3 things which Fujifilm need to fix
Flash support: work with 3rd party flash vendors to get some products out there to match what is available for Canon and Nikon SLRs. It is clear that flashes are not Fujifilm's area of specialty, so forget about "not invented here" and "can't share information", learn from market successes like the IBM PC and Linux: share information = grow your market
Autofocus: the X range of bodies and lenses might be the camera equivalent of the "best running shoes on the planet" but the awful and inconsistent autofocus is like a stone in the shoe. Eventually the runner will get tired of the pain and take off the shoes.
Lens design: include end users early in the design process. Continuing flaws in the lenses are aperture rings that are not firm enough & change by brushing them lightly), and zoom lenses with no capability to put a lens ring with tripod mount onto the lens. Some simple design changes could make a big difference. Another "stone in the shoe".
A bunch of Italian designers are laughing into their champagnes... they were employed for a year or two and swanned about doing pretty much nothing, partying and living it up. Then the day before the design deadline, it was a "frantic" 1 hour session to decide to go with either a marble column handgrip, or a wooden handgrip, and what colour the "H" sticker should be.
hzmeyer: Sorry, but Drobo is not idiot proof. I had one for several years. It had 3 HDs and I thought my photos were totally protected. One day I wanted to format a travel drive and casually placed the cursor on that drive- I thought. It actually was in between that travel drive and Drobo in MY COMPUTER and, as you might guess, it chose Drobo. I clicked FORMAT and years of photos were gone in an instant. You might say to always have several backups. Well, I thought I did- 3 to be exact.
Exactly right Michael! The same as the world's best RAID storage system won't stop a water pipe bursting and destroying all the electronics in your room. So you need an *OFFSITE* backup as well as 2 "active" copies of your data to prevent operator error (that's us, folks!) from destroying your data! PS even large companies are not immune to the "all my eggs are in one basket" syndromePPS anyone using RAID should know that it is designed to cope with TOTAL DRIVE FAILURE, if you get some other errors like a "lost write" then single parity RAID can't recover from these.
TFD: 37,000 vs 8500 is not a order of magnitude
2 binary orders of magnitude!
It reminds me of the "e-book readers will empower users to create their own comments and paths through books". But no, the users wanted books to read. I think the technology in this camera is similar, it is OK to play with but people sometimes want to be passive passengers. The best use for it is probably advertising, so a single frame can be used to create multiple perspectives and a journey through the image. Sort of "bullet-time lite".
plevyadophy: This is a stupid move for a medium format cam maker. Whilst CMOS sensors offer higher ISO settings, CCD sensors are BY FAR superior in image quality at low to moderate ISO settings and medium format should be about quality and NOT bragging rights on a spec sheet.
Hassy would have been better employed commissioning Sony to use their talents to design an improved CCD sensor.
First Hassy buy discontinued Sony cams and pimp them up and sell them at silly prices and now this CMOS thing. It's really sad to see what Hassy is becoming .................. a shadow of its former self.
I hope Phase One ignore this spec sheet CMOS bragging rights nonsense and stick to CCD sensors
It is also about manufacturability of the sensor, the cost-per-unit-of-quality (however that gets measured by a particular market!). So a higher yield CMOS may allow some more $ left over for processing, or better body, or.....
And other engineering targets and tradeoffs.
So it may be that to get fast writes to work, or to enable parallel threaded access to the sensor (to speed up image acquisition and processing). Who knows. You and I don't. So all my speculation is just like everyone else's. The designers have made a choice for (likely) very good reasons.
Unless they are using the "wooden grip" dudes!
rad00p: The only good news here is that maybe old grips start to appear on ebay for some reasonable price. Like £20 which they are worth.
Thank you Fuji for charging us so much for sometime that should be included for free.
Stop complaining, Canon would have sold you the X series lenses without lens hoods and charged 1/4 the price of the lens for one.
PS in reality I agree that it seems a *little* expensive, but you can always wait for a sale.
photo nuts: It's funny that customers need to fork out extra cash for manufacturers' mistakes.
JD- there should be an appropriate, internationally recognised emoticon for "I am being sarcastic" (at a pinch it could also be used for when you are being ironic too).
jwalker019: I think it's great they're finally releasing an upgraded grip, but why would they not just have designed the camera properly in the first place?
Even more importantly, why doesn't the body have *any* sort of grip protrusion as standard?
PinPoint: wow, a dumb rubber cost around 20% the price of a camera body with sophisticated electronics and mechanics... I changed all the 4 tyres of my car and that cost me around 2% the price of car body...
Look up the Oxford English (yes English) dictionary, and remember that the web extends beyond the USA ;-)
If there is one thing that anmnoys me with Fujifilm lenses it is the sloppy aperture clicks, which make it too easy to bump out of your setting. It would be an easy thing to fix, but each new lens has the same problem.
