I'm waiting for the P910 to see if they can extend the zoom range. But in the meantime, I'll bet this camera is fun to use. With most cameras, if you want to take travel photos, you have to go somewhere. Not any more. They just need a one of those microphones that looks like a salad bowl to go with it.
Richard Franiec: Great, candid interview. Mr Iida breaks the mold of typical, cryptic responses to the interviewer's questions once again. That takes a lot of guts and determination. Truly remarkable. No wonder that Fuji have so strong and faithful following. I wish Fuji all the success in achieving their goals.
Richard, I thought the same thing and I think the current Fuji cameras are impressive just the way they are. But on a second glance I don't see much here that isn't obvious. Their video isn't great, a conventional Beyer sensor is cheaper than X-trans, the best way to deal with moire is to upgrade the sensor, AF in mirrorless cameras is slow, SLR systems have more lenses.
In short, Fuji is not ruling anything in or out (except video cameras.) They may or may not develop a monochrome camera. They may or may not develop a medium format camera. If they do bring a monochrome camera to market, Fuji's marketing manager will buy one.
Peter62: Mr. Iida seems to be a very honest man, he also recognizes the accomplishments of other manufacturers. This is not common in his industry.
And he is right: video on my X-E2 is almost unusable and the excellent Fuji lenses could probably cope with higher resolution sensors well.
But I am not disappointed with AF speed.
All the manufacturers recognize their competitor's accomplishments and more important, sales. The reason these interviews rarely stray from the obvious is because roadmaps and specific details tell everybody what your plans are.
Zvonimir Tosic: All right, some will call me biased, but before you do that, please re-assure me with good answers. I am looking at the gentleman's picture above, and in his hands a camera with thinner profile, yes, but with a gigantic lens on it, no smaller that equivalent DSLR lens.
So what's the point he wants to make with this engineering "feat"? That laws of optics always apply and scaling down camera size is a myth? Or that DSLRs are still better ergonomically designed and made for big lenses .. but he won't admit that?
Or that overall imbalance of his design to comfortable handling .. is the new way to enjoy photography in the 21st century? Perhaps following the same route of thinking that the most simple and dumbest of cameras world has ever seen are also called "smart" (smartphone) in this 21st century?
Is there a problem with this 21st century or something?
The giant lens is the first thing I noticed too. Its hard to miss.
I hadn't heard of Rejlander since I was a photo student. Nice to see the old boy getting some attention. This and Meyer Goerlitz lenses in the same week; wow.
So this is a filter you use in the rain that needs to be charged up in sunlight. This would be prefect for a trip from L.A. to Seattle.
This move makes sense to me and laying people off is frequently a sign that a company is moving into the big time.
Retzius: Lytro is struggling because its a solution in search of a problem.
You make a good comparison.
If their method of testing out these lenses is reliable, then what they LensRental is saying is that the Tamron 15-30/2,8 is definitely better than the Canon 16-35/4L, but no where is it close to the Nikon. I'll be getting the Nikon 14-24/2,8 Thanks
That's not what it says at all. It says the Tamron is as good as the 14-24 when set to 23mm. So if you are in the market for a 23mm lens, the Tamron is superb and a bargain.
There may not be that much difference, especially given the price, but the Tamron is slightly inferior to the other lenses at either end of the focal length range. In particular, it's softer in the corners at the wide end.
It is, however, the equal of the 14-24 in size and weight.
Marty4650: There seems to be a real disconnect between making an "affordable camera" for lenses that cost between $4,000 and $10,000.
I mean... why bother?
Can't the Leica lens owner afford a Leica camera?If someone can't afford those lenses, they why would they buy this camera?
Did I miss the part where Konost was planning to create a few affordable lenses for their affordable camera?
I'd say Konost is solving a problem that doesn't exist. Perhaps they might have been better off creating an affordable rangefinder camera that uses Nikon F lenses?
I agree that the market for this would be, depending on the price, small or microscopic. And DPR readers still don't get that KEH is the only camera company interested in creating new cameras that use existing lenses.
