Nikon Announces D5600 DSLR

<p>Looks like a D5500 with SnapBridge: http://www.nikon.com/news/2016/1110_dslr_01.htm<br /> However, it is not announced in the US and is not yet available at the US dealers, not available even for pre-order.</p>

<p>More info:</p>

<ul>

<li>Nikon Europe: http://www.europe-nikon.com/en_GB/product/digital-cameras/slr/consumer/d5600</li>

<li>Imaging Resource: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/nikon-d5600/nikon-d5600A.HTM</li>

</ul>

<p>I'm curious whether it's permanently not coming to the US (like the Canon Eos M2) or whether they're just delaying until after any political repercussions that might cause exchange rate instabilities.<br />

<br />

I've never tried SnapBridge, but I'm given to believe it's horrendously slow, so I'm not excited by it. It's not like there wasn't already Eye-Fi; there's talk of video and remote control over wifi, though I'm not clear what was already there on the new models (never being tempted to spend the fortune on the dongle for connecting the D810...)<br />

<br />

I gather the touch screen interface has been tweaked (possibly to be closer to the D500's), but it all sounds very incremental. For a long time there were a lot of stocks of old models on shelves, so we'll see how this goes down with retailers. Jessops UK are listing preorders with the 18-55 for £800, vs £570 for the D5500, which is an appreciable bump - but exchange rate fluctuations may have affected those prices. The D5500 just got a shout out as the best option in its price range in a DPReview group round-up, so the new one has shoes to fill.</p>

<p>If I'm not mistaken, you need more than one dongle to do wireless connectivity on the D810 with Nikon parts. You would need both a UT-1 and then WT-5A (or WT-6), neither of which is exactly cheap. These systems are designed for connectivity to a desktop or laptop computer, not mobile devices like Snapbridge. If you only need connectivity to mobile devices, you can get the much less expensive Camranger which works across different camera models and is more fully featured than Nikon's Snapbridge application. I think for mobile connectivity this is the preferred option because it is not camera specific. Snapbridge is designed mainly to send 2K jpgs without having to make the connection explicitly every time, and without having to disconnect the phone from wifi to the internet. Time will tell how well Nikon can get Snapbridge to work, but the early reports from D500 users aren't terribly encouraging. I hope they do get it right as this type of a feature would make it easier to share shots from dedicated cameras compared to using a smartphone camera. There are now quite a lot of people who like photography but in practice never print images. So one can question the purpose of the high resolution image if the images are never printed. Dedicated cameras still have the advantages of close-ups, superwide angles, long lenses etc. in various applications. And the high resolution image is still available on the memory card for editing and other applications than online display.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><br />The SnapBridge app is available for compatible iPhone®, iPad® and/or iPod touch®, and for smart devices running the Android™ operating system.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Okay, Windows phones and tablets are out :-(</p>

<p>It is like third-party lenses for SLRs. They always have it for the Canon EF mount for EOS and Nikon F mount. It maybe also available for Sony/Minolta Alpha. However, if you happen to use a Sigma DSLR, don't expect Tamron and Tokina to make lenses for that.</p>

<p>If you can get a iPad tablet that is directly connected (WiFi or data) to the internet (and social media) for about $10 per month, why can't I get a serious DSLR that is directly connected to the internet. It may require an Android or IOS interface. The camera makers need to start fully cooperating with AT&T, Verizon, and others and get with the program. I just got back from an extremely popular tourist town in Japan (Hakone) and almost no one was using a DSLR. They were too busy taking photos from their smart phones and posting them on social media. </p>

<p>Michael: Probably because many people already have a phone and don't want to pay for a separate contract. In terms of uploading, I don't believe there's a great deal on offer that I couldn't already achieve with an Eye-Fi tethered to my phone, but wireless tethered control over the camera is interesting to me (partly because of the logistics of cabling). I <i>do</i> have a copy of HeliconRemote on my Android phone, with a USB OTG cable connecting it to the camera - I'd intended to do some focus stacking while on holiday, but lacked the time and energy. Not needing the cables would have some appeal, although I've never been inclined to install software written by Nikon on anything. (Hmm. Also I'm switching from my elderly Nexus 5 to a Nexus 6P soon, so I hope HeliconRemote still works...) Now, if Nikon were to expose a web interface on their phones (I'll volunteer to write it for them...) so you didn't need any proprietary software at all, that would be even better. I'll have a look at CamRanger too...<br />

<br />

However, I do believe Nikon could do more to make the upload process smoother - Thom Hogan keeps complaining about this. Personally I don't mind too much: the nearest thing to a social network I'm on is this one, and I like to process my images before sharing them. I accept that the youth of today like sharing their images, though. Even I take a lot of photos using my phone, although not so many that I'd call artistic (even by the standards of the rest of my images).</p>

 

<blockquote>There are now quite a lot of people who like photography but in practice never print images.</blockquote>

 

<p>Yes... speaking of that, does anyone actually use PictBridge? I've always been a bit bemused by the idea that there are lots of people out there using digital cameras without computers (how are they backing stuff up?)</p>

I'm afraid many people are not aware of the concept of a back-up. Certainly not that they should make them regularly.

 

If I'm not mistaken, if you use the WT-5A, 6A or similar, you can connect to the camera using a web interface. It is called

HTTP server mode.

<p>Ooh - maybe Nikon did something right. (Actually, that does ring a bell.) Mea culpa.<br />

<br />

Nonetheless, I'm noticing that this thread isn't setting the forum on fire. I hope Nikon have something more exciting in the pipeline.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I hope Nikon have something more exciting in the pipeline.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Like an update for the 24-120/4 with VR akin to the 300/4 E please Nikon..... please..... ;-)</p>

<p>I thought VR isn't exactly the strength on the 300mm/f4 PF AF-S VR lens, at least not around 1/100 sec or so.</p>

<p>Actually, if they allowed the cameras to support wifi, people could tether it to their smartphones and now their DSLRs are suddenly on the internet. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>I thought VR isn't exactly the strength on the 300mm/f4 PF AF-S VR lens, at least not around 1/100 sec or so.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I have tested my copy (of the 300/4 E) right down to 1/25th sec - the VR performs for me better than the 70-200mm/2.8 VRI ever did and it's also better by a considerable margin than my micro 105mm VR at uber slow shutter speeds. By 'better' I mean significantly more keepers but of course shooting totally different subject matter.</p>

The problem is in the intermediate shutter speeds (1/125s, 1/160s etc.) where some combinations of 300 PF sample and

body sample produce markedly soft images with a double image kind of appearance. Slow speeds (1/50s, 1/30s) are

reported to work well, though.

 

My own 300 PF seems to work fine though, with acceptable results at 1/50s and results get progressively sharper as

shutter speed is increased. Unfortunately, some users are left with a problem that remains without solution. Nikon's position (given in response to customer complaint) seems to be that if you want sharp images, use faster speeds (1/320s or faster). Sharp results at slower speeds are "not to be expected." It is a practical stance for many applications (sports, etc.) but many people interpret the CIPA rating to mean that slower speeds should be ok with VR on.

<p>I use the D5500 and enjoy it very much! It doesn't have all the "bells and whistles" offered by other models, but its more than enough camera for my hobbyist needs.<br>

I have been thinking about purchasing a full frame, digital Nikon and to that thought; are there any whispers about an updated Df body?</p>

<p>There is some talk about a Nikon 100 year anniversary variant of the Df, but it may be that people are just making it up in their heads. ;-) I would like to see a new Df with an improved AF system. However, there are people who don't like that camera and see it as a waste of resources.</p>