While curved sensor will definitely help to get well performing optical designs that are simpler and therefore cheaper, there will be a problem left - all lenses that will be designed for such a camera will have to have the image plane curved in the same way. AND gone is using older or 3rd party lens on such a camera if the camera has curved sensor, but the XY lens.
Still this may be very interesting for fixed lens camera (again - the image curvature will need to stay constant over the zoom range)
Seems that these rugger water tight cameras are left behind - not much has happened in the handling or IQ department over past few years - contrary to high end P&S and mirror less cameras.
Thanks for posting these. I really enjoyed them.
Miwok: I read a lot of negativity about the Nikon 1 system but, from what I see here, in the real world they can produce very nice images.(And same thing about the Canon G1 X V2).
My V1 is a great little camera I got for 310€ with a 10/2.8 lens (and got 18 and 30-110 later). I only wish it had a few more maul controls as the way it is done it is more of a 'pro' P&S. While not a replacement for a more serous camera (or in my case a medium format camera) it is great for traveling or family photos (in particular with the external flash), light compact, good IQ, fast AF and decent video. Just my 2 cents.
Seems like Hasselblad plans to follow Kodak on their way to 'success'. Feels sad actually.
Must be the most boring video I have ever seen :)
People kern over time, but I would not expect wonders from 21 ->23, to be honest :)
Shamael: I would like them to find an anti fungus coating, that issue is a real problem in tropical regions where every lens is for the trashcan within 3 years due to humidity. No dry cabinet stories please, that is not where the lens is when you take pictures.
I think the problem is to keep the humidity away from the internal parts - once its get in there (and stays there because of the climate) - it is nearly impossible to avoid fungus. I am just wondering wether exposure to hard UV light now and then could help without damaging the lens.
Not sure what to think of this service. I have used one of my 4x5" scans (yes - scan from a largo format film) and it was marked as potentially modified. Now that means that every image that originated on film was 'modified'.
Every half-decent image that is to be used professionally will have curves/contrast/colors adjusted in post processing - after all - there is no 'true' colour setting in any camera out there since whatever comes out of a scanner needs further adjustments.
I have expected that they test whether there have been pixel content modifications to the file like cloning etc. I have tested that too, but still get the same message. So to me this sort of testing is pretty much useless, since the result is too ambiguous.
Sorry guys - either do it right or do not do it at all.
Clint009: ALL Leica model over many years are still great value, I mean, you won't loose your money at all, even if a model was not a hit. :)
I still have my Leica M4 built in 1967 (Rangefinder, film, no electronics at all) I paid that camera $650. Now this used model BODY ONLY on eBay price is range from $800. up to $4399.00
If, yes IF this Leica T is not a good hit, it will gain in value.Not the same for Japanese cameras. :(
Ehm, did you check lately how are M8 and M9 "appreciating"? The T could as well be made in heaven, but it will not keep its value - it is a digital product. The lenses will keep their value as long as the system will be alive.
So many comments on the 1.2kg block of aluminium. If Leica would have managed to get the wanted result (mechanical stability, precision, whatever) with moulding they would have not gone for milling, don't you think?
I do not know how much precision is needed in a camera body, but one often uses this method to achieve precision and rigidity in complexly shaped parts (for example highly complex components for high end microscopes).
At this stage all I can say - price for the body surprisingly low (for Leica) - lenses as expected.
I have my concerns about the manual controls, but too soon to tell.
The body does not look too ergonomic.
Nobody even complained about the price yet :p
Are you guys series that you want more than 4 Mpix from those tiny sensors? What use is 10+ Mpix image that looks like garbage (noise, clipping, colour depth) on pixel level? Already at 4 Mpix this sensor has only 2 um pixel pitch. I am just wondering ...
The lack of OIS is a bummer, no question about that.
falconeyes: The matter already is regulated in many areas of the world.
Where I live (Bavaria), you need an "Aufstiegsgenehmigung" which is given for a small fee to commercial photographers (valid one year).
Private persons without a plan to commercially exploit their model flights can pursue thier hobby w/o this permission.
Insurance is however still required and costs about 50€ per annum.
Interesting lens, but I am wondering whether -in spite of the IS - the lens will be handhold-able. The magnification at the long end will be very hard to keep pointed towards the subject.
justmeMN: Another mirrorless camera featuring a DSLR Envy Design. :-) Since you can't beat them, try to look like them.
Why? Should Porsche stop making cars that look like original 911? Once you get a good design - you keep using it and only make incremental improvements.
slncezgsi: I guess the camera companies just need to lear that they potential market size in not going to grow in the near future and lear to make profit on sales that they have. It may mean that will will not be seeing a re-design or update to each and every line they produce (and keep adding new lines). It seem like they are trying to over-develop each other - and that costs money, money they do not manage to recover. All this mirror-less burst (new cameras, lenses) - look how much was accomplished in just few years - now probably need to take on a bit more relaxed pace with less investment costs. The tough part will be to communicate it to the consumer who got "spoiled" by the quick advancements and logically expect it to continue. Many shooter skip 1 or 2 camera generations, because they come all to fast and it always pays to wait for the next & better one.
Similar "strategy" (or rather lack thereof) has been seen in DSLR market with probably even worse effect because there was little to improve from DSLR XY_V1 to DSLR XY_V2 to begin with.
Interesting times ahead of us - camera makers may need to change their strategy to survive in the long term.
I guess the camera companies just need to lear that they potential market size in not going to grow in the near future and lear to make profit on sales that they have. It may mean that will will not be seeing a re-design or update to each and every line they produce (and keep adding new lines). It seem like they are trying to over-develop each other - and that costs money, money they do not manage to recover. All this mirror-less burst (new cameras, lenses) - look how much was accomplished in just few years - now probably need to take on a bit more relaxed pace with less investment costs. The tough part will be to communicate it to the consumer who got "spoiled" by the quick advancements and logically expect it to continue. Many shooter skip 1 or 2 camera generations, because they come all to fast and it always pays to wait for the next & better one.
Francis Carver: Wow, these will be like the 99th M4/3 lenses with these same focal lengths.
Manual single focal lenses like these must be dirt cheap to make -- which may explain why there are maybe 2 or 3 decent zoom lenses altogether for the Micro 4/3rd form factor.
Dirt cheap to make? Not if the lens is highly corrected and is made to high mechanical standards. Look at the diagram of the 25/1.8 - that is not a simple clone of double-gaus design. And look also at the distortion numbers. Very low.
Frankly I have no idea what is the target for Kowa with these lenses, but I would expect high quality (which will came with high price I would guess).