Old Cameras: What they need most is a new sensor. 16MP APS-C ain't cuttin' it anymore. Dump X-trans, nobody cares.
"Dump X-trans, nobody cares."
"No one loves Fuji for X-trans. Time to toss the technology into the Foveon/SuperCCD dustbin of history."
Absolute BS. I can achieve much better results with properly processed X-Trans RAW's than with Bayer ones, assuming the same pixel count and lack of AA filter.
JMichaelsPhoto: I would love to see a full-frame sensor, personally. If Fuji, and others, don't want to invest in full-frame sensor technology because of the cost of also developing an entire line of full-frame lenses, as Sony did, it makes the most sense to develop a fixed-lens full-frame compact, as Sony did with the RX1r, from a competitive standpoint. That's just my opinion. I'm okay with the 35mm equivalent f/2 lens, but a camera designed around a 35mm f/2 full-frame lens that says Fujinon on it would be pretty sweet. I'm just saying...
"skip the Trans issues which have introduced issues"
Still, X-Trans is far better when processed properly (Capture One Pro or even the latest ACR) than anything Bayer. For example, color noise is minimal and color moire is non-existing in 99.999% of shots.
rjx: I'd like to keep the rumors on the rumor sites, not DPR news / editorials / or whatever this is supposed to be.
While I'm a regular reader of all Rumors sites, I certainly welcome "most probable/believable" rumours here at DPR too. Particularly with Fuji cameras (I'm a Fuji X user myself, and a big fan of the X-Trans.)
Bring on the Pro2 at last, dammit!
KonstantinosK: Underu4men. Posterization artifacts, pink briefs and a homeless guy. Just saying.
"Very classy, Francis, ad hominem attacks, Konstantinos is Greek spelling for Constantine. Get yourself some culture lessons and stop making snide remarks of people's name. That's so vulgar."
He's been doing that for years...
Too bad it hasn't got a 4k screen (for VR, obviously). I'll stick with my Note4.
sensibill: Disappointing to see emphasis placed on point and shoot OOC JPEGs and little mention of true RAW IQ potential, operational speed and street pricing. Not to mention the substantial resolution discrepancy, which will mitigate 'pleasing JPEGs'.
Lack of proper RAW support in Lightroom, demosaicing problems with X-Trans and the fact that the A6000 has a $100-250 street price advantage seem rather important to go mostly ignored in this article, IMO. As is the obvious chroma (and some luma) NR being applied to their higher ISO RAWs. The detail discrepancy between the Fuji and Nikon or Sony 24MP models is substantial, yet goes totally unmentioned in context of comparing RAW DR and higher ISO.
""Compressed like Sony RAW files" oh no we are going below the belt now. LoL"
Well, cRAW's are the main reason a LOT of gadget freaks haven't jumped on the Sony FE bandwagon. It's the biggest problem with their entire high-end lineup.
"As is the obvious chroma (and some luma) NR being applied to their higher ISO RAWs."
Oh please, do your homework before posting anti-Fuji propaganda.
As has been proved countless times in many articles (including those of mine), Fuji does NOT apply NR in RAW's. This common misconception was based on the LR's (before the current version, poor) RAW conversions with their characteristic color bleed.
"Lack of proper RAW support in Lightroom,"
Not any more. The last version has already fixed the color bleeding problem.
And you, of course, didn't bother mentioning how much better the Fuji lens lineup is. With future, as opposed to the practically dead (no native E lens in the future, "only" FE ones) E mount.
Couscousdelight: Amazing, check this :
If you shot moving objects with pixel shift, the moving parts of the image won't be processed, but only the non-moving parts !
Guys, sorry for bursting your bubble, but that's only partially true (if at all). Just take a look at my following crop (notice the red arrows):
See the interlaced combing lines-like effect? Yes, that's the result of the wind's slightly moving the leaves / wire between the shots.
stanic042: I like the lack of moiré and increased detail
So do I. I'm really looking forward for their FF model. If it'll also have the same-quality/efficiency pixel shift, it'll be a killer.
Mister Joseph: That Pentax Pixel Shift is a Pixel-Peeper's dream. Imagine Pentax Pixel Shift on a 42MP FF Sensor... Or how about a 645Z II with Pixel Shift?
"Imagine Pentax Pixel Shift on a 42MP FF Sensor..."
I *really* hope Pentax does introduce their FF model quickly so that we know whether- it'll indeed have the new Sony stacked 42 Mpixel sensor- it'll have pixel shift and- it'll be cheaper than the A7R2.
