Great Cameras of 2013 Part II: Ricoh-Pentax and Nikon

[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...."

Comments

[Steve Jacob]

Yes, Ricoh GR is a "proper" upgrade. As for the body, it's hard to improve on so why bother?

So far it's the most interesting.

[Miserere]

I would also be holding a grudge.

We're only decent human beings, Mike, and as such, we get pissed off when others are not.

[Gaspar]

A few years ago (cretaceous age, in digital time) you asked us about our dream camera that no one had ever built.

My immediate answer was "a digital Nikonos!".

I'll probably never buy a Nikon 1 AW1, but is nice to know someone listens (or should I be worry?)

[Roger Bradbury]

Considering that TOP has such a large and faithful audience, whoever made that dishonourable and shady decision at Ricoh-Pentax was acting like an @r$e of the first order.

As someone who already has and likes Pentax equipment, who has persuaded one brother and one friend to buy Pentax DSLRs and lenses, I'm not impressed.

This kind of thing does not inspire confidence in the brand.

Was this why you sold the K5?

[Doug C]

Until I read Roger Cicala's blog I thought the Sony A7 twins might not deserve consideration. After all you don't like adapters and Sony only has two decent lenses.

But if adapted lenses give the results they seem to from his tests someone with a collection of older lenses can get into full frame for very little money and get spectacular results. And the user interface should be as good as it was on the Minolta, Contax RTS or whatever the lenses originally fit.

OK, no AF, lousy EXIF data and all the rest. OTOH the EV will give more accurate focus to the slow worker than anything short of large format contact prints. For my indoor work it is simply the only thing that works. Neither AF or full frame DSLRs come close. I cannot afford to miss focus on my jobs so for me, a Sony is the only game in town.

[Alan Fairley]

"Knobs? Dials? We don't need no stinken knobs and dials."

[Doug C]

Oh, and completely off topic,

I just signed a stack of prints with my Rapidograph, always an awful exercise but at least I know they will last.

I was just looking at a couple lovely Bromoils that a friend made for me, and I was curious when they were made. I'll never know because the signatures and dates have faded away despite his use of a "recommended" "permanent" pen.

I hope your project on that subject is moving forward. Your fans are waiting.

[John]

I do think the Pentax K-3 belongs in the list of nominees, Mike. It's one solid machine for a great price. The only drawback in today's world is that it isn't full-frame. It's probably the best DSLR introduced this year (if you consider the D610 merely a fix for the D600, which I do).

[Caleb Courteau]

That really chaps my hide that Ricoh-Pentax would slam the door in your face like that. As Roger Bradbury pointed out in an above comment, someone was being quite the careless fool treating Mr. TOP like that. I'm not about to sell off my (beloved and cherished) k-5, but hopefully someone at the company will read the post and comments and realize they released the PR equivalent of a loud smelly fart.

[Ian Macdonald]

As a long time Pentax user (starting with a Spotmatic in 1968) I'm disgusted by their treatment of you Mike. Also the brutal removal of Ned, who has behaved like a gentleman, does not endear me to the brand. I still like the product though.

[Ted]

As a long-time Pentax shooter I also am deeply disappointed to hear how they treated you. I have owned the K100, K20, and K5, and my wife has progressed from the K200 to the K7, to the K5II. Between us, we have more Pentax lenses than we can fit in our bags. I am truly disgusted with the behavior of a company that I have been very loyal to for many years.

[Anders]

Photographers wanted a Nikon with a small form factor and classic dials. Unfortunately, Nikon choose to focus on the latter instead of the former. I believe this was an unwise decision which ultimately led many to Sony's recent full frame offerings.

[Eric Rose]

The Nikon 1 AW1 is a joke. Well at least for scuba divers. I have used a Nikonos well past 100 feet with no problems. The AW1 is only good to 49 feet. It would have been a travesty if they had called this toy a Nikonos. You've got me thinking about a Ricoh GR though ......

[Clinton Bauder]

* puts grinch hat on *

Sadly I think the only thing Nikon got right with the AW1 was NOT calling it a Nikonos. I'm not really sure what it is or what it's good for but it certainly isn't the heir to the Nikonos line. Both the I-V series and the RS were pro quality cameras designed for serious underwater use. They had their flaws but they were serious cameras with useful depth ratings, proper lenses and in the right hands were capable of producing Nat-Geo worthy work (and regularly did).

The AW1 - not so much. It's only good to 50 feet which isn't near enough for even casual scuba work. Also the low depth rating makes me wonder what happens if the camera is subjected to pressure waves like you might experience shooting in surf or a river. Definitely not confidence inspiring. The lens mount gives me the heebie jeebies. Unless the camera is totally dry it's just asking to drip water into the camera when you change lenses. And if you can't' change lenses then what's the point?

Speaking of lenses I also can't fathom what they were thinking with the lens selection. Underwater your go-to lenses are a super wide (usually a fisheye) and a macro lens. Nikon offers neither for this camera. A normal zoom underwater is about as useful as a fisheye on land; you can use it to take pictures but it will hardly ever be what you want.

The small sensor is also a liability underwater where light is at a premium. Probably OK for closeup work with a strobe but definitely not the best for wide angle scenic work.

For me if you are serious about shooting underwater then a housed camera with a larger sensor is the way to go. If you're not or just need a splash proof or snorkeling point and shoot then you're better off with one of the cheaper waterproof cameras without the removable lens. They're going to be more rugged and more compact will probably take pictures just as good as the AW1.

$.02
Clinton

[stefan]

Hi Mike, i think it should be mentioned that the Pentax K3 introduces a real innovation: The anti-aliasing-solution. There is no common, blur-inducing filter in front of the sensor-pixels to avoid moire like in nearly every other camera. But you can avoid moire (only if needed) via a litte shake of the sensor, optional. This is a new solution and a real step forward...

[ggl]

I don't know about the GRD, but the GRD IV is already excellent. I have never used a snappier digicam. The only problem with it is lens distorsion, so common in most digicams.

Oh yes and the new Nikon Df is too fat. Why isn't the A7/A7r on the list?

[Zach]

Allow me to add my voice to the chorus of the pentax-shooters disappointed with the brush off you received from Ricoh-Pentax. Hopefully they make things belatedly right

[Leland Davis]

I purchased a Panasonic FZ2200 this year and highly recommend it for the following reasons (my other camera is a Nikon D7000):
1.Light and easy to carry around all day.
2.F 2.8 through entire zoom range (24-600mm).
3. Articulated screen plus eye-level view finder.
4. Four uses programmable configurations.
5. Capable of recording RAW format
6. An extensive collection of tutorial on You Tube.