« Great Cameras of 2013 Part III: Olympus and Panasonic | Main | It's Good to Look at Pictures »

Saturday, 21 December 2013

Comments

As someone who takes most of my photos underwater, I can tell you that it is an interesting but expensive toy. If Nikon could have made this the digital Nikonos to take the Nikonos lenses then it would have been way more interesting. As it is most serious UW photographer are putting D800 and 5DMIII in big expensive housings.
Bill

Mike,
Yep, the long slow climb into Summer starts today. However the evenings started to draw back out after about December 12th even though the days were still getting shorter. It's the dark evenings I don't like, so today I'm a bit happier.

This is where I got my information:
Sunrise and sunset times

Hi there. Does this mean you have been in touch with the photographers whose work you will include in the book? Or is the race still on so to speak.. :-)

I am all in favour of promoting the GM1 - it really looks sweet.

I forgot that little fact, that today was the shortest one of the year. I spent about an hour in the barbershop and when I got out at 5PM the light struck warmly.

I passed by shops yesterday and got a new SD card, but I also got to sight new cameras in the shelves.
The GM1 is one tiny nicey thing... Displayed next to a GF6 and RX100 the differences are interesting.
It was announced when the A7 and while looking for latest news for feeding my inner poor gearophile, alas, every site just mentioned the Sony or the bigger sister GX7.
I like that it finally opens the "micro" side of m43

The Nikon 1AW would be an interesting option for a route in the Mekong or Amazonas.

From what I know of it, though the AW1 seems almost ideal for sea kayaking, it is not a good underwater replacement for the Nikonos. I speak as a sea kayaker and Nikonos owner. If the Nikon AW1 had been released 18 months ago, I probably would own one. Up until then I was still using my Nikonos V for sea kayaking, and scanning the slides for online use. On shore I used a D300. But then I bought a Sony RX100 as my carry-around camera and found a decent inexpensive underwater case for it for on-water use. The RX100 and the underwater case together cost less than the AW1, and the RX100 by itself is more pocketable, plus, I will never be tempted to buy extra lenses for it!

I see nothing wrong with the Nikon 1 series. Any of them.

At least they know what they are, unlike that Frankenstein the Df.

See what I did there?

While this is off topic, I wanted to wish you a Merry Christmas, Mike way out there in Waukesha!
I remember how it used to snow all day in Milwaukee and the snow would not lay but with the wind, we used to joke that the poor souls in Waukesha were drifted in.
Hope it is a great holiday time for you and yours.
My two pesos!

Just to clarify my comment in another thread on the Nikon AW1, the problem was image quality. I compared the images from that camera to images from a Canon, a Panasonic, and an Olympus waterproof camera. None of the cameras had very good image quality (by my standards). The Nikon may have been minimally better than the point and shoots, but still exhibited the mushy pixels typical of small sensor cameras. I really couldn't see much difference. I also compared the images to my 1" sensor Sony RX100. The Sony images were very noticeably better. If I am correct about image quality, then what is the advantage of the Nikon? It is way more expensive than the other point and shoots. It is no more waterproof, and therefore no better for kayaking than the point and shoots. It is much larger and bulkier. For all intents and purposes, the lens is not interchangeable. (The camera has to be out of the elements and dry before the lens can be taken off). It doesn't do macro as well as a point and shoot. And to boot, I bet it is not as durable as the other cameras. Believe me, I wanted it to be a great camera. It just wasn't. Anyway, just my 2 cents.

Mike, I am happy to see there is no danger for you to suffer a sea change!

The comments to this entry are closed.