surlezi: No EVF no buy.
It is both OVF and EVF. You will be surprised. Pentax has engineered a technological breakthrough. First ever DSLR that enables sensor feed through the OVF, and instant visual feedback on all changes in settings done through the dial, including, how the SR and ISO effect the final image.
It will have the EVF.That knob on the right reveals that controls on it must feed on direct visual feedback from the sensor.
→ A revolutionary DSLR: Composite mirror + EVF image (probably).Those two new big dials could be full control of the EVF image overlay inside the VF, because camera sends both sensor output and mirror image at once.One dial sets the control, the other fine tunes it, and the button on top confirms it. You have a total control over image preview in the VF before you press the shutter, and can show control and how it affects the image output: 1. how crop looks like, 2. grids, 3. eV compensation, 4. different levels of SR, 5. how ISO affects the image, 6. HDR, 7. See where highlights are, etc. You have an instant visual feedback, far better than using the rear LCD, as in theory, mirror image and sensor-fed image could be combined in one as well and that is possible in OVF only. And of course, no problems with outside light messing with LCD-only preview.Ideally, variably transparent mirror in that case could also be used as a sort of built-in ND filter. A total portable field darkroom.
JackM: TLDR. Why would anyone buy this over a Sony a7 series other than for the jewelry factor?
M is just one way to photography, and the problem is that people associate Leica with M alone. *That* may hurt sales. However, Leica had many ways before, including the original SL, and the R range of SLRs. Many still consider R lenses to be best made ever. With an SL, Leica does not 'copy' Sony, but itself and its own tradition. It is Sony who has no photography history whatsoever, who copied from everyone else (A7 looks like a concoction between Pentax K1000 and a Leica SL), and the word 'commitment' is therefore not in their vocabulary.
Leica does not waste time on making cameras that scavenge on other system's lenses, and if Sony did it uncompromisingly right, and not cutting corners from the beginning, this is what they would do too. There is no other way to quality.But Sony had no guts to do it: it would be too expensive, too committing, just the thing they want to avoid.
Zvonimir Tosic: Thank God for Leica; they are delivering things as they should be done — right and without cutting corners. It was about time that someone teaches Japanese and Korean toddlers how mirrorless things are done. This is pro thinking, first time in digital mirrorless history; everything else we had so far was kindergarten play.
It is the lasting benchmark still. And mindshare one cannot buy with money; it requires respect for the commitment, which many other companies lack.
Leica represents 99% of mind share in photographer's minds. Just think of ease of use and most magnificent lenses. That is what counts.
Marty4650: OK, face it.
This is a mouth watering camera, and we all want one. I just can't aford one. But if I could....
We are accustomed to too much ugliness we don't see good things when they arrive. SL is not ugly. Leica released form to an essence, while Sony, albeit exploring similar approach, did not settle for anything so freeing or so polished up.
Thank God for Leica; they are delivering things as they should be done — right and without cutting corners. It was about time that someone teaches Japanese and Korean toddlers how mirrorless things are done. This is pro thinking, first time in digital mirrorless history; everything else we had so far was kindergarten play.
rhurani: Sony san! for me please the same camera without EVF, without tilting of the LCD, without the filter, but with a built-in flash, a 24MP-only FF for 700$. Deal?
Keep on dreaming about f2 lens. Lens elements would be too wide and too heavy for a retractable design. An f2 lens would be then affixed on the front of the camera, like on Leica X.
aris14: Compare it with Leica Q asap, pls...I can't wait for the comparison and comments...
Btw... Sony is not FauxWagen et such...
According to Leica Q manual, At 28mm, the resolution is 6000x4000px (24MP)At 35mm crop, 4800x3200px (15 MP) At 50mm crop, 3360x2240px (8MP).
8MP is enough for a cover of Vogue and for normals, more than enough for all use. For tech-geeks, though, nothing is enough. :-)
You must try them yourself. Yesterday, I have spent some time with Leica Q. It is in high demand, and for a good reason. The camera is simply the best fixed lens camera I have seen in my life. The size in hands is perfect, ergonomics is spot on, and the machine is very, very fast. Very intuitive. It is not heavy nor bulky — made to handle well, and also manage heat well, which is Achilles' heel of many mirrorless cameras. It can be held with one hand only. The optics is a marvel. Nothing but superlatives. 50mm crop is handy. It can be discerning photographer's one and only camera indeed.
No, they won't do it. Instead, buy new Ricoh GR II for $600 and save $100 for extra battery and SD card. That one is a real deal.
King Penguin: It's obviously a superb camera but using your head not your heart, why would you buy this over a Leica Q.
It's like buying a Nissan instead of a BMW!
......and before the fan boys comment, it's not snobbery, it's about driving experience, pride of ownership, down the road resale price and most importantly pre and post customer service.......the list goes on........
Sensor is all Sony has as an advantage. Other that that, they can't make a camera that is a pleasure to use, that invites you back. No, such thing can't happen. The very first A100, after they bought Minolta, was useful and a fine camera, because it retained lots of Minolta's charm. And that's it.
Leica Q seems to be more appreciated camera than any RX1, and far better thought out. Lens is also more sophisticated, much better ergonomics. On the other hand, many Sony's camera appear no more than half-thought-thru props, to feature latest Sony sensors.
Zvonimir Tosic: As some suggested, I shall too; with this insane resolution, they could have gone wider, 28mm or 24mm lens. And for this relatively small camera with nothing to grab on, how increased number of pixels will affect image quality? This camera will register even smallest hand or camera shake — is the lens stabilised?
Thanks ET2 and Randy.
As some suggested, I shall too; with this insane resolution, they could have gone wider, 28mm or 24mm lens. And for this relatively small camera with nothing to grab on, how increased number of pixels will affect image quality? This camera will register even smallest hand or camera shake — is the lens stabilised?
For beautiful looking cameras, buy Leicas.Although this G5X Canon is as ugly as a mud fence, in reality it may be quite acceptable, even user-friendly.
It would require a power of a supercomputer to run even 4 lenses. Where all the data would be stored too? I had once drawn and planned a similar idea, but it had three lenses only, wide, normal and semi-tele, each had it's own focusing point fed by the data from the widest lens. Each lens could be used separately, or in concert with others. But when the computing power had to be calculated to make the thing work seamlessly, and still remain compact, it was enormous. It is much easier to create just one great lens, insert one great sensor with enough MPs, keep the temperature down of the camera, save on power, and do trimming as needed from the wide lens. Like the Leica Q.With an array of tiny lenses there is no DoF control, no aperture control, no shutter control for each, all is just "snapshot photography" which is no fun at all.
Now they are not tied to any encumbering plans and delays of the parent family. Sony's corporate goals will not interfere with sensor production plans, for this or that reason, and the new business can pace its own agendas. No more exclusive "buying rights" through corporate parent barters, no more delays because of need for parent corporation books to look "prettier". Etc.