Nice device, if it should work as promised...
Good article, but it does not clarify a common misunderstanding of "equivalent aperture", seen in many postings. The article nicely shows the equivalence regarding focal length, DOF, gathered light etc.. But what is frequently misunderstood is that f/1.8 leads to the same exposure time regardless of sensor size for the same scence, light and ISO setting. Some people assume that an "equivalent" aperture of f3.6 (in this example for a f/1.8 MFT vs. full frame) also would lead to a longer exposure and so is not usable in low light. You can extrapolate this from the article, but for beginners it would be nice to add a simple summary that clarifies the practical aspects.
Retzius: The fact that this is still $300 cheaper than the Nikon 1 V3 really shows how insanely priced the V3 is with its 1 inch sensor...
The Nikon 1 is made by DSLR Gurus, just to show that DSLRs sell better than mirrorless. Its pricing helps to prove that concept.
Lassoni: This looks good. Hope it can compete with sigmas out there
Sigma ? I don't know any Sigma long range zoom that could be regarded as a benchmark. Sigmas Art lenses like the 1.4 35mm or the 1.8 18-35mm are fantastic, but these are completely different lens types. You can be quite sure that a 18-135mm never will reach these optiical heights. As many others already mentioned, a 18-135mm is made for convenience. It may well be a solid performer, but such a zoom range requires many optical compromises. So don't expect wonders.
nerd2: Funny fact: you can just use DX version of 35mm 1.8G lens that costs less than 1/3. Yes you'll get bad corners (with non-removable vignetting) though.
Funny, yes. But it makes no sense to shell out the money for a FF camera an then accept bad corners.
msolea: For me, the major con is that it does not have a microphone jack for higher end microphones. I actually like the fact that it does not have a touch screen. I have used touch screens before and I always found them irritating. While, I have only handled this camera briefly, it seems to be a solid camera. If Sony were to offer an A7000, I would like to see a MIC jack added and possibly internal 4HD. But, I am not that big into making videos, so the latter point is that that crucial to me. Perhaps, they can take out the AA filter too.
That said, there are a couple of lenses I would like to see for the E-system or FE system, like a 70-300mm G or Zeiss OSS variable aperture lens as well as a wider angle lens that would at least incorporate 12mm or 18mm equivalent in the DX format that is also of high quality ~ G or Zeiss quality.... But, with the 55mm filter size. After all, 24-70mm f/4 FE lens is a bit too wide for this body, but manageable. Hence, my dilemma based on initial impressions.
A 70-300mm lens for APS-C sized sensors will inevitably become big. Even more an FE version. The size advantage of the shorter flange distance doesn't play a significant role at 300mm. So I doubt that it is meaningful to put such big lenses on such small camera bodies.
Steve Balcombe: Canon has been using a fluorine coating on high-end lenses for some time. It's incredibly effective.
Really ? Canon has used (and uses) flourine in form of flluorite glass (calcium fluorite) since many years in their L telephoto/telezoom lenses. Fluorite glass has superb optical properties and is part of the outstanding performance of these lenses. But fluorine coatings seem to be something new.
Hubertus Bigend: <lens></lens>?
Joking aside, all of it of course only works as long as those images will be published with EXIF data intact..
Of course, one can easily delete or manipulate EXIF data. But I doubt that this would play a big role for stolen equipment. The photos around on the web will most likely not be posted by the thief himself. They rather will be posted by a buyer of used equipment, not aware that it was stolen. So he/she sees no reason to change the EXIF data. For stolen images, however, I think this will be a different story.
sphexx: How do they handle photos from cameras/lenses that have been in multiple ownership?
This can be done by the recording date contained in the EXIF data. All images shot before the camera was tagged as stolen can be regarded as belonging to legal owners.
Tom Caldwell: It just means that the new Leica lenses are tied to cameras that can add the software corrections and that the lenses will be less competent in non-oem situations. I guess we had all figured that anyway and no one in their right mind had any idea of taking these rather expensive lenses and slumming them on a NEX body - if only that would work.
One of the nice things about the old "perfect" Leica lenses is that once bought they could be used on a lot of different camera bodies and enhance what could otherwise be achieved. Leica lenses were justifiably revered. Not any more - Leica lenses have been shown to be just subject to the same market constraints as the rest of them.
@BarnET: Yep - I forgot to mention the Tri-Ellmars. But they do not really fit in the prime vs zoom categories. Their optical forumla is in fact a zoom lens, but the step design allows more optimization for the selectable focal lengths than for the whole range of a "true" zoom. So they have an exceptional position in the world of lenses.
