FlyPenFly wrote:
I bet if you look at the sales # for the line that comes in several colors vs the "Pro" line...
Even in NYC, everytime I see a group of Japanese girls, almost every time one of them has a MFT and usually a GF-x in a color.
They're just being practical! These things are so tiny, you could lose them in a big handbag/shopper if they're just plain black. Tsk. Don't you men know anything. *pouts*
FlyPenFly wrote:
This camera isn't for people who post in alternative gear photography forums.
If you look at Nikon's home market and where MFT and even NEX is winning its essentially for women who are looking for something better than a Canon SDxxxx Powershot.
If you're in Japan or much of east Asia, its mostly women carrying a GF2 or Oly around who aren't Alt Gear photographers but are enthusiasts. Why do you think Olympus and Panasonic release those cameras in feminine colors?
So is this only intended for women in Asia?
The "non-alt/ non pro" women I know generally fall into two categories.
1) Those who simply want the most compact camera possible with the simplest operation that will effortlessly get that shot of kids, family, friends, vacation, etc. Image output is usually posting to Facebook/ web or occasionally a print no larger than 8"x10". Most compact cameras such as the Canon SDxxxx/ Powershot Elph will do this perfectly for under $200.
2) Enthusiast who might shoot with M43/ NEX or something like a Canon Rebel. Does not mind carrying something a little larger than (1) but often expects the versatility of a system with a full range of interchangeable lenses and has minimum image quality requirements of say M43.
I'm sure there are other minor categories (chic set perhaps with more money than sense) but this is what I encounter the most. The Nikon completely misses the first category due to size, price and possibly complexity compared to a tiny P&S nor does the Nikon seem to offer anything comparable to what the enthusiast can already get from the M43/NEX/etc. in the market.
2.7 crop? ------> you can't use ANY lenses except Nikon's FAIL!!!!!
Ugly Body? ----> Nikon had years to watch everyone and learn from what consumers like, instead of doing it right you came out with an ugly can FAIL!!!!!
Slow Primes? -----> It's bad enough you can't use a voigtlander 35mm and make it a 50mm...So at least give us a f/one-point-something
Nikon,
What have you learned?
What do you want us to do with a crop of 2.7?
I love my Sony Nex 5n!
I love it's 1.5 crop
I love it's form factor
I love its High ISO to IQ ratio
I love that I can use legacy glass
I love its LARGE APS-C sensor that made me sell my D300 and 17-55mm f2.8
That's alot of love
Who would have thought Sony would be beating the pants off Nikon and Canon
And given the average situations in which these cameras will be used, the lenses will often be shot wide open anyway (at least the zooms). For the typical buyer of this camera, they won't know or care about diffraction and will base buying decisions on numerous factors that the average reader here would never consider for a camera purchase.
It's obvious from Nikon's decision about the sensor format that they're not interested in courting the alt/enthusiast niche of photographers represented here with this system.
I agree completely with:
FlyPenFly wrote:
This camera isn't for people who post in alternative gear photography forums.
Next up: Canon.
It will be interesting to see how they interpret this market segment. Obviously for those of us here, Sony's direction (and the Ricoh GXR M module) are where we feel Canon should focus...
Ron,
I certainly hope Canon does come out with something useful.
Any addition to the small camera arena is welcome in my book. I honestly hope they will release a well thought out product.
I am still not over the fact that Nikon - after a long, deliberate process - finally released a mirrorless. And that it would be so awkward. I know the Ricoh GXR has taken a beating on forums over the years, for being a "silly" and "niche" concept camera but at least it was and is a clever design, APS-C sensor and built for photographers.
But what the fudge did Nikon think when introducing this? It does not even fill a specific void in the market - nor does it compete with the existing and seemingly lucrative 4/3 or APS-C market.
If it is targeted at the female market in Japan they can probably sell a multiple of thousand units for sure - but why even bother to introduce it to the north American and European market?
My guess is, for the "Pro" style crowd, this is a target aimed at S100, LX5, XZ-1, etc. because Nikon's solution in this market totally fell on it's face.
However, the upper pricing of that market is $500.
FlyPenFly wrote:
Tariq: I don't think its only for women as can be seen in the higher end model.
I do think though that women how are buying the MFT and NEX cameras was one of their primary targets.
Its a weird thing but this market is a powerhouse buyer in Japan. Maybe because in Japanese households, the women control the household finances?
Interesting thought there.
Seriously, though, I'm a woman, I bought a MFT (to replace my G10 and complement my 7D), but I'd never consider anything smaller. They didn't target this woman, sorry, Nikon, funky colours and all...
Hm... Not as bad as I thought it would be, and thankfully better than the Pentax Q. But pretty mushy, especially in the flowers in that shot with the bronze statue, my guess is strong noise reduction of course... I'd love to see something natural shot with it, trees, grass... or the pretty much mandatory cat photo. I find it hard to judge image quality when you don't quite know what the surface really looked like.
The images posted at IR look pretty poor to me. In fact, I think I'm more impressed with the IQ out of my wife's old Canon SD1200 which we paid about $140 for.
Not sure if this has come up, but do you think Nikon might be anticipating increasing sensor performance in the next decade, and the ratio between size/image quality decreasing? If they plan on the format sticking around a while, maybe they foresee the NEX seeming overly bulky in the next decade. If you have to make a new set of lenses, might as well make them small. Just a thought.
I find it hard to judge image quality when you don't quite know what the surface really looked like.