NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Camera Talk => Topic started by: Jan Anne on June 22, 2015, 19:16:39
-
Time for a good rumour, apparently the D5 is on its way with a 20MP FX sensor, 15fps, 100K native high ISO, 4K video, etc.
Read the details on Nikon Rumors here:
http://nikonrumors.com/2015/06/22/the-nikon-d5-is-rumored-to-have-a-native-high-iso-of-102400-and-4k-video.aspx/ (http://nikonrumors.com/2015/06/22/the-nikon-d5-is-rumored-to-have-a-native-high-iso-of-102400-and-4k-video.aspx/)
As a former D3s owner these specs sound pretty impressive to me, what do you guys think?
-
We really really need to have a camera break the 1 M ISO barrier ... what would be the future of photography with that hurdle still standing ?? :D
I probably hope for a Df2 in a not too distant future. But a camera without video of course.
-
I remember a couple of things on my wish list after my 2,5 years using the D3s:
- A wider spread of the AF points with AF points at least on and preferably beyond the rule of third grid lines
- Dual AF-ON buttons, with different AF points saved for portrait and landscape modes (so 4 AF points in total ready to go)
- Flash compensation button when using the small SB-400 flash (fixed on the D4s if I'm not mistaken, no issue with built in flash cams)
- Second wheel used to turn auto-ISO on and off (fixed in D800E if I remember correctly)
Especially the first two are high on the priority list whenever I get back into the wildlife / zoo animal arena, focus is critical for animal portraits and animals tend to look around at lot so having two AF-ON buttons with AF points ready to go on both sides of the rule of third grid lines would for me be a gift from heaven.
-
I want a hybrid viewfinder = MUP + EVF or MDWN + OVF.
I want absolute silent operation with global electronic shutter.
I want IBIS and Olympus Style AF speed and precision.
so or so. If it is not a total loser in reviews it might well become my present for christmas or easter
-
...
- Dual AF-ON buttons, with different AF points saved for portrait and landscape modes (so 4 AF points in total ready to go)
...
Fixed in the D810, it can be set to remember the focus point in each orientation, this goes for two sides in portrait. Now, one AF-ON button serves the purpose you're looking for (so that makes 3 iso 2 orientations).
-
With regards to the 173 AF points I suspect there will be a surprise for us. Jamming such a dense cluster of registrators within the "normal" AF real estate leads me to think hybridism.
-
PS ... A touch screen for AF track selection with advanced pattern recognition for birds and bees
-
20Mpx and 15fps works for me... it can be the difference between catching the berry in the air with the tongue or not.. however, i managed to do it with the D4 at 10fps or maybe less with AF, Auto-ISO on..
example: http://www.pbase.com/bobfriedman/image/155740780 (http://www.pbase.com/bobfriedman/image/155740780)
-
...
- Dual AF-ON buttons, with different AF points saved for portrait and landscape modes (so 4 AF points in total ready to go)
...
Fixed in the D810, it can be set to remember the focus point in each orientation, this goes for two sides in portrait. Now, one AF-ON button serves the purpose you're looking for (so that makes 3 iso 2 orientations).
I 'm afraid I do not understand what you are saying Hans :-\
I would like to have two AF-ON buttons (for instance by programming the AE-L/AF-L button as such) with each activating different AF points (one on the left and one on the right) and those two pre selected AF points should change when I go into portrait mode to two other pre-selected AF points.
Quickly scanned the D810 manual but couldn't find the option to use the AE-L/AF-L button as a second AF-ON button but couldn't find anything solid on this.
-
I have never even thought about two Af points... When would you need that?
I can see that a larger spread would be nice but often the lens has less sharpness as you go further out of the frame and you stop down and then don't need precision since you have more dof...
Anyway - looking forward to see it. and the new D2f as well ;)
-
I have never even thought about two Af points... When would you need that?
I've spend many hours in the zoo waiting for the right moment to capture some animal portraits and those f*ckers won't sit still for a second and with the very shallow DOF correct focus is critical with no time for "focus and recompose", changing AF points to the other side, manual focus, etc (at least not at my skill level).
