Alex Velasco: 70 bucks for a strap is high. I would like to offer a suggestion for strap reviews. I appreciate the checked shirt as a backdrop, but why is the camera hanging from the guy's back? Where are the shirt buttons? Maybe your review should show the strap under different conditions. As not all of us live in New England, perhaps you could offer a choice of different patters? Hawaiian, African, plain white, synthetic, t-shirt, or at least a summer style. Also, how about a shot of the camera hanging under one arm? Cummon guys! ;-)
How about an armpit hair gripping support system? With quick release buckles?
Richard Murdey: Hear me out on straps: leather, I know, it impresses people at the coffee shop and all, so knock yourself out on that if you have to, but metal buckles? Just say no. Multiple sets of brass tackle hanging off your camera? Not only does it not look good (uh, the 70's called, they want your strap back...) you might as well sign a disclaimer:"I'm going to unnecessarily scratch my camera now."
The brass rivets reminds me of the beautiful traditional canvas and leather travel duffels or satchels you get from some vendors. They are supposed to evoke travel with Ernest Hemingway, but weigh 6 lb empty and have clunky brass buckles and straps all over.
Nice materials, but to fiddly with the double buckles and the riveted connections between strap and neck pad. Really, you want basic and simple so that the strap wraps around the camera when you put it in a bag and does not have any protruding metal to scratch the camera. Find one of the single-length leather straps (many ebay vendors)
Red G8R: Based on the photos, the build quality looks great. But I'm not keen on anything that requires manual focus.
Yes, that is terrible when you have to focus manually.
historianx: LOL love the we need autofocus comments, they crack me up. If you need A/F for a 12mm wide angle, then you should probably not be in photography LOL
Careful - next someone will claim it is hopelessly crippled without stabilization.
topstuff: Well done Fuji. It is important to make cameras fun to own.
I dare say they are appealing to a much younger, optimistic and care-free customer segment than the resident old grumps on DPR.
Photography is a creative art. It is ultimately about self expression. If a photographer wants to cover his Fuji with a custom colour covering, then good luck to him /her.
I know of more than one very serious pro who would love this !
We are meant to have some fun while on this planet.
Years ago, I would set up my 4x5" camera on tripod in the street in a small Greek village. Nothing stealth there. People would look at me curiously for 2 or 3 minutes, then totally ignore me thereafter. Maybe it is time to do this again to revive a bit of fun in photography.
snegron2: Camera manufacturers have to accept the fact that there is not as much disposable income as there was prior to the real estate market collapse (or as I like to refer to it by its true term; the millennial depression). Lower camera/lens prices to affordable levels and maybe people might buy more of them.
There is only so much of the "higher prices due to research and development" excuse we customers can tolerate as we grow weary every year spending outrageous money on plastic, mass produced equipment.
Not sure if I agree. If the normal US consumer gets excited about something, he seems to have almost infinite disposable income (or at least he is willing to make poor lifetime choices) to fund his purchases. For example, extravagant automobiles (luxury trucks??), cell phone plans, and women's purses sell immediately. To tap this market, camera manufacturers will have to excite their potential customers. There is a big difference: a camera requires work. Many of the other prestige purchases are passive, meaning the pleasure in in their possession.
topstuff: Problem with these forums is that they are the opinions ( generally speaking, for I am sure there are many exceptions ) of people of between middle age and retirement age, generally white and western and with English as their native tongue. And with a heavy bias toward North America.
This is not representative of the world. We talk as if we understand what is happening but we forget that we see things through the lens of our own , narrow, perspective.
DPR forum members look at the world through a 500mm telephoto lens and simply do not realise that there is a much wider field of view with aspects to the environment that they cannot see. Therefore, most of the opinions here ( while passionately held and as legitimate as the next mans ) are irrelevant - my own opinions included.
wbury, you may be right long-term, but don't forget: millions of western consumers have disposable income and are not gear heads. Many of them buy according to the "safe" names, meaning Nikon and Canon. The traditional DSLR from the big two may soldier along for a long time.
tkbslc: If Sigma wants to grow their camera business, they need to put some effort into designing at least one model that has a bit more all-around utility. I am amazed at the detail at ISO 100-200 from these cameras. However, the lack of ability to shoot in lower light, stray more than an hour from a charger, shoot video, or focus on anything moving, means Sigma cameras are not really an option for more than 1% of photographers.
I'm also suprised that with their poor high ISO, they continually affix slower lenses to their DP line. Give us an f1.4 lens and maybe I'm OK being stuck under ISO 1600. And with battery issues, an OVF tuned to the attached lens would be a good solution.
Where does this lack of ability top shoot at lower light come from? ISO 200 is not adequate? Maybe you forgot, generations of photographers used Kodachrome at ISO10 or 25 and Panatomic-X at 32? With a tripod of window ledge, the Sigma is fine at low light. I agree with you about an electronic viewfinder.
kay bhee: for those who want the latest toy of the month......duhh...the rest of us were maybe waiting for FULL SENSOR foveon duhhh...no wonder japan amazon was giving away the dp merrills for less than usd 480 recently... so...whats this mean...we wait for those yoyos to come up with idea of full sensor foveon 2 yrs from now ?
What is a full sensor?
Frank_BR: This is not a serious camera. It seems more like an attempt to draw attention. The real business of Sigma is manufacturing lenses.
Just the opposite: this may be a serious camera because it makes the photographer think. In other words, not a point-and-pray for the one-hand generation.
Habemus_Canon: "Rugged Looking" means "won't be mistaken for a woman's purse" so that a guy can feel comfortable carrying it.
Similar to how "rugged looking" on crossovers means big bulbous tires and aggressive plastic fittings so the guy can fool his friends that he is not driving a minivan.
DFPanno: Pro workflow starts with Photo Mechanic. Surprised no mention here. Works quite well on the air.
Nice software; I liked the time I used it as a demonstration. But is is very expensive.
Nice lens, and attractive price. It is probably great optical quality. Does this suggest that current photographers are re-appreciating the benefits of top-quality prime lenses and finally moving away from the low-end do-it-all kit lenses?
JohnEwing: Suggest another category: "Best cameras to buy second hand". Might put manufacturers' noses out of joint.
@whiteshadow: not only is he not joking, but the legislation goes on to state that a person caught with an older DSLR will have to attend a photography training class. There, the students have to use film, and develop it themselves with their own hands. Also, they will have to learn sensitometry, exposure basics, and will be forced to set their own shutter speed and f-stop. It is akin to the pending legislation to make motor vehicle offenders take a class to drive manual transmission.
As usual, I think the Pentax K50 is the most interesting one of the group. Often it takes the smaller and more innovative company to make the clever product. It's a pity Pentax is marketed so poorly in the USA.
Some people did rent darkroom space in the old days. But I can see the analogy you are making.
sebastian huvenaars: Imagine this scenario in 1983.
Photographer has a dark room at his house but needs to pay every month to get access to it.
Sound too unrealistic to be true, but here we are in 2013...
Cane: To all those happy video is removed, I hope you want that pesky auto focus removed too? Just another thing to get in the way of p u r e Photography.
Well, consider. Thousands of serious photographers uses Leicas with rangefinder focus, and they do quite well. They even don't have (gasp! horrors!) in-body stabilization.
hip2: RAW would be hard to use with the lack of RAW processing software on mobile platforms.as it targets smartphone and tablet users that do little processing and share almost immediately, adding a RAW workflow would take too long, i guess.
though having the choice would be nice, at least, for very special pictures that you take great care to compose/frame and expose, and later edit on your computer.
I agree. $500 is a lot for an imaging device that won't save a raw file for you.