Antonio Rojilla: I love this camera. I like the style, design, controls, features, -expected- quality, and even the brand. But it has a problem: the RX100 III. As much as I like this Fuji, I'd pick the Sony.
I hear what you're saying - but ergonomics and 'pleasure factor' come into it as well. I didn't warm to the the Sony and bought a Nikon Coolpix A instead. There were a whole lot of reasons why the Sony should have been the choice, but for me: Ah - less is more; give me the big sensor and no features. All these cameras will take great pics. I'm glad there is so much choice.
Nice - appears simple but the devil's in the the detail;eg when he flicks the 24-70 to 24 he does not say how he stops the flash from zooming out too, and does not say how he's metering it.Likewise he changes later to an 85mm at f2.5 and there's no mention at the end of the video of the 85mm lens. only the 24-70 2,8 (which is hardly the starter lens) If anyone at home tries this on an APS with a kit zoom they ain't gonna be getting that shallow DOF.
Why are people hung up about this "Oh, it must be Full Frame to be pro" crap?
35mm is totally arbitrary - based on the movie film , and remember, it used to Be called "miniature format" because it was so small. Roll film was small too. Quarter Plate was small before that... jeeze. Why was Half Plate called "Half Plate"? See if you can guess.
Unless you have an SLR (optical viewfinder limited by sensor size - no, not Fuji X) or a whole bunch of legacy glass (Nikon, Canon yes, Fuji X no) then there is no reason to bang on about "Full Frame" being pro.
Want a big sensor? Get a Phase One for goodness' sake.
Come on - these images are great! Forum HDR experts can hate all they like, but these are sensitive, beautifully constructed images. If you don't realise that it's an amazing feat to get these pics then that's too bad;and reading a forum won't help you.
Lots of switches there:I'd like to see the cockpit as redesigned by the Apple design team...
Retzius: welcome to the world of FX sensors. Yes they are bigger and get dusty. You clean it. Yay problem solved.
Come on - I've been changing lenses on my D700 for five yrs and no no dust. This D600 thing is different.
Teru Kage: How much longer can prosumer DCs like this last? Traditionally, these have served as niche cameras to bridge the gap between compact DCs and D-SLRs. But with the introduction of MILC cameras, I can't see much of an argument in favor of buying pro-DCs. The size and price difference is negligible, and the performance of the MILCs are generally a few stops higher.
As someone who just bought a P7700 for professional use, I think it's great that this class of compacts exists! For exteriors (good light) where you can shoot static subjects at base ISO, I can leave the DSLR at home. They are so easy to carry that I can make sure I always have it with me, so cheap they're almost disposable, and very versatile. I had not bought a compact for 5+ yrs and the increase in quality in that time is great.
Good robust discussion here!
As someone who has spent way more time than is healthy looking at the old chart, and way more money than is wise buying cameras (not true really, they make me rich)
It seems the DPR guys are viewing comments and taking them on board, so I will add:
In comparing models I looked almost exclusively at:1: the Martini bottle coins (first stop for outright resolution), then2: the paper clips (tricky for cameras), then3: the fuzzzy coloured balls (for high ISO), and finally4: the Paul Smith watch (a combo of the others)
FWIW I don't like photos on a test chart, because unless you know what screen/process/quality was used to print them they're a bit useless, and even if they aren't useless there's usually a real object that will give you better info.
On the new chart I think I'll be going1:Resolution chart2: Fuzzy Balls (yay)3: Circuit board
PS - if you stuck those crayons on with Blu-Tac I hope you realise they'll fall off before too long...
Congratulations - A great article! Found out in a few mins more than I'd been able to find before with hours of searching. Keep up the good work!
I read the iPad article and it's the best I've seen; found out in 10 mins what it took me days of searching before to glean.
Will become a valuable resource I'm sure.
larrytusaz: I like the Kate Bevan rant a LOT better. Dpreview is free to do as they please, but they seem to be going far beyond just ACKNOWLEDGING the Hipstomatic/Instagram trend and actually shoving it down our throats, when I've come here for years to read about Nikon DSLRs. Mirrorless is fine as well, I realize it's great to have something besides JUST the DSLRs (I have an Olympus E-PL1 myself), but come on now--is this site now iphonecameras.com?
