disraeli demon: Still no affordable, compact 24mm f2 lens for APS-C - I guess if you're into primes, Nikon (and Canon) expect you to upgrade to full frame.
@olivemoonstudio for the field of view on APS-C, f2.8 would be a bit slow for my tastes, yes. When I bought my Nikon D50 back in 2006, I hoped Nikon would eventually release a set of fast primes tailored to APS-C; 18mm f2.8, 24mm f2, 35mm f1.4 and 60mm f1.8. These would have been direct equivalents of lenses they already made for full frame. Unfortunately, the availability of affordable f2.8 standard zooms (I used the original Sigma 18-50 2.8), the need to re-tool full-frame lenses to cope with high resolution sensors, and the gradual decline in price of full frame, bringing it within the reach of more serious amateurs each year, means it's probably uneconomic for Canon or Nikon to produce such a suite of APS-C friendly primes. While I understand this, it's still a shame those Canikon APS-C shooters who prefer primes haven't got many dedicated options.
Still no affordable, compact 24mm f2 lens for APS-C - I guess if you're into primes, Nikon (and Canon) expect you to upgrade to full frame.
As someone who has chronic back trouble as a result of carrying camera gear for years in shoulder bags... Start using a rucksack now, kids. It's nothing like as convenient, but your back will love you for it in later life
Prognathous: "3D XPoint (pronounced cross-point)" - probably from the mind of the same marketing person who came up with Pentax *ist D (pronounced who-the-hell-knows)...
I like to think of the "*" as a belching sound
Finally! FINALLY! A rangefinder-style body with a fully-articulated screen! I've been waiting for that since they introduced the GF-1!
Nice to see Panasonic sticking with this form-factor for their "serious" camera bodies. Not so sure about the size increase, but I'll wait to handle one before commenting.
Once thing on price: generally, the price of Panasonic bodies has settled to something far more reasonable after a year or so. Wait a bit, and you get a much better deal.
The XT10 looks so like the old Canon FX film SLR, every time I see one I get a twinge of nostalgia
I can't help wondering if a camera with this many features is Leica testing the waters for introducing an interchangeable-lens AF-capable camera (if you think of the Q as Leica's "LX100," imagine a "Leica GX7/A6000".)
jjdsyd: Impressive on a number of fronts. But, I guess I am the only one here that doesn't like how it looks. Much prefer the looks of my GX7. Perhaps they will release a GX8 with 4k capability...
jjdsyd - I'm with you on not liking the looks. Generally, I've liked the curvy pseudo-DSLR looks of all the G-cameras, though I thought the G5 was the least successful. This one looks like an OM-D jumped the fence and ravished a G6 - it's neither one thing nor the other IMHO
JPR.lda: Is the silent mode really silent like on the Sony A7s???
Depending on the lens in use, you can get a slight noise as the aperture blades stop down to take the shot, but it's no louder than the ticking of the leaf shutter on a compact. I leave my G6 and GX7 on electronic shutter as the default, only switching to mechanical shutter if I need flash or to freeze fast motion.
Sergeg: I love everything about my GX7, functionality and rangefinder looks, ergonomics, handling.This has a curious appearance, like some miniature SLR from the 70's, why the "pentaprism" protrusion if there is no mirror, does it have any practical function beyond cosmetics? The FZ1000 and LX100 fill my 4K fix and I love the extra rez of the FZ!This is a curious beast with an uncertain niche to fill IMO.
To me it looks like Panasonic lost their nerve regarding the G-series design logic and tried to make the top plate look more squared-off and "OM-like." The result looks like a bit of a kludge to me (though I generally preferred the G-series curvy "DSLR" look to Olympus "OM" styling anyway). The end result looks like one of those odd early-80's automated SLR's that were around before Canon introduced the Eos series.
I had my eye on one of these for a while as to use mostly asa video camera, but I held off because the price of G-series cameras always drops at the end of the production run - I picked mine up for £299, less than the cost of a decent premium compact. Really pleased with it.
