The D500 looks like a great camera, but building it 5 years too late is not what D300/300s users were asking for. So many of them moved on. They were encouraged by a huge Nikon campaign to go full frame at great cost. Many left Nikon and found an upgrade from the D300s in mirrorless, again at great cost. Those people are not coming back. Considering how capable the D7200 is those customers are not likely to switch. The D7200 and D500 will take sales from each other for owners of older models. Nikon shot themselves in the foot with the delay. Now they will conclude they were mistaken and should not pay attention to customers when the D500 is not the great hit that the D300 was and there will be no followup in 3 years.
VBLondon: I'd say that they've fully come of age when more of them have built-in EVFs.If you want a fast normal zoom and built-in EVF the choices today are the aging Panasonic LX100 or the sluggish Canon G5X
I agree. I don't think you can take any camera seriously if it does not have a viewfinder. Certainly a camera that is difficult or impossible to frame an image in normal conditions of bright daylight is not an enthusiast camera.
Stroke of genius, really. His photographs make me wonder about his subjects. Who were they? What happened? They look like people with history, not black and white abstracted patterns of lines, spots, wrinkles. Really moral guy in the best sense.
I love these intelligent and informative interviews. I am sure that Fuji's openness is due in large part to your approach. Thanks, Barnaby.
ijustloveshooting: no tiltable lcd? must be a joke.
Sorry, mistake. I thought I was helping by pointing out that you can use aLcamera without a tilting LCD. Now you have jumped to sarcasm and IBIS. Oh dear. People have been taking pictures for over 150 years without IBIS. Leica, Nikon, Canon, and Fuji don't like IBIS and it is a valid solution. Buy the features you want. Evidently this camera is not for you.
Really, really nice preview. It seems to zero in on what I am interested in. Well done, Richard.
Wubslin: 'faux leather'
Stopped reading right there. Goodbye Fuji, you won't be missed.
Oh, please. Leather has not been used on cameras in decades including Leica, except for collector cameras. It just doesn't hold up. Faux is an improvement.
Keeper78: The grain in the pictures look like from my ex A6000...Somebody know if is the same sensor?
Probably it is the new sensor in the Nikon D7200 which just came out. Nikon can probably iterate faster than Fuji. They probably both started developement about the same time.
You can tilt the camera and still see the LCD. How about that? Tiltable LCD is nice, but it is easy to work around.
Damn. Nice upgrade.
munchaussen: I will end the Sony-Fuji fight:
Sony DON´T have a single rangefinder camera.
Done! end of the fight.
(Sony does another type of cameras, so stop comparing xpro with what? )In the end, at least you should compare Xpro with a Leica.
Ah, words mean what you choose them to mean. Your handle is appropriate.
Too late for many. I got tired of waiting and went the D800 route. And like many started experimenting with mirrorless for travel. I have been known to say that my Fuji X-T1 was my D400. I can't count the number of times on the Fuji forum that someone said that they sold all their Nikon equipment. Really? A DX flagship that is as big and heavy as a D810? Nikon should have used this opportunity to make this mirrorless and migrated the design down the line like they have in the past. I hope the D500 is successful, but I fear that much of the market for it has gone elsewhere and it delays Nikon's serious entry into mirrorless.
This is kind of odd. Medium format is great because of the larger sensor. It makes up for the lower resolution of a medium format lens. Back in the day when lenses were rated in lines per mm a good medium format lens would resolve 45-50 lines per mm while a good 35mm lens might resolve 80 lines per mm. The difference was that there were lots more mm of film with the medium format. You completely lose that advantage putting a medium format lens on a small sensor.
I understand what is being said about curvature of field, but I put in the Nikon D810 as a comparison it seems to be notably sharper in every area of the target. Am I missing the place where you explain what lens was used? I have never found it in your reviews. Is the lens on the D810 a similar focal length to the lens on the Sony? I also wonder whether on the Sony it is field curvature or as you also say it is a lens very close to the sensor. That would be softness due to non-parallel rays which is very different. Soft corners due to field curvature don't happen in a three dimension subject, but inability of the sensor to capture light at the corners because of the angle of incidence is not really recoverable.
Shouldn't the development be over with or nearly so? Nikon never makes an announcement like this. Does this mean it is delayed?
What a clever idea. Shooting in black and white suggests the animals are already gone. It is like discovering a trove of Billy the Kid and Abraham Lincoln prints. Guarantees an emotional sense of loss that is probably good if you are trying to save them.
I am sure that a list of the faults compiled of all the available DSLRs would be nearly as long.No doubt mirrorless autofocus can be improved, but at least it does not have the very serious lack of sync between DSLR body mounted body sensors and the image sensor that has required lens AF tuning tools to built into pro cameras. Has any DSLR provided a serious manual focus tool?
And what is it with the love of reprogammable buttons? Nothing is more confusing and difficult than that to me. Give me a camera with a nice collection of dedicated and labeled dials and buttons and I will learn how to use it.
Canon has a new cube camera. What will they do? Oh, nooo.http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1187825-REG/canon_1002c002_me20f_sh_multi_purpose_camera.html/?gclid=COOyqvrb98gCFU9rfgodxPAILg
raztec: This would be a valid argument if Polaroid was the market leader and some other small company copied it's design to try to fool people into thinking they are getting an equally good product. That's why design patents exist.
However, in this case it appears that Polaroid are simply going for a cash grab instead of riding on the coat tails of Gopro and bettering their product.
The business leaders at Polaroid should realize that imitation is the best form of flattery.
As I understand it Polaroid went out of business. Some businessman bought the right to license the name. The Polaroid Cube is a cheap rip off of the GoPro by one of those licensees. This is like someone patenting a flat rectangular shape for a phone and then suing everyone for patent infringment.