"Dual Mode is a special mode that we have seen in a similar form on various competing devices. It allows you to embed the front camera image in the main camera frame or vice versa. It works with both video and still images and is accessed in the same way as the panorama mode described above. The embedded image can be moved around the screen but not resized. Unfortunately, the very small output size of 1280 x 720 pixels limits its usefulness."
That's VERY bad. I use my Note4 almost exclusively in Dual mode when shooting social videos / snapshots to, then, share it with relatives on YouTube. I simply *LOVE* dual recording.
(I only use the Note4 for this kind of stuff and nothing more serious. My X-E1, which, with the 27mm prime, is very light and small, is used for everything else.)
b craw: Looks a bit like the love child of a Leica Digilux 2 and a Samsung NX500. Pretty.
"Menneisyys, NX1 has higher default noise reduction in jpeg...less noise and less detail both. IQ is the same and RAW is much better than jpeg like with most cams."
I've only compared RAW's, in which the NX500 was sigbificantly noisier than both the NX1 and even Sony 24 Mpixel cameras like the A6000.
"Looks a bit like the love child of a Leica Digilux 2 and a Samsung NX500. Pretty."
Hope it's not as dumbed-down and underperforming as the NX500. Yes, even IQ-wise - the NX500 is about 1EV worse in high ISO and 0.5 EV worse in base ISO shadows than the NX1.
Gadgety: "It takes many of its features from the GX7 that it surely replaces but builds them into a much more substantial body....the GX8 doesn't have room for the built-in pop-up flash that its predecessor offered... the one thing the GX8 isn't short of is space."
"In a nice touch, Panasonic has removed the 29 minute, 59 second recording restriction from non-European models, so it's only European users who might by stymied by the workings of EU duty regulations."
It's 4.5% tax. Why not offer two models in Europe, one with the restriction lifted, with the addition of the 4.5% tax.
"It's 4.5% tax. Why not offer two models in Europe, one with the restriction lifted, with the addition of the 4.5% tax."
This is what has been constantly asked ever since the release of the GH1. Philip Bloom for example posted even a firmware petition more than six(!) years ago (and talked a lot to Pana): http://philipbloom.net/blog/the-lumix-30-minutes-eu-recording-issue/
The results are known, unfortunately :( It seems the only way of getting the camera for us EU people to order it from overseas, with all its hassles (higher price & no local warranty, for example).
Brian Mosley: Richard,
is there likely to be any difference in image quality when using the electronic shutter vs the mechanical shutter?
"In fact, can't see any difference in image quality - perhaps the only risk is rolling shutter effects for fast moving subjects?"
That sounds really promising. Does it also apply to the A7R2? (and, hopefully, the upcoming A7000?) That'd be a godsend (I need every single EV I can squeeze out from the sensor when shooting panos.)
"if any, in noise levels etc when using Electronic vs Mechanical Shutter in any camera (Sony or Panasonic)"
I wouldn't hold my breath. For example, on the Fuji X-T10, the all=electronic shots have about 2 EV more noise in deep shadows in RAW. In JPEG's, there's virtually no difference.
norman shearer: I really like the tech they are putting into this camera, lets hope some of it ends up in the A7000. An electronic shutter with no rolling artifacts or drop in bit rate would be great for street shooters.
"Why would " drop in bit rate" be great for street shooters and what bit rate has to do with street shooting to begin with ?"
He obviously meant RAW bit depth, which is indeed different between mechanical and electronic shutters on many cameras.
"though Apple users will have to manually re-select the camera's Wi-Fi if their device is already connected to a different network"
oh, the 'legendary' user-friendliness...
We can only praise Apple for not putting NFC in there. And no, Apple Pay isn't full NFC.
Utterlyotter: Magnificent camera, but not for me for the forseeable future even though it does give me a touch of GAS.I really really hope this sensortech will be implemented in the upcoming A6100 or A7000. (End of the year or 1st quarter of next is my guess)Teething issues - wich most new tech has - should hopefully be ironed out by then.
+ Quiet shutter, built in ND capability and Ibis would be nice, as long as it doesn´t make it significantly larger..
"Here he goes again, mentions a lens costing more than twice as much as the Sony 24-70, but calls the latter "expensive"."
Is the Zeiss around 1000 euros (amazon.de: 1029 currently) here in Europe? Yes, it is. Does it have *significantly* worse IQ that the Canon, which "only" costs 1920 euros on amazon.de? Yes, it does.
What's the point in using a top (and _very_ expensive) body with a zoom delivering significantly worse IQ than both the native primes and third-party (here: Canon) zooms? I definitely wouldn't bother with the Zeiss zoom. Either the primes (the 55mm, for example) or the Canon zoom, no lower-quality zooms for me on a $3000 body, thanks. You know: a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.