-reports-from-cp.aspx/ (http://nikonrumors.com/2016/02/26/nikon-dl-accessories-and-hands-on-reports-from-cp.aspx/)
ah haha!
i am actually one of the contributors to his (nikon and pentax rumors) site. next time i am going to make more pentax related stuff for him and my blog. :o :o :o
if there is one positive thing that i can say about the DL's is that they are pretty responsive for their class. usually, compacts tend to be sluggish ::)
i wanted to try the EVF but there were limited samples available and i do not want to argue with some Japanese old men just to get to try them (they can get aggressive at camera shows 8) ).
i really dont know if this is going to be a success or not. the asking price is just too high to be honest. last year's P900 or P800 (forgot the name) is also an amazing performer. sometimes you dont know how nikon's management thinks
-
Not 'silly notation', but highly misleading marketing. Why use an 'equivalence' that really is a nonsensical reference for the targeted user group anyway? Just playing a number's game probably.
Shooting with arms stretched out in front of you is possibly the worst manner in which to hold a camera steady .... No amount of in-camera stabilisation can change this simple fact.
I agree, I find the use of FX/35mm equivalence to be increasing annoying. Before digital cameras, no one talked about focal length equivalence for different formats. You simply knew a 80mm was "normal" for medium format, while 150mm was "normal" for 4x5, etc. shorter FLs were wider, longer FLs narrower. What I find particularly annoying about using the equivalence is that only the field of view is equivalent. It completely ignores the fact that even though the FoV may be the same, the DOF is very different, thus the different lenses on different formats are not really equivalent.
As to shooting at arms length, I agree with you. However, I would note that the DL 24-500 does have a viewfinder, so you can hold it properly while shooting.