RStyga: Thank you, Fujifilm! WHEN you develop the right RAW S/W for your X-Trans technology there will be no need for conventional sensors in your cameras. Good move.
I don't know how close you've followed this but there have been no problems with RAW converters and their X-Trans sensors for a long ass time now.
attomole: So View finder, shutter speed and aperture ring are swapped out for flippy screen, Mode switch and control dial. And Fuji muzzle sweeps the flanks of Panasonic and Olympus uFT and the APSC DLSR market by showing its serious about the system nature of its X cameras with an entry Model.
Technically this one has more dials than the others in the line up if paired with a lens with an aperture ring. You have two unmarked dials that will control exposure compensation and shutter speed just like before, and now you also have a mode dial.
schaki: I find it somewhat laughable that Fujifilm have copied the "M" from Leica rangefinders at the same time as using the M for their most simple model which in fact should be for the X-Pro1.So what is the next joke from Fujifilm? Probably that the jpegs with badly smudged foliage still remain unchanged from previous models in the X-series? At least i might guess so unless they've some other bad card to play on..I could have considered the X20 if it not had been for that very irritating flaw.At least they've got the tilt-lcd right with the X-M1. Hope to see options with low NR included as well and I might test one.
Leica wasn't the first manufacture to come up with that "rangefinder" design, have you seen cameras from the past century...
pumeco: I was going to visit the link and then thought to myself, why bother?
I've seen Samsung and Sony components in my Samsung and Sony products, and prefer to see them in their rightful place. Would it be too much to ask for them to leave it in pieces?
PS: That manufacturing process looks like it's out of calibration looking at the amount of dust gathering between the glass and aluminium!
Most generalization are in fact a byproduct of limited knowledge and biases, and you're projecting a whole lot of generalizations. Do you disagree that Apple products are different enough to warrant a fairly knowledgable person into opting to buy an Apple product rather than products you would consider superior? Perhaps, they like the OS better or the handling, size, or a number of other reasons? I mean, do you actually think everyone who buys an iPhone are in fact dumb people who only fell for the marketing and not because they just might like the device?
You're sitting here and talking about dumb people who fall for marketing and love a company to an unreasonable degree, but do you realize that you're on the exact opposite of this spectrum, and your kind is just as annoying. It's fine if you don't like a product, don't buy it. Instead go and buy a superior product and then spout on online forums how you're the pinnacle of your species, because that's the "adult" thing to do.
whyamihere: I may not have been doing digital photography for long, but I have been doing digital art and video editing since the early 90's, so I'm aware of the implications of pixel density and perceived resolution clarity. Keep that in mind as I say the following:
Anyone who thinks this Retina Display will help them with their digital photography work is either ignorant - as in, "You don't know how the human eye works," - or doing something wrong - as in, "You're face is way too close to your screen."
The ignorant will think the screen is awesome because they think it'll somehow translate into clarity. I'll bet the differences won't be noticeable until you're too close to the screen, at which point you're doing something wrong because nobody holds their laptop that close to their face while working.
The "Retina" trick only works for devices that need to be that close to your eye, such as a phone or a tablet. That sort of pixel density is wasted on a laptop.
He wasn't arrogant. He is right. I've got a 27" iMac with 2560x1440 res and the screen is about 24" from me, I cannot see any pixels; I have to stand at about 12" to distinguish the pixels. On laptops you usually stand closer, but then again the DPI on MacBooks is higher than that of iMacs so you'd have get closer than 12" to see the pixels. And you usually hold an iPhone about 5-6" from your face and that's why a high DPI makes sense.
Such a high resolution on a small 15" screen can give lots of estate. But I'm not sure how they are dealing with the extra estate since the UI elements are the same size. The only pluses seem to be that if you happen to stick your face into the screen you won't notice the pixels. And that's totally fine, it's what all screens should be going for, but not for this price. The Air is still just as capable a machine as this new Retina Pro at half the price, and chances are that you won't notice that much difference between the screens during regular usage.
645D: My current Samsung core i7 6GB RAM 750GB 15.4 display laptop costs $600. Why can't Samsung makes a 2880x1800 screen?
You're also missing some features in there, like that fact that those 750GB are on a moving HD, SSDs are much more expensive. I mean I don't even have to go into any other features you're missing, but just look at the Ultrabook battle, they aren't much less expensive than Macbook Airs, many are around the same prices. So if Samsung made a laptop that looks like this Macbook Pro with the same specs it is extremely unlikely that it'll be $600, although, I also doubt it'll be $2200, I think Apple here is really riding the niche market with the only "retina" display around, so they are banking on the price for now.
altaf007: why don't dpreview.com change its name to electronicsreview.com since when they have started putting news articles about other electronics and computing items
This is like the only story that is not about a camera that I see. I mean I would understand your concerns if the front page was filled with non-camera related news, but you're extremely neat picking, and acting as if this site is not about photography all the sudden.
waxwaine: If I remember the idea of m43 was "Go compact", and this is not a very good example. No point on this compared to any APS-C camera.
