One_Oldman_4U: I hope they become popular. This will make Nikon and Sony think twice about their future pricing strategy. I also hope that Samsung will come out with road map regarding this NX Mini to include a "Pro-sumer" version to compete with the Nikon 1 V3. One advantage Samsung will have is that they can flood the market with these inexpensive cameras by a much lower prices than it's competitors and hopefully will drive the prices down.
I waited to upgrade my V1 to the V3 but the price kept me out. I just wanted the body since I already have some lenses but yet no body only option here in the U.S. Even if Nikon will sell the body only, I bet it will still be in the $850.00 - $950.00 range.
Competition is great for all consumers. It's always great to have choices, good or bad.
On 4/3 that's equivalent to 35mm- I doubt you could get a 35mm f1.8 fifty years ago. Phil
hc44: Must be a lot of good lens glass is rendered junk because the body it's attached to is soon outdated. Makes abstracted lens a good idea.
I have a 2006 four thirds Digilux 3 slr from Leica/ Panasonic/ Olympus with the firmware updated. It has a big Leica zoom lens and produces first class pictures reminiscent of Kodachrome. The images don't stand high on-screen magnification but on my 24 inch monitor the full image is certainly sharp. It's a pity it needs to be carried in a small zoomster case but I can't get the same pleasing results from my various modern small cameras. Philip
RichRMA: Don't forget; Kodak once had 63% of the small digital camera market. They sold them in every place from camera stores to drug stores. The name is obviously still remembered.
The last Kodak popular cameras that gave sharp pictures were the 1960s Retina folding cameras and slrs. What followed gradually became useless if you had any concern about picture quality. APS was a good example of this. I had an APS slr and replaced it with the full format F55, much the same size camera but sharper results.To be fair, none of the new camera products will be manufactured directly by Kodak but bought in from other firms. If the latter are good then the Kodak brand might get taken seriously.Philip
wootpile: One can only hope that Kodak will be developing a m43 sensor of their own. Good for competition and opens for additional camera brands. I doubt it though, it will probably be the existing sensors again. Still, we can always hope :)
Micro4/3 cameras do not fit in the pocket. They need a shoulder bag, particularly if you have several lenses. For the money the image quality is very good. It isn't as good as those from a Leica M9 but look how much cheaper it is. I can use Leica lenses on adapters on my G5 but I never do - the M4/3 prime lenses are sharper than the sensor.....Philip
Galbertson: One other question...i have great nikkor glass gor 70's. Can they adapt to a7r? Is old manual lenses be good glass on digital ff camera. Do only late lenses specific to digital bodies be best for image quality.?
I use 1970s and 1980s Leica film camera lenses on my digital M9 and no problems arise. I also use slr lenses on adapters to fit the M9, Nikon 20mm AF and Olympus-mount Tokina 17mm manual. These work well stopped down a little to maximise definition. I sometimes use a 12mm Voigtlander f5.6 on the full-frame M9. The results are amazing but I need to use Cornerfix to deal with cyan-tinted vignetted edges to the image (or crop a little). I don't think I have any digital-age lenses to use on the M9. At Leica prices I can't imagine buying one. Philip
brycesteiner: Any samples? I wouldn't mind having a non-fisheye lens at 8.5 and keeping the focus in state. On a ultra wide lens I don't usually have to make many changes to focus anyway.
You could leave it on infinity mostly. I use a 12mm on a FX-format camera and it hardly ever needs focussing at f5.6 or f8. Philip
Results like my 17mm Tokina on a Leica M9, needs stopping down for sharpnessbut very usefulPhil
tjbates: Fascinating subject. One of the main reasons why FF has become less desirable is the size and weight of lenses. A different design approach to the lens/ sensor relationship could help miniaturize lenses.
I was put off a Nikon D4 and zoom lenses due to the total weight of the outfit so bought a Leica M9 which weighs much less. No zoom lenses really, just a range of fixed focal lengths by Leica and others. Buy a lot of lenses and you get a very heavy outfit! I could manage with 4 or 5.Philip
davidrm: "We've reached out to Adobe". FFS, can't you just say "asked" ??? Or do you prefer to leverage new paradigms rather than use English?
what does leverage new paradigms mean?
Fox Fisher: Why people are obsessed with sensor sizes? If you insist saying that APS-C is always better than m4/3 then Medium Format should be above all... Lets all go buy a medium format then.... as you can see comparing a camera with just a sensor size is irrational. It's all comes down to individual buyers taste and use and the end of the day.
Spec wise it's a great camera. It fills the boxes where Olympus E-P5 left empty. It will be painful to sell my beloved RX100 for this awesome camera with awesome lens selections.
Larger format in film was always associated with higher quality. Obviously lens quality and photographer's talent played a big part too. Something similar applies to photo sensors but the quality of these improves as later generations arrive. My M9 Leica, an old fashioned camera, gives me much better results than my M4/3 Olympus EPL 3 but I have not tried the OM-D that has a later sensor. I imagine the Leica M240, being the most recent of the M9 type, is the sharpest- it is certainly the most overpriced. Philip
GSD_ZA: I'm sure it will be a very competent piece of kit, but I just couldn't justify one of these over a Sony NEX7 or one of the excellent Panasonic mirrorless/interchangeable lens options.
This has a better zoom than my Pana.G2 and looks smaller. I have heard dealers criticise Sony's after sales service . My Lumixes have never gone wrong, nor my Canon shirt pocket cameras so I cannot rate their service departments! As to flash I rarely need it.PL