Here's an example with the D3s and 200/2VR, focus point is roughly on the top right rule of thirds point to get the eye in focus and have the bird look into the image for a pleasing composition.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4034/4413733501_38a157660f_o.jpg)
But when the bird looks the other way I need the AF point on the opposite side of the frame, by the time I've changed AF point the bird usually looks the other way again and decides to do so for a while until I change the AF point again and on it goes. With two AF-ON buttons I would just recompose using the other AF-ON button and take a 3 to 5 shot burst.
-
For this couple of years, I've been keen on the new models of Nikon DSLR, not really for my next purchase but for the change of the basic control layout which I find not logical or sophisticated. I've never really liked the splattered layout of the three buttons around the shutter release. I hope a reasonable change is applied to D5.
-
I second Jan Anne's wish list. With all these buttons lying around, a reconfiguration to dual AF-ON should not be that difficult... including, possibly, firmware revisions for older cameras.
As the Df has become my main camera (instead of the D800), I wish it had a less cramped AF zone. The broad rectangular AF detection zone of the Olympus OM-Ds are just right, for instance.
Until now Nikon issued a "reduced size" camera, eg D3 > D700, D4 > Df built around the same sensor. I'd be curious to see what happens here. The D-one digit family is just not the right size for me.
-
Nikon (and Canon) HAVE to respond to Sony's leaps in mirrorless "fullframe".
-
Indeed, and providing a decent hybrid solution could be one way. But let us firszt see the D5.
-
I have only briefly experimented with it but in the latest FX cameras (e.g. D810) the "dynamic 51-point 3D" or whatever it is called is fairly well able to maintain focus on a subject in those cameras which have higher resolution matrix meters. I think it would be possible to first point the manually selected point to the bird once and activate the focusing, then as the bird turns its head, just turn the camera to recompose the shot and let the camera take care of finding where the bird is in the frame (within the area covered by the AF sensor array). It might not work 100% of the time but neither does single point focusing. It's worth trying it if you have one of the 2014 cameras.
The D4(s) doesn't have an AF-L/AE-L button to reprogram. Although I don't feel the need for two thumb buttons, if they can be reprogrammed in a flexible way, it may find uses. :)
I don't think an increased AF point spread is possible, unless it is based on focusing using the main imaging sensor, which in turn has its limitations. However, what Nikon might be persuaded to do is increase the spread of cross-type sensors, although in the latest interviews they seemed to regard that there is a compromise between achieving low light sensitivity and a lot of cross type sensors, and they seemed to prefer a layout where low light sensitivity of the focusing is optimized.
One way to solve the need to have larger focus point spread is to use a high resolution camera such as D810, and when required, compose in such a way that you can achieve a very-off-center composition by cropping a bit from one or two sides; this typically requires no more than (say) 10-30% of the image area to be lost, and with a 36MP sensor you still have 24MP or more (maybe next year we will have 50+MP, so there is even less damage). The 1.2X crop mode on the D810 is also something that can be used and works quite well. Finally there is the D7200, although that camera seems to have a lower resolution matrix meter which can affect the performance of the automatic subject recognition and tracking, if you want to use that.
-
With regards to the 173 AF points I suspect there will be a surprise for us. Jamming such a dense cluster of registrators within the "normal" AF real estate leads me to think hybridism.
Sometimes these "rumors" are way off, sometimes spot on. Usually the more accurate rumors appear a few days before announcement.
15fps seems a lot for a DSLR as well, so it may be in mirror up operation in which case only the on-sensor autofocus would be available (or none at all). If Nikon can make the mirror move up and down at 15fps it would be an accomplishment certainly. I don't need high fps but for dance photography and figure skating it would be occasionally useful, but for that I think 10fps is already fine. I think it's highly likely that the top speed is achieved with the mirror up (which limits the applications of the high speed feature).
Hybrid EVF and OVF may compromise the quality of both. Fuji says they haven't made a physical update to the X-Pro1 because the XT-1 EVF cannot be incorporated in a hybrid OVF/EVF design and the X-Pro1 users would expect an OVF to be available.
I think a better solution would be interchangeable viewfinders with EVF and OVF options for different applications and user requirements. This is what I would prefer actually, although it would no doubt be expensive.
-
I don't think the improvements in nominal top high ISO rating in the camera translate to corresponding real world image quality improvements; the raw data is improving a lot slower than the nominal ISO specs but image processing and improved dynamic range in the sensors have made the results at ultra high ISOs a bit more acceptable.
