Wow! Really, they are serious about that. First Hasselblad with the Lunar, now Leica with small apperture premium price APS-C compact cam.
There is no viral marketing necessary from the competitors - this camera is easily doing that job.
That price with that camera with the current competition is really, really ambitious.
these prices are very reasonable, competitive and much more realistic then the latest rumors.
I already have the 14mm and the 35mm from Fuji and I am more the 21mm than the 18mm Fullframe guy. Therefore I am not in. But in general these two lenses are welcome additions to the lens lineup - especially the 12mm lens. Very nice.
And in the past I have never been dissatisfied by Zeiss lenses for my Canon 5dmkII.
It´s good to have more choices.
I cannot really believe that. They cannot be so ... hmm ... blind.There are very nice mFT cameras with very nice primes, there are also very nice Sony Nex cameras - ok, very few primes and finally there is the Fuji X-System which brings nearly everything what stands for Leica: OVF plus EVF, very good primes and a extremly interesting roadmap plus a very good standard zoom.And Leica? Leica thiinks they can win market shares with an expensive (but nice looking) system with a dark zoom and no primes. For them, I don't hope so and whait curiously for the announcement - even when I am already sold to the X-system ;)
Nice. But I am still using my DSLR for Tele-stuff. So not interested.
But I really, really want to have the 1.4 23. That's urgent. Q4 2013 - oh why o why.
They look great and I loved my X100, but now I will hold my breath for the 1.4 23 for my X-Pro1. I will not buy another camera, no! I won't buy another camera ..... no, I will not! Still, what a nice camera.... !nope!
abolit66: technology, shmenology, learn how to make a decent camera first, Fuji!
I can only laugh on that polemnism. The focus of the X-Series is not the fastest yet, but for sure it works very good, is meanwhile fast enough for the most stuff and is the most accurate I've worked with so far.
I still not get why people like to bash on different brands and writing up such nonsense. If you write something you should be able to at least share substantly experience with these cameras and you should be able to proof it somehow. Otherwise it is just fart in the wind.
And Canon continous to fullfill little movie-makers dreams .... But does not bring competitive products for the stills photographer since long.
500$ and no lens hood, that's ridiculous.
What happend to Olympus?
No need to upgrade from a 24-105mm lens. ok.
The price is just ridicolous, also for the f2 35mm. I can get a Zeiss 2.0 35 ZE for that money...Canon, that's not the way to rise market shares, that's the best way to loose them.In the head of somebody who thinks about his first FF-DSLR:"Hmm, should I buy the Canon 6d with 24-70 IS for 3.500 Euro, or should I go for the Nikon D600 with 24-85 for 2300 Euro?" --- yeah, that's a tough decision.
My father does have a lot of very good glas but is also a big fan of the 18-200. Therefore he instantly bought the new 18-300 and sent it back after a few days. He will stick on his 18-200 vrII. The 18-300 is in his opinion optical worse, much heavier and much bigger.
Why did they brought out the mini?Quite easy, because some customers demand them, what the success of the Samsung Galaxy Pad clearly shows.I am a iPad2 user, but my wife would like to have a Mini, because it fits easily into her handbag - and she demands it for quite long now ;-)I refused to buy the Samsung for her, because I don't want to learn a new device. I am a Apple guy, with not much time ;)
So I will buy the iPad Mini for her. Perfect fit.
I just compared it to 5dmkII and the Fuji X-Pro1 (as I have these two) to bring it in some context for me.So the results for the D600 are very good, a tat better then the mkII and in Raw from 1600 on also better than the mkIII - but it is clear visible that the improvement of the SN-ration is not as fast as in the last years. With one exception: The Fuji X-Pro1 with it's APC-sized x-trans sensor really shows to big two what is possible nowadays. Kudos Fuji - great job against the FF-sensors! In RAW it keeps up with the most recent FF-DSLRs up to Iso3200, and only looses margins after that. And in Jpeg it is just easily ahead up to Iso6400. Wow!
