John McCormack: Good news. Now if Olympus will only put some money into R&D for fabled Olympus Trip digital we've been waiting for...
Why, Tedolph, you’re back! Glad to see you here.
pacnwhobbyist: Something I've been wondering: Where are Nikon and Olympus with their competing larger sensor compacts and bridges? I'd be interested to see what they come up with if they ever released a camera in this segment.
Olympus has cryptically stated that it will unveil a “street shooter’s dream camera” later this year. My hope is precisely that it will be a large sensor compact (imagine an XZ-2 with a 1" or even ⅔" sensor).
chillgreg: Ren Kockwell called the X100T the best camera in the world. Which gives even more credence to the DPR Silver award. Well done Richard!
Really? Do we need to resort to ad hominem attacks? Whatever you might think of Ken Rockwell’s opinions doesn’t justify personal attacks. Most unattractive.
RStyga: It's a very nice camera and all but the RAW output is still fuzzy with pixel-level artifacts due to the X-Trans structure. Fujifilm needs to resolve the RAW conversion otherwise X-Trans will become synonymous to low high-ISO noise at the expense of "double"-AA-filter style IQ. At a time where manufacturers remove the AA filter to achieve a crisper image, Fujifilm advertises a sensor with no need for an AA filter but -in essence- with an even more blurry IQ than traditional Bayer sensor that have an AA filter. No moire is great but I'm not sure why one would prefer an X-Trans camera since applying PP on a Bayer sensor can remove moire completely and obtain the same "blurry" image that an X-Trans camera produces.
I believe a better solution is simply to abandon the X-Trans sensor and return to a Bayer sensor. But I suspect Fuji is too invested in X-Trans to do this. Too bad, since a next-gen X-100 with a Bayer sensor would be remarkable.
Naveed Akhtar: they should consider making an lx100 competitor with this beautiful body and an extended lens focal length range.
If Olympus could match Panasonic LX100's specs, but with beautiful Olympus color, I'd purchase it in a heartbeat.
ttran88: Give me 24MP with A6000 AF and I will buy as my apsc camera system. The Canon of the APSC mirrorless world. Gotta love fujifilm.
@kwa_photo: It might just be time for Fuji to ditch the X-Trans sensor. As the resolution in their sensor climbs, the benefits of the X-Trans over Bayer diminishes. And with a return to Bayer, they can hopefully improve their video capabilities as well.
Peiasdf: Good price but hate it that Fuji purposely strip away X-tans and direct-dial controls. I like my X-E1 but since I never use the EVF, I could easily see this as a smaller/lighter alternative.
If you don't like that the X-A1 or X-A2 are not equipped with the X-Trans sensor, you need only look to the virtually identical X-M1, which does indeed have the X-Trans sensor.
As for me, I am glad that Fuji is keeping at least one of its cameras in the X-line with the traditional Bayer sensor.
Absolutic: How come no review.preview mentions anywhere that the hot shoe that RX100 M2 had, has been removed on RX100 M3. Is it because Sony figured with 24-70 lens, nobody will be shooting portraits on this so a real flash is not needed?
It's mentioned in the comparison chart on the first page (Introduction) of the preview.
Fascinating. Always great to see this kind of street photography that shows the passage of time.
Jogger: I still shoot my D700 from late 2007.. the problem for Nikon is that i dont need to buy a new DSLR every year the way people do with mirrorless cameras. That is what is driving that market and why companies are trying to get in.
Consumers in the mirorrless segment of the market will buy lackluster cameras only to upgrade then annually (just read the m43 forum)... whereas a DSLR will last you a decade or more. Nothing glamourous here, nothing to show-off.. just a rock solid DSLR that does its job and lasts.
I agree with HFLM. I am a strong proponent for mirrorless (I own one, along with my DSLR), but it must be recognized that mirrorless cameras have been playing catch-up these last few years. Only now (perhaps since the release of the Olympus OM-D EM-5) are mirrorless at a level where they can replace DSLR's for many users (not every user, understand).
atakomba: Come on Canon, what a bad joke is this miniaturised dslr. Who on earth will buy this, people who are looking for small camera + lens combination will run away from this to m43, nikon1 etc. Shame, this was the last desperate shot from Canon, a missed one
Why will those interested in a small ILC run away from this? I very much like m4/3, but there are times when an APS-C sensor will do better, all other things about the camera being equal. I can certainly see this new Canon encroaching on m4/3 sales.
The real question for me is whether this product can compete with mirrorless models that also are APS-C, not m4/3. Can this camera go toe-to-toe with Fuji's XE-1 or Sony's NEX series?
I might not go with Canon's offering, but it's great to have so many choices.
Timmbits: I was a little upset when they discontinues igoogle.com ...it brought everything together into the best homepage we had ever seen.
Google used to be a one stop shop for a diversity of tidbits - tools here and there - that made it compelling to use google.
But as google sheds parts and components because of money problems and internal cost-cutting, it is becoming less and less attractive.
The whole was worth far more than the sum of it's parts... and now that they are breaking everything off, the ship is sinking for me.
Time to jump ship - Google has rendered itself useless to me.
Bing. Out of protest.
Kinematic Digit: Some improvements from what I've seen so far on one of my toughest reference images I use to compare. The Watercolour effect (colour smearing) is much improved. Details is still lower than competing products like Capture One and SilkyPix. More testing to do and will publish my own results against the rest.
@Kinematic DigitThank you, Mr. Lam, for your report. It provides clarity on some questions I had about this update.
jbagg: The absence of any mention of Apple Camera RAW in the article is quite striking. Apple Camera RAW is used by both Aperture and iPhoto. Despite the fact that Apple Camera RAW works on only one platform, I would not be surprised to find out that there are more Apple Camera RAW users out there an CaptureOne and DxO combined, if not more than Adobe Camera RAW as well. Lightroom has a larger market share than Aperture, but Aperture and its sibling iPhoto together represent a very large market.
Agreed. I would have liked to see Aperture included because so many of us use it.
Mouser: What about Apple Aperture??
The introduction to the article specifically mentioned that one of the criteria for being included in this review was that the program run on both Windows and Mac. Since Aperture is a Mac-only program, it was excluded. As an Aperture user, I too would have liked to see it go head to head with the others.
This seems quite exciting. Offerings like this are making m4/3's too hard to ignore.
Thanks for this!
Vince876: Well. Now Panasonic or Olympus can make a copy of a m4/3 camera without the color array. It should not be expensive and puts a good idea at an earthly level.
Even further, without the IR-UV cut filter.
Not the hi-end cameras, something like the GF2. They could be not expensive and maybe cheap. With very good lenses ten times better than the Leica ones in terms of rendition/cost.
Hear, hear. My thoughts exactly.
The Silver Fox: Ideas on what flash to pair with this bad boy? I know it's all the rage nowadays to shoot without flash, but it *does* have its uses!
Thank you all for your thoughtful replies — Very helpful!
The Silver Fox: I'm sold on the OM-D and will buy one next month. While I plan to invest in several of the primes, I will also get an Oly zoom lens for general purpose shooting. But I'm unsure which kit lens to go with. Any suggestions?
I understand that the 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 is weather-sealed, which is a great thing to have for travel. However, both the 14-150mm 1:4-5.6 and the 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R are equally compact, with 3 times the zoom capability. Coming from SLR's, I'm new to m4/3, so I'm free to invest as needed. Though I've been taking pictures since a wee lad, I'm a relative newcomer to serious photography, and an out-and-out newcomer when it comes to m4/3. So, any help would be appreciated.