munchaussen: oh yeah! selfies are more important than EVFs...
-was that sarcasm?
-nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo-was that sarcasm?
"DxO must have an arrangement with Fuji to not test their lenses. I tried to show some comparative tests but there is no Fuji data."
As they don't support X-Trans, they could only test the lenses on the X-A1, which may not entirely represent the achievable quality on X-Trans cameras.
Good luck finding as good a generic, cheap lens for the A6000 than the 16-50 kit lens of the Fuji.
(OTherwise, we agree. The A6000 is great; too bad Sony's lens lineup sucks like hell.)
Quickly tested it on my S805-based, stock Samsung Note 4.
Extremely basic app shooting at non-native resolution but some 2900*3900. It doesn't even save EXIF data to images. Apart from some silly filters, there's really no way any serious shooter would use it - again, because of being fully non-configurable, lower-res and EXIF-void. I assume it also produces some overprocessed images (just like the stock Camera app on the Note4, I should add).
John C Tharp: Two questions:
1. Is the AF improved? This is Fuji's 'Achilles' heel'.2. Isn't X-Trans better at higher-ISOs, but lower in acuity than Bayer?
"Capture One give amazing results but not at its default settings. "
Yup, as I've pointed out at, say, http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3716827 , it applies, for X-Trans sensors, unnecessarily large color noise reduction at lower ISO's. (Note that ACR / LR does the same. Nevertheless, as I've pointed out above, rarely should one use ACR for X-Trans demosaicing / development.) That's the first thing one should decrease.
Simon97: When sensor area was taken into consideration, Apple came in dead last :)
Yeah, and it won't change in the future, given their obsession with thinness. The next iPhones may even have smaller sensors (than the current 1/3" in iPhones - their iPads have much smaller sensors) to make their camera module thinner now that a lot of people are complaining about their being a "bump" on the back of their phones.
dialstatic: In terms of development over time, Samsung has by far the most interesting trend in this graph: a huge rise in a short period of time vs very gradual developments for all the other brands. Surely more interesting than 'apple overtakes nikon for second'. I've never used a Samsung camera or smartphone - I'm just pointing this out.
"Good observation. If you compare to 12 months ago Apple are tracking pretty flat, whereas Samsung seem to have tripled its share over the same period."
No wonder. Apple has been pretty stagnant WRT integrating bleeding-edge tech (including camera stuff like 4K, dual camera etc.) and, consequently, a lot of geeks (the ones that also post a lot of pics on flickr - I have some 5000 shots there at https://www.flickr.com/photos/33448355@N07/ ) have moved to Samsung (and particularly the Note4).
This trend will definitely continue if Apple refuses to start innovating or, at least, integrating into current and well-proved tech into their handsets.
Sorry to be this negative about this company,But they sure delivered a whole lot of nothing here.
"X-trans is pointless, cause all things it was supposed to eliminate are simply eliminated by higher pixel count (NX1). "
1, how much does the NX1 cost? More than even the high-end X-T1, let alone the X-E1 or X-M1 (And I think it's significantly noisier at base ISO than any 16 Mpixel X-Trans sensor.)
2, even if you downsize the 24 / 28 Mpixel Bayer images to 16 Mpixel and calculate in the ISO difference, X-Trans images do have less noise. I've played with them a LOT (I've published tons of stuff here in the Fuji forum) so I do know what I'm talking about.
mosc: You made a new 16-50 and it ISN'T a powerzoom pancake? You do realize the A2 is a compact body, right Fuji? Sigh.
"Well, Samsung NX does offer a better quality 16-50mm power zoom while similar size as Sony's."
Do you have any _dependable_ review of the Samsung PZ? Neither SLRGear nor LensTip have reviewed it yet. "I luv it" blogs / posts don't need to apply.
"oh yeah! selfies are more important than EVFs"
Fuji isn't targetting geeks / nerds / photogs with these lowest-end models... and soccer mums rarely need EVF's.
"2. Isn't X-Trans better at higher-ISOs, but lower in acuity than Bayer?"
It all depends on the demosaicing algorithm. With ACR and its pretty bad X-Trans demosaicing, it is. With RAW developers (e.g., C1 and PN) sporting _significantly_ better X-Trans demosaicing, it isn't.
