The Online Photographer

All the nominees again:

Canon SL1
Ricoh GR
Nikon Df
Nikon Coolpix A
Olympus OM-D E-M1
Panasonic GX7
Panasonic GM1
Sony A7r
Sony A7
Sony RX10

(Play this now) And the winner....

  The Olympus OM-D E-M1, TOP Camera of the Year 2013

I was sorely, sorely tempted to give the nod here to the Sony A7r with its Zeiss 35mm ƒ/2.8. That one's got the buzz—it's the camera that people are coveting this year, the one that offers all that promise. The stuff gear dreams are made of. I love what I've seen of that 35mm lens, and I'll bet I could write a very good defense of a camera that has the right lens instead of a lot of lenses.

2013 Runner-Up: Sony A7r with Zeiss Sonnar FE 35mm ƒ/2.8

But I've got two full-frame (FF) cameras in the house, and I hate to say it, but I think I'm kinda getting over FF. When all is said and done I just don't think it gives me enough extra to warrant all the fuss. This isn't some big decision; it's just the way my feelings about it have evolved. It's a little like all those people in the old days who argued that 4x5 was so very superior to 6x6. Well, yeah, kinda, a little, maybe—but I can make do.

Nothing against people who prefer FF; I can see the sense in that, too.

The Achilles heel in the end is that the A7 system has, um, three lenses. And with Sony's spotty record of filling in lens lines...I just can't bring myself to call it the CoY. Quite. Try as I might.

...And yeah, it is awkward, at the very least, to give the palm to the E-M1 when the E-M5 was our CoY a year ago. That is just unBALANCED. And opens me to charges of being an Oly fanboy, which I'm not. But that's an accident of the sequence of events...rather than not give our CoY award to the E-M1 this year for the sake of evenhandedness, what I ought to do is go back in time (sorry, Ctein) and yank the award away from the E-M5 for last year! There were so many deserving contenders, and now the E-M5 is eclipsed (sorry, E-M5 owners, but it is. Don't think I'm not sympathetic; I bought one too.) I wish I could change the past and give CoY 2012 to the Fuji X-Pro1. That would restore the proper balance of nature, not to mention brand impartiality. But of course I can't do that. It's a little too late to be revising CoY '12.

It galls me not to give a pat on the back to Nikon, for listening to its customers and thinking of those who want a camera with more old-fashioned controls. It pains me not to give the award to Sony, which deserves a big fat sloppy kiss for all the fun stuff it's given us lately and for how hard they're trying. (If anything, at the moment, I'm a Sony fanboy. And that Zeiss? Hit me where I live why doncha, pluck at my heartstrings—I went through photo school with a Zeiss C/Y 35mm ƒ/2.8.)

The GX7 is near and dear to my heart for being a Great Leap Forward from a series of cameras I've owned and loved, and for being more Leica-like than any current Leica. (Sorry again, but it is. Although maybe it's not quite as Leica-like as the X-Pro1.) In fact, the only thing wrong with the GX7 is the E-M1, in the same way that the only thing wrong with the Coolpix A is the GR.

The E-M1 wins the old-fashioned way: by being so good. If this were a footrace, the E-M1 would be Usain Bolt. No matter how admirable the other guys, you just can't deny the freaky fast dude who flies across the finish line half a second earlier than everyone else.

The E-M1 is what I wanted the E-M5 to be...and reluctantly concluded was not. A few brief points:

• It's really nice to hold. Ergonomically this is the best camera I've used in many years. The size and weight are just right—not too big, not too small; not too heavy, not too light. The handgrip is really great to grip (never mind how it looks). I love the way the two main dials fall to thumb and forefinger (if Olympus ever changes this, the responsible party should be boiled in lens lubricating oil). That funky little thumb lever that switches to ISO/WB is a fantastic solution.

• The image quality is really special. Pixel-by-pixel comparisons be hanged, the pictures just look great to me. They nourish my enthusiasm for lovely-looking photographic images. 'Nuff said. (Well, a little more needs to be said: I don't think it's better than the E-M5. But it's as good, which is enough. YMMV.)

• With a weatherproof lens, you can hold the whole shebang under the kitchen faucet. No, I haven't done that yet—I make it a policy not to tempt fate. But I'm also not going to worry if I get caught out in the rain.

• Love the way a flip-up viewing screen makes the camera into a mini-Rolleiflex. Yeah, other cameras do this, but it happens to be something I really want my camera to do.

• The camera controls are very customizable. There seem to be just enough buttons, and there are so many ways you can set them up that I almost can't imagine any photographer not being able to configure this camera exactly to his or her tastes and preferences. I never felt in control of the E-M5. I always feel in control of the E-M1. Big difference there.

• Awesome image stabilization. I have the GX7 here as well, and while the GX7 is competitive in many respects, where the IS of the two cameras is concerned it's like a footrace between Usain B. and Drunk Uncle.

• The viewfinder is excellent. No, it's not as good a view as a large glass pentaprism viewfinder. But it's the first EVF I actually like looking at the world through.

I could quibble. I don't like the positioning of the on-off switch or the review button. How picky is it reasonable to be? Oh, and by the way: the E-M1 is NOT too expensive. On the contrary, you should feel grateful they put as much expensive goodness into this camera's build as they did. It's great that they put so much money into this. You can tell.

But forget all the above: the main, overriding gestalt of the E-M1 is how complete it is. It does everything right and nothing wrong. The best thing about it is how solid it is, how well it falls to hand, how well everything works, and how well it all works together.

Is it better than any other camera? Of course not; cameras are a matter of taste. Does it warrant upgrading from the E-M5? Probably not; depends how well you get along with the E-M5. Best image quality? No, just really good, and good enough. I think it does have the best IBIS, and might have the best EVF, and it's possible it has the best ergonomics. It's not the best toy, though, so if playing with gee-whizzery is your thing (not that there's anything wrong with that) then this one probably won't distract you for very long.

And recall that I'm not big on video.

So if you just want to take pictures....

I'm sorry, but our hands are tied. Gotta do what we gotta do. This was a great year for cameras, and there are a lot of fine choices out there. However, the Olympus OM-D E-M1 ticks every box and raises Micro 4/3's whole game. Acclaim and applause: it's the Camera of 2013.

Mike

Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Morgan: "It's interesting you mention all of the lens options with Micro 4/3. One of the things that keeps me from considering Micro 4/3 is the wide-angle lens choice below 24mm. The Panasonic 7–14mm has the purple blob issue, the Olympus 9–18mm is completely uninteresting, and there are no rectilinear primes below 24mm. This is one area Fuji seems to have Micro 4/3 beat and may eventually get me away from using a DSLR."

Mike replies: You make a very good point, one I'm always trying to remind people of: evaluate the lenses in any system first, and evaluate only the lenses that exist, not lenses you have to wait for. It's a personal matter, so you're very right to evaluate it for yourself. It's really the first step in considering any camera: can I get the lenses I need for my own uses? Just because I might like Micro 4/3 and 4/3 lens choices doesn't necessarily mean you will.

Amin Sabet: "Really well said, Mike. I feel as you do about all the nominees. I'd add this about the Sony A7 and A7r: As bodies, they are relatively unrefined compared to the E-M1. For example, the shutter release button placement is awkward, and of course there's no image stabilization. What the A7 and A7r give you, however, is the ability to have fun with a virtually limitless number of adapted manual focus lenses. For example, there is now a run on Leica R and Canon FD L glass like never before. That plus the fact that the new Sony FE 35mm ƒ/2.8 and 55mm ƒ/1.8 are both really excellent."

