clicstudio: Is it me or the jpgs look better than the raws? Still both look pretty bad to me.
In the photo you mention, the JPEG is mushy with noise reduction issues. And still darker and more contrasty to boot.
Its you. The JPGs are desaturated, dark and excessively contrasty in comparison to the RAWs. Not radically different but enough that a side by side shows the RAWs to be subjectively better. And that is the real issue: subjectively. For me, the RAWS beat the JPGs but apparently many prefer what they are used to in color and contrast.
RGWR: Why do they keep ruining good cameras by letting them grow bigger over the years. GX7 was perfect in that respect. This one isn't.
I'll trade you my GX-7 for your GX-8. ;)
PKDanny: CRAZY PRICE!!!
A Fuji FrontierRA-4 printer was $205,000 and it only went as large as 10"x15".
Like ProfHanD said, the price is very competitive for the class. In 1995 I paid nearly $10,000 for a 36" Encad with a RIP. Quality was fair but when I switched to HP then Epson the difference was night and day.The HP was wonderful and was 42" for about $7000 IIRC. The Epson 9800 was $5995 and I picked up a 7800 for $2500.Theses are production printers and make economic sense for someone generating a lot of output for money.As such they, are very fairly priced. I actually am still surprised there is that much of a market remaining for such low cost LF printers.
Great video that shows that success is not instantaneous but is a rewarding journey. Great to see something about inspiration instead of gear.
Howard: This thing is big!
Leica SL was the first large mirorless.
Jacques Cornell: This should come as no surprise, as Fuji has a long history of making highly-regarded medium-format lenses.
And large format, cine, enlarging and television lenses. All enjoy excellent reputations.
Just fine. Big enough for a big battery.
Yomama: I think most of us think that the camera companies are competing against one another. But in reality they are mostly Japanese companies that work as a monopoly. Their collective objective is to see growth in the industry, by selling stuff that are almost good enough but not quite there.
A is selling overall performance, b is selling small size, c is selling lightning AF, d is selling the best image quality.... So we end up buying into more then 1 system and use different ones for different situations and we change cameras every2-3 years. To be honest the camera industry just want us to act like that.... Not like the old days when a camera is just a camera.
So yes. Sigma was not allowed to produce a camera that crosses its territories and risk taking profits from the other big brothers
Yeah, Oly and Sony are happy that they are losing money but that more cameras are being sold.The fact that some cameras have some features but not others is a matter of licensing and marketing.
Levi Civjan: This seems worse than my GX8 for everything I shoot. I'm not sure what it's better for other than image stabilization, unless you use the double stabilization on the GX8.
IBIS helps in all hand held situations and has been demonstrated many times and appreciated by owners who can see the improvement in their photos.
rwol1970: I'm still waiting for a real, affordable retro camera:
- Only manual operation- Simple light meter- No monitor (wait until you're home; if you know what you're doing you don;t need a monitor) so you have full attention for real photography
Maybe a manual winder for the shutter too?Heck, NO CARD just 512MB internal memory. That'll learn ya.
It seems that the market prefers Oly's style and IBIS to Panasonic's stolid qualities.
oopsibrokeit: It is a good looking camera but offers little you cannot already get in mFT GX8 etc for less money
Price is not the only thing. I love Panasonic but Olympus has charms that go beyond specs.
"In terms of design, the F is a gorgeous camera, both to gaze at longingly on a table or to physically hold and use. "
For many that is all we need. ;)
alextardif: Taking bets on how many warranty claims will be filed after people start busting LCDs when they ram their schnozes smack in the middle with that interesting EVF placement, LOL!
Cool tech nonetheless!
It will be a problem for anyone with a steel nose.I actually agree with Steven that it will be greater problem for left eyed photographers.
joe_leads: I'm wondering why they keep a DSLR mount for this camera. Why not make a new mirrorless mount with short flange distance and offer their existing DN lenses for Sony E, as well as future mirrorless lenses for both mounts? Their DSRL lenses could still be adapted.
People happily use adapters. However those who are picky about ultimate IQ fuss about them as they have seen the results of poor manufacture and iffy fit.This is not to say that it can't be done but any engineer will tell you that you have introduced a new set of tolerances that need to be accounted for.As for tele converters, they have the same issues but are masked by the magnification of the center part of the image circle thus minimizing lack of planarity.
kty: Come on Sigma, join the Micro 4/3 system and make these cameras with active MFT mount. They would be a totally unique offering to tons of people and undoubtedly very good sellers.
And add the anti µ43 trolls to the anti Sigma trolls?
So you will be inclined to buy their lenses in native mount and not adapted.Adapters, no matter how popular, introduce variables in the optical path that can affect IQ.As they are very proud of the resolution of their cameras and lenses they decided not to compromise.
Richard Franiec: Ultra wide zoom compact is a huge innovation on its own.If the lens performance is good, this camera will become a well deserved sales hit for Nikon.
The performance could be excellent.Both the Sony RX-100 and the Panasonic FZ-1000 have superb lenses in front of 1 inch sensors.