lem12: This x100s is probably one of the nicest looking rangefinder camera out there.
after Leica though...
BarnET: "Large 18.4-megapixel CMOS sensor"
Large compared to what?!.Lmao!!!!!
Large compared to a pin head ;-) I also find it curious when they write: Rangefinder-style mirrorless
Where is the Rangefinder?
If they would scale this up to an APS-C sensor it could be interesting.
Monochrom: Remember when no one could believe the price for the RED ONE to be true?Five years later and you get about the same specs for a quarter of that money.A shame that the lens you'll need will still cost you at least 10K...
Why not put a $10k lens on a $6k body?
UnitedNations: As expected only a poor 1% increase in score over the X-E1. Which I think is still overly generous ...because the 'newer' X cameras(X-e2, X-t1, X100s) all have major problems with their JPEG engine.
The 'newer' Fuji X cameras not only render their JPEGs in an unnatural waxy way, but even bigger problem is that their JPEGs have severe limitations in Dynamic Range. This is a problem which was NOT present in the X100, X-Pro1, & X-E1.Simply speaking the JPEGs are nearly unusable in the 'newer' Fuji X cameras IF you are coming from the early X cameras.
It is Fuji's free choice to suddenly make their X cameras into mostly 'RAW Shooting ONLY' cameras, but I am not sure if people who bought Fuji's early X cameras will be happy & be willing to buy the 'newer' X cameras knowing that the usability of the JPEGs has been significantly deteriorated.
Any camera is RAW only as far as I'm concerned. Who uses JPG OOC in 2014?
DonSantos: Well I'm about so sell my "gold" award x-e2 with the awesome fuji 35mm 1.4 and upgrade the the "silver" sony a7 + zeiss 55mm 1.8.
Am I crazy?
Yes. The A7(r) is underwhelming and I think one need to wait 2 or 3 gens before something good comes along. Besides Sony does not know to make lenses.
vincent0923: despite the fact that the iso rating is over stated. the iso 6400 X-E2 shots still beat many other camera's iso 3200 shots.I really hope Fuji would allow Auto iso max 12800, which is more like iso 6400 for other brands.
I can also see that the X-pro1 retains better detail at high iso, giving a notably less waxy look for skin tone
Well that depends on whether you enjoy details or NR
Provia_fan: Photography is no longer what you can do with you camera, but what can your camera do for you, if I am judging by some peoples perspectives from their comments.
Well, most of the time is it the person behind the camera that is the limiting factor. But as for DR, then our eyes are far superior still.
Shunda77: Why are all the Canikon fan bois running so scared over these Fuji cameras?
Is it because Nikon's woeful jpeg engines and Canon's outdated sensors are developing into festering sores on the buttocks?
Fuji is sure doing something right! Nikon and Canon are clinging on to their old technology.
That said, I'll wait for 2nd or 3rd gen sensor from Fuji before buying into yet another system
It is still just a Bayer sensor after all.
Do you use the inferior Adobe software to post process? The RAW images looks rather soft compared with m43.
GPW: Great interview. At least he didn't try to push some low end BS DSLR cameras like Nikon and Canon. I just wish their lens IQ was on par with the big two. I think a lot of people are fed up with Nikon and Canon forcing their customers to buy cameras with minimum upgrades. Great job Sigma
I believe you will find that some of the recent Sigma lenses are above the quality of the Canon and Nikon equivalents. At least according to reviews and tests. Not my claims. :-)
This great interview sums up why I stick to Sigma products (cameras and lenses)
And yes, they have already made me said WOW several times. I cannot forget when I "developed" the first RAW files from my DP2 Merrill. Even if I was used to Sigma camera's RAW files, I was just taken aback by the stunning quality.
abluesky: For me the, a very important issue is the hight ISO performance. Does that mean that now the max ISO is 800? I'm not familiar with the Foveon upper ISO limit.
Depend on what you mean. The foveon sensor excels at normal ISO, not at high ISO. For colour photos you cannot go very high up in ISO, but if you do B&W then you can go much higher. I try to limit colour photos to ISO 320 in low light, but one can do up to ISO 640 and get good results with the Merrill cameras. For B&W ISO 1600 is not a problem and it gives nice grainy noise. You can even go to 6400 if you are careful when you do the shots.
So to sum up Foveon cameras do not have the high ISO capabilities like the Bayer cameras, but Bayer cameras do not have the image quality as the Foveon has at ISO 100-200. For me it is the latter which is important.
(unknown member): A one stop increase in ISO performance is as modest as it gets and would not cause me to upgrade from my Merrill series Sigmas. The extra length over the Merrill series DPs is also not something I would prefer. I hate to say it but I don't see how this upgrade is going to attract new users or cause existing users to want to upgrade. That said, I love my DP Merrill series cameras.
I have all DP Merrills, but I'll also get the dp2Q (at least) because of the improvements that it has. I'm particularly interested in 14bit RAW.
That said, I'll keep my Merrills as I have kept my original DPs. I even use the original DPs now.
Here is a every day shoot-out between the original DP2 and DP2 Merrill for those interested: http://www.flickr.com/photos/prebenr/sets/72157634524714567/
yabokkie: an ergonomic nightmare but there are many buyers who don't care ergonomics nor image quality.
how do you know? Have you tired?
rpm40: I appreciate Sigma's dedication to trying new things, but they usually end up shooting themselves in the foot and putting some amazing tech into flawed products, eater than refining into a more mature product.
Sigma is their own worst enemy.
carlos roncatti: innovation is always good, and sigma should be applaud by that...fuji, ricoh and so on...im just very skeptical about ergonomics...lets hope its good to handle, who knows...but sure looks,like may said, good ergonomics for selfies
We'll see, but I cannot understand why it should not have good ergonomics. There are plenty of the traditional styled cameras that have terrible ergonomics even with the lump on the front of the camera. I think SIGMA has found that this solution does give good ergonomics, otherwise I don't see why they would be so bold with the design.
It is also a 400g camera, not 2 kg :-)
dccdp: Maybe it's just my lack of imagination as I haven't had my coffee this morning ;-) but how do you hold this camera? I mean, yes, you probably keep your thumb at the side of that inverted grip. But then, how do you operate those buttons, especially the nice Focus one?
How do you use your thumb on a camera with a traditional grip? I don't see and difference here.
xpanded: Bigger battery, check.Small form factor, eh... no.On/off switch, eh... no.Foveon sensor, eh... not really.
This is hardly a step forward Sigma.Glad I just bought the DP1M so I have the full real Foveon trio.
How on earth would you manage to make a smaller camera than the Merrill taking bigger battery than the Merrill?
Of course there is an on/off switch and it is way better than the one on my GH3.
Of course it is a Foveon sensor.
Esign: The reversed handle is for selfies, which most shots nowadays are.
Or some people cannot think outside the box and think the grip should always be in the front?