Speed: "An embarrassment of riches."

Oskar Ojala (partial comment): "Simply put, it's a user's camera: just works in the field, takes great pictures, but won't be the best in a spec sheet comparison. I hope that cameras like this would be the norm."

Dave Karp: "My wife and I went to Samy's Saturday. I thought we would probably come home with a Pentax K-3 or a Panasonic GX7. We came home with an Olympus E-M1 and 17mm ƒ/1.8. It just feels right. The electronic viewfinder is delightful. When we got home I pulled out my Dad's beloved Pentax MX and put it on the table next to the E-M1. They are nearly the same size. The E-M1 is lighter. The grip on the Olympus makes it easier to hold. This is the digital camera I have been waiting for."

Jim: "I would probably agree that the E-M1 is the better camera...but I love the jewel-like feel of the Panasonic GX7. It is Leica-like, as you say. I took a quick trip to Rome with the GX7 and the new, tiny 12–32mm from the GM1...perfect combo. Here are some of the results."

Photo by Jim Tardio using the GX7 and Panasonic 12–32mm pancake zoom lens

Mike replies: Jim, that second picture at your link has some serious distortion on the right-hand side, and the colors look off. I admire the flashy way those Italians dress, though.

The Chamonix 045F1, new for 2013.

Here we wrap up our survey of the cameras of 2013.

Sigma: It's rather odd that perhaps the best sensors for pure image quality, amateur division, are to be found in a quirky and obscure line of cameras from a lens manufacturer. But there it is. Sigma's only new camera introduced this year cements its plan to "fix" the fixed lens problem with the little DP[x] Merrills in the same way that Rollei once did with its TLRs: need a different lens? Buy a whole new camera. The series now has a moderate wide angle (the DP1), a normal (DP2), and with this year's DP3, a short tele. It's a nice simple solution, maybe most especially so if you need only one.

A DP with a different focal length lens naturally does not vault to the head of the crop as the year's standout. Should you want to marvel over image quality in every shot, however, the Sigma Merrill cameras are for you.

Samsung: This year Samsung brought us—well, brought somebody—the Galaxy NX, the world's first camera to feature the Android OS natively. Which might be cool, but I don't know what "Android" is. Although I know what an android is. A body's gotta be born somewhere on this blue teardrop and can only speak but so many languages, and I apparently don't speak Android. You may think this unfair, but then, if you're a diehard Samsung camera partisan you are a) not coming here primarily to feed your brand passion, and b) most likely lonely.

Lomography: I already covered the Lomography Konstruktor in the kickoff post of this series, where I called it "geek times three...it's a film camera, a toy camera, and a plastic model kit. Like a hat trick of regression and geeky goodness." Which means, of course, that we love it. And if I had more time and more space, I would buy one and spread the parts all over the top of a table and leave them there for two years, you bet I would.

Chamonix (the "-ix" is pronounced "ee"): New for 2013 is the beautiful 045F1, which starts with the 045N2 and adds base and asymmetrical tilts at the rear standard. I'd explain that, but if you care at all, you already know. If you're interested in this camera, don't forget that the world's most perfect lens is a great match for it.

Phase One: Finally, if you were wondering at that brief clause "amateur division" at the beginning of this post, here's why. The best sensors from you can buy, professional division, are the Phase One IQ2 series of backs, new for 2013. There are three, topping out at 80 megapixels, which, you might recall, is approximately the number of megapixels Ctein once calculated that current lenses can actually use. There is even (sob!) an IQ260 Achromatic (black and white) 60-MP back that you (quaintly) control with optical filters. I will be getting one of these just after I finally acquire my Feadship yacht and convince Gwyneth Paltrow to start living for giving me backrubs. (The IQ2 backs start at $40k.) Back here in reality, I must reluctantly admit that camera equipment more expensive than sporty German automobiles barely twerks my radar screen...or rather, it glows ever so faintly on the screen and I go outside with the binocs for a wistful visual as it passes in the distance.

Nominees from this group: sadly, none, although we find most of them delightful in their multitudinous ways.

Coming soon (of course): Our winner. New Year's Day. Place your bets.

Mike

Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Bob Smith: "I got a Chamonix 045F1 in November. It is a stunning looking and finely crafted camera. One of my avocations is building and finishing 18th C. furniture by hand so I'm sure of my statement when I say the fit and finish on this camera are excellent. It is a bargain at the current list price."

Gerry: "I think the most significant innovation of 2013 was Sony's decision to offer a programming interface (API) for their cameras, thereby allowing third-party software developers to develop their own applications that communicate with the camera. This is far more powerful than Sony merely releasing their own application for controlling their cameras from a phone or tablet. It means that Sony is allowing third-party developers to make the camera do things beyond what Sony itself has imagined. The A7 and A7R are on the list of cameras that initially support this, and I think that makes them good candidates for the TOP Camera of the Year Award.

"However, if the award has to be for features that are within the camera itself, I think the award should go to the Panasonic GX7 for the configurability of its buttons and touchscreen focus point selection.

"I've found that the best antidote to all 'Camera of the Year' awards is to go back and read a review of the camera you already have. I read one for my camera the other day. If I didn't already own one, I'd want to rush out and buy one. It has been said that there's nothing more subversive than an old newspaper and perhaps nothing can better subvert consumerism than a glowing review of a discontinued product."

expiring_frog (partial comment): "By the metric of programmability, the Galaxy NX and cousins are so far ahead of the pack it's not funny. You can (at least theoretically) reprogram pretty much anything about it, and not just to remap a few buttons or control it remotely. The kernel is open source and as far as I know Samsung plans to or has already made the camera API available. The last sentence of Gerry's comment applies far more to the NX than to the Sonys. (No, I don't own Samsung stock and have no interest in buying their cameras :-) . It just seems people don't really get the potential of the NX, or how much customizable, extensible software can transform how you capture photos. For comparison, see what folks have done with their iPhones (even when considered purely as a communication device) since Apple opened up the API. To me it's infinitely more interesting than just putting a larger sensor in a mirrorless camera."

The Sony RX10 with its lens extended. This would earn most interesting new camera of the year, if that were the contest.

I should point out again that we're nominating "Cameras of the Year" (CoY) for 2013, not "the best cameras available" in 2013. To be considered, something needs to be mostly new for 2013 or utilize significant new technology. It needs to embody what was happening this year.

"Significance" in new technology is a tough call to make, though, since significance is usually only apparent in retrospect. (For example, I'm pretty sure I once predicted that all sensors would be Foveon-type sensors by 2013.) This year, Canon's Dual-Pixel Autofocus in the 70D and Pentax's on-demand anti-aliasing filter in the K-3 seem to be significant technologies—but are they significant enough to warrant the cameras they first appeared in to be CoY? Was the first camera that had in-body image stabilization (IBIS) the camera of the year for that year in your judgement? I don't know, I'm asking.

On the other side of the argument, I think the original Canon D30 (remembered as the first affordable digital camera to rival film) was the Camera of the Year in 2000 and the first Digital Rebel (remembered as the Model T of DSLRs) was the Camera of the Year for 2003.

