carpenikon: It is only a camera test. The reason why mist people love Fuji is because if their lens lineup. Altough the Nikon D500 will be a good camera the lens selection of excellent APSC lenses is limited. You always have ferling you 'need to go fullframe' to get the most out of best lenses as they are not optimised for APSC. I switched from Nikon to Fuji fir that reason. Nikon dies not offer excellent APSC lenses. You buy a camera but invest in lenses. And by the way, my X-T1 with a prime (eg 23mm F1.4) weighs together less than den Nikon D500 body only.
"Even the best one - the 16-35 is visibly worse above 28mm, that's why I'm adapting a Canon to my A7rII."
So you are comparing DSLR pro lens to the Sony, ah huh.
May I ask FE16-35 visibly worse above 28mm when compared to what?
This is about APS-C mirrorless, more specifically Fuji X-series bodies. You can compare XF10-24 mounted on ANY Fuji X bodies all you want and the "average" FE16-35 will still murder it any day.
See the point? Good glass isn't be all end all.
I happen to own the A7RII, 35/2.8 and used to have the XF 23 1.4.
Personally I take the Zeiss any day.
The XF 23 giggles back and forth when focusing (XF56 does the same), it's also clunky and makes noise when focusing (very noticeable in AF-C). I still couldn't believe a so-called top Fuji lens does that.
On the contrary the Zeiss is compact and lightweight, complete silent with silky smooth focusing. And if you can't identify nor acknowledge the Zeiss' unique rendering and excellent microcontrast then that's your loss, not mine.
Again mediocre lens on bigger sensor will always beat out good lens on smaller sensor - exactly the sane case with m43 vs Fuji. Plus all the inherited benefits with larger sensor.
Because as i said ff + mediocre glass is still better than apsc + good glass, and once you pair a good glass on ff it achieves a level that apsc can never reaches.
Same argument applies to m43 vs apsc.
Fuji glass is cheaper and smaller because they only need to accommodate a smaller sesnor, again same goes to m43.
It might be a sweet spot for you, but personally the x-pro2 being the same price as A7II is simply, to put it bluntly, retarded.
Fuji glass is easily 80% of the price, size and cost of sony FE. I rather be a man, pony up the cash and have the better DR/IQ/ISO/IBIS/Video from a ff Sony. (This is coming from someone who has owned and sold X-100T and X-T1 with 18 2, 23 1.4, 18-55 and 56 1.2)
Good glass is relevant for any sensor size.
However no matter how good the glass is it will always be limited by the sensor still.
So you can have the best aps-c glass but a ff sensor with mediocre glass is still better overall. That's why always go for the biggest sensor.
villagranvicent: Great, I can buy the Sigma 35mm Art for Canon plus this adapter or simply buy the same lens with e-mount for my A7.
Only problem of course the fact that Sigma Art doesn't come in E mount lol
tom1234567: I wish Fuji would by there sensor it would be good to have an X-T2 with This great sensor
Fuji won't use Korean sensor, or they will be shamed by all other Japanese companies.
So yes wish all you like, it won't happen.
zavart: Oh , and one more thing . Samsung should have joined the MFT group, especially since they didn't have a large selection of lenses to begin with . This would have been a smart move because people right now more than ever are looking for lighter cameras and lenses and it would give them opportunity to be part of the successful group rather than lone loser with the dead end system ! At least people could have risked buying their cameras knowing that in the worst case scenario they could have always buy lenses and accessories from other MTF makers !
You do realize that MFT lenses aren't going to fit/cover the sensor in the Samsung right?
sdgreen: No matter what its merits, I thought the NX1 was overpriced, not widely available & didn't have enough lenses (not the ones I wanted anyway)
16/23/35 f1.4 to begin with.
Hugo808: I think they've quit too soon. Sure, most of us are wedded to Canikon but new people take up the hobby all the time and there aint nothing wrong with Samsung stuff. They've just got to invest a bit more and hope for the best.
"hope for the best" isn't what the exec and shareholders @ Samsung would like to hear.
fzrTom: One of the best camera slowly disapear : sad news.If the NX1 had been done by Canon, Nikon or Sony, this camera would have been a succes. I really hope that the Sony A7000 would be a clone of the NX1.
Don't worry, the a7000 will surpass it.
Bjrn SWE: Intresting that a camera rated 82% is considered better than a cam at 87.
Because they are not the same scale.NX1 is an 87% against other aps-c offerings, whilst the A7II is a 82% in FF bracket.
CheersUK: OK, usually there is no smoke without a fire. The fact that Samsung haven't directly addressed all these rumors, after all this time...well the silence is deafening. The fact that their customers already invested heavily in their system are probably wondering what the future holds for them...like an expensive camera bag full of equipment that will no longer be supported??
I'm sure that when Samsung does release some information, it will be in their usual style, of actually creating more questions than answers...although I'm sure they'll wait till most of the inventory is sold, before they do.
You'd have nobody to blame but yourself if you heavily invested in Samsung....
That's like throwing money into the sea.
kewlguy: I just read another hands on review on the rumor site, it says Leica put everything people like about mirrorless into the SL. Really?? I love my mirrorless small and easy to carry!
Nikon D610/Canon 6D is smaller than it :)
infiniti029: Hasn't Olympus (and some others?) already been doing eye detect AF for a while now?
but are they FF, 42mp and shoots 4k?
newworld666: Not really new and not a real big deal !Why do they limit this only on eyes only .. and not any part of the frame the photographer would like to be tracked !!! Canon offers this for many years now .. and it's more versatile then just limiting it to eye tracking..look at page 34http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/eos_1d_x_explained/AF_guide_EOS-1DX_eng.pdf
1Dx, 7DII, 5DIII, 5Dsr have functionality with more option to keep tracking and various more or less difficult situations.
You do know that single point, zone etc are available right?
No more MA, perfect continuous tracking with much larger coverage across the frame.
This camera is so much win that it's scary...
Dirk Nuary: Always pricey, why?
Well the Batis is Zeiss-Zeiss, it can't be bad yea?
Even if it isn't Otus level it will be well above Canikon equivalent.
So yes you get what you pay for.
EcoR1: Excellent. It seems that E-mount is becoming very fast the de facto mount for professionals and enthusiasts who wants to have best possible image quality in smallest possible form and with all modern camera- and lens-desing benefits.
Personally I think I'll go for a 25mm lens, it has a very short minimum focusing distance and I can finally give up my 24mm A-mount lens. Also weight is not bad.
@ whyamihere The Nikon 85 1.8 is mediocre at best. It's not even at Sigma 85 level.
And please don't compare Zeiss to Nikon lol
straylightrun: Great. Now the FF emount system just needs a budget line of lenses to appeal to the other 97.5% of users.
If you are budget conscious you shouldn't be shooting FF and Zeiss in general and go back to your Canikon....
...or Pentax lol
It's a Zeiss, what do you expect?
You get what you pay for.