UnitedNations: As expected only a poor 1% increase in score over the X-E1. Which I think is still overly generous ...because the 'newer' X cameras(X-e2, X-t1, X100s) all have major problems with their JPEG engine.
The 'newer' Fuji X cameras not only render their JPEGs in an unnatural waxy way, but even bigger problem is that their JPEGs have severe limitations in Dynamic Range. This is a problem which was NOT present in the X100, X-Pro1, & X-E1.Simply speaking the JPEGs are nearly unusable in the 'newer' Fuji X cameras IF you are coming from the early X cameras.
It is Fuji's free choice to suddenly make their X cameras into mostly 'RAW Shooting ONLY' cameras, but I am not sure if people who bought Fuji's early X cameras will be happy & be willing to buy the 'newer' X cameras knowing that the usability of the JPEGs has been significantly deteriorated.
all the jpeg's I have seen from the new X-T1 confirm what United Nations is talking about in his comment. Waxy, water color like shots, at 800 ISO more than half of the detail is gone and some parts in straight fine lines are simply missing.
Anstup ID: Is it possible to design mirrorless camera with medium-format sensor and Sony E mount?
one can design a mirrorless in medium format, but it requires the Mamiya SD mount.
Valiant Thor: Hasselblad has always claimed they listen to their customer's feedback, however it seems that they think that they understand what they thought that we said, but I'm not sure that what they heard is what we meant.
so is Sony, they listen to what you say, but not do what you want.A6000 claimed to be a NEX-7 replacement show us that once more.
jon404: 3X the price of the new Pentax 645D-II... same 50 MP sensor? What am I missing here?
Aha, and with a Pentax 645, you do another job as with the Hassy or Phase one. I used the 3 barands, and I can tell you that Pentax makes the same good shot, better than the Hassy in the 40 mpix format. But, look how a Pentax is made and built, and look at the other 2, it is like comparing the inner outfit of a Rolls Royce to a Toyota. The Pentax looks awfully crappy and like a cheap plastic toy The big size of the body gives it that ancient plastic shell look where the edges do not fit on each other, what we find often in cheap Chinese toys for children. Pentax lenses are better than Hassy or Mamiya, but the body looks terrible.
yabokkie: the difference in sensor area is much smaller than between 35mm format and APS-C. but the difference in price is 4-fold larger (50c : D800 : D7100 = 28,00 : 2,800 : 1,150).
one pays 10 times more than D800 but get less than 1 stop improvement.
Since ever, "Pro" was paying less for much more money. Only IQ made the difference in MF, in lower sized formats, it was camera body quality only. I love the simplicity of Leica bodies, they have just what you need. But, in digital, the move towards live view, and in near future to AF, will make it a hobbyist tool as well, just the price will remain. And here Leica will stand on a spot where those adept to the brand will not want it anymore and those at the hobby side can not afford it. In the case of MF, it is Pro equipment and will remain it, we will never see hobby material in medium format, at least not in the next 20 years. Maybe we will see some MF cameras that target a greater audience, but it will limit to that. When FF came, everyone was ringing the death bell for smaller sensor, and..... s.h.i.t. happens. The only camera species endangered is small P&S since cellphone market will eat that market up completely very soon.
agentul: this will be good for walking around and street photography. finally, some real competition for m4/3.
it's indeed a big 4x3
yabokkie: > Outstanding ISO performance - up to ISO 6400 - > will raise available light photography to new heights in this genre
larger format cameras are basically for adequate light/slow shutter applications, not low/available light which depends more on lens aperture.
either the one who told this nonsense has no basic understanding of photography or thinks that audience are fools.
you're a jerk. At all times 1/500 th was the top speed for all medium format leaf shutter cameras, while ff dslr's where up to 1/4000th. Flip mirrors made it up to 1/1000th, but look at the size and weight of the mirror. The one of a Mamiya 645 was so sensitive that once you use a simple brush to dust it, it was off focus and camera had to go back to factory for adjustment. I sold my 645 for that reason and went over to Bronica. My last Zenza was the GS 6x7.
Nukunukoo: Do they have one that fits inside my purse?
@ andreas, your sure that it was her purse, not her panty. :-)
PowerG9atBlackForest: Had dpreview's Barnaby Britton the opportunity to ask the same questions to Hasselblad he did to "senior figures at Canon Inc." before he probably would get similar answers, such as "We don't see smartphones as an enemy".
maybe Hassony will make soon a cellphone attachment with that sensor, :-)
xmeda: Pentax 645DII will arrive with no mercy :D
I have used the 3 brands, Hassy, Phase one in Mamiya 645D body, and Pentax. In IQ, Pentax and P1 where a tiny bit better than the Hassies, but with this model we have to see that again.What made Pentax a bit less appealing was the quality of the camera itself. It looks like a cheap plastic toy, juts like a plastic made toy for children. The super large Pentax logo on the front makes it looks awful. To me that Hassy made a good impression and the Mamiya was more simple all over. The Pentax had the most commands, and if is see pictures of the new 50 mpix Pentax, it comes close to any modern dslr in buttons and commands you find on it. I enjoyed the 40 mpix picture quality, liked it more than the 60 mpix. Never tested the 80, but all those models in CCD had bigger sensors.
