leeys

Huh? It's still the NX mount, don't see a new mount.

Stabilisation is in lens.

Looks pretty good, issue is support and ecosystem. They do have some very tasty native lenses though.

It's going to be a Panasonic camera - just buy the Panasonic version.

Wow, that picture of the Df and FE gets around. o_O One reason why it's so thick is that you can just about "see" the sensor stack along with the LCD module.

As for questions...

1. Nikon, where is the damn D400? :P

2. Why is Nikon going down with a strategy of using very different sensors to differentiate the FX line? It's an annoyance for a pro to work with two or more different camera types.

3. Will there be a Nikon 1 with an extremely deep buffer (>60 frames, aka 2GB RAM)?

4. Canon, when are the new sensors coming? Proper new sensors. Sony has kicked your arse for some time and it's starting to get embarrassing.

Ask them if they could make a lens line that's not so unnecessarily gigantic, just take a look at leica r. Oh and please a modern 24-70 2.8, and please make it smaller.

Not going to happen for a variety of reasons without some new exotic material. Any change is size and weight is going to be small.

You should hire Sacha Baron Coen to ask those questions to them :)

That'd be hilarious.

Guys, don't forget, there's going to be a crowdfunding campaign, so actual sales look like it will take a while yet.

They can always disable PDAF in 4k video.

If this is true I'm going to kick myself for not buying that cheap parallel imported EM1 before the global warranty ended. >.<

We know nothing about its video functionality. Nothing.
Things that will make it a loss or a great video camera:

-What exactly is the sensor, new or 70D's?

Based on the rumours it's very likely to be the 70D's.

Which leads to another (rhetoric) question, this being a video-centric forum, why are we discussing, and even agonising over a mostly stills-oriented dSLR which in practical terms doesn't even exist yet?

Just wondering out loud.

Because lots on here started with the 5DII?

Because that's only what the competition are offering isn't it?

But no one camera offers all of that. I suppose if someone does do it, it'll be one hell of a camera. Add continuous AF tracking and it'll be the perfect hybrid.

I understand that this is very video centric website, but it also comprise of many hybrid shooters who are still photo and video shooters. If the D750 shows about the same quality as the D810, I would prefer to invest in it because of its versatility. I shot a lot of things with my D300 at 12 megapixel, but I don't see myself in todays world going for a paying gig where the uncle cell phone or entry level Nikon/Canon Dslr shoots 20/24 megapixel photos.

Firstly, I think people are saying that there are better hybrids out there.

Secondly if you're trying to sell your services based on your gear's output you are in for a very hard time.

But boy, would it be interesting if they'd at least give a shot at *one* camera that'd be a hybrid video camera (Nikon is too much of a still photo company to make a camera not at least being 50% focused on stills in my opinion). With more cameras capable of full sensor readouts, with H.265, I find it hard to think that this would need to be such a huge task and a large gamble for them as a company. If they price it around the price of the higher end Nikon 1 systems, it'd probably interest consumers too.

This has been absolutely frustrating, because Nikon are also a company that have no incumbent video business. They could have just gone for it and established themselves in 2008, but they didn't. Even if the video market is 1/100th of the stills market it'd have been good for marketing and selling their other cameras.

They need younger top management in Japan.

In that line I think you've established why that is not going to happen.

For serious photography the 14bit color space that the the DSLR*s provide is much more desirable than the limited 12 bit of Sony's RAW's (correct me if wrong and the sony has 14bit)

 

Some times it feels like these japanese camera companies coordiante their releases since not one of them provides everything. I allso find my self thinking If only GH4 shot 14Bit RAW images it would be well suited for Pro photograpy

Even 12 bit raw is substantial. The Sony's use some lossy compression scheme so it's more like 10 or 11 bit instead. I still think it's usable and definitely far better than the 8 bit baked video files that just about all hybrid cameras spit out.

 

What I'd like to see from Nikon would be a bold mirrorless APS-C hybrid video + photo camera.

You know, you reminded me of when the first rumours of the Df surfaced and it was going to be a mirrorless retro-styled camera with the D4's 16MP sensor. I got really excited. Then it turned out to be a DSLR and there went my interest...

Anyone who spends their hard-earned based on a rumour is truly a twit.

I do feel like a twit now though; a cheap E-M1 with global warranty would've been really nice!

 

 

For stills it lacks the ergonomic fluidity and flow of the Fuji X-T1

Nope. Not even close - if you want the absolute fastest and fluid UI a modern control scheme has that, and the D750's is pretty good.

