KevinD65: Every logical option for ILC has now been explored. There are only so many things camera makers can do.
You can stick with an APS-C sensor and keep the same lens mount for legacy lenses. That's what Pentax did with K01.
You can go with a smaller sensor and new lenses, and maintain legacy lens support with adapters, but then you've got a different crop factor, so the legacy lenses won't be optimized for the camera. That's what Oly, Pany, and Nikon are doing. Advantage: Smaller lenses.
You can stick with the APS-C sensor, a new lens mount with a shorter flange distance, and adapters for legacy lenses. This is what Sony, Samsung, and now Canon are doing. Advantage: Old lenses keep the same crop factor and therefore still work well.
Canon and Sony are the only options that gives you legacy bodies, legacy lenses, new body, new lenses with same crop factor, and adapter, all from the same manufacturer. Makes sense to me. Wish Nikon would do it.
The main point I was trying to make is that no matter what option camera makers choose, people complain about it. Option 1: The camera body is too big and thick. Option 2: Bad crop factor, bokeh not as good, no good UWA options. Option 3: New lenses are still pretty big, so what's the point. Nobody is ever happy with the choices.
Yep, you're right, if you have Sony legacy lenses. Originally I was assuming Canon or Nikon legacy lenses, because between the 2 of them they own the lion's share of the DSLR market.
Every logical option for ILC has now been explored. There are only so many things camera makers can do.
Cameras like this make sense for APS-C landscape shooters who want something lighter and smaller than a DSLR for backpacking. I own a Nikon D7000 with 5 lenses, and have an OM-D on order, but I don't like the idea that I'll then have to be switching back and forth between 2 different sensor sizes / lenses and having to be thinking about 2 different crop factors all the time.
I wish Nikon would do this too. I'd like to have a Nikon-made mirrorless APS-C sensor camera that gives me full functionality with existing lenses.
KevinD65: Crazy thought ... Get this lens and a Nikon FM10 and you'd have a very light weight full frame camera for under $1K. Of course, it wouldn't be digital, but it would be a small, light kit for backpacking. Carry a digital P&S for test compositions and exposures, and for times when the shot isn't film worthy.
Hey Dennis, thanks for the advice. Actually I already have 2 Nikon FE's but the shutter is stuck on one and the camera store wants more than the camera is worth to fix it. The second one still works though. The FM10 is attractive due to the weight, but I realize the build quality is not as good.
But back to this lens ... actually, I am intrigued by it, and the fact that I have an existing FE to use it with makes it all the more interesting. I've always wanted a pancake prime and wondered why nobody made one. It could be fun. There are a lot of time where I really don't want AF.
Well, landscape photographers are always looking for the best IQ they can get, thus the allure of FF. Presumably any serious attempt at landscape photography will involve backpacking, thus the allure of FF for backpacking. And unless you're taking camping gear, llamas, and sherpas, there's a quest for the smallest, lightest gear you can find that will still deliver the goods.
I agree an E-PL1 is not a bad option, though I would buy and E-PL2 instead (don't like the E-PL3 grip). I really would prefer a viewfinder though, so that has me waiting for the OM-D. But Oly can't seem to ship it, so I investigate other options. For now I just use my Nikon D7000 and wait for the OM-D.
A Canon 5D puts you into a different weight category. I mentioned the FM10 specifically because is is plastic and weighs only 14oz. Also, I don't have Canon lenses, so Canon is out for me.
Crazy thought ... Get this lens and a Nikon FM10 and you'd have a very light weight full frame camera for under $1K. Of course, it wouldn't be digital, but it would be a small, light kit for backpacking. Carry a digital P&S for test compositions and exposures, and for times when the shot isn't film worthy.
Oh boy. Here we go. Get ready for the "knowingly selling defective equipment" deluge from this forum. In this case, however, no one probably cares since Olympus can't seem to be able to ship the camera in the first place.
I don't get it. But all the same, I wonder if it will inspire a new breed of landscape and studio color photography by shooting 3 exposures with 3 color filters and then combining them in PP. I'm sure some people will try it just for the nostalgic novelty of it. I wonder if such photos would have a distinct look that could not be created by any other method.
KevinD65: Of course Fuji should address the issue, but I don't think they should hang their heads in shame. This is a great little camera and Fuji should be proud of it.
Is it defective? Well, depends how you look at it. No camera is perfect, just read dpreview's conclusions for any random camera. Every camera has flaws, be they build quality, mechanical failures, ergonomic issues, AF problems, color rendering, whatever. I remember when I bought my Nikon D200 and everyone was up in arms about the banding issue.
I bought the X10 because I wanted a camera that would fit comfortably in a belt holster for hiking, give me plenty of manual controls, and let me attach filters. I love the retro styling, the manual zoom ring, the way it feels in my hands, and for me the IQ is equal to or better than my D200 for like 1/10 of the size and weight. I'm not too worried about the orbs, and if I run into them I'll figure out a way of dealing with them.
As for Fuji making fun of their customers, I don't know anything about that.
If I could find a $100 camera that gave me a high quality build, manual controls, ability to attach filters, took a remote cable release, had a manual zoom ring, shot in raw, had a good, fast lens with a wide aperture range throughout the whole zoom range, a decent OVF, and gave me a good alternative to a DSLR for a large majority of shooting situations, then I suppose I would buy it. But I couldn't find that camera, so I bought this one instead.
I don't think I'm apologizing for Fuji. I'm just saying you have to take in the totality of the situation when making a purchasing decision.
Of course Fuji should address the issue, but I don't think they should hang their heads in shame. This is a great little camera and Fuji should be proud of it.
The best thing is it looks similar enough to my old D200 that my wife's not even gonna know I bought new camera!
Put an EVF in it and we'll talk.
The closest thing yet to my dream camera ... a digital, mirrorless, affordable Nikon FE. No zoom lenses though ... bummer. Definitely seems targeted against the M9, but hopefully affordable.