macky patalinghug: FF?I know many will vehemently react to this question.It's just a poor guess so please don't get angry.
They have actually stated that they won't make a FF system camera anytime soon. A fixed lens compact might be coming, though...
rb59020: Retro like the Df
Fujifilm is certainly innovative (hybrid viewfinder, novel approaches to sensor design etc.), but I wouldn't call retro design innovative. It's consciously and purposely not innovative.
write2alan: Here is an idea for Fujifilm: Make a camera body that can take Nikon lenses. Make a camera body that can take Canon lenses and etc... You'll sell truck loads of them overnight. Who has Fujifilm lenses? I don't see that many hands up.
Find yourself an old S5 Pro, and you have your Fuji body with Nikon F mount. ;)
inevitable crafts studio: sleep tight nikon 1 developers
I don't think this Fuji camera will take away that many customers from Nikon 1, considering that the typical Nikon 1 user is hardly an advanced enthusiast.
RichRMA: Be embarrassing if it has the same AF performance as their mirrorless cameras. Why even go the DSLR-look route?
Because quite a lot of people prefer how those cameras look and handle. What's wrong with offering different options for different users? It's not like Fujifilm will recall their other models, and re-build them to look like this one. They are branching out, not changing course.
Collie Camp: Even though I don´t like fake SLR designs like the Olympus OM-D and prefer my X-Pro1, this camera looks pretty damn good!
Well done Fuji Design Dep.!
I hear it will be weather sealed?
Why is an SLR-styled camera without a mirror fake, whereas a rangefinder-styled camera without a rangefinder mechanism, is not?
Even though the design of SLRs were dictated by the technology inside them, the design in and of itself is still valid, even without a mirror, to someone who likes how these cameras handle. The same goes for rangefinder-styled cameras, if you like how those cameras handle.
Zoron: whoever bought X-E2 is conned...lol....time to sell
Whenever you buy something, you do so fully aware that something more interesting (and possibly better) will be released in the near future.And as already have been mentioned, this new camera sits higher up in the line-up, and aims (partly) at a different target user.
Pete peterson: It looks like Samsung has it's sights on Sony again. It killed off Sony's (ericsson) strong mobile phone position, it killed of Sony's No1 position in TVs and now it's gunning for their camera position as well.
If the Samsung sensor will be on par with the excellent NEX sensor and the samsung F2-2.8 zoom beats the very average sony PZ 16-50 F3.5-5.6, then this could be the beginning of the end for NEX dominance.The NEX has two things going for it small size and excellent sensor.
So far, Samsung hasn't done anywhere near as good a job marketing and distributing its cameras, as its smartphones, tablets and TVs.
iae aa eia: I don't understand why some guys here don't like the idea of a modular camera. They offer lens interchangeability, the sensor is not ridiculously small, you can have them mounted on your phone (whenever you want), you can achieve far better image quality, can have easier software updates/upgrades, and even pay a lower price. Some guys are even complaining this news should be anywhere else! What is wrong with you, guys?
I love the idea! I have a Nokia 701. Imagine they have its software compatible with Symbian OS and I could buy a mount for, let's say, 200-300 bucks, and then a lens. Awesome! They can even offer handgrips!
The only problem I see with this kind of product is if they ask the same price as an equivalent camera.
It's not necessarily the modularity that people don't like, but the fact that it's a smartphone add-on, rather than a dedicated camera with more photography-friendly ergonomics and controls. The Ricoh GXR, for example, could have been really interesting, if Ricoh had made more lens mount modules for it, rather than "lensor" modules.
Mark Banas: Just a note to the folks questioning validity because certain brands were excluded (while the reason is right there in the introduction). I set the criteria for the heads to be reviewed in order to limit the field to heads that should perform similarly.
Of course, smaller or larger heads may also perform as well, or better, but where to draw the line? If I include a 48mm Markins (Q20) then the 50mm Feisol (CB50) should be in, and maybe even the 48mm FLM. Put in the 38mm Acratech, and there are entire product lines that can fit in the criteria! No sense in making exceptions for some and not others.
