Main advantages for the Nikon DSLR user are NEF/RAW conversion with Nikon Capture NX 2, same as with the DSLR files, also the wireless remote control ML-L3 known from many DSLRs like e.g. D50, D70 or D80 can be used, all CLS flashes like SB-800 can be used, many dedicated controls, familiar menue system etc.

Drawbacks e.g. are slow GPS, useless LAN, slight CA (as can be seen in 100 percent view) and only one NEF picture buffer.

So although the G10 offers a bit more reach at the long end (140 mm equiv. instead of 112 mm) it’s a no-brainer for any Nikon user to buy the P6000 and not to buy the G10 as one would miss known NEF/RAW workflow, remote control, CLS and more!

Only those Nikon users who rely on the questionable P6000 “reviews” instead of making-up their own mind buy a G10, the smaller form factor of the P6000 adding to its pluses: I have a bag full of Nikon DSLRs and – ahem – some bags full of lenses so the P6000 fits ideally as a complement and can be carried easily all the time.

What we can learn is that it often is not soooo very clever to rely on “reviews” rather than to make up one’s own mind…

The P6000 is a great little camera (with room for improvement), but the above, lengthly, post is wrong on a number of points showing that the person just likes to seems to want to sound knowledgable:

1) It took them a few months, but it *is* fully compatible with Capture NX2 where I get quite a bit out of the sensor.
2) I have never noticed signicant CA (for a compact-type lens) in the hundeds of pictures I’ve taken.
3) It offers plenty of benefits as far as the “Nikon” platform goes, especially using my Nikon flash, using Capture NX to edit raw files, and keeping the Nikon look-and-feel to the controls and interface.
4) It is significantly smaller then the G10, which was a main priority to me.
5) It has issues as does any small sensor camera, but the noise cleans up well if you know what you are doing and have realistic expectations (for a camera that I can keep in the pocket).

Having said that, I’m very impressed with what Canon did with the G11 and S90. If the S90 had been out when I bought the P6000, I would have gotten that (the G10 is just too big for my needs — it won’t fit in a pocket). But I think Nikon got the form-factor right, and the the lens is sharp on the P6000, and am looking forward to the next iteration with a *hopefully* larger sensor, cleaner sensor.

Hav

Let’s hope we can say good riddance to megapixel wars!

My wish list for a high-end compact point-and-shoot is similar to what others have already suggested:

APS-C sensor that has decent dynamic range and decent low-noise high ISO performance.

NEF format–fully compatible, such that you can fully use all features of Capture NX 2 to post-process images–just like NEFs that DSLRs shoot.

Fast shutter release–comparable to a DSLR.

Last year I bought a Canon G10, and I must say that like the size and feel of the camera, but I found the performance to be mediocre for some situations and fantastic for other situations.

15 MP in that small sensor meant poor performance at high ISO, with lots of ready noise from the base ISO 80 on up. The lens also readily suffered from major chromatic aberrations when in landscape mode.

On the positive side, it works very well in macro mode, with tight sharp images across the image. Chromatic aberrations seemed to disappear in macro mode. The G10 has regular dials that you can quickly and easily set ISO, Exposure Compensation and Exposure Modes.

Now we hold our breath. With the Canon G11’s announcement, Canon has “blinked” and has apparently listened to complaints about the G10. Has Nikon done the same, or are they relying on clueless and conflicting marketing blather that plagued the specifications of the P6000?

BTW, my DSLR is a Nikon D700, which I am crazy about. Because the P6000 offered no advantage or benefit as far as the “Nikon platform” goes, I bought the Canon G10 as a carry-around point-and-shoot camera. At least the G10’s CR2 Canon RAW format was fully compatible.

New list, according to Nikon global in 2008-2009:
DX: 10-24, 16-85, 18-105, 18-200, 35/1.8 and FX: 70-200-II, 60 micro, 50G, and the 24, 45, 85 PC-E
New count is: 11 lenses

offer a SB500 – a SB400 with slave capability

the sensors are too dense – up to date APS-C 6 megapixel with HD 1080p

put on a fixed 30mm F1.8 lens or offer a micro F mount

put on front and rear thumbwheels – like the big DSLR’s – and an ISO wheel

high resolution LCD and optional attachable optical viewfinder –

12 bit raw lossles compressed NEF or compress raw

5fps continuous

in other words, an enthusiast camera that will take great pictures

[NRR] admin

Nevertheless, youre doing a nice job here, thanks!

Nikon has released:
Bodies: 7 (D60, D700, D90, D3X, D5000, D300s, D3000)
Lenses: 14 (new 70-200, 50 AF-S, 500 G, 600 G, 35DX, 10-24 DX, 16-85DX, 18-105 DX VR, new 18-200, 60 micro, 105 micro, 24 TS, 45 TS, 85 TS)

Canon has released
Bodies: 3 (XSi, XS, Rebel T1i)
Lenses: 6 (18-200 EF-S, 24 L, 200L, 800L, 17 TS, 24 TS II)

So what’s Nikon’s problem again? Because it looks to me that they’re releasing new bodies and lenses at twice the pace of Canon. That they’re not making the particular piece of equipment that YOU think they should have made for you? And you solution is to shoot MF? MF is fantastic, but I don’t know what that has to do with the equipment that any DX/FX format digital camera manufacturer has released.

In terms of lenses, I am still playing catch-up to Nikon , first need to win the lottery to ever get any chance of owning those beautiful gold banded lenses. Now call me a nit-picker, though I am still waiting on AF-s wide-angle primes with 50mm AF-s specs: distance window, weather sealed mount, takes filters and has a decent wide aperture (f/2 for 20, 24, 28 and 1.4 on a possible 35 if that doesnt raise the price too much)