(It might be more meaningful to pick the CoY of ten years ago and do that every year. In the '70s I wrote a piece opining that the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences ought to give Oscars every year for the movies of ten years prior. The problem with this conception is that although the Academy's objectivity and judgement would be greatly improved thereby*, our interest in the outcome would be just as greatly diminished. So it goes.)

-

Leica: Leica introduced the X Vario this year, a handsome and well-designed APS-C mirrorless camera with a fixed, slowish 28–70mm-e zoom lens and no viewfinder. But at $2,850 it is aimed at the most price-insensitive segment of the market. For everyone else, it doesn't compete with its putative competitors. For C0Y, a bit of a non-starter.

Sony: We're in the middle of a sort of Sony Renaissance. Canikon have the camera market sewn up insofar as anyone does, but Sony is the one company that both wants to elbow its way into that club and also thinks it can. Because innovation rather than a more staid approach is about the only feasible inroad, Sony has been very bold and creative with new ideas.

Accordingly, some of the most interesting cameras and camera ideas of recent years have come from Sony. The "SLT" cameras in 2010, the NEX-7 in 2011, and the A99, RX100, and RX1 last year.

2013 continues the trend. No fewer than three of Sony's top enthusiast options have received useful updatings in 2013, in the form of the APS-C mirrorless NEX-5T; the RX1R, which is Sony's tiny full-frame, fixed-lens camera without an anti-aliasing filter; and the RX100 II, an upgrade of what we consider to be the leading small pocket digicam for...well, everyone.

On the innovation front, there are the super-low-cost A3000, which has lots of limitations but an extraordinarily low price (not linked because we don't recommend it), and the odd-duck QX cameras, which are essentially lens-sensor modules meant to marry with smartphones. (I wouldn't know from those. My smartphone is only useful as a texting walkie-talkie with my offspring, as the world's most expensive Angry Birds console, for giving me driving directions out loud (very useful, I must admit), and for telling me jokes. Apropos Ctein's column yesterday, courtesy of Siri: "The past, the present, and the future walk into a bar. It was tense.")

The A7 and A7r—ostensibly the interchangeable-lens versions of the RX1, but in reality all-new mirrorless full-frame cameras, one with and one without anti-aliasing filters—are shoo-in nominations for CoY if anything out there can be.

But perhaps the most interesting camera of this year from Sony is the RX10. Almost entirely invivible in the alphabet soup of camera designations, and mystifying to John Q. Public in terms of its species, it is a very small but very complete premium camera with a fixed Zeiss zoom lens. The lens has an equivalent focal-length range of 24–200mm (limited by bridge camera standards, vast by enthusiast camera standards) and a constant ƒ/2.8 aperture. Finally the camera has a 1-inch (<9x14mm) sensor. Conceptually all this makes it a rather intense hybrid—a fixed lens but a very good and capable one; a much-larger-than-tiny but smaller than Micro 4/3 sensor; and a very capable but very small body with a traditional SLR-type form.

Weird. And yet you might well be looking at the future. Many have said that full frame (24x36mm) is taking over (2012 was the Year of FF, no question), but I think the opposite: Micro 4/3 is almost too big for most people and most uses. FF will die out, I think, except as the "medium format" for professionals, and the public will end up with smaller-than-APS-C sensors in the cameras it uses almost exclusively for video and stills in electronic display formats. I just really hope that the eventual standard will be something as large as 1-inch.

Be that as it may...Sony's nominations for CoY are the RX10, the A7, and the A7r.

Mike

*Rocky had just won best picture, which at the time I thought was...let me be diplomatic...not the right choice.

Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Steve Greenwood: "Currently in San Francisco with a Sony A7 and the 35mm ƒ/2.8 from Lens Rentals—goes back in a couple of days. Won't really know about overall quality until after some serious time with the iMac and the 13x19" Epson at home, so I'll confine myself to first impressions in the hand and carried on the shoulder. Which are very positive. In size it's about the same as my Panny G3, and carried on a shoulder strap it's about the same—easy to forget it's there. Impressive for full frame. Viewfinder is excellent and completely usable for this eyeglass wearer. Controls are good and fall readily to my fingers. The Zeiss looks to be a little gem; I like the way it is essentially self-hooding. I debated whether to rent this or the RX10 for this trip. I will rent the RX10 before making a purchase. But the bottom line is that for me, all the possibilities are Sonys."

Speed: "The death of dedicated cameras in favor of phones has been forecast for several years. Hasn't happened so far. Instead we're getting more choices, many not from Canon or Nikon. Good for us. I hope that the CoY choice is even more difficult and controversial next year. And the next."

Bill OBrien: "My comment about the Sony A3000: cameras take pictures plus lots of other things. If you are only interested in taking pictures, the 'lots of other things' just get in the way. The A3000 is a very good camera; the lens it comes with is really good. Resolution of the lens and sensor are close to some other very expensive cameras. My point: When you say '(not linked because we don't recommend it)' it leaves the impression you know something 'not good' about the camera but are not going to explain. Have you used one? Do you know any one who has used one?"

Mike replies: No, I've not even seen one, but yes, a "trusted friend of the site," Kirk Tuck, has used one and gave it a negative review. I'm not saying Kirk is infallible in his every opinion (I don't think he'd say so either), but I do think the A3000 has a bit of a "Yugo Problem." The Yugo Problem, first discovered by Henry Ford (although not by that name of course), is that very cheap new products have to compete with the used market. Either a) better products available used for the same price as the new product, or b) products of the same quality available used for even less. I'm not willing to say the A3000 is a bad camera, or that some buyers might not enjoy and appreciate it, but I don't think it's a good idea for us to recommend it.

Well, this one is certainly going to be the easiest one of these posts to write: 2013 saw the introduction of two of the best Micro 4/3 cameras to date.

Olympus: Three cameras in particular are of interest from Olympus this year. The E-P5 is the current version of the Pen. It's a beautiful and capable camera that is also elegantly styled. If you're particular about your camera's looks and you don't need a built-in viewfinder, the E-P5 belongs on your short list. The Stylus 1, all-new this year, is the company's deluxe bridge camera—dpreview rightly points out that camera companies are (somewhat anxiously) working to figure out what regular people will buy when they want something more than the camera in their smartphones, and the Stylus 1 is Olympus's very slick attempt at an answer. But despite its handsome angular styling and well-specified  lens, the Stylus 1 would not be a camera to naturally tempt enthusiasts because of its 1/1.7" (i.e., <8x6mm) sensor.

No, the towering product intro from Olympus for this year for enthusiasts is without question the OM-D E-M1, an improved E-M5 made to a higher spec. I've been using an E-M1 and I have a lot of thoughts about it, which I'll defer to another time. But that it should be a strong nomination for CoY 2013 is beyond doubt.

Panasonic: Olympus's main partner in the Micro 4/3 consortium also introduced its best-ever camera this year.

But first we need to mention the wee little GM1 and the SLR-like G6. Both fine cameras. Good, now we've done that.

The Lumix GX7, recently field reviewed by Carl Weese in these pages, takes the GF1's somewhat up-and-down lineage to a whole new level. It is to today's digital cameras just about what Leica's M6 was to cameradom in 1984. Or close. (the Leica M, a replica in digital of the actual M6, is a whole different beast now, with a whole different meaning.) Of course the GX7 will not be anywhere near as iconic because its life will be so much shorter (out, out, brief candle!). But right now....

