Just out of curiosity I was looking at past news maker camera launches and I started wondering why only Nikon is getting beaten up for launching a full working proper camera ala DF.
Okay DF may not be looking as cute/sexy as E-P1/X-Pro or as small as A7/R, but if you keep these emotional first impressions aside, I think DF even at its launch price is much better cam than mirror-less counterparts its trying to compete with. I am not comparing it with DSLRS as I think Nikon is trying to compete with mirror-less crowd
Here are some examples I could think of:
Olympus is ground breaking for overpriced E-P1 with no VF, SLOW AF, few lenses and noisy sensor (USP: Smallest, cutest and 2nd mirror-less in market after Panasonic G1)
– Launch Price $999
Well Fuji gets applauded for a quirky Beta product ala X-Pro1/X100 loaded with firmware bugs, sloooow AF and VF w/o diopter adjustment (USP: Dummy RF, EVF/OVF)
– Launch Price - $1500
Sony gets all the love for compact FF ala A7/R with slow AF, shutter vibrations launched with two lenses costing 2-3 times of their DSLR counterparts, with size as big as SLR lenses (USP: Sensor, Sensor, Sensor)
– Launch Price - $1600/2300 with Native lenses $800 (vs $300+ of DSLR) and $999 (vs $100 of DSLR)
Nikon launches a compact and lightest FF DSLR with nice 100% and big OVF, AF probably much better compared to any mirror-less, with industry leading clean Sensor, quality build magnesium body with shutter rated at 150K (?)
- Launch Price $2500
Are we too harsh on Nikon or expecting bit too much from a company which launched a genuine good product (compared to mirrorless category) or its just that "Pure Photography" campaign is at fault?