Uninteresting edition of an already uninteresting camera...
I love it and I think is a great creative effort... I agree, the control dials on the front make little sense and would be easy to accidentally switch between AF, or MF without knowing it, but the whole concept is very worthy... I guess my perfect real-life camera would be a Fuji X-Pro1 with full frame sensor simply because I love extreme DoF shallowness.
Congratulations and thanks for sharing!
OneGuy: I read all comments here so far and have a distinct (if biased) impression that Sony has been inspired by Pana GF1 w/20mm pancake. This Pana cam does not need image stabilization and makes great 30x40 cm pics (my own testimony).
Zo, for RX1 $1k premium over GF1, it must make 40x60 cm prints routinely, be fast-kid worthy without flare, and sprint 100m under 10 seconds.
My GF1 + 20mm + VF cost me $700 and the IQ is excellent, no need to spend 3000 more on this. But I would be more than happy to put money together for a Fuji X-E1.
SantaFeBill: Wonder what the boys who priced this were smoking? Probably the same as those who did the initial pricing for the Sigma SD1, or who did the licensing agreements for the BetaMax format (remember that?).If it gets you that far from reality, perhaps I should try it. :)
I guess this camera is aimed to the same Leica X2 target, basically is "only" $500 more expensive but I guess with a much higher IQ... still I rather have a Fuji X-100 for half the price.
Cytokine: Would the senior management and product managers care to write a book on "How not to launch a new concept" I think it would sell very well, with the title "How to kill an icon in 24 hours."
My sympathy's go out to all their staff who deserve better than this. Its not the concept of working with Sony or another manufacturer, its the truly unprofessional way in which this has been done.
I do not believe that the current management team are even capable of correcting this fiasco. The mistakes are so obvious that even a junior brand manager would be appalled.
Couldn´t agree more... I should expected a digital X-Pan, or a DSLR inspired in their H-series, but this is a joke, no matter the fancy leather, or wood grip which make it looks even worst!
This is the ugliest camera ever designed... The wood grip is so "Rolls Royce"... At least Leica is not alone creating uber-expensive equipment for the rich and famous.
liptonius: I am not impressed.My GF1 brings me just as good pictures with my Nikon 35 F-.1.4 lens.
And my GF1 with the 20mm 1.7... even my Minolta MD 50mm 1.4 deliver the goods for $75dlls, basically $6925dlls cheaper than the new Summicron and mine is 1 stop faster.
pedromeyer: you don't purchase a Leica to take better pictures, any more than you buy a Rolex to get a better record of time. It's all a bunch of nonsense to discuss the unique quality of pictures made with a Leica, as most of the time, the LEICA is so slow that you will miss out on the great images, to start out with. If I compare my Canon with the Leica, the Canon runs circles around the Leica ( and I have them both). So let us be honest with ourselves, the Leica is not a very competent tool to make images. No one, I assure you, will be able to see a picture and say, well that could only have been achieved with a Leica. That might have been true, circa 1950, but today in the digital age? not a chance. Leica's business model is not about making the best cameras to take pictures, but to sell to those who enjoy the feel and quality of an almost hand made tool. A Cartier watch, if you know what I mean.
Hugo808 says: "For further information see the work of Henri Cartier Bresson"
Well, Hugo you don´t have idea of what you are saying. HCB pictures were all about "the moment" he managed to capture, not exactly by the micro-contrast, the "3D effect" and all that BS that seems to be so important these days.
“Sharpness is a bourgeois concept” – Henri Cartier Bresson
renato: All 3 examples above are terrible. The first one - the shadows are not controlled at all, and form a bad pattern (lots of bumps on her dark side). The second - just washed out, and flat, no lighting work presented. The third - the main light is positioned too above and too aside - resulting in a larger nose than could be.
Yes, you can use just one key light, but then you have to be able to master a shadow pattern. If you can't - then stick with a large reflector and fill the shadows, just a touch, so it is not looking like black holes.
In fact in the first one (the girl with the black fabric on her head) she looks deformed... very weird neck position, enhanced by those shadows.
dark goob: Can we please stop referring to 135-format as "full-frame"? It's factually wrong because 135-format cameras are not always full-frame. It's actually a fact that the Nikon FX-format sensors are the only known cameras to support a crop-sensor mode. Not to mention the fact that Micro Four Thirds and Four Thirds are both full-frame formats -- despite having a smaller sensor.
Quit using language wrongly!!!!