Another no-brainer nomination for CoY.

So the Olympus OM-D E-M1 and the Panasonic GX7 get the invitation to our award show.

We're getting closer to the Big S.

Mike

Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

adamct: "Ooof! For what it's worth, I think the GM1 deserved more serious consideration than you gave it. On paper (or on a website) it is easy to dismiss out of hand as a possibly cute toy that is overshadowed by its larger, sexier, bristling-with-features big brother, the GX7. In the hand, it is a tiny, jaw-dropping jewel of a camera, very responsive, with picture quality the equal of its beefier sibling. It is a camera that makes you want to slip it into your pocket and go for a picture-taking walk. The thing is smaller than an LX7, fer cryin' out loud!!! Anyway, taste is personal, but if you get the chance to actually hold one yourself, you might find yourself surprised...."

JK: "One note about the GM1: just on a size/weight basis, it removes any excuse for Micro 4/3 users not to carry around a backup body at all times. If you'd pulled this thing out a few years ago you'd have had jaws dropping in disbelief. A few years before that and you would have been burned as a witch."

[Ed. Note: In the spirit of full disclosure, as ever (the principle being that I tell you where I stand and then you can decide for yourself if I'm biased), I have to admit to some feelings about Ricoh-Pentax. I liked both constituent companies, pre-merger, but, as you might recall, Pentax was our lead advertiser for a few years. The basis for it was a handshake deal I had with the "old king," who was a very fine fellow and a very fine fellow was he. But when the old king was beheaded (um, figuratively speaking—sorry, Ned!) and a new head was crowned, they said, "You got a contract? No?" and traipsed off...owing me quite a pile of moolah. The company was unconcerned about this. It's a blip on the balance sheet for Ricoh-Pentax but a big deal for l'il ol' me, and I admit I'm kinda holding a grudge. Not because I intended to—I intended not to, actually—but because that feeling of resentment is still...well, there, smoldering with a tiny wisp of smoke.

You might want to take this minor departure from equanimity into account in your peregrinations around 'n' about TOP. —Mike the Ed.]

As you know we are currently surveying the year that's coming to an end looking for our "Camera of the Year 2013." That award comes with no grand cash prize and does not affect sales figures, confers no prestige and apparently goes unnoticed by whichever company wins it, and our readers are independent-minded and experienced mavens who go their own way regardless of what we say. But we do it anyway, because what the hell.

So to continue our survey of the landscape:

Ricoh-Pentax: The huge news from Ricoh in 2013—okay, the only news from Ricoh in 2013—was the new Ricoh GR. Although based on previous Roman-numeraled iterations of the basic body shape, tracing its roots back to a film version, the GR 2013-version has an APS-C sensor, a huge leap up from the "tiny" <8x6mm sensor in the GR IV.

Like the Leica of old—I mean back when it was just a camera company—Ricoh gets high marks as well as outsized mindshare from photographers. At least, those photographers who try its products. The GR is therefore a nominee for Camera of the Year.

On the Pentax side, there's yet another significant and thoughtful updating. The excellent 24-MP flagship K-3 builds on the K-5IIs / K-5II / K-5 / K-7 line. Which is a good thing, as we liked those cameras and especially their silent-ish shutters and sturdy and handy body styling.

Pentax's new (well...) camera design for this year is the MX-1, which uses some design cues from the old MX of sainted memory and is solidly parked in the "retro" camp that's allegedly been trending over the last three years or so. A digicam (née point-and-shoot) that is definitely not bad but also nothing extraordinary (although note the current very low price), the MX-1 stands no chance of winning overall and therefore gets shunned by the Academy.

Photographers love the little GR out of proportion to its market share.

So, a serious contender in the form of the Ricoh GR for Ricoh-Pentax. But remember that Pentax is the Subaru of camera brands, as one of our readers put it the other day, and we love Subarus.

Nikon: First, the Nikon Df is a shoo-in nominee. Needs no introduction further than this to our audience. The Df is a) proof that Nikon is listening, and b) an option—choice—for those who like old-fashioned-y knobs 'n' dials. Choice be good.

Seems like it's been a good year for Nikons. The D5300 is, as one reader pointed out the other day, better than almost any digital camera you could buy more than a handful of years ago; the D7100 is a mainstream 70D competitor and the beneficiary of long development; and we actually quite approve of the D610, a mistakes-were-made-but-we-admit-nothing course correction of the problem-plagued D600. What's wrong with fixing problems? Nothing as far as we're concerned. The D600 is a camera we really liked a lot, and if you like FF DSLRs with their excellent viewfinders then the D610 has got to be on your short list.

The fine little Coolpix A, a GR-fighter, is, at $300 more than the already expensive GR, priced out of the discussion, and has been since its introduction. You don't hear it talked about much. But we've also liked it since the beginning, so it snags a nod.

And the coolest Nikon of the year is the great-great-grand progeny of the once-famous Nikonos, and why O why they didn't call it a Nikonos is a missed marketing trick and a mystery. But the Nikon 1 AW1—a shock-proof, fully waterproof, and temperature-tolerant take-me-anywhere camera with interchangeable lenses—(although, granted, there are only two of them—where are we, Sony-land?)—definitely garners a nomination from us. Give it to the kids at the swimming pool and say "What, me worry?"

So, Nikon's got three nominees: The Df, the Coolpix A, and the Nikon 1 AW1. Fine and dandy.

We're up to five nominees now, with four companies considered. And the best is yet to come....

-

[Part I is here. To be continued....]

Mike

Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Edward Taylor: "'Give it to the kids' may be the best advice for the Nikon 1 AW1. I admire the concept, and I admire Nikon for actually building such a camera. So, I bought one as soon as it was available. I tried to like it. I am going to the islands with the family in a few weeks and really needed a better underwater camera. But, alas, I sent it back. The problem: image quality, or lack thereof. Maybe I just had a bad copy, but the images, with or without pixel peeping, seemed no more impressive than my various point-and-shoot, tiny-sensor underwater cameras. And, those cameras are smaller and more convenient. I don't know what they did to that 1" sensor, but it doesn't seem to measure up to the 1" sensor in my Sony RX100 II. So, I'd vote for it for idea of the year, but camera of the year?—No way!"

Giovanni: "With all due respect, I saw the Nikon Df up close, and my good ol' FM back home said: Well, I put on weight and waist size just as much as you did over the past 30 years, man. Yep, even Leica added a bit of weight around the waist since the good ol' M6, but it's invisible by comparison. I would have been tempted to give my Nikkor AI lenses some good mating opportunities, but it seems like they'll have to stick to the old lady, a bit frayed at the edges but as svelte as ever...."

Fuji: Fuji had two major refreshes of two major camera models in 2013, the X100s and the X-E2, both of which are particularly successful and desirable cameras. Either one would have to be among the top contenders for anyone looking for a fine compact camera with a high pride-of-ownership quotient.

And yet both have their roots in the original models from previous years (2010 and 2012 respectively). We do note that the improvements in both over the originals are not insignificant.

The very compact mid-line X-M1 is new from Fuji for this year, but our feeling is that if you're going to spring for an expensive, beautiful Fuji, then you should spring for an expensive, beautiful Fuji that has a viewfinder. You won't be sorry.

Hence, no nominees from Fuji this year.