Frank_BR: Ove Bengtson, Hasselblad Product Manager said: "… This CMOS sensor model represents a major leap forward in camera development and breaks new grounds for medium format photographers…"
It sounds almost ridiculous when someone says in 2014 that CMOS sensor is a "major leap forward in camera development". In 2000 the Canon D30 already had a CMOS sensor! That is, the sensor technology of medium format is lagged 14 years compared to other formats. The technology in the MF field develops so slowly that in 2028 Hasselblad (if it survives until then) will be bragging that its MF cameras can shoot 1080i video…
sell such a camera for 6000$ and it will sell. If someone could tell me at any time what justifies a price tag of 30000$ for this camera or any similar one from any other manufacturer. Bring us a camera, mirrorless, in the size of a Mamiya 7, and at a reasonable price tag, and it will sell. Here, the sensor is a 42x32 mm size, what is far from the 4.5x6, 6x6, or 6x7 size, what made the medium format in reality. We are here just a bit less than a double sized FF, so i doubt that the benefit of quality compared to a FF sensor is really that big. What will improve is dynamic range for sure. But, will one really see that on a normal sized print?
stratplaya: Who manufactures the sensor? I didn't find that in the release.
Tommot1965: Im not very impressed by the images that are hosted on DPR..most look soft the higher ISO images look softer still
if you see the full sized images on Photographyblog, they are the same, soft and at higher iso, watercolor like with a lots of loss in detail.
cheetah43: With its design it belongs to Goddam City.
looks like a relic taken out of an antiquity shop. My F5 looks the same, and it has more than 16 years.
Robert Daniels: Wonder if 500.00 extra bucks worth the upgrades?
ask better if the 5900 bucks at beginning even worth to buy this low resolution relic.
Shamael: Keep selling the mirrorless bodies to dumping prices, overprice the good DSLR bodies and keep making lenses at prices no one wants to pay anymore and the market will collapse sooner or later. Let's see Sony as an example, good cameras, like A7 or a6000, sell at dumping prices. If you want the next better lens for it, it's right away 800$, if you want a top fast prime in the f1.8 or 1.4 range you end between 1400 to 2000$. Those companies forget that the whole world is in a crisis and 90% of the world population do not belong to those that have money like hay. We see at what level Hasselblad fights and what profits they do. Some companies like Leica might look good, but behind the scene it is much different, Leica fights with bankruptcy since many years and the future will bring us more and more simple cameras with AF and lower prices. You can not survive with top luxury overpriced stuff forever. On the end, what makes the market? Low and mid range DSLR's only, but is that enough?
And they wonder why the market is bad. Nikon's DF is the best example of what a company should avoid to do. Stop the nostalgia crap and make cameras that are functional with all in it that works the way it should and at price people can and want to pay for it. We have enough crippled junk on the market, we do not need more.
We see new models every 8 month, we do not know what to buy, most have all we don't need and not what we want, the disadvantages being often bigger as the advantages. So, where is the marketing study, how much do they listen to the user, why can we not get what we ask for. For sure, they can not give us satisfaction in all, but, is a Sony mirrorless without Ibis we ask for on the end what we want, it has no silent mode shutter, the NEX series are limited to 1/4000th in addition to that, the A7 series have horribly loud and vibrating shutter systems, all in all a good development, but thrown on the market to see what it gives, the next models will then have partially what we ask for. On the other side, how many companies have too many choice, you do not know what you want, and as I claimed, the other one has what you want in the previous one and that one has again not what the other one has, and so on. It is like a good camera chopped and piece taken to make more models.
Now let's see the DSLR market, Canikon continues using the same sensor in multiple models, polishing up eternally the same body. The higher end of them misses what is good in the lower end, see D7100 from Nikon with more futures, but no tilt and swivel screen. The low end have no drive motor for non hsm lenses, why? Many mirrorless have no VF, the only complete in all body is Pansonic"s GX7. The body has it all, but contains that highlight burning 4/3 sensor. Fixed lens pocketable with honest sensors sell much too expensive, even Ricoh's GR is overpriced, consider the price of a NEX3N to compare, a GR is in no wat better and costs more at production. Sony has not announced any new DSLR since more than one year, they should announce the A79 with 32mpix in the next weeks.
Keep selling the mirrorless bodies to dumping prices, overprice the good DSLR bodies and keep making lenses at prices no one wants to pay anymore and the market will collapse sooner or later. Let's see Sony as an example, good cameras, like A7 or a6000, sell at dumping prices. If you want the next better lens for it, it's right away 800$, if you want a top fast prime in the f1.8 or 1.4 range you end between 1400 to 2000$. Those companies forget that the whole world is in a crisis and 90% of the world population do not belong to those that have money like hay. We see at what level Hasselblad fights and what profits they do. Some companies like Leica might look good, but behind the scene it is much different, Leica fights with bankruptcy since many years and the future will bring us more and more simple cameras with AF and lower prices. You can not survive with top luxury overpriced stuff forever. On the end, what makes the market? Low and mid range DSLR's only, but is that enough?