So, my apologies if your preferred brand is not in the review group (hey, even I use a Markins Q3 day-to-day), and I really tried to get a Manfrotto for the test, but their top-lock was delayed a bit and some of the sample heads had to be returned by the time it was out. Without all of the heads on hand at the same time, some comparisons would not be possible.
Thanks for all the comments!
As he explained in the footnote, the weight limit is not standardized, and may mean different things depending on the manufacturer.
michael19843: I'm kind of hoping Canon will release a new full frame camera with a sensor to challenge Sony's übermensch. Maybe in 2015.....
"For those with a lack of cognitive skills the Canon sensors are dire."
The Canon sensors are only dire to people who care more about lab tests, numbers and pixel-peeping, than about pictures and real-life photography. The lens you use, and your photographic skills and technique, have a much greater impact on the final image, than the sensor. Lab tests tend to exaggerate differences between sensors, that is often not noticeable in practice.
"No one is remotely interested in a firmware upgrade to the 1DX."
I'm sure those who actually own the camera think otherwise.
Mike921: I think the reason why people don't take Samsung (or Sony for that matter) seriously is because their product range is so diverse, eliminating photographic products due to poor financial performance will be relatively easy and financially painless for them. However, on the consumer side we all have the problem of 'investments' in glass, and it won't be financially painless for us to make a change.
I suspect the re-organization of Samsung was just a way to "hide" a non-profitable division within a hugely profitable one. It looks better in the financial report that way.
clicstudio: ... And another year went by and DPR still hasn't bother to review the 2 flagship Canon and Nikon cameras...
The main purpose of a review is to help consumers make an informed choice. The people who are in the market for high end professional cameras are usually already deeply entrenched in the system of their choice, and aren't likely to need that help.
I really enjoyed the comment too. Every time I read it, I discover something new.
Jogger: I could see these doing well in Walmart, Target, Staples, or Radioshack. There is a place for cheap off-brand, products like this. And, in many places around the world, American nameplates are still well regarded; e.g. Buick is considered a luxury brand in China.
Exactly, F2.0 is always F2.0, if we're talking exposure. Total light gathering (and hence, noise), DoF and diffraction are other matters entirely. But nobody is cheating; when stating that a lens has a certain F-stop, you're only making a claim about the FL/aperture ratio. No claims are made regarding image quality or DoF. If you expect an F2.0 lens on m4/3 to give identical results as an F2.0 lens on FF, then it's because you have limited technical knowledge, not because someone cheated you.
JDThomas: "JK doesn't have a booth at the show, but we visited them in a hotel suite..."
Pssst. Hey kid, wanna see some top quality camera gear? Meet me in the back alley behind the Rio Hotel. I'll cut you in on a good deal.
What makes you think it's reverse-engineered? JK Imaging are members of the MFT consortium, so they have access to the mount specifications, lens protocols etc. It was Olympus, who announced that JK had joined about a year ago.
SeeRoy: A low-cost M4/3 camera - providing it's a decent performer - is a great idea if it reinforces the format. Let's hope it's successful.
It's not fair to compare the price of a new product at launch, with the heavily discounted price of an older, now discontinued, product. Don't you think the Kodak S-1 will be cheaper at Christmas time 2015?
(unknown member): Well, unless they're holding something back until the last day . . . this is a pathetic bust. We may not see anything worthwhile until Photokina in Sept of 2014. People are going to continue to move on to Sony, Fuji, Olympus, Panny, etc. Canon is still selling, but on their name only at this point. Sad huh?
From a business point of view, it's better to make a profit by selling on your name only, than not making a profit at all, which is currently the case for the other mentioned companies' imaging divisions.And to be fair, Canon does offer good, solid products at all levels from entry-level to professional, an extensive system of lenses and accessories, and good customer service.
Zentinel: As i expected.Canon now is not Camera Brand, they are the greatest printer company of the world, cannot expect world leading technology on Canon camera...really SAD.
Just curious, what world leading technology did the other companies present? It seems to be a general consensus, that nothing groundbreaking was introduced at this show, at least on the camera front.
RichRMA: A BSI sensor that large? Should be interesting.
4/3" is the sensor format, Micro Four Thirds is the lens mount. This camera uses both.