But who knows. They laughed at Nimslo. They laughed when Foveon said their sensors would be in everybody's camera. Now we look back and see how wrong those predictions were.
justmeMN: I can see why a startup would want to enter the thriving and growing camera industry - oh wait. :-)
Foveon built a better mousetrap and took the market by storm.
Must be what Ming Thein has been playing with. I wish them luck.
DaveE1: The Adobe marketing creeping into the site may backfire.
So, Photoshop has been around for 25 years?... an interesting fact, but also a reminder that there are better software for most photographers these days. The audio CD has been around since 1985, but that doesn't make it the best way to listen to music.
The comments under the recent article on the Photoshop 25th anniversary made it clear that many people are developing a dislike for Adobe and its products.
Despite what the carefully crafted Adobe press release would want you to think, Photoshop is increasingly becoming less relevant. Eventually, even the "power" users will move away when the newer alternatives get traction.
Sorry Adobe, but your money and size doesn't buy my opinion ;-)
It is odd when somebody not only pays for a product (every month) but also feels the need to provide free promotion as well. But to each his own.
I have to use Photoshop for work because the customers all use it. Like Microsoft Office, it's self-perpetuating. But at home, Lightroom and some NIK plug-ins are more than enough for me. I'm old school so software is the least enjoyable part of the process and if you need training to use it, it's probably too complicated. Of course, Photoshop training is self-perpetuating too.
DaveE1: There's something intriguing about very old photographs. I'm drawn to study them closely, as I find the thought of living in those times interesting.
I wouldn't want to give up my modern day comforts and technology though. I'm sure that someone will be saying the same thing in 100 years about photos from 2015 :-)
I think they will say "they took so many, there had to be a good one in there, somewhere."
This reminds me of a company I worked for that decided to skip PMA one year. We sent a letter to dealers saying "we're not going out of business but the money we save on PMA will be put to better products and services."
Nobody bought it and the rumors began, so next year it was back to PMA. But with Sony, I think people are confusing Sony's future, which is assured, with the future of Sony cameras which is something else.
I presume that when you do get a lens to test, one that has actually been "produced", it will be purchased anonymously so as to be representative of what a customer might receive. Even better and fairer to all, would be several examples. The same would apply to any lenses that the Sigma is being compared to.
Rooru S: BCN rankings has been published for last year results.
SLR salesCanon 54.7%Nikon 39.1%Ricoh (Pentax) 4.5%-------------------------54.7+39.1+4.5 = 98.3%
Guess Sony only managed to get 1.7% of A-mount equipment... Maybe the next thing in the spin off crazyness is Sony A-mount.
EDIT: Actually that's a great Idea. Sony should sell A-mount and let another company keep developing lenses and bodies.
A year ago I posted a link to a NY Times article that explained Sony makes it's money in entertainment. I don't recall if that included video games. True, Sony still has specialized electronics business like sensors but these days it's a movie company. Which Sony camera got as much buzz as The Interview?
Sony has money to buy Minolta as a distress sale or make a $1100 Walkman just to get the press coverage. But at some point they have to except a small business in cameras or get out. The problem is, once they say "We're number three!" reality sets in and the money for all-new designs, "road maps" etc, starts to disappear.
Crashing a drone on the White House lawn probably got things off to a bad start.
Why is everybody worried about Sony? Olympus and Pentax users seem to think their favorite brand will be just fine in a few years, and by that logic, why would Sony run out of steam? Sony isn't huge in camera market share but they can afford to stay in it as long as they care to.
rsf3127: To those who believe Sony is going bakrupt and Samsung is the new deal, please read about the meaning of keiretsu & zaibatsu, and their korean counterpart, the chaebols.
This of central importance to get to the kernel of the problem. It is the neo-Keynesian strategy creating giants that are too big to go bankrupt - and to compete with small businesses. Until they eventually go bakrupt when the aid from the government dries out.
Neither of them is going bankrupt. What they are doing is separating the parts of their business that bring in a healthy profit, from the other parts.