iAPX: I understand why this camera is exciting for some, including me. I also understand why some wealthy wants one, excluding me.
But, clearly it is too pricey, and the sensor is really inferior to what have been made these last years in full frame format. Even inferior to last generation APS-C, and in some case to 1" or micro-four third sensors, if you look at the noise and the dynamic range.
I dream that Fuji will have an hybrid-viewfinder camera with interchangeable lenses, in both TRANS-X and Black&White versions, to offer a competitive challenger.
PS: many old leica lenses are natural resolutions filters for a 24MP sensors, so it's useless to have this definition. More over that, this kind of sensor deserve extremly precise Focus, when using 50mm (or longer) wide open for portraits, and I didn't find people able to do it using their own eyes with a rangefinder. This is not new, it's problematic since 18MP sensors on Leica.
You get without the Colour Filters over the pixels they see 3x the light of a colour sensor and so will get a lot less noise? (Also sharper and no aliasing.) Monochrome is a special case and doesn't relate to colour sensor comparisons.
princecody: You could get a Sony A7II with the Sony 35mm 1.4 ZA and have superior IQ to the 246. Its mirrorless like my EM1 and you call these cameras toys? Sony is the IQ FF King. Leica needs to innovate more in my opinion.
Remember the Sony lens has a colour filter over each pixel that throws away 2/3 of the arriving light, the Leica just grabs it all, so gets 3x the light and less noise. Also no moire/aliasing or worrying about where edges are (only 1/4 the Sony pixels see Red and 1/4 see Blue).
Dr_Jon: (Maybe a bit picky, but...) I'm not sure you can talk about "read" noise or the sensors making "small improvements" as the Canon sensors are really good with excellent read noise and, as you say, the issue is off-sensor noise, specifically noise after the ISO amplifier. Other than that it seems a good piece.
Thanks for that - although it's Friday evening here in London, my interests are more in improvements in Wine/Beer delivery to my table and music loudness... (actually both of those are not so bad right now) :-)Plus feel free to drop by any time for a discussion... drinks on me...
P.S. no-one mentions dark current either (which is more electrons per pixel per second, so short exposures don't care).
However some people do still seem to split it off, so I'd say no - I'm personally happy with taking read noise as a sensor property and Canon's ADC noise as something different. (But that's just my opinion and I'm sure people with broader knowledge bases than mine could happily disagree.) E.g. see Roger Clark's work, he takes Canon sensor read noise as the lowest value (with increasing ISO) that still gives 8 stops of pixel-level DR.
I don't think this matters so please don't take it too seriously, I merely discussed it above to show my thinking and explain I may not align with accepted practice but aren't on my own. My original point was more the article linking the DR to sensor development ("small improvements"), when the DR is controlled by off-sensor electronics.
It may get lumped in these days, that's certainly the easy way to do it, back when I did this sort of stuff (first job after Uni, so a while back as I seem to be middle aged now, not sure how that happened) we didn't do that, as it wasn't a sensor property, but much work has been published since and I/we would never claim to have been following a standard then anyway.
Certainly even people who can't access data directly from the sensor can calculate the sensor read noise to a reasonable approximation, although from the end user point of view it doesn't matter - does the user care the sensor in a Canon 6D has 15.5 stops of Dynamic Range (which it does) if DXO says they can only access a bit over 12 stops (plus DXO normalise it so this could go on and on).
(Maybe a bit picky, but...) I'm not sure you can talk about "read" noise or the sensors making "small improvements" as the Canon sensors are really good with excellent read noise and, as you say, the issue is off-sensor noise, specifically noise after the ISO amplifier. Other than that it seems a good piece.
Dr_Jon: Small correction:"It maintains a minimum altitude of 5 ft / 1.75m in flight"That's above your head, not over the ground, as could be dangerous otherwise...
Not sure about the fixed-focus lens though, would AF have been so difficult?
BTW I walk past George Orwell's old home pretty regularly, I wonder what he'd make of this...
...or save a bundle on haircuts!
titus45: viewfinder magnification x82, is it a joke ?
Nikon D5500 is 0.82x as well.
Zumzifero: As with the Canon 70D, what is really killing this brand (for me) is the lack of a 100% coverage in the view screen. As an Architect I use Perspective correction on buildings a lot, and since APS-C is more then enough for me (plotter resolution is usually crap compared with Photo printers) all I ask for is a proper bright viewfinder for when I shoot in bright sunlight. LCD screens usually are unreliable and composing with a viewfinder that doesn't shows me the full picture is unnerving. Pentax does that, and so does Nikon with the 7100, but with Canon I need an expensive (and for me unappealing) 7DMkII, meaning I'd rather go with a 6D instead. It's overkill since I much prefer small light bodies having to crawl in restricted spaces form time to time...All that keeps me tied to canon are mostly my 10-22 EF-S, but temptation to switch brand is soooo strong!!! (Olympus OMD 5MkII?)
