FF equivalent 85mm converter would have been more exciting/useful IMHO
pca7070: Average height (M/F)：North Korea: 158cm/150cm South Korea: 174cm/161cm
The only thing this camera (coolpix a)has over the X100 or XE-1 with 18mm F2 is "pocketability".. How much do/can we want to stuff more crap in our pockets? I, for one don't have any more room after my wallet, cellphone, keys, and change. I have no problem toting a little larger, but a light camera in a small messenger type of bag - much more comfortable than stuffing another device/thing in my pocket.
I'd much rather opt for EX-1 with 18mm f2, or 100Xs; both which could be had for $200 more. I don't care so much that this camera is "pocketable" - but that maybe most important for some... I don't like my pockets weighed down with yet another device - in addition to my cell phone. How much stuff does one really care to carry in their pockets anyway?
Thomas Kachadurian: I love this trend, but DPR hit it on the head. $1,100 is too much for an f2.8 lens. The x100 with a f2 lens and viewfinder is the same price. They're smokin' something at Nikon.
I agree, I'd much rather pony up another $200 for the Fuji and get built in hybrid vf, f2 lens and much more attractive retro look imo. Nikon needs to produce a much cooler coolpix that offers something truly unique to get this much money for a compact camera from me. I just don't get Nikon, not getting it.
Marty4650: Cameras can be rated by objective measures (like AF speed and accuracy, Dynamic Range, ISO capability, lines of resolution, etc.) but there will always be a subjective element involved. We sometimes fall in love with a camera, and when we do that we tend to overlook the flaws and emphasize the good things.
I remember around six years ago Phil Askey reviewed the Leica M8. He found numerous flaws with it, and objectively rated it as "recommended" which was just about the LOWEST rating Dpreview was using at that time. Despite this, he loved using the camera, so he immediately went out and bought one with his own money. And it certainly wasn't a cheap camera to buy.
I think something like that has happened here. The Fuji X-E1 is a very nice camera that produces really great image quality. It is exceptionally well built, there are some very nice lenses for it, and despite all the stated flaws, it is probably a joy to use.
Hence... the Gold Award. I call it emotional grade inflation.
Agree, there has to be some reserve in the reviews for the whole experience of the camera, not just the clinical facts
Erik Johansen: Paint it black Oly, please.
They will, for $200 more!
HiRez: I'm liking everything about this lens so far. Biggest issue for me will be the bokeh quality. Can this be a serious portrait lens in the way that the 70-200 f/2.8 is?
As far as bokeh quality, I've searched for some sample images of the Canon's F4, and have liked what I came up with. My guess is that the Nikon will be as good or better. If you already have the 70-200 2.8, you can shoot it at f4 to get an idea too. I am very tempted, for the weight, size and MFD.. My only hesitation to trade the 70-200vr2 for this is how well this lens takes TC's compared to 2.8. Can't justify picking this one up to add to the 2.8
Weather sealed? Metal or polycarbonate barrel?
Looks very much like d700 at ISP 6400
You can see the umbrella in the catch light in his eyes.
is this really an azalea? looks to me like a lilly.
this picture would have worked a lot better if the butt was in focus and the back ground blurred IMHO
Great opportunity to start your own mansurovs, ishootshows, kenrockwell, etc .com.