I would like a Df II also. I mainly would like the AF system from the D750 (or whatever is in the D5, if possible, but the D750 AF system seems to be more likely to fit in the space available in the Df body) to be inserted in the Df and the battery to be the same as used in the D810/D750/D7200 so that I could just have one charger and one type of batteries. Otherwise I really like the Df but I'm hoping there is an update.
I also think it is nice that there are some cameras where the surface real estate is optimized for still photography. The ergonomics can be better that way. I think video shooters would also prefer cameras with controls optimized for video. I can see the merits of hybrid designs but I also don't see why every camera should need to be a hybrid.
-
Canon 1Dx does 12 fps raw, 14 fps jpeg. And that camera is way past due on a Tech refresh
Would be curious to know under what conditions 15 fps.
-
Canon 1Dx does 12 fps raw, 14 fps jpeg.
The 14 fps in the 1D X is only available with mirror up (no viewfinder or AF). I guess it could be used for wide angle action shots (that could be set for a lot of depth of field) e.g. snowboard jump shot sequences and similar situations.
One area where high fps can now be used is in the studio with modern flash equipment (Elinchrom ELC can be fired at up to 20fps).
-
...
- Dual AF-ON buttons, with different AF points saved for portrait and landscape modes (so 4 AF points in total ready to go)
...
Fixed in the D810, it can be set to remember the focus point in each orientation, this goes for two sides in portrait. Now, one AF-ON button serves the purpose you're looking for (so that makes 3 iso 2 orientations).
I 'm afraid I do not understand what you are saying Hans :-\
I would like to have two AF-ON buttons (for instance by programming the AE-L/AF-L button as such) with each activating different AF points (one on the left and one on the right) and those two pre selected AF points should change when I go into portrait mode to two other pre-selected AF points.
Quickly scanned the D810 manual but couldn't find the option to use the AE-L/AF-L button as a second AF-ON button but couldn't find anything solid on this.
Ah, then i understood wrong. I thought you wanted them linked to the orientation of the camera. The thing you're asking for is indeed not possible. But, the orientation thing is pretty sweet though.
-
15 frames from MUP with EVF. Great improvement.
I like to see the D5 to be a LEAP forward like the D3 was from the D2X not a small step to the side like the D4 from tbe D3s.
-
It does not look interesting... enough for me. I need to see at least one of these:
EVF
More megapixels.
Lower ISO
Better LiveView
-
Hybrid finder must come.
I do not really need better Frame rates if the AF does not hit much better.
I feel 24MP is not a huge step up from 16.
why not have 54MP and a 17 downsampled as fast as the D4s?
-
Nikon (and Canon) HAVE to respond to Sony's leaps in mirrorless "fullframe".
Indeed, the new Sony is quite interesting, the spread of AF focus points is quite impressive as can be seen here: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7945517371/opinion-did-sony-just-do-the-impossible
-
The example videos of the AF tracking shows show relatively wide angle of view (not a close-up) and a fairly deep depth of field. I would like to see how it works on a 300/2.8 wide open in a similar situation (motor racing), with Sony lenses as well as adapted (e.g. Canon).
I unfortunately don't seem to be able to use an EVF. I just today tried the A7 and A6000 at a camera store and started feeling a bit ill after operating the cameras using the EVF. It's like the viewfinder image has some wobble as the camera is moved in different directions, also the action of zoom showed up in the viewfinder with a delay. The image was a bit flickery in the camera store lighting and had a bluish color cast. The cameras seemed to be highly responsive in other respects, the focus was snappy and there was no appreciable delay in the shutter firing after pressing the release button. Using the camera felt a bit like the ground was wobbly under me I could feel it in my legs and stomach (the EVF has some distracting effect on my vestibular system I guess). I don't know if I could get over these but I don't want to try again in a while. Perhaps I've used OVF cameras too long and it's become an integral part of my brain, how it's supposed to work. I don't get the nausea if I use the back LCD of a camera, I guess it's because it's just a small part of the visual field so the effect is much more mild.
A classical style D5 would fit me well. Improvements to the AF, some additional resolution and speed, improved viewfinder clarity and it would be a perfect match.
-
Indeed for an EVF to be interesting on a camera like the D5 you need to have a super fast playback of what the sensor picks up, this 'lapse in time' where everything is smeared and not 'in sync' with the movements, zoom and panning etc. of the camera is not for action or PJ style photography at all.
