Will you buy Nikon's upcoming EVIL camera?

Will you buy Nikon's upcoming EVIL camera?

  • Never!

    Votes: 128 43.2%

  • There's a small possibility I might.

    Votes: 113 38.2%

  • Probably.

    Votes: 38 12.8%

  • Absolutely without a doubt!

    Votes: 17 5.7%
  • Total voters
    296
I would agree, however I'd add that a small sensor camera is pretty much out no matter how well it otherwise performs - simple because of it's small sensor. I'm not a fan of the infinite DOF thing that comes with small sensors. m4/3 is too little control over that aspect already for me!
 
A 4 letter word for this camera

A 4 letter word for this camera

I could use #$%@ or @#*^ but for this forum let me say this camera is J-U-N-K!!!!

Give me the M8 1.3 crop at least. Otherwise it is #$%@!!!!!!!!!!!
 
I'm with you guys! It's always a good idea to judge a camera on the basis of rumors about its specifications rather than real-world experience using it to make pictures.
 
semilog said:
I'm with you guys! It's always a good idea to judge a camera on the basis of rumors about its specifications rather than real-world experience using it to make pictures.
Click to expand...

Nikon-Mirrorless-Camera-X810.jpeg
 
semilog said:
I'm with you guys! It's always a good idea to judge a camera on the basis of rumors about its specifications rather than real-world experience using it to make pictures.
Click to expand...

I remember a discussion or two with you (like this) in the X100 pre-release threads, though, where you seemed rather active in general.

(Back then you were excited about the "potential" of the camera based on leaked specs, though leaked deliberately; I guess here it's just that people are disappointed about lack of potential based on leaked specs.)
 
Last edited:
There was plenty of information about the X100 at the early stage - the lens, the format, and the viewfinder. WHere is there equivalent information for the Nikon?
 
Paul T. said:
There was plenty of information about the X100 at the early stage - the lens, the format, and the viewfinder. WHere is there equivalent information for the Nikon?
Click to expand...

Then again, the discussion here is nowhere near the level of technical sophistication of those X100 threads - here, it's just hypothetical questions of "if it's such and such a crop lens, it's probably not interesting for me". You can have that discussion on the basis of a leaked lens mount picture without hurting anyone.

My X100 comment was primarily directed at the comment about real-world experience using a camera to make pictures being preferable to discussion based on specs and rumours. In general I would tend to agree, always assuming the actual availability of the camera in question. However, the inverse observation from the X100 case is also true that the lack of such pictures (and cameras to take them with) didn't stop anyone from extensive commenting activity, the poster in question included.

Finally, in a forum full of camera nerds such as this forum, it seems like a very common trope to ask for taking pictures instead of technical discussion. You read this a lot and I've been making that kind of comment myself. However, if you come to think of it, all that trope does is play to the collective bad conscience among camera nerds concerning talking about gear. The fact that we all know this bad conscience to exist makes playing to it a bit of a cheap argument.
 
Last edited:
^---- Bingo. There were actually things to talk about with the X100. Here? Essentially nothing, yet. I'll talk about this camera when there's actually something to talk about.
 
fdigital said:
I can tell you what it won't have without even using it - any depth of field control.
Click to expand...

If that's the real sensor, and if it turns out that you're right about the size, then yes, you are also correct that it will (at times) be difficult to obtain inadequate depth of field in photos of cats and old mailboxes — a crucial element in composing digital photographs that look as though they were shot with an overpriced Holga.
 
semilog said:
If that's the real sensor, and if it turns out that you're right about the size, then yes, you are also correct that it will (at times) be difficult to obtain inadequate depth of field in photos of cats and old mailboxes — a crucial element in composing digital photographs that look as though they were shot with an overpriced Holga.
Click to expand...

Yes, because all I do is take photos of cats and letterboxes 🙄
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom