fastlass: Can you just say that this is a 42.5 mm m43 lens. The target audience knows what the photographic characteristics in terms of angle of view, depth of field control, and background blur are for them. Let each standard stand on its own.
Equivalence is an unwinnable quagmire. It collects light on the sensor like a f/0.95 in any format (unless you bring up the Speed Booster, and please don't) and has the angle and DOF of a full frame picture cropped to about one quarter of its area. That is too hard to explain or else takes too long, so you summarize as best you can and some nitpicker inevitably goes on the warpath.
Huwhah? The wide angle is kind of cool, but that long lens strikes me as mostly useful for daytime paparazzi work. Even the OMD 5-axis IBIS will have a grand old time trying to keep up with that beast.
Justin Francis: Pentax really can't afford to waste resources to come out with such a flawed concept. They really should have canned the Q series and started again.
That said, the Pentax K-01 really was a dumb idea. Leaving a bunch of empty space in the body to keep compatibility with SLR lenses was a lazy move that eliminated the main reason to buy it. So yeah, they do screw up sometimes. I have a similar skeptical eye on Canon and their mirrorless. However, and for reasons that I cannot possibly explain, the Q does not lose money.
In all seriousness, you need to stop acting like you know what sells in Asia. I have no more idea than you do why Japanese want to spend $$$ on interchangeable lens cameras that can clip to a smartphone. They just do. Roll with it.
For shame, people. I bet you guys also laughed at the $7000 Sigma DP1 with wood burl veneer.
Let me be the first person to say...WTF?? Seriously?!?
ETA: It looks like I was not the first.
micahmedia: I look forward to this using this as a 25-50mm/f1.2 equivalent on my m43 bodies with a speed booster. : D
Serious q: why use a m4/3 body with this lens? You can spend less for a native lens with a lot of advantages (e.g., full control, AF capability and/or speed) and for less money in exchange for that extra aperture. For the sake of a little cool factor it seems to have no advantage at all over a few sensibly chosen native primes, or else using this lens on its intended bodies.
CameraLabTester: There is what they call the "Sweet Spot" of market PRICING a product such as this lens.
Too high a price disenfranchises potential serious buyers, loosing sales.
Too low a price eats up profits and lowers margin.
Sometimes there is such a case of "Wholesale Windfall".
Sigma should price this lens a little lower than expected and see a significant boom in sales... and a greater following and respect to their brand name.
Cachet. Sigma has hit a number of homers with new lenses, and a little unobtanium in the lineup will help to build their reputation as the Wendy's of third-party AF lenses: still not necessarily as good as the best stuff that Nikon or Canon make at home but a step ahead of the other options.
CameraLabTester: This will have the same fate as the Nikon "1" system... Oblivion.
Sometimes, great big companies like Canon and Nikon make really huge blunders... but they are too Jurassic in thinking, they just run the useless idea to the ground, at the expense of the suckered consumers...
The Nikon 1 is an odd character. You can dismiss its size and lens selection (lord knows I do) but:
1) Nikon engineered the hell out of that thing. After taking into account the sensor size (yeah I know) it is a remarkably capable camera. 2) Never underestimate a marketing budget. Ashton Kutcher can sell widgets but he don't come cheap. 3) Do not try to understand what sells in Asia. It just does. Serious about this. The Pentax Q is still around. Why? Someone is buying it, and I can tell you they don't live in Pittsburgh.
Not exactly dispelling that stark dilemma for NEX owners between choosing lenses that are good and lenses that a normal person can afford.
mpetersson: Another re-branded Panasonic? If this is the real camera it looks like a Panasonic with a Leica-like skin pulled over it.
EssexAsh: Never. Panny has committed root and branch to the 4/3 sensor size. The would have to design an entirely new line of lenses, pulling resources away from their gangbusters m4/3 operation. Not going to happen.
A fixed 3.5-6.4 zoom? For $3,000+ ?!? Yikes. Trying to visualize the market segment Leica is gunning for, I see wealthy brand-conscious NEX users who don't need portability or the option to use decent lenses.
Is not. Panasonic does not make APS-C.
jtan163: Re-badged MFT?Aren't they already MFT consortium members?Don't they already rebadge Oly and Panny products?EP5 rebadge or derivative? (obviosly with an oval body plan).The big question then is would they make their own lenses or lend their name to AF Oly/Panny lenses (perhaps developed especially for the Leica brand)?
To me a standalone RF-less , presumably MF,full frame does not make much sense unless they released a line of glass for it. Simply building a camera to adapt other people's glass sounds crazy.And it does not seem reasonable to release a line of glass for something like that.Be interesting to see.
Or going completely the other way, and interchangeable lens X2.
The least interesting would be a fixed lens FF.This is what I actually suspect. An RX1 killer. Or at least competitor.
Leica has an agreement with Panasonic, not Olympus. The GF1 was such an awesome camera because Panasonic made it expecting Leica to re-badge it. The zoom lens was idiosyncratically great for the same reason.
I would say that Leica is using its partnership with Panasonic to make a m4/3 body. However it would be odd to position a 4/3 sensor above the X2, so I have to go with a full-frame version of the E-PM series. A pretty smart move IMO.
StevenE: Could be interesting.But I'd like my Android to be able to trigger a full-blown real flash. Just for fun
Does not work. Phones use an LED flash that ramps up much too slowly (in flash time) to trigger a device. The phone needs to send a trigger signal by bluetooth, and as far as I know the current API does not support that. A shame because they would become much more useful devices if it did.
You know why this is cool? So far as I know nobody has ever gotten an idevice to sync with an external strobe. The dinky direct flash LED has too broad an on-off time to trigger optical slaves, so people who want to take portraits with it have to use direct flash (gah!), natural light (grr) or modeling lights (bleh).
That simple functionality would make the Apple iwhatever so much more useful for those of us who like taking pictures of people that look good.
JEROME NOLAS: Well deserved wins! Wonder why there's not "Lemon of the year" (the most silly idea like Nikon 1, Pentax Q and so on...)
Damn you JEROME, I was just about to complain that the Q got robbed yet again. You need to be quick with your obvious jokes around here.
AngryCorgi: Is this a product of Malaysia or China too? I mean, I have no problem with that being the case, but it would further highlight the nonsense of the price. If you are gonna save $$$ on labor, then you can't turn around and charge US$900 and look like anything short of a jerk.
It's an entirely new lens design that will (or had better) shoot very well at f/1.2. Making one of those from scratch is not trivial.
techmine: $900 lens for any system should definitely be backed by solid market research. So Nikon's research showed that there is a need to build a fast portrait lens for Nikon 1 system?? I think they just got carried away by the success of 18.5mm f1.8 lens. They don't have "value for money" dimension working.
Anyone who wants an interchangeable system to succeed needs to develop a lens ecosystem. This actually looks like a fairly smart move. I had Nikon 1 cameras on death watch until this, but now it looks like Nikon plans to invest the time/money to make it competitive.
Nikon engineered the 1 system fairly well, and if you can set aside hard physical limitations like depth of focus it really outperforms expectations for that size of sensor. I see no personal reason to choose this over micro 4/3, but Nikon is not run by morons. Maybe this is one of those things that plays best in Japan. Pentax Q, I'm looking at you.