I really like the size of the first Sony A7X models and for sure they work with some lenses, just see Jan Ann Zeiss 35mm 1.4 OMG it's nice.
But definetly not with most of my wide Leica M lenses - focus peaking is not for me on those lenses - everything was more or less red :)
-
I'd associate EVF with still shots and MF lenses (where loupe or focus peaking are a decisive advantage, especially in low light and with wide angles). For action shots, something to which the D5 seems predestinated, it is less relevant.
-
Maybe there arrives a point in time in which we can have a hybrid system with light amplification and zooming capability overlaid an optical viewfinder. Push a button and the finder lights up. We are not there yet - far from it.
EVFs are getting better, but they still can be an eyesore and cause a perception of nausea for *some* users. I'm afraid I find myself there and apparently I'm not alone.
If a D5 arrives, we will quickly see what the Nikon boffins have come up with. The evolution of digitals cameras is beginning to slow down as the camera technology mature and in a stressed time of austerity, Nikon must have some real aces up their sleeve to push another high-end and likely expensive camera onto the market.
-
:o
Xiiii.... D5 already in the horizon and I'm not yet mastering at 100% my D4s
-
When traditional phase AF was born (Minolta?) there were a few years of infancy/teen challenges. This is now a mature technology and it and it is now time for the on-sensor AF to take its step into the grown-up world. So I am really looking forward to what the slow ones (Canon/Nikon) have for us late this/early next year.
I still claim that a hybrid solution is best.
-
Xiiii.... D5 already in the horizon and I'm not yet mastering at 100% my D4s
Well, you don't have to buy every model in the series. I think quite a lot of people are still using the D3s and even the original D3.
With cars, I think it's good to keep one in the family for 15-20 years, then maybe sell it and get a new one if the repair costs are getting too high.
-
Well, you don't have to buy every model in the series. I think quite a lot of people are still using the D3s and even the original D3.
With cars, I think it's good to keep one in the family for 15-20 years, then maybe sell it and get a new one if the repair costs are getting too high.
Well, sure... but either I'm too slow to learn or Nikon is too fast releasing new models... :D
-
I keep the D3S as it is a reliable and good work horse. At one point it may replace my battered D2H used for product shots in the studio.
The D800 might end being converted to IR. It's not a bad camera, not at all, but I never really bonded with it.
At present I can not make any reasonable argument for taking an interest in a machine-gunning D5, 1 M (?)ISO and 4K video notwithstanding.
-
oh man I already want that D5 sooooo bad. I LOVE shooting action stuff. But the prices are so high for this line. The D3S could do *everything*. I still miss it. So I'm hoping the D5 will prove to be a do everything model.
-
i would wait until the bugs are out.. i bought the D4 right away and it was no where near as good as the D4s... could have been that manufacturing run of the D4 for the olympics was rushed but i would have expected more for a $6k US cam.
-
i bought the D4 right away and it was no where near as good as the D4s... could have been that manufacturing run of the D4 for the olympics was rushed but i would have expected more for a $6k US cam.
Well, it was made in Sendai and you know what happened there in 2011. I hope similar circumstances do not repeat any time soon.
-
Another version would be a darn fast version of the D810, like 8 or 9 fps and better AF point distribution, pus a new line of lenses supporting AF with builtin intelligence. Why not software upgrade our lenses if we can software upgrade our cars?
-
i bought the D4 right away and it was no where near as good as the D4s... could have been that manufacturing run of the D4 for the olympics was rushed but i would have expected more for a $6k US cam.
Well, it was made in Sendai and you know what happened there in 2011. I hope similar circumstances do not repeat any time soon.
nor do i... was a horrible chain of events for the Japanese people.. forgive me if i sounded insensitive.
-
Introducing new technology just because it's there is not always the wise decision...
Remember almost all the fancy new stuff what ever gismo you buy over here in the west including USA is transported on a ship from Asia powered by a good old two stroke Diesel engine! Why, because it get's the job done. No new fancy technology can compare to it's reliability and running costs.
Sure it's come a long way since Rudolf took out a patent for it, but the engine parts and principles are still the same, we have added computers to run it and it's running cleaner but that's it. BTW the computers on those things are making more shit than fun for the crew ;) Apparently no one could foresee just how much environmental beating a computer gets in an engine room.
