T3: Now my only question is: black or silver?
Black and silver are equivalent to red on full frame
Mike99999: For everyone who is comparing this tiny lens (the size and weight of an Olympus 17/1.8) to the Sigma 35/1.4... the Sony Zeiss FE 35mm f/1.4 is coming next month.
@yabokkie like Intel they have had hardly any successful products year on year
This is a good lens better than the Sigma as the Sigma is too big for street photography where 35mm is an ideal focal length IMHO the additional speed and edge performance are not important to me and not much anyway.
however because it says Zeiss on it an it's 700+ quid it going to meet with a hail of brand snobbery, and well let's face it is rather expensive for simple formulation.
Nikon surprisingly are doing quite well in this sort of space, their more recent 1.8 G lenses 85, 35 50 mm come in at often well under this price and offer decent performance. If you want to shoot primes on full frame. I doubt you will get a better value rig than a D610 with the aforementioned lens line up. shame their SLR line up at this level makes people so angry
John Miles: What a breath of fresh air. I was being retroed to death.
It doesn't have retro features like a Viewfinder or useful ones like an adjustable screen, that grip doesn't look comfortable (but i guess you have to try it) Sigma have never made great cameras, they have a technology package that works exceptionally in some circumstances, no doubt this will improve on this, and the funky design will help set it apart in that niche.
Haim Hadar: Very nice, but I fail to see what's so special about entries 2 & 3...
Two of my favourite, but I would have reproduced 3 slightly darker and with a bit more colour in the old town to give an even starker contrast between the lively old town and sterile high rise. The spots on the lens on 2 make the picture
I really like the look of this camera and sure it will perform, but I'm unconvinced by the controls, i would have liked to see a position on the Shutter speed and aperture to use the command dials to set the exposure, thus affording easier control without taking your eye from the finder and use 1/3 stop increments.
So Fuji have nave a camera that for looks I want to buy, but when I put it next to s 70D or a D7100 (or Pentax K?) the performance real world handling and accessory line up is going to be decisive , add in a couple of lenses, particularly the 56 1.2 vs 80 1.8, and even full frame starts to look competitive
yabokkie: I have the impression that Fujica design was copied from Canon FX. which came first?
I thought the Pentax LXhttp://f650gs.web.fc2.com/p_LXnew.html
It looks like they just decided to build the prototype, and it has some faults, (many fixable with FW though) But it has that full frame "pop" and fidelity smaller formats do not seem to quite deliver, After that the size comparison shot with the 6D tells you all you need to know, a camera this capable has never been this small.
Provia_fan: People, stop saying that iit looks like the Df! Fujifilm had their own classics, which were very nice and great little cameras, this camera is more like their own classic Fujica ST, STX,AX,AZ series SLRs. In fact, even the X mount to me looks like a throw back to their old Fujica X-mount with minor alterations and electronics.So, let this little guy have its own personality folks!
:By yabokkie (4 hours ago)why did Fujifilm abandon them if any of those cameras are any good?"Cmon Yabokkie, like a 52 Vincent, good for its day, but technology moved on, I had Fuji St 605, for many years, It was only when more sophisticated exposure systems and it was getting fairly worn did I part X it fir something new.
d3xmeister: I love that Fuji, Pentax, Olympus and Panasonic are teaching Nikon and Canon how to design cameras. But Fuji really is on top of the game.
The DSLR ranges from Canon Nikon and Pentax are so capable and extensive, not that much bigger physically once you consider its as a Kit with flash and tripod.
They will continue to struggle, this cameras (on its own) will not shake the consumers love affair with the DSLR.
This is the way a camera should be controlled.
Shutterspeed, aperture ... and ISO.
The three primary parameters of exposure.
Why did it take this long for camera makers to ditch PASM, and place ISO alongside shutter speed and aperture? This is much simpler and straight forward.
Thank you Fujifilm!This will be my next camera.
I first remember seeing this approach on the film era Pentax MZ 5, not sure if was the done before that.One thing that concern me is that there are also command dials, which are more convenient for adjustment when the camera is up to your eye, in which case where is the shutter speed correctly shown , on the dial or in the viewfinder?I would add another position on each dial, say "CD" to transfer the control to the command dial
EssexAsh: "Adobe do something" article. Cue villagers with pitchforks and torches.
Id love to see the hate generated if Dpreview reported an Adobe update that was really useful , but released it only on an apple product.
Not so much @bronxbombers4 I stand by the statement
I wonder if DPR sometimes publish things slightly in devilment so they can rollabout laughing at some of the irrational hate remarks in the comments. I would be tempted.
Zeisschen: wait: "It's an ultra-fast portrait prime"
Why is there still no single portrait shot from this lens? I can mostly see pictures from houses at daylight with focus close to infinity and aperture stopped down. Any of them could be made with a kit-zoom lens. Pictures that could need some subject isolation (horse, buddha statue) are not even taken at F1.2. The horse statue shot has infinite DOF, it could be taken with any point and shoot or smartphone. The only F1.2 "portrait shot" I see is the guitar player statue , but impossible to see any details on that surface, I can't even spot the focus point.To me all those samples look like a kid running around taking snaps with the camera on automatic-mode. This is a f**** expensive 1600$ ultra-fast portrait lens, remember? I guess I better look elsewhere...
I would not excuse the rudeness of the OP, but up to the last sentence it was valid robust criticism not rude.
But I agree when looking at sample shots I always scan across for a head and shoulders portrait, Other than edge sharpness, its a shot that at low f numbers it gives a great impression of what a lens is all about. It also seems like an easy shot to do you just have to get a compliant subject.
yabokkie: small sensor doesn't necessarily mean lower quality in low light. 4/3" should be able to compete with 35mm format with f/1.4 zooms (12-35/1.4 and 35-100/1.4) and f/0.7 primes (18/0.7, 25/0.7, and 43/0.7). someone will make them for us, Pana, Oly, Sigma, or Tamron.
but still from these shots we can see the image qualities are not good at base ISO. smaller sensor means lower quality in adequate light (same ISO means shallower wells on smaller sensors, thus more noise, lower quality).
shoot at ISO25 with a 43/0.7 lens on a 4/3" camera, when will we be able to do it?
yabokkie, I always see your posts on these MFT and APSC new lens posts taking about equivalence and stuff. And I am wondering what system you are using yourself,? are you a fan of MFT/ APSC and just think that the manufactures have to step up to the plate to match what is available on 35mm full frame?
Its almost like being there
backayonder: Ah the Wizard of OZ. If only Nikon could find the Courage to produce a D400
Chuck Norris uses a D300.
How about D4K?
Carlos Loff: A camera that only shoots up to 1/4000 can be a good camera and all one may need but can never be a great camera
that right nobody ever took a great picture with a Leica before the M9, or with a Hassleblad or linhoff
There is some lens testing to be done @DPReview towers after this years CES