Now, please Adobe, get rid of the last bit of folliage issues in RAW, and the X-Pro1 is near to perfect in terms of image quality, especially regarding the sensor size!
SheikYerbouti: A zoom lens on a rangefinder type of camera seems to be going against everything that rangefinders were originally designed for. But, as Fuji have demonstrated with their X-Pro1 and X-E1 cameras, it can be done quite elegantly. Still, I'm wondering how useful and how intuitive a zoom will be on these cameras? To me a zoom makes much more sense on an SLR because its through-the-lens view is more suitable for framing and composing an image with a zoom. I think rangefinder photographers are better off with 2, 3 or 4 excellent prime lenses in the bag ...
... which gives me an idea: Wouldn't it be nice if at some point in the future Fuji introduced a high quality, compact, K-5-style SLR that made use of their amazing X-Trans sensor? Maybe Photokina 2014 would be the right time to announce such a camera?
That's fine. If the optical qualitiy is what I expect I will buy the zoom for sure.
Ok, as today is not the 1st of April, I assume they are serious.
Karl Gnter Wnsch: Another epic fail on the sensor side. Again - just like the SCCD's introduced ages ago - the resulting images show abundant artifacts because of Fujis choice of a different sensor layout. Previously the sensor cells were hexagonal and orientated mainly diagonally - trading off resolution for tighter packing and requiring an rotational interpolation. Now they are sacrificing color fidelity on the altar of luminance resolution. Sorry but this concept doesn't pass muster for me! The traditional demosaicing algorithms are well researched and can deliver exceptional results. The Fuji concept is not free from moiree though they claim it to be better - which it may well be but the tradeoff to not have well defined color edges ruins this whole concept for me.
I don't see the epic fail (and why is such a dramatic expression necessary to point an opinion out?). I just see that meanwhile for a lot of cases I prefer to use the X-Pro 1 over my 5dmkII, and I already got rid of some lenses in favour of the Fuji.Yes, RAW is still an issue, but an solvable one. But, how funny, I have re-discovered Jpegs as a very convinient possibility. Meanwhile I have some big prints at home, and especially some shots I took in Asia are just breathtaking. And so far I never had problems with moire. Not on architecture, people, landscape, cottons...
Surly the X-Pro1 is not for everything and even in its strong areas there are some weaknesses, but picture-quality and colour rendition is for sure no weakness but a huge strength of it - from point of view.
smatty: The biggest issue for many X-Pro 1 users does not seem to be addressed by this big update: Minimum Shutter Speed for AUTO ISO!
I simply don't understand why this feature, which has been working perfectly in the X100 for over a year now, is omitted in the X-PRO 1?
I really appreciate the improvements in FW 2.0! Especially Auto ISO up to 6400. But nothing has ruined more shots for me with the 18mm lens that the 1/30s shutter time threshold in low light. I use the 18mm lens for street photography and hardly any person can be captured sharp at 1/30s without motion blurr!
I just don't get it and I'm really dissapointed...
I am extremely happy with the predicted improvements, but also for me AF-Speed was less an issue than the missing lowest shutter-speed threshold for Auto-Iso. For the time being I have stopped using the Auto-iso function most of the time due to that reason. Only alternative is complete manual-mode +auto-iso, but than the exposure compensation does not work anymore and I have to rely on the camera - what under some circumstances is not possible.
So please Fuji, have a heard and implement the minimum shutter-speed adjustment for auto-iso simmilar to the X100. Thanks in advance.
For my taste Canon is lately focusing too much the video business.
dreams comes true. A 1.4 23, a 10-24, 2.8 14 .... That sounds too sweet.
I am so looking forward to get rid of some heavy FF Zeiss glasses.
Ha! They will do it the other way arround. 5,4 Percent Tax on every Still/Movie device.Problem solved and more money to ripp off.
;) my bed