Vladik: Does this is mean that they going to move production to china? :)
I don't have any Canon lenses made in China. The little pancake is from Malaysia but I'm always pleasantly surprised that when I get a lens (or body) it still comes from Japan. Have to check but I don't think even the EOS-M lenses are made in China. Not that there is anything wrong with the nice folks in China but this stuff is too expensive for China.
Very interesting. I wonder if this is how the commies came to be known as "reds".
Boss of Sony: I like these photos, although I think they have nothing to do with photography or cameras. They would probably be more appropriate on a history website. But I'm glad I saw them.
Actually, photos are what come from cameras so there is a connection.
jaykumarr: bottom line:will retail at $7995.
My Spiratone Girl Watcher lens retailed for $79.95.
peevee1: " To access it, you have have to go to the Custom menu in order to make the Custom menu visible"
either Jeff or I
Markol: Why would you buy this over the old model? Same sensor, still lousy movie specs, still not the 5 axis ois but of course a higher price. Will we have to wait again for 3 generations to get a new sensor? Well ok, it's still very good but the other things I mentioned are deal breakers for me. AAnd the biggest question of all: have they finally fixed their shutter shock problem?
With so many similar/redundant small camera models, I'd expect nice holiday rebates on the ones they want to get rid of.
Richard Murdey: K-50 is so much better in every possible respect that the K-S1 can only be described as being "for stupid people who don't know any better".
Well, compared to the usual "relentless pursuit of excellence", "for folks who don't know any better" sounds pretty catchy.
That photo of the blue one in the grass makes it look like someone wants to bury it. At least put a Aetna Rokunar skylight filter on it first.
KL Matt: Looks like a poor unsuspecting K5 got some bizarre disco mirrorless rammed down its throat and unfortunately lived to tell about it.
How could you not see it coming?
Carlton Foxx: The only problem with this essay is that you're not buying a bunch of specs or a box of metal, plastic, and glass.... You're buying the engineering talent of the people at Fuji who used their experience, education, and judgement to create what in their minds is a camera that best uses the technology that the company has developed over the years. That's what makes this camera different from the nikons and canons and olympii....
Ok, you're hired. But you left out is, you're buying as much as they are prepared to give you at this price. They know how to provide everything enthusiasts would like to see, but not at this price.
Jogger: Sorry Fuji, your competition has moved on to 1-inch sensors.. in smaller bodies with faster lenses and less expensive. This is dead on arrival.
With all the technology (especially Fuji's amazing ability to handle high dynamic range) you'd think by now they could squeeze enough out of a too small sensor to make it good enough for people who are serious enough to care about the other stuff. Nope. I'm sure we can count on DxO to produce chart that proves otherwise, but it ain't so.
After I sold the X10 (no orbs or any of that) I had given up on compact cameras because they just weren't good enough. Then, Canon had one of their big rebates on the original G1X. Compared to the X10, the G1X was prehistoric. Primitive and unrefined, to put it mildly. But the ability of the G1X to record detail was dramatically superior to the X10 because the crude G1X had a decent sized sensor.
And Viking79 is correct. The Sony is very cool except for the corners. But obviously people either don't notice or don't care. To each his own.
I had the X10 and it was amazing to see so much technology, optical and build quality lavished on a sensor that was obviously too small. Lesson learned. But with a bigger sensor and a $500-700 price Fuji would have the perfect almost-pocket camera.
sbansban: I was so happy to see the Ricoh GR included among the best compact cameras for travel but was surprised to find its close twin Nikon Coolpix A missing - especially when it has by far the best sensor AND lens rating from DXOMark among all cameras anywhere close to its size. Some other great travel cameras that came to my mind were the Canon G1 X, Fujifilm F900EXR (why is the F900EXR never mentioned in the same breath as the other 20X+ pocketable compacts like ZS30/TZ40, SX280, HX20V/HX50V et al?), LX7, maybe even LF1 - all of which are still very much available for purchase. And since the Canon SX280 now has a documented battery issue that Canon has failed to resolve with their latest firmware upgrades, wouldn't its predecessor - the SX260 be a wiser choice?
Even if the image quality and the interface of the Nikon A were identical to the Ricoh the price would need to be identical as well. Ricoh does have an underdog thing going but if they make a top-notch product for less money, why shouldn't they?
This rivalry, probably unintentional, has been going on since Ricoh introduced the GR-1 film camera, which outperformed the Nikon 35Ti, yet the Ricoh was half the price.
As for DxO, I'd rather take Ken Rockwell's advice. All that technology and their results still don't match what you see when you actually use the product.
JDThomas: Ohhh! Let me be the first to complain about how expensive this camera is! Only dumb rich people can buy this camera!
Not only quick but constructive. Looking at this pixel shifting, I suspect we will look back in a few years and think they went to a lot of trouble but for now this seems like a clever approach.
FBoneOne: The angry comments below are quite puzzling. Leica has not been able to keep up with demand lately. Regardless of whether any if us think these cameras are worth what they charge, why wouldn't they charge $8000 for it? They still have not found the price point that curves down demand. Actually, if we look at the recent history, Leica M cameras tend to react like true luxury items with increased demand as price goes up.I actually love Leica Ms and would own one if I could, but I understand their decisions - they may not help me, but they seem right when it comes to maximizing Leica's profits, which is after all what they should be thinking about. Nobody has to buy a Leica, so their pricing strategy does not hurt anybody, and it sure seems to be helping them, so again, we may not like it but I don't see much to criticize.
The problem with your analysis is that the numbers are quite small. It's no different from reading about an ultra-exotic car where, despite a handful being made, they can't seem to keep up with the demand.
Just another Canon shooter: Did Chevy shrink so much in size to require a 600mm lens?
The car was so far away, it was the size of a lemon.
ThatCamFan: Please stop EFFING up already Nikon, Canon is does PROPER quality control tests apparently, not Nikon. I am saving up for a Nikon but you are REALLY making me question my choice.
Its got a computer inside. Early adopter + computer = problems. That's just the way it is. Banding, orbs, light leaks at 100,000 ISO. People talk about how trouble-free film cameras were but they were much simpler, mechanical devices. And they weren't trouble-free. Just easier to fix. Except Bronicas.
mpgxsvcd: I find it interesting that everyone keeps saying “Look at the Market Share Nikon has” instead of “Look at the profits Nikon is not making”. Having a big market share is a good thing only if that market has growth potential and is already profitable. Having more of a non-profitable market is actually a bad thing.
Tell that to Sony.
Not normally a fan of Nikon as a company (products are great; company isn't) but I think they're doing pretty well here, admitting instead of denying and doing so right away. Unfortunate for all concerned but if you want to be an early adopter you take your chances.
mpgxsvcd: The single biggest thing to remember here is that Sony, Panasonic, and Olympus all depend on revenue from something other than Digital Cameras to keep their businesses going. Canon and Nikon are Camera companies first and foremost.
Slumping camera sales will hurt Nikon and Canon way more than it would for Sony, Olympus, and Panasonic. If Nikon and Canon stopped selling DSLRs and compact cameras tomorrow those companies wouldn’t be around for long.
Cameras like this are the best bet at continuing to sell cameras to the mass market. Canon and Nikon have abandoned this market almost entirely.
Olympus is in poor shape all around and would have been gone altogether without medical. Cameras are substantial for Canon but they make lots of other things as well. Sony is no longer making money from electronics at all (see NY Times) so it is a mystery why they want to break into a small but crowded field like cameras. A very long-term plan, perhaps. Panasonic is fine without cameras; Fuji and Nikon are the companies that really depend on photo products. Innovation is great but some of the coolest products are not big sellers, like Ricoh for example.