I see that the interchangeable focus screens have returned on the 6D after being eliminated on the 5D3.
Seems there is much more interest in this camera than the Sony A99. Come on Sony release an interchangeable lens version soon.
marike6: Why would anyone want a proper DSLR with PDAF, a solid grip, and an optical VF when they can have a slippery little E-PL3 PEN camera with no VF and slower, less accurate Contrast Detect AF?
Go to B&H on any given Sunday and the DSLR kiosks are jammed with people while the mirrorless kiosks have no one looking at them. Yet we are supposed to believe that trendy ILCs are the bees-knees and DSLRs are old technology.
Actually Contrast Detect autofocus is much more accurate than Phase Detect autofocus because the main sensor is performing the autofocus. It is not plagued with front and back focus issues like Phase Detect autofocus. As for speed its funny how you mention the E-PL3 which is very fast at autofocusing. Have you actually used one? For 95% of users the speed of the autofocus of most mirrorless cameras is plenty fast enough.As for sales your anecdotes about B&H mean nothing. Mirrorless cameras are selling very well. I own and love DSLR cameras but find I end up taking my Panasonic GH2 out much more often. I only bought the GH2 for video but have become a reluctant convert to mirrorless.
EnsitMike: We don't like it, we LOVE it. We love the yet to come pro version too! :P
Would you "LOVE it" if it wasn't a Canon?
Guidenet: I think there is no excuse for leaving out modern sonic ring focusing motors in a new lens today, especially at this price point. Giving old technology a new name doesn't help except for the fan faithful. These days, we demand that a modern Sigma lens have HSM (their name for sonic ring type). We demand that Tamron's newest be USD (same thing). Nikon owners require all new lenses be AFS. Canon owners have long required USM (ultra sonic motors).
Pentax and Sony have been slow to adopt probably because it is expensive. Only Pentax's top "Star" lenses seem to have SDM (Sonic Drive Motor). There maybe one or two others, but they are just now moving that way. Their two new medium format models of course use the newer technology.
So what's the excuse for not using modern sonic ring motors in a new $900 lens from Olympus? The lens isn't that small. A good AF design would be worth it even if it required a little more width to handle it. Most excuses are going to not make much sense really.
I would love a technician to explain the different autofocus motors and their advantages and disadvantages in PDAF and CDAF cameras.I used to use Canon SLR and then DSLR cameras and always remember USM being used in most of their lenses and micro motors only being in their cheapest lenses and being noisy and slow. Now most contrast detect autofocus lenses are using micro motors and appear to be more applicable for their application than ring type motors but their motors are fast and silent.Olympus does has their own ring type technology that was used in their 4/3 lenses but now use micro motors in their m4/3 lenses including their premium lenses. I can only assume that they are using the best and most appropriate technology.It is interesting that Samsung use ring type motors in their 85mm and 60mm lenses thus allowing full time mechanically linked manual focus.If anyone could give a technical explanation on lens motors and their advantages and disadvantages it would be appreciated.
zzapamiga: Just wondering what the advantages and disadvantages are of the new MSC screw drive autofocus and how does it compare to a micro motor or ultrasonic lens?
The Olympus article I linked on MSC states:
High precision screw drive system. It is silent because it is an internal focusing mechanism that moves just one lens unit.
Just trying to understand the advantages of this type of focusing motor in a contrast detect autofocus system compared to Samsung implementing a ring type ultrasonic motor "Super-Sonic Actuator" in their 60mm and 85mm lenses.
Just wondering what the advantages and disadvantages are of the new MSC screw drive autofocus and how does it compare to a micro motor or ultrasonic lens?
donthasslethehoff: This deflates my interest in m43. Pricing isn't sensible for non-pro's here, so I'm wondering with this lens at $900 and the Panasonic 12-35mm priced at $1200, does the m43 system lose it's luster?
For me, it is, and I really like the OM-D.
Sure, I can still buy the 45mm prime for a decent price and the Pana 20mm, but comparing these lenses to their CaNikon equivalents, I'm trying to see the value proposition.
Maybe there isn't one. Glad I didn't sell some of the Canon glass I kept.
So what your saying is they should release more cheap and crappy zooms.
amangupta: For portraits in sufficient light, it is best to consider it as a 75mm f/1.8 rather than the cropped sensor equivalent focal length. Portrait lenses are supposed to "flatten the perspective" and 75mm lens will show the perspective in exactly the same way no matter what the size of the sensor behind it is. And DOF will also be according to 75mm f/1.8, which is plenty shallow I believe (I have a 60mm f/2 for Nikon DX and usually have to stop down to prevent half the face from becoming blurred). Only thing the FOV equivalence with 150mm changes is the distance between subject and photographer (which incidentally, increases DOF further).
