Archiver: Or perhaps a 24mm f2.8 equivalent with a 24mp sensor, allowing greater cropping potential. The Fuji Natura S and Natura Black f1.9 had 24mm lenses so they could be used as 'social' cameras, taking in group shots with ease. Fuji could have continued with those thoughts. The 24mm field of view is one of the things I love the most about the Natura Black. It's perfect for capturing landscapes, and interiors that show context.
@Rishi Sanyal - I have a question: why is DPR promoting the concept of "equivalent" apertures as a pure number, without mentioning the context of DOF for the same subject framing compared to 35mm film camera with the same focal length lens? How knowing that "X70 is F4.2 equivalent" would help a real-life photographer?
I am afraid that mentioning "equivalent apertures" out of context of DOF may confuse those who could interpret the number as if over a stop of light somehow disappears somewhere, which is not the case. Mentioned f/4.2 equivalent is not related to light gathering ability (or lens "speed") which stays f/2.8 no matter what (this is pure physics f=F/D).
So, X70 has 18.5mm f/2.8 lens with APS-C sensor, resulting in a field of view of 74 degrees (diagonal) which is wide angle. That's all, no equivalents needed. I believe that for the camera size and weight, and intended use, parameters are wisely chosen by Fujifilm for the X70.
One thing that caught my eye is "zooming with your feet" concept, which is mentioned twice in the article but it is actually impossible thing to do. Namely, moving towards/away from the subject without changing focal length *changes* perspective and relative sizes of all objects in the frame. Unlike that, optical zooming is equivalent to cropping which *preserves* perspective and relative sizes of all objects in the frame. These are two completely different things, both are valid techniques but not interchangeable, using them require different ways of seeing and thinking and will in the end produce distinctly different results.
This should be taken into account while selecting a camera, because presence or absence of a zoom lens does not have to do with the way we walk, but with the way we see.
The site has the corrected text now. Apart from SRL to SLR correction, one more clarification found its way to the update. Right after "Coming up in spring 2016!" the text now reads:
"PENTAX is launching a full frame digital SLR, brand-new format for PENTAX"
replacing the original:
"PENTAX is launching a digital SRL with a brand-new format"
The inspiration seems to be taken from magnetic core memory modules used in the 1950s, 60s and 70s: identical addressing principle (cross-wires), also 3D stacked, but different bit-memory technology (individual magnetic cores vs. semiconductor cells) and reading mechanism. Simple, fast and very low-power, I am looking forward to see applications and operating systems making no distinction between storage and main memory - zero loading time, no need to save working files. Could be very interesting!
backayonder: Looking on the bright side at least there will be no more pointless threads about what lens to take on a vacation to Europe.
All you will need is a lens cap.
Or if one wishes to travel light, leaving lenses at home and traveling with just a body and a body cap would do too :-)
Martin Datzinger: I stand corrected (suggested it would be 2k).
I was expecting the same, around 2K. At this price it will be selling like hot cakes! Great job Sigma!
Love the technology, more functional than good old circular split image focusing screens. Even better, does not black out in low light! (Also liked "Highly Confidential" classification on a slide aimed at the widest possible audience.)
Daniel Lauring: If only Pentax had added removable lenses, like they did with the Q. As it is, this is just one more in large group of 1/1.7 Sony sensored cameras with nothing to make it stand out of the crowd.
I'd say not another mount, rather a replacement mount. Q should have never happened with that sensor size IMO. However, introducing APS-C, 1", or m43 compact system by Pentax would compete with their DSLR line (well, with "both" cameras at this point, not counting color combinations). So Pentax needed a solid gap between interchangeable lens compact system and K-mount DSLR system, and here we go, the Q.
Note that manufacturers with no need to protect APS-C DSLR line aggressively innovate in ILC arena, most notably Olympus and Fujifilm. Others are entering that segment just to dig trenches and wait but with no real interest to release innovative products in order to protect their existing "big" cameras.
Richard Murdey: This smells like an opportunist move by Pentax, a cheap gimmick to cash in on nostalgia for the Pentax 70's era film cameras. Olympus did it with the OM-D, and Pentax thought they would be leaving money on the table if they did not do likewise.
If it sells, more power too them. To me it looks tacky, especially the way the lens and tilting LCD screen parts are just bolted on to the "MX" body with no thought to maintain any stylistic cues.