IMHO, X-Trans is significantly better than Bayer if you know what tools to use to develop your RAWs.
kadardr: Fujifilm X-A1/A2 with a Zeiss Touit lens is as good as a Leica X. With a kit lens its like an X Vario. May be better. But no one buys Leica for image quality so whatever.
"Well, thing is every Fuji lens is "so good" cause its cooked in RAW. :) "
If you didn't mean lens correction (which is NOT done in RAW's - have you EVER developed Fuji RAW's?) but noise reduction, it does NOT cook the RAW's. It's only because of the lousy ACR demosaicing that many people tend to think it's cooking.
"X-trans is failed tech, thats all.. there is absolutely zero benefit in it. Every X-trans camera would be better as regular Bayer one. X-trans is only pain and no gain for users.. or anyone in fact."
Absolutely false. You haven't played with X-Trans RAW's, I assume. X-Trans cameras do deliver lower color noise and much-much lower probability of color moire than Bayer ones. Of course, RAW development is pretty tricky - basically, currently, I can only recommend two RAW developers as of now (C1, PN); the others have somewhat or significantly worse RAW demosaicing.
PandaSA: I hope this isn't a hint of things to come. An X-E3 that is only the X-E2 with a flip-up LCD will be more than a little disappointing.
It'd be an instant suicide for Fuji to stay with the same old tech in middle models in 2015.
Ben O Connor: Finally, technology is slowing down a bit -at least for Fujifilm.
This is entry level - something pretty much neglected by Fuji. More advanced models will surely have a LOT of goodies.
Mattersburger: Conventional sensor or not?
Here's the Fujifilm spec from your other article:
FUJIFILM XQ2 key features list: •12 Megapixel 2/3” X-Trans CMOS II Sensor
It's the XQ2, not the A2.
gunkan: Why did they use the same sensor? It's exactly like an Fuji X-A1 with a cheaper screen!
"Because a newer sensor would have cannibalised what they are selling on the market right now. DUH!"
i doubt it. I wouldn't purchase an entry-level, Bayer-filtered Fuji even with a better sensor now that the release of higher-end, X-Trans-filtered Fuji bodies is imminent. And a lot of us advanced Fuji users think so. The A2 is just too simple for us (and too much targeted at the soccer mom folks with the silly mode dial), particularly because of the lack of an EVF.
Xentinus: f 4.5-6.7 must be a joke!
"The short end could be used indoors at arenas and gyms. However, even Fuji magic can’t make up for F4.5."
Yup, I've shot thousands of shots with the 50-230 at the Wife Carrying World Championships 2014 at (typically) both the tele and wide end outdoors (see my albums at https://www.flickr.com/photos/33448355@N07/sets (the ones with the word "eukonkannon" in them; note that I've uploaded every shot I've taken there, evn the technically bad ones); my photomontages are at https://www.flickr.com/photos/33448355@N07/sets/72157648232147455/ ). The results are pretty great, assuming you use pre-set focus. (AF is useless on the X-E1 with this tele for any kind of action.)
Haven't tried it indoors.
Nevertheless, should anyone need significantly larger brightness, there's the absolutely flawless Fujinon XF 50-140 mm f/2.8 R LM OIS WR. For non-pro shooters (people shooting only for fun, not for money), the 50-230 is a great bargain.
Well, actually, given the extremely good low-light performance of Fuji cameras (even the Bayer filter-based A1/A2), IMHO 6.7 isn't a problem. I shot pretty nice shots with the 50-230 at its tele end even in dusk with the E1.
Also don't forget that you can always go for Fuji's much more expensive and heavier and larger teles. However, IMHO, the 50-230 is an absolutely excellent compromise.
I'm absolutely sure that their new higher-level cameras will have a LOT more goodies - for example, at least a 24 Mpixel sensor.
Marty4650: This really isn't good news for Japan, because it just means they will gain a few jobs only as long as the Yen value is depressed. The instant the Yen gets stronger, then the jobs get shipped back to Cambodia, Thailand or anyplace else where labor is cheaper.
Most customers won't care one way or the other. The "Japan built is better" myth has long since faded away. Anything can be well built, or poorly built anywhere in the world today.
Prolly it's because they're manufactured in Japan that that Fuji X cameras (not the entry-level ones, that is, the A1 and the M1) are so reliable and virtually indestructible.