You should probably compare the EF-S 10-18 to the 9-18mm for pricing, although I assume you were talking of a trade-in? Olympus also save some money in the smaller sensor as that's one of the expensive bits. Note you'll need a tripod for 40MP as it takes eight shots over 2+ seconds.
Oh and you can always get a screen hood like a hoodman.
P.S. when measured a number of the "100%" viewfinders aren't quite. Gotta love marketing... (I do much prefer 100% personally, or at least as close as I can get.)
BTW IMHO the 10-22 is a great bit of glass, sharp to the corners and very low distortion - the corners are better (relatively speaking) than those on the 16-35 f4 L I just traded mine in for (I haven't had a camera to shoot it on for 4+ years, but kept it as it was so good).
Gesture: They look sharp, but will existing Canon APS-C glass work OK on the new sensor?
It'll be fine, the change is resolution is not great (from 5184 pixels across the sensor to 6000, so +15%).
whatta: Does it have silent shutter?
I cannot understand why it does not have gps (like almost all phones) and why the viewfinder got smaller??760d 0.82x700d 0.85x100d 0.87x
Btw does that mean we can link the metering to the AF point?"(1) Evaluative metering (linked to all AF points)"
Seems to be a big step-up from prev models and not highlighted:transmissive LCD in viewfinder
Probably for battery life reasons, although you can quite easily do this using a phone and GPX (the phone tracks locations over time and then software pokes the locations into the images, based on timestamp - bonus points for changing both to summertime).
maxmarra: I seriously cant understand canons strategy ....couple of month ago 7Dmk2 came with 20 mp sensornow low end 760D came with 24 mp
i believe 7Dmk2 sensor must be better than this new rebel despite the lower mp(or else canon is crazy)i am waiting for 80D ... hope they use the same sensor as 7Dmk2 in it.i believe this new 24 mp sensor is a noisy one
Maybe think of 70D as 40MP (producing 20MP images) and this as 24MP?
Randy Benter: The T6s should get a firmware upgrade to add AF micro adjust. I would never use a DSLR without this capability. It would be nice to have a smaller DSLR like this as an option, but apparently Canikon believe that enthusiasts and pros would never want a smaller/lighter camera. The competition is offering some nice options (e.g. E-M1 and X-T1), but Canon still doesn't get it.
I think if you're technical enough to want AFMA you should be looking at the 70D and up... (How many people really do this anyway... I have, using FoCal Pro and a TON of kit, but I'm pretty sure most people don't care.)
kodakrome: Why doesn't it have this? Why doesn't it have that? Why doesn't it do everything I want?
Every new product seems to bring out all the whiny babies.
No personal teleport (for instant close-ups) no deal...
Small correction:"It maintains a minimum altitude of 5 ft / 1.75m in flight"That's above your head, not over the ground, as could be dangerous otherwise...
tommy leong: Well Done Fujifilm.You continue to awe us with great products....Cant wait till you get to fullframe.
Unless someone works out a way of making very very fast lenses (f0.7 and less) then larger sensors will always have a place, as that's the only way to collect enough light to reduce the noise inherent in that light to a pleasing level. (Even with no Colour Filter over pixels and a 100% quantum efficiency.)
It will be interesting to see how Pentax/Ricoh get on with their attempt at FF... I wonder if they will use a high-MP sensor (the new Sony 56MP perhaps) so you can still get decent results with the APS lenses?
Peiasdf: Confusing lineup. This is a X-E series with the EVF at the center instead of the corner so is it a step up from X-E or runs alongside it? It seems Fiji is running two lines of APS-C mirrorless/EVIL cameras: X-Pro, X-E, X-M and X-T1, X-T10, X-A
I don't know, it's a bit like Oly going with OM-Ds instead of higher-end PENs, so it wouldn't surprise me if the X-E3 didn't appear.
Fogsprig: I don't think X-T10 would be a huge hit among Fuji lovers.If I'm not wrong, those guys yearn X-Pro2. They asked for it for almost two years.
UPD Well, my E-M10 gets in OMD lineup as a strong entry-level one but it's not a specs-giant like E-P5 (X-E2 or X-Pro1 in Fuji world) from more awkward PEN series. That being said I may be wrong.
Where does it say this camera won't get firmware updates - did you just guess or get it from an actual source?