Anastigmat: "we're just using more expensive materials"
That is hard to believe. Sony may charge slightly more for the sensor because of volume discount for a buyer like Nikon, but other than the sensor, there isn't anything inside a camera that can jack the price up to Leica territory. Is Hasselblad using platinum or gold inside their cameras bodies?
Yes. I just wish Leica would market those cameras as co-developed with Panasonic, instead of pretending they are Leica cameras, which they are not. Paying a premium for the Leica warranty and whatever image tweaks they make is fine. Pretending is was made by Leica is not.
BrianDragtstra: He says: 'This [the Lunar] is not a NEX-7 camera, just because we are buying components from Sony'.
On this youtube video you can see the camera and it's menu with the firmware notification. It says NEX 7, not Lunar :-)
"Manufacturers can't just made an empty body anymore. There's a lot of complicated, expensive things that go inside it now." Except it's clear that manufacturers rely on subcontracted, albeit customized, sub-assemblies and construction. This, I believe, is why the models come so fast and furious. Even look at menu screens. The Samsung ones are much like the Panasonic ones. The LCD menu screen shots from the new Pentax SLRs look a lot to me like what I saw on a Nikon D5100. And so on.
Good interview. If that rear LCD on the K-01 tilted/moved it would be an immeasurably more useful camera.
Sad that Hasselblad couldn't look at these formats and see what innovations (viewing, ergonomics, image processing, lens adaptability, etc.) it could bring to the table.
Trevor G: Great to see that Leica, masters of the niche camera, are actually expanding their range and ideas.
The new M changes things so much that I actually thought for a moment about the possiblity of getting one. I'm sure others will be equally moved, and more than ever will part with the cash to do it.
Yes, many cameras remind of the command module of the space shuttle.
Standing by the product is important and one of Leica's appeals. I wish you had had time to ask about the X series and possibility of making it for interchangeable lenses.
XF1 reminds me of German WERRA rangefinder in its minimalism.
Maybe luxury and camera are incompatible concepts. But when I think luxury (premium) camera, I think superior materials, components build to robust specification, performance and tolerances above that of the competitors, the best possible lenses, etc. For example, for its era the Olympus E-20N was a "luxury" camera and remains so to this day in many ways with its magnesium alloy chassis, whisper smooth and quiet shutter, great close-range focus, wide maximum aperture through its entire focal range, etc. Hassy and Sony, think of ways in which Hasselbald engineering and heritage can ENHANCE these cameras.
If this is a real partnership, the companies would have been better off with a solid announcement, instead of rushing crude, even bizarre sketches and mockups.
REDred Photo: I feel that a lot of the arguments presented here are not quite targeting the real issues...
Why do people really buy Hasselblads? Perhaps there are a few people out there willing to pay lavishly for style, but I suspect the VAST majority of Hasselblad users (and Lecia users) got into the system for the unique capabilities, quality of craftsmanship, exceptional lenses, and long-term durability of the system as a whole.
I use a Hasselblad 501CM with a Phase One digital back in my studio specifically for the leaf shutter lenses, huge digital sensor, rock solid dependability, direct tethered shooting, long-term compatibility, etc. Do I LIKE my Hasselblad... sure I do... but more importantly, it has capabilities other cameras dont... and it does what I NEED it to do... exceptionally well... and it will continue to do so long after other cameras have been recycled.
If you take away all the reasons for using a Hasselblad in the first place, then what do you have left? A Sony.
"How about a smaller Hasselblad-esque body with SLT (semi-transparent, non-moving mirror), 36mm square 22MP sensor with 16bits, no AA filter, interchangeable focus screens, a set of quiet, electronically controlled leaf-shutter zeiss autofocus lenses that allow flash sync up to 1/2000th of second.
I'd pay $7k for that. Not for a Sony." Exactly.
Faucet taps on top deck to pour drinks?
This makes Sigma SD1 with wood body mainstream.
Solution in search of a problem.
Where's the EVF. And I don't see a Jade handgrip.
VENTURE-STAR: I've owned three Canon G series cameras. All were fitted with useless viewfinders which I hardly ever used. Nevertheless, they were reliable, well built cameras with good optical performance, producing very consistent results. I also had an Panasonic LX5 (with no viewfinder), which was okay but lacked satisfactory optical performance. In fact, the last digital camera I owned with an accurate viewfinder was an Olympus 5050. But I've found small VFs to be mostly a waste of time and I prefer the bigger view of an LCD screen. The 7700 is exactly my idea of a good compact (almost) camera. I'd prefer it with a manually operated, non-retracting zoom as this reduces the liklihood of component failure. Unfortunately, this camera's CCD will never provide SLR quality. Apart from that it looks good. My concerns are build quality, reliabilty and lens performance, especially at wider apertures towards the edges. If the test reports are favourable, I might buy one as my next SLR backup.
"I'd prefer it with a manually operated, non-retracting zoom as this reduces the liklihood of component failure. " Avoid the Achilles heel of the modern digital P&S, the zoom gearing. Amen.
jdonalds: Wow the specs and price on this Nikon look really good. It will be good to see the full review. However...
All 4 cameras in our house have viewfinders. My wife and I simply won't buy a camera without one. There are times when the LCD simply won't do the job. An EVF would be perfect.
Perhaps Nikon will consider putting a viewfinder on the next model if they see sufficient comments like mine and so many others here.
Yes. The lowly P60 went EVF instead of optical tunnel and it works great for bright light or those who prefer eye-level working. Often, Nikon and Canon just don't try hard enough.
buongustaio: any news about the sooo much craved body that would better handle top-pro 4/3 lenses?17mm aside, this is all i'm asking from this stand :)
Good points all.
Wish Pentax Ricoh could ally itself with one more strong company. Is there another electronics firms (i.e. Sony or Panasonic) that would like to get into cameras?
manhattankid: I am very disappointed in the G15.
First what happened to the G13 and G14???
Canon removed the flip screen which to me is the best feature of the G series. I have owned the G 5 which came out in 2003, the G6 (which I bought used instead of buying the G 9 and G 10), and have been thrilled with the G12.
The G5 had F 2.0 lens, canon later lost that and now brings it back, it had raw, canon later dropped that with the G7 and brought it back , and it had an articulated screen which canon dropped and brought back.
Why not make a G series camera with a larger sensor, F 2.0 and articulated screen? That is not a fantasy camera since Canon already has these features in other cameras it makes. I will be passing up on the G15.
Like dpreview, I was surprised that the G series was continued. More interested in seeing what the GX successor is like.
deep7: Funny, though understandable, how so many complain about the fixed screen. I have a G1X and would much prefer NOT to have the annoying, fiddly swivel LCD!For a while I used an Olympus EP1 with a fixed screen and found it quite useable when viewed at an angle (ground shots, overhead shots etc.). I suggest G-series fans wait until you actually get to try one before you panic too much.
I'm happy enough with my G1X but wonder if Canon will ever have the balls to make something a bit more serious - better viewfinder, better close-focus implementation, fewer gimmicks (wink detection??!! etc.). It would help to abandon the G compact shape and go for something lower and wider...
"a bit more serious - better viewfinder, better close-focus implementation, fewer gimmicks " Yes.