Dimit: I've played with it for an hour or something..it's a fine camera with 2014 standards BUT someone has to say this (since DPR suprisingly doesn't admit):BUILD QUALITY IS AND FEELS CHEAP!...sorry guys,better wait for a couple of years to get a descent car build-wise than a chevy right now!!!
that was the reason why i picked x-pro1 to compliment x100, x100 feels better made than x-pro1
More I look at it, more I like it. Will definitely give it a go to work out if it beats my DP2M.
(like a mini alpa fps)
These are great for Sony NEX (damn, shall I call them Alpha now) cameras but look a bit out of place on Fuji's X cameras - design doesn't really match.
Nukunukoo: Oh why didn't you guys even go at least F2.0?
I guess being a macro lens it's fast enough, you'd use it at around f/8 anyway or not?
panpen: $1k for a 50mm 2.8 macro lens? Insane. If you don't need the macro capabilities, the Sigma 60mm 2.8 does the job for less than $240.
or good old Nikkor AF-D 60mm f/2.8 Micro - I got mine for £160
D 503: I am finding no attraction to the latest cameras. They do not solve any problems for me. I am not keen on the x Trans and would have preferred a good Bayer at higher resolution.
@yabokkie - not sure what's cheaper, design of new CFA/layered sensor technology or using over and over good old bayer CFA ;) (and how exactly is bayer improving?)
@yabokkie, based on your comments I believe you have no experience with either Foveon or X-Trans based cameras -> just an observation, no hard feelings
UnitedNations: Who will buy the X-E2 now?!
Many who prefer that form factor ;)
that's the whole point of Fuji's offerings, have a camera for all design preferences with the same tech inside them
Viramati: impressive. If only it was FF I would leap on it
Always found it funny FF guys trashing APS-C, APS-C trashing m43 -> just get what works for you and enjoy it. Most of the people here are getting no benefit of having FF over m43. What matter more is to learn how to compose and expose a shot ;)
sauchiyong: I do not think Phase One and hasselblad is going to sell many CMOS to make Sony happy. I expect a Sony medium format mirrorless coming out soon. It will look and feel like a A7r.
yep, but the ones made for V series from Hasselblad were made in Germany in Zeiss factory, the ones for Sony as far as I understand it are 'designed' by Zeiss but not made by Zeiss factory, also notice how character of those lenses doesn't really look like the Zeiss from old days.
Sdaniella: niche sensor for a niche demand, albeit with more Mpbut strictly shooting in good light (ISO 6400 cap is telltale, not really meant for true low light), it may only be scaled-up current tech (not really new), but scaled up for MF needs not too different from now, albeit a bit better for action than before. (e.g. current SONY tech)
if any mfr is going to do true low-light MF, its 44x33 mm will more come in at closer to 30-32 Mp, and offer both stills/cine-video, with clean ISOs at 25600 to 51200, or thereabouts. (scaled up current Canon tech, but it remains to be seen if they are interested in MF, since it is so much smaller a niche than even Cinematography is, and as a priority, still long way off)
so far, no mfr has seriously addressed true low light shooting for either 24 Mp or 40, never mind 50.
I doubt Canon would venture into it unless it also has MF Lenses made, too.
I actually like this idea but would need to see the output from this sensor, how 16-bit CMOS compares to 16-bit CCD. My back goes to 800 but I really use it at 50/100 ;)
mpgxsvcd: Serious Question. How many of you shoot Medium Format or would switch to Medium Format if the right camera body was produced?
at all those, rightly, pointing out huge prices of digital backs - you can always get a used one, older one… not many changes have happened on the digital medium format back market. you can get decent back from 2005/6, just look at PhaseOne P40/45 or Leaf Aptus 33 or 33S. If you already have a medium format film camera these two options are brilliant.
one here ;)
nathantw: If it's 16-bit color (it should be) and has better IQ at anything other than ISO 400 (which it will) then I think they might have a winner. Unfortunately it'll probably still cost an arm and a leg ($50k - $60k) with lenses in the $5k range. However, if they brought out an affordable CMOS 6x6 camera back that fits the Hasselblad V-series, then dangnammit, I'm there!
I'd love square sensor but not quite sure they'd go for it. They stopped selling V series in April 2013 so there's no interest I guess for them to make something like this (or Sony it seems - I don't think that Imacon is behind this)
you can also use V adapter and old Zeiss lenses
Dear Samsung, please leave cameras, well you know, to camera companies and go back to designing some fridges or whatever you are good at
jamesm1291: As an owner of the DF, I was was amazed by how much it resembled an attempt to damn with faint praise. Then I saw the rating and saw the reviewer had to concede the excellent performance of this camera in the face of his prejudices. I began seriously taking photos in the 50's through a series of Pentax, Canon and Nikon film SLR's. The DF harkens back to these days and I am unashamedly in love with it. Unlike the opinion the reviewer, I find this camera feels quite solid and substantial. It also has wonderful creative capabilities and provides logical access to them. No other DSLR can surpass it in the excellence of its images. It cries for prime lenses, not zooms.
If you are a lover of fine craftsmanship, appreciate the old days when the photographer controlled the camera and not the other way around, want the finest available image quality and are into walk around street photography and stunning portraiture, this camera shines. The price is high, but the rewards are great.
@HowaboutRAW - you might want to check Ming's two part review of Otus ;)
Maverick_: Why punish Nikon for stepping out and producing a beautiful retro camera.
It's not like they abandoned their normal model range.
They just paid homage to the classics. Red Dot does it every day. Auto and motorcycle companies do this rather often too. Nothing wrong with it.
And of course the internals are from a current model, did you expect they create a whole new product just to sell a handful for those with a sense of nostalgia?
As a non-Nikon fan, I think Nikon should actually be praised for thinking out of the box for just one model. Nice concept!
@HowaboutRAW - re the new M - have you?
InTheMist: Steve Huff's review is up. I find his review is closer to my own reaction to the Dƒ.
"I can have any DSLR or camera that I want and for me, the Df wins it. If I designed a DSLR for my own use it would be 75% Df and 0% Canon 5D. Enough said."
Huff shouldn't be taken seriously
Ecorone: Hard to answer the question. The RX1 has the best IQ but you can buy 4 GR's for the price of it. As for handling, the Fuji and GR are excellent.. they're both a bit more elegant than the RX1.
The Fuji has a 35mm focal length and it's got a faster lens than the GR, but it's a bit bigger and more expensive. I've never touched a CoolpixA so I won't comment on it.
Best bang for the buck: GR. Best absolute IQ: Sony. Best compromise (and yes, prettiest): Fuji. (I opted for bang-for-the-buck and bought a GR and I love it.)
that's fine, all of these cameras are brilliant in their own right and nobody could go wrong with either of them and each fulfils different needs