hetedik: One more dishonest looking licence agreement. Shame...
"6 Copyright licence
Canon will only use your Materials for the purpose of providing you with the irista Services. To do this, you grant Canon and those we may work with a free, non-exclusive, worldwide, sub-licensable right to do everything necessary to provide the irista Services, including (without limitation) to use, publish, reproduce, host and store your Materials (the "Licence"). The Licence continues for as long as you use the irista Services."
The important part, i.e. summary: you grant Canon a free, non-exclusive, worldwide, sub-licensable right to do everything including (without limitation) to use, publish, reproduce your materials.
Great he? These multinaltionale lawyer-run smarties are sooo hateable.
All true what you say...however, beyond just the "standard element services" involved in maintaining a cloud based photo sharing site, it also does appear to grant Canon Inc. itself the "sub-license rights" to fully reuse all of your uploaded "Material" content in almost any way it so chooses as well- (without limitations). These "Sub-legal rights" by a commercial company, or entity, is definitely something to keep in mind if you also happen to be storing and/or posting commercial, high quality images to any online site that has these kinds of "sub-legal rights" over all of the content uploaded to them.
Thanks for this "fine print" info - which is most disturbing in that Canon can attain full legal reproductive rights to any "materials" i.e. images that are uploaded to their new Irista photo Cloud service. I believe this technically legal corporate appropriation of "materials" is also true for almost all of the other free (and perhaps paid) online cloud storage and social media sites as well: including that ubiquitous data mining monster.: FACEBOOK.
Zeisschen: ha!! gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay!
pca7070: X3 sensor is the way to go.
It could be if only it was available as on option inside a similar D800 like state-of-the-art camera body - instead of being entombed inside a primarily lens companies vague idea of one.
Jeff Greenberg: No ISNo f2.8No thanks.
And......No Hood includedNo Strap includedThese basic camera "accessories" are excluded at the "suggested" retail price of $3350 US. I'm surprised that they aren't charging an extra $150 or so for the red dotted box it comes in.
Gotta give it to Leica Solms for boldly attaining even higher levels of market arrogance - topping even the pricing hutzpa of their re-branded Panny's and their double marked-up Epson EVF's.
This company must really be confidant that they know their future marks.....err customers of this DOA camera so well.
Valentinian: If a flash and the EVF 2 can be mounted at the same time, it will be a good choice for wedding photographers.
You already posted this earlier and was informed that they can't both be "mounted at the same time". Why ask this impossible configuration question again? And even if they could somehow be jury-rigged to work together, why would this then be a "good choice" for any wedding photographer(pro or amateur) - especially when shooting at the long end of the attached fixed zoom is a painfully slow f6.4@ a 70mm 35mm approximate? This new Leica is anything but "a good choice for wedding photographers".
sirkhann: Sigma DP Merrill, hello?
@HubertChen"The Sigma DP Merrill has probably better low ISO performance, but not high ISO performance."
Well, other than maybe having a whisker more discernible resolution at base ISO's, the Fuji's X-trans (IMO) is superior to the SD1M, or DPM's Foveon sensor in it's overall color fidelity and dynamic range - two very important image quality parameters that at least for me, trump Sigma's single parameter of perhaps having the best overall absolute resolution any day. Plus, for all of it's non-DSLR like performance shortcomings (real, or imagined), the Fuji X-Pro 1/X-E1 can run circles (performance and feature-wise) around any and all of Sigma's branded prototype beta style camera bodies.
And Fuji at least has the technological wherewithal to somewhat competently and competitively produce both their camera bodies, as well as their lenses, while Sigma has only ever really excelled in any technologically comparable terms with the latter.
Plastek: No OVF, no deal for me.Wish Fuji would release X-100 with interchangeable lenses...
@Plastek". I don't give a s*** about specifications, what matters is how camera works like in field and X-PRO1 behaves worse than an entry-level DSLR."
And isn't that the crux of why so many primarily DSLR'er seemed so flummoxed by a decidedly non-DSLR like camera such as Fuji's X-Pro 1 - simply because it doesn't "behave" like one - as if it was ever supposed to.
I came to the X-Pro 1 from a FF Canon 5D II - never once expecting my new Fuji to "behave" (perform) as my 5D II did - knowing full well that they would be very different shooting experiences altogether.
