So, how large is that 'large sensor' then?It is such an imprecise term.If FF, it could be interesting for shallow dof, but as they mention 'equivalent lenses' it must be a smaller sensor than that.
So, what is the physical size of the sensor?
Given enough megapixels, wouldn't cropping an image in software have the same effect as using a longer lens?Yes, you lose some resolution, but that is not a big deal if you shoot your images for the web and such?
None of the samples shot wide open? I would like to see that DOF, especially from that f/1.4 lens.
bstolk: I wish they would fix the super slow start up time. My biggest two gripes with it were the slow AF (fixed) and slow startup after deleting photos on computer. I have to FORMAT THE CARD EVERY EVERY TIME that I transfer images to my Mac. This is so idiotic.
The last firmware update fixed the super slow start up times after using the memory card with a Mac.
Got the XF1 for my mother, but she is on her 2nd, as the first one broke within days (lens motor stopped working.)
The second unit has so far been working just fine.
I'm puzzled by the fact that the XF1 does not show up in the flickr stats at all? What's up with this?http://www.flickr.com/cameras/fujifilm/?nomodel=1
Downside of this camera is that you cannot get shallow depth of field despite the 1:1.8 lens. This is because of the small sensor.So I recommend saving up more money, and get a Sony RX100 or a Fujifilm X100S instead.Shallow depth of field only happens if the lens is fast AND the sensor is big.
That would be a 'fashionisto' in this case.
Wake me up when someone finally comes with a 60x60mm sensor. The term 'Medium Format' is getting more diluted all the time.
Did Leica misspell 'Focus Peaking'?Did they mean ''Focus Peeking'?
I wish they would fix the super slow start up time. My biggest two gripes with it were the slow AF (fixed) and slow startup after deleting photos on computer. I have to FORMAT THE CARD EVERY EVERY TIME that I transfer images to my Mac. This is so idiotic.