"Littlized" Canon Rebel SL1 next to full-sized Canon 70D, both introduced in 2013. Illustration from camerasize.com.

Canon: As the world's leading cameramaker ("still," it might be tempting to add), Canon remains a safe mainstream choice for professional workhorses. However it is generally in the same situation as Fuji for CoY 2013: the company introduced some very fine cameras that will very naturally be among the top choices for people looking for cameras in each of their respective categories, but each represents an evolution of a well established model—that is, not much "newthink." Again, there's nothing wrong with that. As a purchase decision, an "evolved" model might indeed be a smarter buying choice than something that's all new and different.

But then, this is the 2013 Award, not a Buyer's Guide.

This rules out three very fine cameras introduced this year: The Canon 70D, a class-leading traditional 35mm-style APS-C DSLR; the Canon S120, a top choice as a pocket camera (albeit one with a "tiny" 1/1.7" sensor); and the Canon PowerShot G16, a "Swiss Army Knife" digicam that traces its venerable roots way, way back into the mists of digital camera time.

This leaves two potential CoY nominees from Canon. The first is the quirky PowerShot N, an early attempt at a "social media" camera that brings Wi-Fi and device connectivity to the forefront. As such it is engaged in a hard battle on two fronts, answering the Sony QX and similarly meant to provide an alternative to the smartphone hordes now storming the cameramakers' bastions and battlements.

One condition for nomination for Camera of the Year, however, is the possibility of the camera in question actually winning. There is no chance the PowerShot N is going to end up as our CoY. Hence, no nomination.

The second "possible" from Canon is also an answering gun: the Canon SL1 (called the 100D elsewhere in the world), a super-miniaturized "real" DSLR that apparently constitutes Canon's rebuke to Mirrorless. Canon seems to be asking, "You want small?" And the SL1 is its way of saying "we got small."

The Canon SL1 is a nominee for Camera of the Year.

Mike

Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

ronin (partial comment): "I rate price/performance as one of the top factors in rating cameras, a factor ignored by 99% of reviewers and embraced by 100% of engineers."

Frances Gigg: "This is the same SL1 that you described back in October as a 'lumpen, stunted little beastie'?"

Mike replies: Put things in writing and they come back to haunt you.... :-)

Phil: "Perhaps you have overlooked an aspect for the 70D (although I know what you mean)? 'The Canon 70D is the new bar against which all other video AF systems will be measured. In Imaging Resource's 15 year history, Canon's Dual-Pixel Autofocus technology is one of the few true breakthroughs we've witnessed, making it this year's Technology of the Year.'"

Charles Maclauchlan: "I understand your criteria and also understand that it's your criteria. I believe however that 'Great' should have a category for evolutionary. In fact, having regretted buying cars with revolutionary engines or transmissions I have great respect for evolutionary. Fuji (you knew I was going there) not only evolved the X-100 into the X-100S but then gave me a firmware update for my X-100 bringing many of those evolutionary features to a discontinued camera. That's pretty 'Great' in my book."

Mike replies: It is, and I see your point. But what we're after here, ultimately, is "The Camera of the Year for 2013." So ask yourself...could that really reasonably be the X100s, when the all-new X100 came out in 2010? That just doesn't seem to fit, to me.

It's that time of year again. Starting on Sunday I'm going to be doing a few posts about 2013's best cameras. Because, yes, it's fun.

Before we start, anybody got any nominations? It should be something that was "appreciably new" in 2013, not just a fine camera, and it should be something that's "of the time," that is, distinctively 2013. Although I don't see how any list-maker could resist the Lomography Konstruktor (above). I mean, this thing is geek times three...it's a film camera, a toy camera, and a plastic model kit. Like a hat trick of regression and geeky goodness.

And I haven't been able to determine if there were any new view cameras this year. Sure, most of our finalists will be digital cameras, of course, but a tiny bit of yeast leavens the bread.

Fellow geeks—erm, I mean fellow connoisseurs—your nominations please?

Mike

Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Joe in L.A.: "The camera of the year to me is the Kaizen!

"You can't find a Kaizen at your local camera store?  Look again.  Kaizen is the Japanese business philosophy of continuous improvement. I first heard it used as a practice by Toyota.

"This year, the obvious trend in cameras is Kaizen.  I am so grateful that I was able to return my Nikon D600 and get a D610 instead.  When trying out the Fujifilm X-E2 and X100s, they seemed to be more satisfying products than their predecessors.  Commenters above say the same about the Olympus OM-D E-M1 and the Apple iPhone 5s.  There are many other examples this year.

"So, if you want to give the award to 'something that's of the time, that is, distinctively 2013,' give it to the Kaizen.

"At least until next year's Kaizen 2.0 comes out."

A few random early observations, now that I have the Panasonic GX7 and the Olympus OM-D E-M1 in the house:

Mirrorless is growing up
The word is "refinement." Start with a good, innovative new design, get feedback from users individually as well as the market as a whole, and create a new version that maintains the strengths of the original while addressing the consensus shortcomings.

Fuji X100s: Closest thing yet to 'the DMD'

It seems obvious to me that we're dealing with significant refinements here. One reader spoke the other day about how different the Fuji X100s is from the original X100 (I'd link to it, but I can't find the comment). I can't speak to that, having never used the "-s."

Being very familiar with the antecedents of the Panasonic GX7 and the Olympus OM-D E-M1, however, I can say that both of these new cameras are very significant jumps over their predecessors...they amount to transformative refinements.

Together, they take Micro 4/3 to new heights. They're the two best Micro 4/3 cameras to date.

The new status symbol
Dials and switches, switches and dials—are they the new status symbol?

Electronic controls (menus) and the ubiquitous buttons-controlled-by-the-same-dial are cheap, and have proven an easy enough way to add the perception of value to electronic cameras. The downside is "feature creep" and intolerable complexity for users, which end up in practice making cameras slow to use and finicky as users grope their way through a thicket of options. One reason the new Nikon Df is so expensive is that real manual switches and dials are expensive.

They can also be really, really nice.

Olympus OM-D E-M1: Dials and switches done right

I admitted that it was my fault that I didn't get along with the Olympus E-M5; it's quite possible, and not unreasonable, to work through its controls and learn how to set it up to use comfortably. Many people have. But it was so paralyzed by featuritis and brainlessly addled by overcomplexity that it just...well...pissed me off. My problem. I used it for a while and then offloaded it.

The E-M1, by contrast, although obviously based on the E-M5, is a delight to use. And the reason is those luxurious, expensive dials and switches, switches and dials. I especially like the fore and aft clickwheels—so nice—and the 1-2 switch, and the locking PASM dial is a nifty (though probably unnecessary) touch.

GX1+6
Back in Panasonic-land, the company has poured everything into the GX7—in direct response, it seems, to its competition. The result is that it deserves six integers between it and the GX1, which was a capable if ultimately limited IL digicam. This is a considerably more ambitious camera. Built-in EVF, check. Tiltable built-in EVF...wow; great. Comfortable handgrip. In-body stabilization, although at a fairly rudimentary level of implementation—but a first for the line. Better sensor than ever, check—one that our friend Carl Weese says gives him noticeably better results in prints.

Panasonic Lumix GX7: More ambitious than its predecessors

Like the Olympus, the GX7 seems fast. Very responsive. I love that in a camera. Like the steering in a car, it really determines the device's character at a basic level.

