GabrielZ: It seems to me now, that all those camera manufactures that incorporate in-body IS will be going the sensor shift way soon, as a way of adding value and improving the image quality/colour/sharpness of their cameras.
ToCouscousdelight: Yes...I've read online that Sony already has a patent for such a design and may release a sensor incorporating it soon (according to the rumour mill!) even though it seems to be targeted primarily at the video market and incorporates a global shutter too...we'll see.
I was watching a review of the 645Z at TheCameraStoreTV channel on YouTube a while back, and was really impressed by the apparent image quality of this camera. Easily outdoing any FF DSLR I've seen lately. If I had the dosh I'd get one, despite the bulk!
It seems to me now, that all those camera manufactures that incorporate in-body IS will be going the sensor shift way soon, as a way of adding value and improving the image quality/colour/sharpness of their cameras.
Timbukto: Subjectively I think the Tamron sunstars look good and like that it gets slightly diffuse going outwards. Not a fan of the Nikon double spikes. On the otherhand I don't like the medium sized sun flare blob on the Tamron, prefer the very large and more diffuse Canon sun flare blob, and Nikon's sun flare blob is so small I would consider PPing it away (the sun was also at its lowest in that shot as well). Do these lens flare blobs change much in size with different aperture values?
The Canon overall seemed the best taking into account both sunstar + more diffuse lens flare that looks like a PP effect you'd want to keep, vs something you want to PP out entirely.
Ugh just opened up the larger images...stop trying to pull the shadows up on the Canon! ;p
Yes, that very noticeable sun flare blob on the Tamron has almost put me off the lens completely. I hate that sort of thing, its something you find in cheapo kit lens and should not be in a high-end pro one like this!
Mike Sandman: It's very refreshing to read so many un-hedged, direct statements from a camera company executive. Thanks, dPreview, for asking the questions, and thanks Fuji, for answering them forthrightly. Mr. Iida even acknowledged Samsung. This kind of thinking is responsible for Fuji's successful transition from film to digital vs. Kodak's failure.
It would be very nice (and quite a surprise) to see an equally frank set of answers from Nikon or Canon about how their cameras stack up against the competitors.
Yes I agree with everyone on Mike's string. This is the most forthright and informative interview I've read so far from a photographic industry executive.
I'm glad I 've bought into the Fujifilm X-series family. Even if my X-E2s EVF dimness, even at its maximum brightness setting, in daylight while wearing glasses continues to be a major problem for me.
I'm also still not able to get the level of fine detail image quality out of the Iridient RAW converter I purchased specifically for its X-Trans de-mosaicing, that in reviews is supposed to be amongst the best available for that purpose. Which is also quite disappointing. But maybe that'll improve as I use it more and get to know it better over time.
AZPhotog86: I've used the Illum and it's a disaster with a terrible workflow--with eventual poor results. The inventors of this technology should have licensed it to Apple/Samsung as other have said. Would've saved them a lot of grief...
Yes, a missed opportunity on Lytro's part. I think this company is heading for the history books.
smorti: The main difficulty they face is avoiding vignetting and colour shift: because the lenses are so close to the sensor, these problems (which are avoided with film cameras and DSLRs) are very difficult to deal with. It's fine with smaller sensors, but not with larger sensors. Leica gets round this with some very innovative micro-lenses on the sensor - question is whether such a small start-up will be able to match that level of engineering.
GabrielZ: All the photos in this gallery here look flat and lacking in sharp detail.
Yes, didn't notice that. But still why take a landscape shot for instance (such as this) using such a wide aperture if its going to come out with such narrow depth-of-field? Just looks blurry and badly shot. I know its at sunset, but that's what higher ISOs and tripods are for.
Nice idea, I hope it works with apps other than Photoshop. $50 seems a bit pricey though.
All the photos in this gallery here look flat and lacking in sharp detail.
steveTQP: As for "advantages of mirrorless systems", are we forgetting a big one, IMHO...The lack of AF Adjustment (or AF Fine-Tune, as some call it)! In other words, since the mirrorless systems focus right off the sensor itself (no reflex mirrorbox like in a DSLR), assuming the system and lens are not faulty, the Focus is always spot-on....There can be no "back-focus" or "front-focus" issues, again, assuming the system and lens are not faulty. That, to my 57-year-old eyes, is of critical importance, if "Sharpness" is a criterion of one's photography. Thank you.
I noticed on the second photo, you can still see a seam on the inner barrel. Does that mean plain old plastic is used like on the inner barrel of the XF 18-55mm R LM OIS kit lens? I thought these pro red-square lenses would use metal inner-barrels like most of Canon's L-series pro lenses.
spontaneousservices: What does "R" stand for?
To photofisher - they still cost less than the equivalents from Nikon and Canon.
I received my X-E2 a couple of weeks ago now. And it doesn't feel cheap or plasticky at all, as Eddy M a bit further down here claims, its actually quite solid and overall feels a little higher up the quality ladder than the E-M10 he thinks is so great.
The only issues I've come across quality-wise are the rear-control dial on the camera and the aperture ring on the kit lens rotate a little too easily. Also the shutter speed and exp-comp dials while very solid in feel and rotational resistance, are very slightly tilted forward rather than completely horizontal. And when doing long exposures at night using live-view, I noticed the LCDs backlighting isn't very even, with a quite noticable dark patch in the upper-right corner. Even though when using it in any situation that isn't nearly pitch black, the backlighting unevenness isn't noticable at all. Finally the EVF even at max brightness is too dim in bright daylight. Bad eyecup design for eyeglass wearers being the cause it seems.
Fujifilms variation of Silkypix produces good results, but works at a snails-pace, at least on my late-2013 model year 13" rMBP. So I downloaded Iridient Developer instead, and will be giving that a go soon. Its good that Fujifilm will still be supporting older models with this upgrade (I have an X-E2) but was expecting that support to be incorporated together with their latest models and not somewhere down the line like its turned out to be here...starting to feel a little left out by Fujifilm.
Also they seem to be falling behind the technology curve compared to the other brands lately. Hopefully that'll be sorted later this year when the rumoured new X-Pro2/X-T2 is expected to arrive. The X-Q2 compact released recently was a bit of a joke, a new model designation for the same camera with an one extra film mode! They could of taken care of that with a firmware upgrade, like they did with their other models back in December.
Eddy M: The body feels cheap plasticky!!! EM10 feels solid like a tank but cheaper.
I've used an E-M10 and it does have a solid body, but the control dials while quite nicely damped feel like the plastic they are and fragile, perched there on top of the camera.
I've ordered an X-E2 and should be receiving it over the next couple of days. I'd like to know if the electronic level is visible on the EVF too? As I read somewhere that it wasn't on the X-E1. This is important to me because I hate correcting wonky horizons in post and don't like composing photos using back panel live view.
That venerable brand name appearing on a lot of drivel lately makes me sad.