Canon is doing OK in the FF DSLR segment, barely OK in the enthusiasts APS-C DSLR market, not so well in the entry DSLR segment and downright poor in the DSLM market. I believe their extensive lens base is not helping them decide to invest more on a new DSLM mount and system.
dpr4bb: Lots of complaints here about the fact that the X-A2 does not use an X-Trans sensor, just like X-A1 didn't. Must be a big drawback, obviously...
Be that as it may, how come the X-A1 photos from DPR's new studio comparison scene look so good, JPEG or RAW, compared to the other Fuji cameras that do use the X-Trans sensor?
XA-1 has a VERY good sensor. Xtrans sensor, on the other hand, may be less noisy but has issues with acuity and artifacts.
@John C Tharp1. I hope so.2. Yes.
Does it come with oil satchels or the technology to enable the sensor to produce the unique flare effect?
Just joking, happy new year...
To big, too heavy, too expensive. What's so DSLM about it? Nothing. A well-built lens with expected high IQ, it seems, but not a DSLM lens.
RStyga: How is this worth releasing when the K-5 series is currently manufactured?
How is this worth releasing when the K-5 series is currently manufactured?
uhoh07: Also, why has the M9, MM or 240 have never, as far as I can tell, received a full review on this site? I did see an M8 review, and M9 preview, and a four page romp "shooting with the M9-P."
Love it or hate them, these are benchmark digital systems and can be easily rented, one has to wonder why such short shrift at DP?
Preferably such review would be done with the help of a working Leica pro, to avoid the all to common DP foible of "I can't get used to where they put such and such button".
The Leica takes practice to use effectively. I bought the M9 solely for the results with RF wide glass, and at first found the focus and framing method difficult real world. But 11 months later I far prefer the M9 to frame and focus over my A7 even at high speed.
Most hysterical is the DXO rating of the M9 sensor, which simply proves their numbers measure values which are irrelevant to many of us, and certainly have nothing at all to do with how sharp an image will be with a lens attached.
Don't expect much from blind followers of a brand.
Yeah, and I don't like vinegar in salad... Blinkers...
Comparing any Sony A7 series sensor output with M9 is a good joke. But it is only that, a joke. I don't imply that the aged M9 sensor is for the bin, on the contrary, but it is inferior to any current FF sensor, clearly. If you also consider the price difference between camera bodies and lenses it becomes a joke...
I would really like to see the output from a Sony A7 and a M9/M-E using the same lens (although some peripheral IQ degradation is to be expected on the A7 due to adapter use, i.e., planarity issues).
RStyga: I hope that the next FW update will address the price issue too..
Fujfilm's image as a DSLM maker improves constantly and their sales keeps increasing; what are you talking about?
Well, I'm not sure how long you've been into digital photography but that's exactly what happens in the digital camera market and no destruction has befallen any manufacturer yet.
Paul Guba: Comparing two cameras with similar sensors is like comparing two cars with V8 engines. The 645Z and the Alpa are two completely different machines. I won't justify the huge price difference but at the same time you can't compare the two as tools. Phase also has better software and years of experience getting the best data from a sensor. There both great cameras but the similarity ends at MP.
Well well, your response is not as absolute as it was a few weeks ago... that's a start.
I hope that the next FW update will address the price issue too..
I'm not in particular favour of any lens maker but it is sheer ignorance to maintain that Canon lack the resources and knowledge to make excellent lenses and that near-extinct Leica does. I remember reading about a 2002 lens test by PopPhoto of the top x lenses ever made and perhaps the top three there were from Voigtlander, Nikon and Pentax. Some people in this forum have to sit back and take a deep breath (HowAboutRaw) before continuing their eulogy of Zeiss and -especially- Leica. Lens design has moved forward since early 1900s, in case you haven't noticed, so some pre-aspherical, pre-coated, pre-historic Leica lenses might not be the best thing since sliced bread anymore...
Royal BS... Zeiss is great, not all of them, but great. Leica too. BUT they are not the only makers of excellent lenses. They do price them extremely high, though, and that's offensive.
What Hollywood shoot with is, somehow, not very important, don't you think?
Canon and Nikon cannot reach the Leica and Zeiss lens optical quality? I'd say they're close enough for all intents and purposes and enough is enough with this fluff of an argument!
maxnimo: So what do you do if you need a 300mm equiv. telephoto on this thing?
Either Pentax is selling grossly inferior medium format cameras or Alpa is selling grossly overpriced ones. Something tells me it's the latter.