And on top of everything, pretty good value for a dollar, for the luxury end of mirrorless at least—it's the best deal of these three cameras at the moment. And great good looks. The GX7 is the best camera yet in this successful and prolific line of model evolution from Panasonic.

(By the way, if you know one of those he-men who insist that cameras are just tools and they don't give a $#!% how they look, Jorgen Udvang has a camera they wouldn't mind using. It's just a tool—it doesn't matter how it looks, right? So then it stands to reason they wouldn't mind using this. [Cue laff track.])

Customizable
I haven't really investigated the E-M1 very extensively yet. I had lots of work to do during my three-day break just past, so I didn't get much time for photography. But I'm going to venture one conclusion. One that might not quite be warranted yet.

I have to explain it a bit. Bear with me here.

You know how, in the very old days (before my time, really), interchangeable lenses were considered a way to customize a camera? That is, the fact that you could screw one lens off and screw another on was not something you were necessarily expected to change on the fly, but a way to create a different camera. So old-timey pj's would have two bodies, and one would have a 50mm and one would have a 135mm, and neither lens would ever come off its body.

That's still the way I tend to operate, in essence. I like to get a camera set up the way I like it, and then leave it that way.

Customizable cameras: Old-time pj's Robert Capa and George Rodger

I know some people are different. Some people like to switch all the time between all the different options, depending on the individual job at hand and even on the individual shot they're trying to make. So it's manual focus one day, predictive AF the next; Program exposure for one shot, Aperture-priority for the next; and so forth. Get the idea?

So here's my point. I can't predict yet how that sort of photographer will like the E-M1. That is, I'm not sure I know how easy or convenient it will be to switch back and forth and back and forth between all the available modes of everything.

But, what I can say is that I think photographers like me—who tend to like to set up their cameras according to their own tastes and then more or less leave them set up like that—are going to like the E-M1 very much. It seems to me like it's a camera that's going to be very easy to customize according to each photographer's personal tastes, for photographers who like to do it that way.

Once one does that, it's going to be easy to get to really get used to the camera controls until they become second nature. So I suspect this is a camera that its owners will become very comfortable using over time.

Really very nice in that respect. Haptic technology, I believe it's called.

Too new
These are just preliminary reactions—and I know, I know, it's worthless to get too excited by new cameras because of their limited arc. It's not like you can keep a digital camera for 40 years like an old film camera. And—this is the reason it's an "arc"—we've all gotten very spoiled by getting treated to the latest and greatest while it's shiny-new and special. (We may have to wean ourselves of that particular addiction eventually.) The latest/greatest from three years ago have already lost most of their gloss. At this end of the arc, though, it's very easy to be impressed.

But.

But I am, indeed, greatly impressed by both the GX7 and the E-M1. These are both really nice, refined, luxurious camera designs with great features. (I haven't even mentioned the best feature of the E-M1 at all.) They seem well thought-through, luxurious, and capable.

All three of these cameras are very expensive. On the other hand, you're getting what you're paying for, and it's good to have that option. You don't need cameras this nice. But it's great that they exist.

It's been fun and interesting watching "the DMD" cameras evolve. I'll be writing a bit more about these two as I get to know them in the weeks to come. (And maybe I can even persuade Carl to share some of his thoughts about the GX7. We'll see.)

Mike

Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

jay moynihan: "My DSLRs are ancient bodies, in digital market terms. High ISO on them is not really a feature. I recently got the Fuji X100S for my 'daily carry' as it appealed to my old-guy sensibilities. Turns out to be not only fast and good design, but OMG! the high iso performance floored me. The manual focus even works.... As a 'non-professional,' it seriously calls into question any future DSLR upgrades for me."

Will: "This is great, but the Fuji X-E2 really belongs in this conversation. It is similarly a product of refinement, similarly retro-styled, similarly EVF-driven, and is lousy with switches and dials. Probably too late. Regardless, that was a fun article to read."

Jeff1000: With a quiet-as-a-mouse-wearing-sneakers leaf shutter, bokeh-envy-inducing 23 ƒ/2 Fujinon Aspherical lens, a fabulous 16 MP X-Trans APS-C sensor, wickedly fast and accurate auto- and manual-focusing options, it’s the 'DMD' of all DMDs: the Fuji X100S. Brilliant camera, absolutely brilliant. I’m disappointed that the camera scribes at the sprawling TOP Media Complex haven't taken a closer look at the X100S and reported back :-), but I know, there are so many shiny new objects out there it's hard to keep up."

Ruby: "I had to laugh just a little, because although I primarily shoot digital, I have two MX's, one with an 85mm and one with a 50mm, and neither lens ever comes off."

Godfrey: "I've been working with the Oly E-M1 exclusively since it arrived a month ago. Outfitted with the Panasonic 14mm, Panasonic-Leica Summilux 25mm, and Panasonic-Leica Macro-Elmarit 45mm, this may be the best camera ever developed for me. (Ah, there again is the '28-50-90' idiom.)

"The capabilities are great, the ergonomics and customizability is outstanding, the image quality is something to write home about. I feel absolutely confident to sell off everything else I currently use...including if I feel like it the M9...and relying upon the E-M1 for all my photography. It's that good from my perception."

Michael Bearman: "Why can't you keep a digital camera for 40 years?"

Sylvain responds to Michael B.: "From the top of my head:

• OLED technology where it is used—EVF, LCD panels—has a relatively short life expectancy.
• Battery technology: batteries wear out over time and lose their max capacity; at the rate we see manufacturers change battery formats, that will be a real issue. (It was already an issue once in the past with the shift from mercury batteries to 'modern' ones.)
• File format: A RAW of 2013 might be impossible to read in a filesystem of 2053. Although this could hopefully be mitigated in many ways. Adobe DNG is such an attempt.

"And I'm sure there are many other things. Nothing impossible to overcome, but my impression is that mechanical cameras could see some of their parts more easily replaced or remade, I believe, than an electronic circuit/sensor."

Jock Elliott: "Dials and switches and buttons—oh my!

"Mike, there is one downside to those lovely manual controls: inadvertent activation. I was chimping some shots taken with my Canon G12 and muttering 'Why in heck are they so dark?' Then I noticed that the exposure compensation dial was way off of where it should have been. It protrudes slightly from the back edge of the top deck of the camera and had rotated from contact with the bag when I was sliding it out to shoot. That kind of thing generally doesn't happen with software settings."

Mike replies: I'd disagree with that last conclusion to a certain extent—although perhaps I just have a genius for bollixing things up. And at least with a manual control, you can relatively easily see what's gone awry, when it's gone awry—anyone ever had the experience of having something go "off" with the software controls and not be able to figure out quickly what or where? Granted I use too many cameras, each for too short a time, but that's not a good feeling.

I'd also argue that the "inadvertent setting" problem is partially fallout from the rapid pace of development, which prevents designs from being slowly refined and perfected. For example, the SD card door and slot position was perfect on my Panasonic GF1; it's much less than ideal on my current Sony NEX-6, which always has me fumbling and cursing. With slow evolution, little niggling problems evolve out of a design. But when each new camera is too much of a blank slate, that process isn't allowed to occur.

In fact, this is one of my big hopes for the OM-D E-M1. As Olympus's new "pro" body, I'm hoping that its future development will take a more conservative course and retain the basic haptics long enough for the look, feel, and operation to become comfortable and familiar to consistent users. This is something Canikon tries to do with its top pro SLRs, largely with success.