Richard, exactly my thoughts. Looks like a Borg camera, some retro flesh covered here or there by modern electronics. Doesn't look attractive to me at all.
And speaking of the name: I think they wasted iconic MX designation for nothing! It seems there is no one left at Pentax who understands Pentax heritage anymore. If they wanted to shout "retro" but "auto", then more appropriate name for this camera would have been ME-D1, reserving the ME designation for non-interchangeable lens advanced zoom compacts, leaving MX-D1 designation for a compact interchangeable camera system, and perhaps even LX-D1 for an advanced compact with interchangeable lenses (similar logic to the current Fujifilm X20, X-E1, X-Pro1 lineup). But we have Q, so this opportunity has also been wasted.
For this to happen you need strategy. But it seems that all Pentax strategy boils down to calling a board meeting from time to time to ask "what are we going to do next" question. Hence the result(s).
Raskolnikow90: What a beautyViewfinder, fast lens, fast speed, controls, raw and x-trans will prvide outstanding image quality...Nice to see such a cam, i hope competitors will follow..Its a pity there is no 24mm and nd filter, that probably would have make me dump my old GF(1) =)
Great work fuji!!!
Speaking of an ND filter: X10/20 do have filter thread. So go ahead and get a real filter, or a set with several densities, get a graduated ND, polarizier... or whatever you want.
Any closer to dumping GF1 now? :-)
Looks it is based on Olympus XZ-2 hardware. Looking at the side by side pictures, lens matches XZ-2 down to the tiniest details in terms of dimensions and visible components, specs are almost identical too. I like the addition of external exposure compensation dial though, very good, something I missed on XZ-1. Since XZ-2 is a great camera, both sensor and optics, no reason to believe Pentax will disappoint. However, Fujifilm is going to steal the show with X20 in this class.
Biowizard: I have long beein waiting for a decent camera to be produced with a bare, monochrome sensor. For B&W work, especially when using deep filters (eg red to darken blue skies and accentuate clouds, or blue to do the opposite), such a camera will produce images of 4 times the resolution of images produced by a Bayer-filter camera. Plus, when shooting with pale or no filters at all, such a sensor will be between 3-8 times as sensitive to incoming light.
For those who prefer monochrome work, a camera like this is long overdue. Those hereabout who are sneering at the concept, are simply showing complete ignorance about how their "colour" megapixels are actually generated: by blurring, mixing and and interpolating. Not by recording.
Shame I can't affort the asking price ... but maybe Olympus will come out with something similar now that the precedent has been set.
@Biowizard, @Joseph: completely true, I have not taken into account how volume relates to price. However, once this camera proves it's advantages (and I am expecting it will) other manufacturers will likely jump in and develop cheaper sensors. Also, thanks to sensitivity advantage these sensors could be even smaller retaining great performance. Monochromatic versions with filter threads of Nikon 1, Canon S/G series, Fuji X10, Panasonic LX5, Olympus XZ-1 (or the likes) anyone?
And another plus: technically, fabricating monochromatic sensors should be cheaper, as well as cheaper to install and integrate into a camera system. Also, slower/simpler processors are required since data processing is very basic. In fact, the most expensive part in Leica M Monochrom is the Leica logo!
Ken Draper: I'm not sure if all the commenters here appreciate that recording only the luminance values at each sensor site greatly increases the effective resolution of the image recorded. For photographers shooting only B&W this is a very good thing, and superior to converting from color.
Gothmoth: all test images always look lame. Let's wait until those who know how to do B&W properly start making the real stuff.
I am sure they do not. It seems most people assume B&W sensor is nothing but a color sensor with no color and that's all. Completely wrong.
Absence of AA filter increases sharpness, absence of color filter array (CFA) drastically increases sensitivity, and image does not have to be (re)constructed from 50% green and 25% red and blue pixels in order to "simulate" 100% color pixels, leading to reduced resolving power and unwanted artifacts as a result of the process.
Just one example: converting 18MP color image to B&W simulating deep red filter effectively uses information from 4.5MP red photosites only. In contrast, using a real red filter on the new Leica would still give you an 18MP image. Add to this benefits of not having AA and CFA and we are comparing apples and oranges here.
IMO, Leica M Monochrom makes perfect sense for B&W applications. It will be far superior to any B&W conversion from Bayer pattern color sensors, especially where extreme filtering is required.