If you don't need 4K video, they're an absolute snap right now (end of May 2015).
Xentinus: Doesn't it have 120 fps at 720p video recording?
It'll be interesting to see if the 4K video pipeline allows for increased buffer depth in stills, like it does on the LX100. I only wonder because the advertised burst rate is fairly modest (7fps) whereas the LX100 goes up to 11(fps). One of the great un-advertised features of the LX100 is the way you can just keep on shooting RAW without hitting buffer full or having to wait for it to write to card once you're done.
Marty4650: It all comes down to this:
1. It can be small (like Pentax Q)2. It can be sexy (like Fuji X)3. It can be cheap (like Samsung NX)4. It can have scores of lenses (like M4/3)
But you can't have everything in the same system.
Pick which two you want, then select your system accordingly. Stop wishing for everything in the same system, because it will never happen.
And now Sony offers a fifth option that no one else has...
5. It can have a full frame sensor with world class image quality.
If you want an apple, then don't buy an orange.
While designing lenses for high-resolution sensors is different to designing for film, I can't help thinking of the superb compact 28/35/45/90 AF lenses that Zeiss built for the Contax G system. I'd love to know if the large lens size is a technical requirement.
I feel sad about this... It's an amazing technology, but the idea it could be more than a gimmick for stills photography seemed wrong-headed to me. I wish them well, and really hope there's a market for them somewhere.
disraeli demon: Glad to see the μ4/3 lens stable continuing to expand. Before switching to mirrorless, I was using Nikon APS-C and was constantly disappointed by the lack of compact fast primes for that format. Four years on from switching, Nikon does have a 40mm macro for APS-C, but neither they nor Canon offer a 60mm f2 (i know there are "nifty fifties," but that extra 10mm does make a difference). Neither company has anything to match the range of fast wide-angle primes offered by μ4/3... Or Fuji...
As far as Nikon goes, when I was shooting 35mm film I had a "classic" set of primes; 28mm 2.8, 35mm f2, 50mm f1.4 and 85mm 1.8. To get that range for APS-C you could get the Nikon 18mm 2.8, so long as you have a screw-drive body and don't worry about how long Nikon will support those old lenses, no 24mm f2, no 35mm 1.4 (Either Nikon 35mm 1.8 or Sigma 30mm 1.4 which is bigger that my 50 1.4 and has a dubious reputation for focussing, no 60mm f2. I think Sigma does/did 20 and 24mm f2 lenses but they were designed for 35mm so they were the size of beer glasses. When I talk about "compact " I'd include the Nikon 35mm 1.8 for DX,.
Marty4650: There seems to be a real disconnect between making an "affordable camera" for lenses that cost between $4,000 and $10,000.
I mean... why bother?
Can't the Leica lens owner afford a Leica camera?If someone can't afford those lenses, they why would they buy this camera?
Did I miss the part where Konost was planning to create a few affordable lenses for their affordable camera?
I'd say Konost is solving a problem that doesn't exist. Perhaps they might have been better off creating an affordable rangefinder camera that uses Nikon F lenses?
I own a battered old M-42 with a couple of lenses and would LOVE an affordable digital body to attach them to. Even second hand M digital bodies are way beyond my range.
ogl: 42.5/1.7 = 85/3.4 for 35 mm system.....It's slow lens.
I've got to say, if you're dead set on shallow depth of field, why shoot μ4/3 in the first place? The thing I love about the format is being able to get greater depth of field for the same light-gathering ability at any given aperture. Different strokes for different folks.
Glad to see the μ4/3 lens stable continuing to expand. Before switching to mirrorless, I was using Nikon APS-C and was constantly disappointed by the lack of compact fast primes for that format. Four years on from switching, Nikon does have a 40mm macro for APS-C, but neither they nor Canon offer a 60mm f2 (i know there are "nifty fifties," but that extra 10mm does make a difference). Neither company has anything to match the range of fast wide-angle primes offered by μ4/3... Or Fuji...
Is there any information on whether the sandwich will be made available in μ4/3 for the European market?