I agree... Medium format cameras are also full frame, so 4x5, or 8X10 are. On the other hand I think Olympus and Panasonic lenses should have used lens nomenclature according to their "field of view"... if the 20mm 1.7 behaves like a 40mm in 135 format and the equivalences seems to be so important why not call it a 40mm?
Marty4650: You just can't please everyone.
If Olympus had made this a cheap lens... made from plastic, with a maximum aperture of f/2.8, then everyone would be complaining saying "I would gladly pay more for a much better lens."
But instead they decided to build a high quality lens, so now they will complain that "it costs too much."
You simply cannot buy high quality optics at bargain basement prices.No one has them. Not Canon, not Nikon, nor Pentax or Sony.
Incidentally, Leica will be happy to sell you a 75mm f/2.0 lens for $3800, and it still won't autofocus.
And Leica fanboys will gladly pay for it.
Seems like I get into a math MIT forum...
Everybody seems so concern about depth-of-field control, then why bother with FF?? Go get a nice digital medium format back, or even better, a 4x5 or an 8x10 camera and you will see what real DoF control is. And guess what, you can get pretty shallow depth of field with any 1.4 lens in this format if you know how to work around it.
Sergio DS: There's much talk about the aperture, dop, etc stuff... First of all equivalent aperture does not mean equivalent light transmission, I'm sorry but even in the same camera two 50mm lenses with the same aperture might have different light transmission characteristics, albeit similar, however, the dop values should remain the same. In the case of the FF vs APS vs m4/3, I ain't even go there... But from a dop point of view we can say that this 75mm is, from a dop perspective, equivalent to a 100mm 2.4 APS-C lens, and simiilar to a 150mm F5 lens on fullframe, only regarding to the DOP! If you don't believe it just check for yourselves http://www.dofmaster.com/doftable.html
yabokkie, is NOT 2 stops darker... behaves like an F3.5 in terms of DEPTH of FIELD not in terms of gathering light.
ManuelVilardeMacedo: I never realized a new release of a micro 4/3 product could produce the reactions I'm reading here. It's not just the stupid equivalence theories, it's also the number of trollers that come around whenever Olympus issues a new body or lens.Olympus has a long tradition on innovative products: the original Pen line introduced half-frame to the world; the OM series set the standards for all future SLRs; they created the first entirely digital camara when all others were analogue bodies with a sensor thrown in; and they - and Panasonic - created the micro 4/3 format. They started something; in a stagnant world, where cameras were confined to marginal evolutions, they dared to be once again innovative. And they were successful: they put mirrorless cameras under the spotlight, and this new format is evolving and catching up with the DSLR competition - hence the hate comments from all these fanboys.Olympus has a rich history of great lenses, and they're back in the game. Way to go Olympus!
Agree... people spend too much time in this place discussing equivalences that it looks more like a math forum than a photography forum. 1.4 is 1.4, period. The only difference is in terms of depth of field and that´s all. TOO much science, and very little art!
I agree, the "Public Vote" is absurd. At least they should change the name of the award to "The Jurors Vote" or something...
wcowan: Excellent idea, I hope Fuji releases a few more converters. A 0.68x (24mm EFL) and a 2.0x (70mm EFL) would have been far more useful. I would buy both at a similar or slightly higher price point to this 0.8x offering.
If this works for them I am sure they will release more converters, and maybe an X200 could have a 50mm f2 lens instead of the 35mm and then the converters would be more appealing.
ybizzle: Fuji keeps things interesting yet again with this new lens. The X100 just got better both firmware wise, and lens wise. Sure not many will buy the lens, but it's nice to know the option is there if you need the extra wide angle.
With all the firmware updates and new lens housing to fix the sticky aperture issue,the X100 can possibly be one of, if not, the greatest camera of all time...
Fuji will be in the future what Leica was the past century. Just give them time... I was thinking in an M8 but what the heck, I will go for the X-Pro1!!
owenleve: I have the x100. Have used it for about 6 months. Final conclusion. Cute toy... Not falling for this add-on Fuji. Thanks. Oh, looked at the xpro out of curiosity. Felt like a plastic holga. Image quality 'can' be nice but I'm sticking to real, professional gear... called Nikon.
For sale, X100....
Another troll in the house...
dmanthree: I wonder how many uber-rich will buy these and proceed to shoot pictures with the lens cap on?
Eric Clapton for sure will...
plasnu: Those pictures are the most beautiful "Image Samples" ever posted on DP review, and I'm not a monochrome guy.
Simply breathtaking. Thanks.
Breathtaking...? wow, Leica should be glad to have costumers like you with you very easy to pleased.
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review