The Panasonic G5 Micro 4/3 mirrorless camera has hit the clearance racks—only $299 with lens. The 14–42mm stabilized kit lens, that is.

[UPDATE Saturday 6:10 p.m.: The price of the kit at Amazon has risen to $498 and they have only 3 left, and the price of the body only has risen from $249 to $299 with 14 left in stock.

But B&H Photo, which says "No longer available" for the body-only, still has the body + lens kit at $299.]

[UPDATE #2, Midnight: ...And they're all gone. —Mike]

In writing this post I found myself calling the camera "Very capable but quite bland but very capable."

Okay, made meself laugh again. But actually that does about nail it, once I stop to think about it. It's not much of a toy, but it is a tool—a neat, attractive, easy-to-use tool.

Just passing the word along.

Mike
(Thanks to several readers)

ADDENDUM: A friend tells me that there is something special about the G5: it's the cheapest current large-sensor camera that's completely silent. He emphasized several times: not "quiet"; silent. The GX7 also has this mode, and reportedly the Panasonics' electronic shutter produces artifacts in certain situations. However, my first friend says he has successfully photographed in church with the camera only inches away from someone's ear, and, as long as his lens is wide open (the closing down of the aperture makes a tiny click), he still goes unheard and unnoticed.

So there's that.

Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Steve G, Mendocino: "Some time ago, you posted a similar closeout sale on the Panasonic G3 (body only, I think) and I got one. I was so happy with it that I sought out and bought a second body used but in like-new condition from B&H. The G series is a bit Dangerfieldian—gets no respect—but they're fine picture takers. An excellent match for the 20mm ƒ/1.7 Panasonic lens in weight and balance.

"I also have the equally underrated 14–45mm Panasonic IS lens, which was the first GH kit lens. An excellently sharp lens at moderate apertures through its focal length range.

"Spend some time working through the setup menus (in my case, mainly turning things off...) and you have a fine simple camera. Mine is set to aperture priority, at which point the thumb wheel toggles between setting aperture and exposure compensation. ISO is right below that, so it's easy to reset without taking my eye from the (only OK quality, but 100% accurate) finder. When the screen is folded closed, the EVF is active. Open the screen, and it switches to that. Movie button is disabled, so no long, dark films of the inside of my shoulder bag. Highly recommended."

mbka: "I switched directly from G1 to G5. The G5 totally works. 'Bland' never crossed my mind. It just works. Image quality is noticeably better than the G1 and the body coating is more pleasant. My G1 had gotten sticky over time. Bonus, with the G5 I actually manage to take usable night photos, starry skies included. Usable doesn't mean perfect. There is some noise that needs cleaning up in LR or such. The long exposure quality cutoff seems to be about 30 secs. Above that, half the stars are produced by the sensor. Either way, one of my night pics now works as my desktop background, meaning in fullscreen mode on a monitor it is good enough to please. But seriously. The G5 works. The only half-serious issue I can think of is the overly contrasty EVF. On mine I haven't managed to find a setting that I really like. It might be sample spread."

Like most modern SLRs, it looks better in black

First things first...gotta keep the lights on. In case you want to be the first on your block with a Nikon Df:

Black body only
Silver body only
Black body with 50mm ƒ/1.8 lens
Silver body with 50mm ƒ/1.8 lens

...That out of the way, this was my reaction when I first saw the pictures of the Nikon Df: Omigod, be careful what you wish for.

People have been asking for a digital sensor in an FM2/FE2 body for a long time, and this is apparently that racehorse designed by a committee*. My preliminary impression was that it proves that: a) Nikon doesn't get retro, and b) Leica retains its crown as the only camera company that actually gets the concept of Jobsian simplicity.

Another way to think of the Df: it's a D610 with dials. If you like dials, this might well be a good thing. Or a very good thing.

Of course, it's not really a D610 (a camera I think I really like, by the way, although I've only played with a D600 briefly). The Df has, very roughly speaking—along with no video (yay!) and greater support for older lenses—the sensor from the D4, the battery from the D5300, and only a 1/4000th top shutter speed.

One thing it's not is an FM2/FE2 with a digital sensor in it. In the words of Yuan Sheng: "We were at the Nikon Singapore media event earlier, and...my first impression is that the camera is really fat." Thirty life points to the first reader who spots a photograph on the Web of the Df next to an actual FM2 or FE2.

My email inbox thinks the Df is likely to disappoint older photographers who actually knew and loved older Nikons, and that it will only have "retro appeal" to younger photographers, who are more likely to see it in the light of current DSLRs and don't see past the styling cues.

Retro done wrong: the Excalibur**, half 1930s Mercedes,
half 1970s Ammurricun luxomobile

But a camera can be a working tool as well as a styling exercise and an aesthetic creation. And as I look at the Df more, I can start to see the logic in it. Leaving behind the FM2/FE2 styling cues (which strike me as retro done wrong) and any pretending toward metal-manual-mechanical simplicity, it does look like Nikon's engineers have done some significant thinking about the control interface of a modern camera and the ways in which a camera might be designed to leave certain things out, as well as jam everything in. I do like that double ISO/compensation dial on the left-hand side of the top deck.

In any event, I'm always saying that people should never judge a camera until they've held it and used it, so I'm not going to go all-in with the chorus of complaint and criticism that is sprouting all over the Web (and in my in-box) along with the interest and enthusiasm. The Df is emphatically not what people who wanted a digital FM2/FE2 were asking for; but it might be something else interesting and useful. And who knows, maybe it will have a good influence on future Nikons. We'll have to see.

And now, I'm off to read Thom Hogan. This should be fun.

Mike

*Old joke: A camel is a racehorse designed by a committee.

**CORRECTION: That's actually a Zimmer in the picture, not an Excalibur. Thanks to Doug C. for the correction.

Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

James Symington (partial comment): "I just dumped my large Nikon outfit—D800E, D600 and a whole load of lenses—to move to the Sony A7r which is small enough to actiually use with some pleasure. The introduction of the Df has not even slightly made me rue that sweeping decision."

D: "I really really really like what I see. I actually postponed purchasing a camera to see what this was actually going to be. With the current buying incentive on the D800 there is only about a $300 price difference between the Df and the D800e. Even though I love what the Df represents, I ordered a D800e this morning. For the price, 'The Big Dragoon' gives much more bang for the buck."

Chris Lucianu (partial comment): "The Df is exactly the kind of retro Nikon I expected. Alas, it is also precisely the kind of retro Nikon I dreaded."

Rory O'Toole (partial comment): "As a Nikon user I'm disappointed, and especially with the price point. Correctly priced (more X-Pro1 range), I would probably be interested—if only to get that D4 sensor in a smaller, cheaper body."

Andrew Molitor (partial comment): "If this was just a cash grab, they'd have jammed a Nikon 1 into an FM styled body and sold it for this same price. This thing is actually a legit semi-pro body, with a feature set that's pretty much in line with the price."

Richard (partial comment): "Based on specs alone I see no reason to get this camera at all."

James Sinks: "When I finally saw pictures of the real deal, my first thought was, 'That is one ugly turd of a camera.' My second thought was, 'It must have been designed by people who grew up in the nineties based on what they think old farts want in a camera.' My third thought was, 'Why on earth would anyone want to pay D800 prices for a less functional, more complicated, more fiddly D600?' My fourth thought was, 'The Sony A7r seems like a real winner.'"