Chil75: Wish this had the Time Lapse recording feature....
hahnel Giga T Pro II, remote release and time lapse (Canon version works with X-E1)
Peter Bendheim: This should do the haters proud. There is the blind hatred of Apple coupled with an equally obsessive dislike of Leica. It will be a case of one plus one equals 5. I don't understand the hatred - Apple created unique products which have really changed the way we live with technology - not just pretty designs. Leica made a camera some 90 years ago which changed photography from bulky cameras to 35mm.Why do so many people hide behind anonymous names and spew such hatred and venom...because products designed by Leica and Apple are recognised by most books on industrial design as important in the history of design. You display your own narrow mindedness and ignorance of modern industrial design.I wish I understood what it is about iconic products that bring out all the hatred and resentment in people, so unnecessary especially given that this is a once off project to raise funds for HIV/AIDS (and at least two people are unable to even comprehend that there is only one camera and not 500)
It is worth reading the words of a real designer: Dieter Rams: ten principles for good design. He says it better than I could. The one principle that leapt out at me was "Good design is honest: It does not make a product more innovative, powerful or valuable than it really is. It does not attempt to manipulate the consumer with promises that cannot be kept."
Take that, celebrity designers.
I can tell you why it is ugly. Because the designers were trying to make it iconic, and be consciously "designful". Over and beyond caring for it or its users. Truly good design puts the user and object as the centre of attention, not the desire to achieve something "iconic". It is the difference between a good actor and a bad actor. Or a good actor trying too hard... it has a forced, self-aware, "look at me", cliched, almost self-mocking design. It lacks the "in the zone" or "flow" quality that defines amazing creations, whether they are art or performance.
To put it simply, this is an object that is aware of its own self, and its purpose to be a design icon, and THAT is why it is ugly (IMHO).
Gary Martin: Beautiful camera, obviously not designed for the DPR crowd.
No, it is designed to appeal to those who think a $500,000 pair of shoes clad in diamonds is good taste and good design. Or Vertu mobile phones. Or....
Jim Evidon: Laser machine body texture instead of leather? You don't want to use this in chilly weather without gloves. The lens barrel looks like a Sony product. It's the one thing that annoyed me most when I had an NEX5N. No tactile difference between the focus ring and the aperture ring. Recessed shutter dial and shutter release? Again, another ergonomic backward step. It's not the smartest design to come out of a camera factory. I'll stick with my M8, thank you. If I felt like spending over $7500 for a new camera body, it would be an M type 240 and not this product of styling over function. But as a fund raiser for people who must have the latest collectors' item and don't want it to look like just another Leica, it does have a unique look.
"If you have to ask how much it cost, you can't afford it"....J.P. Morgan
Agreed, like a titanium-bodied Leica, made in the 3D spark-erosion workshops of some Formula 1 car maker (maybe from parts of a car that won the F1). Now THAT would be cool, practical, retain the classic design of the Leica, and still be valuable, because it just isn't practical to manufacture.
I guess there has to be a way to separate the uber-rich from their $ and get the money back into circulation. Marc Newson's Pentax K-01 was one of the ugliest cameras ever. A Holga is more beautiful. And better than this Leica. Awful.
Oh well. At least it will raise money for charity. Let's hope that noone reads our plebian unsophisticated comments, I'd hate to think that the bidders saw the "emperor's new camera" for what it is, and stopped bidding!
Peiasdf: I am sure someone will take it in now that it is in the NYTimes. That said, most of SOHO art scene is just trendiness, not art.
If "crowd-funding" can work, why can't "crowd-archiving". SImply give the photos out at random to 1000 people, have them do a will that passes on the photos, and record who these people were. If they are photo nuts and squirrels (maybe evaluate them based on a photo of their junk room or shed or garage) then you will have at least 50% of the photos still around in 100 years.
shutterdragon: Welcome improvements! I still want Fuji to support in-camera TIFF.
IN-camera TIFF would be great for those "very special"photos where you want to get the Fuji film emulation or colours
QuarterToDoom: At least Barnes & Nobel got some kahunas http://androidcommunity.com/barnes-noble-reveals-microsofts-android-patents-in-detail-20111114/
In fact there is deliberately little or no expertise applied to patent acceptance in the US Patent Office, the IP system is now set up to use the legal system to decide who is right. Expensive, fraught with the dangers of having big players bully small players just from the sheer weight of their legal armies and resources. Irrespective of the actual IP facts. Though of course it keeps armies of lawyers employed. SOftware patents are particularly difficult, as there are "obvious" ways of doing something in the same way that there are obvious ways to drive a car around a 45 degree bend, given the same car mechanics and experience with driving around a 90 degree corner.
The patents which I love are the ones which implement known technologies and approaches and just insert the words "mobile phone" into something that has been done for 20+ years over wires.