Hey, if the NYT is publishing these pics, then not to examine/consider the whole deal is plain dumb. I think the fact that NYT chose them is very interesting. I remember when they first came out; I studied the set, thought they were great, and it forced me to consider the whole picture taking process. But just as buying a leica won't make you HCB, buying this ap won't make you Lowy.
pinecone: Hello All,
I'm trying to update to the new firmware however the file size is larger then what's stated. It's 33.9 mb rather then 32.2 mb. Would any one have any idea why or solutions to this?
All the firmware updates I've downloaded have been exactly the same size - 33,058KB
Hey, when I bought the x100 on release it was a great camera with superb IQ, great looks and feel, and lots of quirks that could drive you mad.It's been steadily improved by Fuji - 5th firmware in a year.Onya Fuji for trying!1.20 was major advance in focus speed and accuracy IMO, and within a week they've fixed the bugs in it.Fuji were starting from scratch with this camera - and 12 months on it performs SIGNIFICANTLY better than when I bought it.In my world that's a good thing, not a bad one.
jtan163: This price breaks my heart.
I'd really like one, but I can't see myself paying $2300 + the inevitable and unfortunate Aussie subsidiary/distributor markup (best example yet ~$1000 for a SB910 flash! only double what the rest of the world pays).
It is nice, but it's not insanely great from what I can see.
Oh well it will have to go on the long term list along with a complete set of fast glass and an FF body.
I'm Aussie too. I think Fuji seems better than Canikon when it comes to pricing parity. Remember we have GST, so US price + 10% seems fair, which is close to what it is.
This was the same with X100 and X10 - I think Fuji looked after the Aussies!
EDIT: WTF? I just jumped on the digitdirect website; sure the camera + 35mm is $2.6K, but they're listing the lenses all at $999! I hope it's a mistake!
Personally I think the price is just fine - But I also thought the X100 was fine.I think it will come down to ergonomics. If the focus and ease of use is good, then it becomes a useful tool, and $3K for a full kit is a bargain.I think the problem with the X100 is that while the IQ is there, it's not really fast enough for professional use (in focus and ergonomics) so it becomes a nice toy - in which scenario price matters.Again - we'll need to see how the ergonomics/menus/focus stacks up once it's been thoroughly tested by a few pros
David0X: Gosh - sometimes there is useful stuff posted in these comments, so I keep reading them. Then every now and then something like this happens. I continue to be surprised by the deluge of ill informed and lazy comments by fools.
Taking a little time to research will show:
1: the guys are both professionals. Their websites contain a lot of stuff that shows that if you care to look. They are both working pros who know what they're doing.
2: If you read Christian's blog you will see that these are just a couple of quick images posted from day 1 of a four day shoot. This is not a review, it's just some shared photos by a guy who got a camera early and is looking forward to sharing some images as he discovers a bit about the camera.
There are many sensible and useful comments along these lines posted below, but they become hard to find amongst the asinine bashing.
By the way, I have been many times to Quorn where the images were taken. The colours look pretty well captured to me.
^SeeRoy - Yes; that video is naff.
Personally I found the pics mildly interesting and the video less so.I was an early adopter of the x100 but have no need to jump in to this one.My feeling is that the IQ will be just fine, and it will come down to handling as to whether I buy this camera.
^Zachawry - I take your point. I have a suspicion that this was not all that well planned. I'm guessing that Christian's credibility allowed him to get a camera out of an over-eager Sales manager in South Australia, and things were not planned from above.
On the other hand, people complain about shots on the official site being too stage-managed, so it may have been deliberate.
Gosh - sometimes there is useful stuff posted in these comments, so I keep reading them. Then every now and then something like this happens. I continue to be surprised by the deluge of ill informed and lazy comments by fools.
IcyVeins: The color and contrast in those images are godawful. Can't wait to find out how many people want to waste $1700 on this joke of a camera...and that's BEFORE the lens...
Hey - I live in South Australia and have been to Quorn. I'm afraid the colours are accurate. Not sure how that can make them Godawful