Jeff1000 (partial comment): "It’s retro in the way that the modern Volkswagen Beetle is retro: a Beetle body on a Golf chassis."

Eamon Hickey: "I'm glad that Thom Hogan, almost unique among commentators so far, correctly identified this camera's closest style predecessor. It's the FA.

"The FA was a sales flop, but Nikon's engineering self was very proud of that camera internally. There's also a sense in which the FA was a fusion of old and new, so I'm sure its ghost lived in the minds of this new camera's designers in several ways.

"I don't know what this camera will be like to shoot with, but I always thought a 'digital FM2' was a bad idea. For me, modern camera control systems (pioneered by the Canon T-90) just work better than the old dials (and I speak as someone who learned on a Minolta SRT-101 and owned an FM for a decade). And those modern control systems, especially, work better for digital cameras.

"There was never any way that Nikon would leave out autofocus, autoexposure, 1/3rd stop shutter speeds, an LCD, etc., and they were always going to support their modern lens communication protocols (i.e. no aperture ring). That means a design like this one.

"I don't know if the Df will be a sales flop, like the FA was (although high price was part of the FA's problem and might be, too, for the Df), but at least the Df isn't a cookie-cutter DSLR. Hard to predict what the market (in this case, a small target market) will think is cool."

Semilog: "I've had an FM, an FM2n, and four FE2's. I had an FA. I hated it. This looks like the FA, only worse."

Soeren Engelbrecht (partial comment): "To my eye, it doesn't look like a committee design—more like 'OK, guys: Team A does the front and top, and Team B does the back and sides. See you in two months!!'"

Bahi: "I agree with many of the commenters on many points but disagree strongly on one: sales potential. The Df will sell very well. It's part camera (and an excellent camera, at that, if you don’t own a recent, full-frame digital SLR), part status symbol, and part fashion statement.

"A casual, well-heeled buyer of this Df will like its retro appeal, its construction, the 'Made in Japan' label, the dials and the image quality. Its faults will be seen by professionals or very serious amateurs—they're not the market Nikon is serving with this model. It has the D800, D610 and D4 for those folks. The fact that you will be able to do technically excellent work on it in a wide range of shooting conditions is the icing on the cake. Take this camera out and there will be lots of positive comments from the people around you…as long as they're not pros or serious amateurs themselves."

Imre Karafiath: "I remember when the D200 was discontinued at a closeout price of US$600. If that happens to the DF I'll buy one then."

ronin (partial comment): "I completely disagree that Nikon does not understand Apple-like design minimalism. Nikon delivered the most Apple-like camera ever, the V1. Leave the V1 in full automatic and it will amaze you."

...Too sharp. Too detailed. Yuck.

Photo by ijsvogel (click to open)

Notice the reviewer isn't going to give his test camera back to Sony. [g]

Mike
(Thanks to Tom Kwas)

Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Patrick Perez: "In the words of Homer Simpson, 'Sweet merciful crap!'"

Mike A: "Don't buy an A7R to use with legacy lenses because you'll lose resolution with adapters. It won't be sharp enough! Don't buy an A7R to use with native lenses because of all the resolution. It will be too sharp!"

Mike replies: I was speaking, as they say, "tongue in cheek." Of course people will want it more because it's so sharp and detailed, not less. Although some of the examples at the link are, as a couple of people have termed it, "over the top."

Peter Urban (partial comment): "Without exaggeration, I am positive that this is the camera that is going to change my life as a photographer forever—and that of many others too. It has the potential to usher in a new era in digital landscape, nature, architecture and product photography."

Mike replies: Well....

Mark L. Power: "I will be glad when the hyper-real era is over...."

The following is an experiment:

(Please let me know if you have any problems when you click on this. And by the way, the D610 is in stock at B&H. I don't know, I'm kind of considering trading my D800 for a D610. I like the D800, and it's very nice having an all-purpose DSLR around, but I just have no need for all the pixels, and it's just...big.)

Mike

Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

No featured comments yet—please check back soon!

...Passed along to me by my friend Isaac at B&H—he says these are flying off the shelves like crazy today (and in limited supply):

Canon 6D, $1,574 at checkout (I think this is the absolute lowest price ever for a full-frame digital camera bought new, is it not?)

Canon EF 24–70mm ƒ/2.8L II USM lens, normally $2,299, today $1,699 after all rebates. You get $300 off at checkout and then there's an additional $300 mail-in rebate.

Just passing the news along FYI.

Mike
(Thanks to Isaac)

Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

MM: "LensRentals' Roger Cicala, who plays daily with the best lenses in the world, on the 24–70mm II: 'If I say there are four billion stars in the Milky Way, everyone accepts that. If I say the paint is wet, everyone checks for themselves. I’m not sure which path people are going to take with this statement: This is the best standard-range zoom ever made. By any manufacturer. Ever. It’s not close.'"

G'day! I've just finished watching the live announcement of the Sony A7 and A7r from Australia. Looks like the 36-MP A7r is a much more premium-quality camera in terms of its construction and control knobs and so forth, despite looking almost exactly the same as the 24-MP A7.

Camera and sensor size difference between the NEX-5T and A7r

And how can I not like a camera that launches with a Zeiss 35mm ƒ/2.8, given that I went all the way through art school shooting almost exclusively with a Zeiss Contax 35mm ƒ/2.8 Distagon? Sorry, I'm very tired. It's way past my bedtime. Here are a few links if you'd like to jump into the line (queueue in British) (joke, not typo) or look at the shiny pics. We'll talk in the morning. G'night.

Sony A7 Digital Camera (24MP)
$1,698 Available for pre-order

Sony A7R Digital Camera (36MP)
$2,298 Available for pre-order

Sony A7 Digital Camera with 28–70mm Lens
$1,998 Available for pre-order

Sony FE 24–70mm ƒ/4 ZA OSS Lens
$1,198 Available for pre-order

Sony FE 35mm ƒ/2.8 ZA Lens
$798 Available for pre-order

Sony FE 55mm ƒ/1.8 ZA Lens
$998 Available for pre-order

Mike

Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Mark Roberts: "So why are these cameras designated as Alpha (A7 and A7R) when they don't use the Alpha lens mount?"

Mike replies: According to Sony, "Starting from now, we're going to re-brand everything 'Alpha.' We're consolidating the brands. So no longer will you see the word 'NEX'" (source).

Art in LA (partial comment): "I love seeing the evolution of digital photography."

Kenneth Tanaka: "I don't 'eagerly await' cameras any longer. I don't generally follow product rumors, either. But these Sonys were exceptions. The extraordinary image quality I've been getting from my Sony NEX and RX cameras has quite unexpectedly* made me a fan and I've been secretly following pre-release gossip about them. (*I was a scoffer when Sony entered the camera biz.)

"And these A7 models did not disappoint me. It looks like we now have the 'Leica for the early 21st century.' Speaking of which...glad I decided to pass on the new Leica M. Good image quality, but not nearly as good as the Sony RX1. And what a costly and overly-delayed Frankencam! No thanks! So as the Aussie kids were introducing the A7 models in the dead of the U.S. night, my bleary eyes watched my right index finger click 'Buy.' I now 'eagerly await....'"