If it had half as many pixels I'd be interested but frankly 14MP in a compact is ludicrous.
There are so many bad compacts out there it's not funny. The first one made with good noise performance at say ISO800 with 28mm equiv lens and no purple fringing (aha - that counts out the Fuji ), then I'm buying it.
I'm not holding my breath, and with 14MP, I don't think it's going to be this one!
Ya but those aren't little pocketable cameras. I don't think the P6000 will compare to any DSLR, but the 6400 capability (just the fact that they offer 6400) at least hints at an improvement over other compacts.
Having a high ISO feature is one thing, having a usable high ISO is another. My son bought a Canon something p&s that featured hi ISO but it was far from usable. All it was capable of was satisfying the claim it could shoot high ISO. I loved my Cp8400 but it was a dog speed wise. I wouldn't mind this one if it was fast to turn on and fast to focus.
having RAW is a start. i won't use a P&S without RAW and that is why after it became time to replace the Coolpix 8400, i ended up getting a Leica D Lux 3.
Of all the latest offerings announced by Nikon, this little guy will most likely be the first on my shopping list . . . provided it gets favorable reviews. I sure hope it provides lower noise than the G9 at ISOs up to 800.
Pixel count seems too high to me too . . . I think 8 MP would have been sufficient, but what the hey . . . it's only hard disk space . . . and that continues to get more affordable all the time.
WOW, looks great though after reading reviews of Coolpix 5000 and 5100, I am not too enthusiastic about the IQ. Let's see how the RAW mode is (am a G9 owner in which there is a world of difference between RAW and JPEG). I agree, 13.5mp though a 1/1.7 sensor is ridiculous (to put it politely). But apart from that: wide angle, command dial, RAW, flash hot shoe and the design (I like it) sounds delicious!
Sadly, it has far too many MP. The focal length is 6-24mm so the 24x36mm sensor equivalent would be about 300 megapixels. ISO 6400 would suffer from very heavy NR. Perhaps it has the low-color sensors Kodak was touting last year.
If camera companies would dispell the damn megapixel "myth", we'd see cameras like this, only they'd have 4 MP and decent noise performance. I don't see the need for 13.5 MP in a compact camera at all. To me, a true compact (travel) camera should be physically small and produce small, manageable files... when MPs go up, so does the need for a better computer with more memory and disk space.
Analogy: Its like Microsoft Windows, they keep making it fatter and slower in order to "keep up" with new hardware. They don't understand that a light, efficient OS would be ridiculously fast with current processors and memory.
Wonder if they'd have a smaller file option for RAW. I doubt it, but doesn't Canon have a system that does? It IS possible... I'd love to see a 6-8MP RAW save...
), then I'm buying it.
The focal length is 6-24mm so the 24x36mm sensor equivalent would be about 300 megapixels. 
ISO 6400 would suffer from very heavy NR. Perhaps it has the low-color sensors Kodak was touting last year.