This increasingly irrational demand that all photographic imaging tools must somehow "behave" pretty much as a spray&pray DSLR (entry & above), is getting tiresome and misses the point of what some of these newer (DSLR) alternatives offer: being smaller, lighter, perhaps requiring a more deliberate "in the field" shooting style, but is still capable of producing as good (if not better than) DSLR level image quality.
Gunston Gun: i vote for Fujifilm X-pro1/X-E1
"They are very slow and noisy. I find the jpegs to be poor."
Sometimes performing quite slow they very well might suffer from. But to call either of the Fuji APS-C cameras "noisy" - as compared to the popularity contest winner: the Olympus OM-D, just shows that you have little factual substance of what you are talking about. Both of the APS-C Fuji's have at least one-half-to-one-stop superior high ISO performance than the Oly does.
And as far as overall image quality is concerned (DR,Color, and yes..noise), the X-Pro 1/X-E1 pretty handily beat the OM-D - albeit with a far larger sensor to work with.
So if you do really "find" the Fuji's OOC JPEG's to be that "poor", pray tell what current cameras OOC JPEG's do you think are better in color, DR, detail..etc? Surely not the Pop Champ Oly?
Josh152: The only reasons to get an M9 is if you are in love with the rangefinder focusing or want a smallish camera and HAVE to have a 35mm equivalent sized sensor (even if it is a mediocre one). If you don't meet one or both those two requirements then there are much better choices at much lower prices.
Nothing to "educate" myself about at all concerning an aging Kodak CCd vs one of Sony's state-of-the-art Exmor CMOS sensors - which just recently scored the highest overall sensor score ever measured on DXOMark. And FujiFilm's new version of the Bayer patterned CMOS sensor also handily trumps the increasingly anachronistic M9's inferior CCD in DR, Color Depth, and most dramatically in any ISO's higher than 400.
I suggest you "educate" yourself a little more about the differences between being dedicated to a particular brand for basically the brands sake and status -- and being dedicated to attaining the best overall imaging IQ that's possible from any camera in 2012. And here's a wee hint to start your woefully deficient "education" out with: it's certainly not coming from of a 3 year old 7-8K +++ hand-tooled jewelry accessory from Europe ...
And which "class" would that be? The upper "class leader" perhaps, but certainly not any kind of a IQ "Class leader" as compared to many of the far more modern and relevant digital compact camera offerings today - especially those that also allow Leica's still outstanding optics to be mounted on them. The only thing that the M9 (P) is "leading" in -- is in $$$$$$$$$$$.
opticaloptimum: Those making negative comments about Leica nearly always overlook the superiority of Leica lenses.
Not true! Almost all of what you might describe as "negative comments" are directly related to the digital M-Series bodies obvious, and numerous technical shortcomings coupled with thier inexplicable corner cuttings of the few actual modern technical features that Leica does include: like having the cheapest quality, lowest resolution rear LCD on the market for almost any digital camera in 2012, nearly unacceptable buffer write speed just for a single "deliberate" shot..etc. It's always been about Leica's glass, and not with their anachronistic, retro technical and hugely over-priced bodies.
lxstorm: Upcoming D800 / Fuji XPro1 makes Sigma obsolete despite the new similar to D800/XPro1 price tag.
Kendall Helmstetter Gelner: People who are claiming current SD-1 owners will be really mad missed the part where they get free lenses and other Sigma products.
People who are claiming the camera is irrelevant with the D800 release are ignoring both current samples from both cameras (the SD-1 is still better at lower ISO) and also the aspect that any D-800 owner can also buy one of the new DP-M compact cameras that have the same SD-1 sensor, with results from a backup compact that will equal or exceed the D800. It's like having a prime and a spare body with you always.
Pure Propagandic Rubbish!
The D800/800E DSLRs from Nikon absolutely crushes the 15x whatever MP SD1 at any and ALL ISO'S. The SD1's diminutive 24mm APS-C sensor is not even on the same IQ planet as the D800/800E, letting alone coming within a country mile of equaling, or exceeding it.
Nothing to really see, or read here but just some more extremely biased and totally unfounded Pro Sigma FUD coming from one of it's semi-official ambassadors.