So let's assume Nikon and Canon are wise companies... Then they stay on the path and continue to use proven fail safe technology in their professional series of equipment - Sure they introduce new features but seriously don't expect huge technology leaps for those intended segments IMHO
They will introduce the sketchy new gismos in the consumer products...
Sorry for the sidetrack :) I'll look forward to see what you come up with should be included, traditionally many of you here are spot on with your predictions!
-
With cars, I think it's good to keep one in the family for 15-20 years, then maybe sell it and get a new one if the repair costs are getting too high.
For safety reasons mostly, I would argue against that. The improments in that area in the last 20-30 years has been massive and it continues. One feature we will not be without in our next car is adaptive cruise control. I believe most of the car accidents are rear-end crashes, having a radar on the car so it will automatically brake if you don't do it (we're all terrible at driving) would prevent many accidents. /off topic
-
Erik: The F3 had a fail safe mechanical time (only one) for no one really trusted electronic shutters at the time. That is why I got a FM-2 with all times build mechanically and beautifully so (1/250 X-sync and 1/4000 max).
Today we trust a Tesla car with our lives, not only with our next shot, software controlled over the air as well as the SpaceX rockets that sometimes receive updates only minutes before take off.
What do I learn from this? It needs geniuses like Elon and his crew to build such a thing safely but we also came a long way and stand on the shoulders of giants.
Meaning for the topic: The D5 can have EVF additionally if it does not disrupt the workings of the OVF. New tech supplements old tech to build trust.
F.
PS: The freighters that burn the dirtiest Oil available will hopefully be replaced by proven technology: Clean nuclear engines we find in every other ice breaker and Submarine.
-
Keep the discussion to the rumoured camera, gents.
-
We behave.
-
I know, but a friendly reminder once in a while won't hurt anyone.
-
Here is a sketch where I've shown what I would like to see.
The sensor; envision how it would slide in like a memory card and sealed off from the elements by a bottom unit containing a high capacity battery.
-
Nice :)
How difficult can it be - Now lets see what the design department and Production comes up with ;)
-
major changes like that have a huge non-recurrent cost associated with them rippling right through to manufacturing.. dollars and sense my friends
-
Sten: will not happen. Film and sensor adjustments are a very very fine tuning work, ask the big Dane who assembles and disassembles these things
-
It is in fact quite easy to envision interchangable finders akin to say the old F5. You push a button to release the finder and it slides out to be replaced by another of choice. I had hoped this principle so useful on the pro SLRs would carry over to digital, but apart from an intermediary hybrid by Kodak (DCS 760, using an F5 chassis) it didn't and we instead got Live View as a substitute for the right-angle or loupe finders.
Now, why not an interchangable EVF for those bent to have it? I cannot imagine the implementation should pose much of a problem. Slide in the finder to signal the camera it should go into LV mode, then reroute LV signals to the electronic finder substitute. Those not wanting an EVF needn't do anything.
-
Weathersealing could pose a problem I guess?
-
It'll be interesting to see what manufacturer, if any, produces a combo finder system.
I can think of four ways to do it, with current or near-future technology:
1. Interchangeable finder heads, as Bjørn has described: Probably the simplest, most elegant solution from the standpoint of the operator and camera compactness, which is good. A possible downside is future compatibility: Does the D6 EVF work on the D7?
2. Non-interchageable combo finder: No switching out of finder units, but will probably increase size and mechanical complexity beyond what the customers would want---and want to pay for---even though, on the top pro models, compactness of design is the last consideration of the designers. Imagine a D5 with something the size of a Photomic FTn finder bolted to the top. Expensive, and therefore a hard sell.
Could a compact version, with a transparent(when not being used) EVF be created, as Sten has suggested? Maybe...but I'd fear that the EVF image quality, which already has problems in general, might be compromised further.
3. Clip-on auxilliary EVF: Has already been done, but current attempts have been plagued by cheapness and poor ergonomics. Not throwing off the handling balance of the overall camera would be the biggest challenge. This solution would allow the additional possibility of a real, 170º swiveling eyepiece in the style of video cameras---a built-in right angle finder that does more than right angles.
4. A quick-attach, rear-viewing loupe that utilizes the rear LCD, but snaps onto the body quickly, securely, and with no addtional rigging or bracketry. Bonus points if they can make it swivel....
-
Weathersealing could pose a problem I guess?