This is a camera that stills-wise is going to cream the 5DIII in so many ways. There are a few areas it is lacking but given the relative price points I know which one I'd rather go for.

It's from Nikon, it's going to be stills-first.

And it doesn't have to be mirrorless, they just could stop making them so gigantic. Big is good for a lot of things, but a small option would be great. 

Just look how small,"fullframe" with mirror and f-mount:

 

 

They just have to optimize the space needed for the sensor, and the screen.

Hmm, that's a very familiar photo. I wonder who took it.

Or maybe just most people use it as a stills lens.

Again, are you using it at beyond, say, 50mm? At 140mm the stabilizer has to work extra hard.

Also isn't the 14-140mm a Mega OIS lens? 

The GH3, GX7, GM1 and E-M1 all use the next generation of sensors, and will easily outperform a G6. Won't advise you to go to a previous generation sensor if you can help it.

I, for one, am curious why the GX7, for instance, cannot handle RAW bursts larger than 1080 that last a handful of seconds.  Why exactly couldn't it shoot 10 seconds of 4592x3448 with a firmware hack or update?  

 

For that matter, why couldn't the EM1?  I mean, that's sort of a version of 4K.  A cheap Nikon can burst hi-res raw, but flagship models from the major camera brands can't?  Seems weirdly unreasonable, even if it's somehow the reality of the sensor capabilities.

It's the way sensor readout works. The Nikon 1 Aptina sensors are optimised for speed, so suffer in other areas.

Yes. If you look at the back of a UHS-II card, you'll notice two rows of pins. Any other camera will just use the first row and work at slower (could still be pretty fast) speeds, whereas a camera like the X-T1 will use the second row and use the UHS-II specs.

Sometimes I think these sources are also disinformation agents.

Also fanboys with a lot of wishful thinking (see all the FF rumours from Olympus/Fujifilm/Pentax).

Also to add on point #1: The E-M1 already heats up in an extended stills session that leaves the camera on all the time. The GH3/4 are just about the only mirrorless cameras that I've used that remain cool after prolonged use.

I don't want higher resolutions or better codecs, the image is fine for most of us, I don't need anything, just the normal freaking frame rates. I mean, come on! You're sitting on a damn treasure that can change the entire way we shoot movies!

Yea if Olympus so much as adds 24/25p with a higher bitrate I'm going to grab an E-M1 off the grey market.

Uh, UHS-II is backwards compatible with UHS-I. What won't work, are the high speeds that UHS-II supports. The only camera that supports the UHS-II standard right now is Fujifilm's X-T1.

To be honest, I'm not sure a 4K screen is going to be of any use when editing unless you're on multiple monitors and editing at full res - the toolbars will eat into the resolution anyway.

Not sure I can place much faith in this one; stills resolution is much higher, so the lenses actually have to work harder. Cine lenses advantages are in areas other than resolution.

I'm not a computer expert, but I don't think CPUs today are the bottleneck in editing. It's more prudent to invest in extra RAM and storage. With the proper drive connected to the thunderbolt 1 port, you can get read and write speeds of over 800MB/s. The iMac monitor is beautiful. And the iMac is incidentally a work of art in itself. It is regrettable that Apple is bent on preventing user upgrades, but adding RAM to the current 27" takes just seconds, no tools required.

Well, more CPU speed never hurt, if you ask me. With 4K workflows it's definitely good to have more, along with faster GPUs, the latter of which is underpowered in comparison in an iMac.

The only problem is not having Thunderbolt connectivity, which I am thinking about.

 

If you're just using it for backups, a USB 3.0 drive is plenty fast.

It's obvious you have not been in touch with your PC side lately. I use both and some Apple solutions work better (email management) and some are far superior on PC (sorry but Finder sucks!!). If you must go the Mac way -which I cannot understand nowadays since the reliability gap between Mac and PC is nonexistent both in HW and SW- Hackintosh is probably the best solution config-wise, and it'll save you Apple's markup.

I hate hate hate hate using any OS from Apple. It always does my head in; I'm guessing there will be people who are on the opposite end.

Once you go Linux, you won't go back. That's because you're too busy trying to write configuration scripts to see your monitor so that you can reboot a different operating system.

 

But I do everything, minus the occasional Adobe job - in which case my life took a wrong turn - in Linux.

There's always that one Linux guy... :P

Aren't most modern components suitable for use in a hackintosh anyway? It's not like Apple is using anything special hardware-wise now.