Wonderful shot, nice description, thank you. OT: Its a shame to see tens (or in best case 100-200) of comments on artwork while a not yet released camera easily earns more than 1700 (I feel myself guilty as I commented two of these commensts and have contributed to that long list).
Don't forget all M lenses are primes. The T-System is offered with zooms (and only one prime this year). Maybe the T-system primes are fully corrected - no one tested this yet. A standard zoom cannot be corrected to the same level as a prime. I don't know any standard zoom without significant barrel distortions at its wide end, regardless of brand, size and targeted sensor format. All MILC correct this and therefore show stunngly small distortions in the resulting images.
Can you imagine how Leica would be bashed if they would offer the MILC with the most visible distortiions ?
Kelvin L: Looks nice. It's a shame that material designs such as these (and other digital appliances) outlive their usefulness due to technological obsolescence. I feel sad when I see all these solidly-built Leica M8s, Canon 1Ds and Nikon D1/D2 bodies gather dust because their utility is gone or the electronics are slowly rotting away.
HowboutRaw: I didn't mention Leica M glass that can very well be adapted to NEX, m4/3 or even the FF A7 mount. I stressed the problem that we likely cannot repeat this way of reuse with lenses like the Leica T lenses if Leica T should disappearfrom the market. And when Sony disappears it will be the same for E-mount lenses.
@HowaboutRAW: I don't know if this will hold in the mirrorless world. Whan a MILC system disappears, its lenses will become useless. They have very short flange distances and rely highly on electronics, so adapter solutions used for Leica M and other good old glass will be very difficult if not impossible.
The technical quality of the handheld, unsteady teaser video shows what to expect from handheld 4x5 photos. It will turn a quality wise hard to beat film format into an expesive kind of lomography. The obvoiusly guessed distance settings will contribute even more to a "lomo look".
Zvonimir Tosic: Regarding inverting the 645 Z into a mirrorless;There are numerous worthless mirrorless systems out there, from a tiny sensor ones all up to the FF. Why are you so hungrily craving another one? Why such a desperation, insatiable greed, lack of respect for uniqueness?Isn't there enough cheap electronics to feast from, or you crave something that still dares to stand on its own and resist to the blind fad? It seems many have already become the Borg.
@robbo d: You don't gain anything while taking a photo. But while carrying your equipment you will feel the avantage.
iudex: It surely is a nice thing from Fuji to support older cameras. However I am wondering what is the point of compact camera then. If I want to have the possibility to change lenses, I will buy a CSC (one of five available Fuji X-mount cameras). Those people raptured by X100 used to say fixed focal length compact is about creativity, unlike being able to zoom or choose whichever focal length. With adapters the X100 becomes another "CSC", just a crippled one.
But what to do when the fixed lens creativity boost is exhausted ?
ThePhilips: Why there are no TCs for mirrorless, which go between the camera and the lens? Only the ones to screw on the lens?
If the original poster should refer to MILC: For mirrorless systems with interchangeable lenses I doubt that there is much need forTCs. Every system (except Sony A7) has relatively cheap and lightweight telezooms that usually beat a lens+TC combo in image quality. In DSLR systems you can save much weight and money by useing a TC on fast telezooms or tele primes, here usually not. There are only few lenses where a TC might be meaningful (e.g. Pana 35-100, Oly 75).
Lucas_: IMHO it's outrageous to give a Gold Award and an 87% note to this camera and Silver with 80% to the fantastically innovative Sony A7 ( not to mention the A7R, which is clearly at another level and got Gold / 82%! ). It's about time DPR realizes that their reviews "conclusions" have actually become a joke! I can appreciate the level of camera features/controls details and specs they cover ( which IMO is the good value of the review ), but I've learned to just don't care at all about their final conclusions ( sometimes hilarious ) and rating!
The A7/A7r are fantastically innovative but not necessarily better than DSLRs. These cameras have a size and weight advantage and a theoretical advantage for WA lens designs (but no real WA lenses (<=28mm) exist for these cameras). OTOH a DSLR is much more capable to capture the "decisive moment". The lags to the electronic displays and limited frame rates in mirrorless systems justify better overall ratings for DSLRs. So I can't say tat there is anything wrong with DPreview's ratings.
RichRMA: But the body is still second-rate.
Don't forget that it is much cheaper than first rate bodies. Look at the price of Nikon D3/D4 or Canon 1D series cameras and try to adjust what to expect for much less money.