Wrong and the person who liked your comment.The perspective does change because the working distance is different. A portrait taken with a 75mm lens on a FF camera will look different to one taken using this lens on m4/3 due to the distance between the lens and subject being much further on m4/3.
LSE: it's a shame really. the faux 1080p soft output of the 5DmkIII combined with the lack of a codec that doesn't fall appart in post or during motion make its advances in low light peformance and sensor sampling much less attractive. If they had a clean uncompressed 4:2:2 out and more detailed output it would have been nearly perfect. But in 2012, those levels of resolution combined with restrictive internal codec choices and the lack of higher fps for 1080 make the 5DIII a total non starter. I guess we'll see how the 1DX will do or the rumored D600. For now all these HDSLRs are seriously lagging behind.
Sad considering the much cheaper Panasonic GH2 is still the leader for best video implementation in a stills camera. Canon deliberately crippled the 5D3 to protect the C300 etc. With the Panasonic GH3 just around the corner including 1080/60p the Canon 5D3 video implementation is going to fall significantly behind.
magneto shot: oh oh leica promoting B&W. i am glad my B&W tv is no longer used but regret junking it, didnt know there are folks that still lives in cavemen time. Losing color information..is losing a lot of value to the photo. imho, if folks just wants loads of details, get the SD1 sigma, the details with colors are resolved beyond standard comparison and turning that into B&W is a much better and cheaper...process
Not satisfied with just knocking the camera, now let's knock B&W photography.The Sigma SD1 can be converted to B&W and the colour channels manipulated without loss of resolution which is a big advantage over a Bayer sensor. The disadvantage with the SD1 is the limited dynamic range, vertical banding noise and poor high ISO performance. For B&W photography nothing beats a monochrome sensor for outright image quality.
Petka: Have you good people never used the B&W conversion function in newer versions of PS or Lightroom? It is not just that you pull the saturation slider to the left and get a B&W photo. In Lightroom 4, for example, there are 8 sliders for different colors with which you control how those colors appear on the B&W output. That gives the same flexibility as having an infinite number of color filters to put on in front of this monochrome camera when shooting, except that you can do it in the privacy of your own home, and experiment and make different looking B&W prints from the same file. All this flexibility and creative possibility is lost with this Leica. Leica know this, but hopes and prays that the people getting this camera do not know it.
I hope somebody makes an honest comparison with D800 and this Monochrom showing this simple fact how much creative and quality adjustment possibilities are lost when using a monochrome sensor compared to color RAW and B&W conversion in post.
I think people who buy this Leica are aware of this fact. The other fact is convenience does come with a cost. You can play with the sliders all day but the results will not have the same quality as this Leica produces. For example, try mimicking the effect of a dark red filter on a Bayer sensor. The result is significant resolution loss. Even the mighty D800 will result in only a 9MP image.This is a niche product. If you cannot see the benefits then this camera is not for you.
Wonderful output. The results are beautifully sharp and detailed. I love the very fine random noise which looks exactly like B&W film grain. Hopefully this will encourage other manufacturers to produce monochrome cameras.
For those who are interested in a monochrome camera but cannot afford this Leica, Maxmax have a conversion process for Canon Ti DSLR cameras.
This was announced on the 7th of May.
MadManAce: Compared to the Sigma SD1, I am actually disappointed with the sharpness in both jpeg and Raw. I hope that Adobe figures out how to work with this new format because manufacture converters GUI are always garbage. Since most reports say AF is lackluster, I'll wait for the next generation and maybe by then Adobe will have the sensor figured out.
Actually compared to the detail of the Sigma SD1 all the APS-C Bayer sensors look pedestrian, with the X-Pro 1 unfortunately being the worst. Hopefully it is a software problem and not a limitation of the sensor.
Raw Photo Processor's current Beta version also supports the Fuji X Pro 1
Finally 1080/60p! Hopefully it produces much sharper 1080p video than the Canon 5D Mark III.
whtchocla7e: Why does a video camera have an optical viewfinder?
It is not a video camera, it is a stills camera that will be used for video.
micahmedia: Nice to see some files side by side finally. The hype about detail compared to Bayer sensors seems to be a myth still. It's a 15mp sensor--no more, no less. In some testing it has better color resolution. But if you want to see those 30-40mp claims fall flat, pull up the D800 on the studio comparison and have yourself a laugh. Even the D7000 is doing better with fine detail. Maybe its the glass. But in these shots, the SD1 isn't looking mind blowing. I'm a fan of underdogs, so I kinda wish it had a surprise for us.
From the review "Low ISO detail is exceptional, with a degree of pixel-level sharpness that conventional Bayer sensors simply can't match." This is confirmed by the comparison images. It is clearly capturing much more detail than the D7000.