I once went under water - involuntarily, as the ice sheet I stepped on disintegrated - and when I finally managed to make it to dry land, the finder of my F5 was dry on the inside .... as was the film chamber.
-
Weathersealing could pose a problem I guess?
where?
-
Hybrid OVF/EVF is not such a big problem. Look what Fuji did with the X100-Series. A really good Optical finder needs a lot of glass, an EVF is in fact a relatively small item to integrate. We already have a Display in the Way The D2X did not have it, the D70(s) and the D200 had it and the D2Xs had it too.
Make that display to toggle between supplementing the OVF-picture like it is today into being a Full 4-MP-EVF like in the Leica "Q" full frame 24-MP 10-fps "Compact"
(http://www.fujifilm.eu/fileadmin/products/DigitalCameras/ProSeries/FujifilmX100T/features/index/pic_02.jpg)
I find this picture very inspirational. It shows the X100T solution. In a MUP situation we have a wide variety of option to place the actual EVF and the Mirrors in a full fledged Nikon Pro Body, don't we?
-
It would still be better to make this into two entirely separate systems. Combining two entirely different technologies means that compromises or adaptations have to be found.
-
then any focussing aid for MF lenses, even if it is not a full EVF, would be more than welcome. Of course I can use LV in critical situations and switch back to the OVF, in case of distant shots, but that is antithetic to the Df philosophy for instance. Maybe abolish the three-aspect focus confirmation and put a continuous, "eye-up" display instead (the confirmation leds are out of the attentive vision zone and require the eye to be moved)
-
I find the viewfinder in the D3 much less clear and as a result, more difficult to use for manual focus compared to the F5 viewfinder. I can easily reliably manual focus using the matte area of the F5, and the D3 was a huge disappointment in that regard (especially since I had just acquired some manual focus lenses which I was easily able to focus using the F5 even on high resolution ATP). I think the LCD overlay is what causes the loss of clarity. I would prefer it completely erased from the design in Nikon DSLRs at least from the higher end models.
-
hmmm... catch 22...
-
I had a fight about this with Bjørn many years ago when the D2Xs came out. He praised the camera with display anyway but later praised the Df more because she seems to have a display but good MF behavior too.
-
'Fight' and 'discussion' are different concepts, Frank.
The D2X had, for its time, a really nice viewfinder. The Df is better. Can these finders be further improved? without doubt, but there is no screen that will function equally well for manual focusing as it will for AF. So interchangeable screens are absolutely required as a starting point., Interchangeable finders would be even better.
-
Interchangeable finders is a very good idea, and it can be useful when you don't want to get attention. I travelled in the Soviet Union a long time ago, and in some situations it was not a good idea to be seen taking photos. So I removed the finder of my F3, and let the camera hang on my chest, I could easily see on the screen what I was aiming the camera at. Nobody noticed that I was taking photos.
-
Well, Japanese are very conservative, despite being normally associated with high-tech. Their preferred communication is still via fax and papers are still their medium of the choice. Nikon's design has been conservative for 3 digital generations(reference to professional grade), where improvements are iterated step by step. Perhaps their product cycle is only revised every 10 years or so?
-
If we see a EVF similar or even better than the Leica Q there are hopes If it is done as a supplement to an OVF - hopefully similar to the Df concept.
I have shot a lot with fast lenses and wide angle lenses on D1, D2Xs, D3 and continue to do so on the D3X, sorry I fail to see the problem with that, you guys obviously have another experience, just saying I managed to get the job done...
-
Sorry, but this is very far from what I see in communication with companies in Japan.
Obviously the product cycle is not ten years. Just see the on-line predictions where you can clearly see at what rate development happens, the D series is longer than the smaller DX series but that is the way the market drives it...
-
The D5 will be mainly targeted to sports- action- and press photographers, and I think they are a bit conervative, they want a tool that works like the tools they have, only a bit better :) . I don't think Nikon will experiment with EVF or other radical changes with their top professional camera. They will probably come with EVF or hybrid finders in a lower end camera first, maybe even a DX body.
I think the D5 will be built on the trusted D4s, only a bit better in many ways. A few more pixels, maybe new AF, faster fps and processing, and of course 4k video.
-
The Leica Q has a 3.7 MP finder. How good is it?
-
As I wrote in this thread:
http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?topic=511.0
I was impressed :)