So, go compact if you want, don't buy the lens, problem solved.
supeyugin1: $350 for a converter? They are crazy! I've bought my Samsung NX100 with 20-50 and 20/2.8 (30mm equiv.) and a flash for $450 brand new. I later sold the flash for $70, so that's $380 for the camera with 2 lenses. And those jerks from Fuji are charging $350 just for one bloody converter?!
I'm curious where you got a brand new NX100 with two lenses and a flash for $450? eBay? I can get a new X100 on eBay for $800-900 with hundreds of dollars worth of accessories too. Let's not forget you have to add an EVF or an OVF($200), I also doubt the lenses you have are of the quality of the 23mm Fujinon. Limited manual controls, and all plastic enclosure on the NX100. These are all things that add to the quality and the price. Sure, this converter is overpriced, no doubt, but the cam is right on the money with its options.
Maybe this explains better than I can explain it with words:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studio-compare#baseDir=/reviews_data&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=false&headerTitle=Studio scene&headerSubTitle=Standard studio scene comparison&masterCamera=fujifilm_x100&masterSample=dscf2567&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=fujifilm_x100&slot0Sample=dscf2567&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=samsung_nx100&slot1Sample=sam_0183&x=-0.4619460262441197&y=0.13772142912604124
Jim Evidon: I assume that a reasonable company like Leica, having removed the Bayer filter and, I imagine, the anti-aliasing filter, not to mention all of the company logos and engraved scripting will no doubt offer this camera to the buying public at a price set well below that of the standard color-able fully scripted M9. Of course, I am given to other fantasies as well.
Makes sense, no? This camera is cheaper to manufacture than their regular M9. But that's not the point is it? Leica knows how to sell niche products, that's why they are still around.
Nikonworks: My D700 and D7000 and D300 and D5000 and Samsung TL500 can do the same thing.
Laz r: I was thinking someone should do this. I was hoping iit would be apple . I use my iPhone a lot and enjoy editing my pics with all the available apps running iOS . a micro 3/4 done by apple would sell. Wifi enabled and ability to download apps would be a big seller.. I also think this is the future of point and shoot cameras ...
I haven't seen Apple claim that they invented multitouch or Siri... :S
texviddy: Fuji can't really be leaving their loyal X100 users without remedy for the continuing problems, can they???
Those people ressurrected Fuji!
To address the slow focus they would have to make a new camera and give it to each customer. As for sticky aperture blades, it hasn't been confirmed to be a wide spread defect to do a recall, but they have had excellent customer service in getting each camera that's turned in fixed. They have even confirmed that they would do free repairs for out of warranty X100s.
Noksukau: 10,000 = 'limited' edition?
I was making a complete assumption based on high consumer demand, but as of September they sold 300k. So around 330k as of now could be a good estimate.
TOOBAD2: THIS IS THE WAY IT SHOULD LOOK.
I think the black makes it more modern and pro looking, but I still prefer the two tone retro look.
luchs: Would be great if this edition (and the older) gets an upgraded firmware so the manual focus is actually usable to prefocus in dark.
Also nice to have would be the "Q Menu" on the RAW button. The letters "RAW" go away over time anway :-)
I would also love for either the RAW or Function button to be able to do what that "Q" button does on the X-Pro 1.
mpgxsvcd: Great they made an exclusive camera even more exclusive. I actually think that making a "black" camera is a more useful thing than making a fixed prime lens camera.
I never understood what the apeal of this camera was in the first place. Atleast it looks good in black now.
For one is has exceptional IQ compared to other APS-C cameras, exceptional ISO performance. It has a great lens, and by being fixed it is smaller and more compact than if it wasn't. It's good for anyone who only ever needs a 35mm, it's a great street camera, it is extremely quiet and unobtrusive, it is also not a huge intimidating monster. It has its quirks like the slow focusing, but great if you do lanscapes. And of course it's sexy.
What do you consider a limited edition?
The X100 probably sold millions, 10k compared to millions is limited.
slaughtr: As the owner of a Canon 7D, a Sony NEX 5 and a Fujifilm X100, I can honestly say I get the most fun shooting and the best color reproduction when I use the X100. I still need the 7D for numerous reasons, but I'm excited as hell to sell the Sony for the X-Pro 1. An X-100 with interchangeble lenses is a dream. The X-Pro 1 should be even better.
I have to agree with sesopenko, the sample images don't impress me a whole lot on sharpness and detail. I can get sharper images with my X100, especially at those apertures.