Oh I'll keep going at it, OIS and a short zoom, a 24/28-7-/80 equl. zoom of F2.8 or maybe even better. Would be a great camera, not replace, but augment the X100, an X100Z.
AA filters, really. Why cut the sharpness? I will bet that in a few months from now Nikon will one out with D760, without AA filters.
Snyc is at 1/200 and 1/4000 is fast enough for vast majority of photographers. Nikon F2s had a 1/2000 and snyc of 1/90..Nikormat was 1/1000 and sync of a blazing 1/125. And it all worked for everything from the sports to still life.
All of these are make sense up grades and the firmware upgrade will make your TX-1 into the TX-1b (just kinding about the b). A great Xmas present from Fuji.I cannot wait.
Nice, but I still think a high speed short zoom lens would be wonderful. A equal of a 28-70 at F2.8 would be nice.
iAPX: F****Ing hot but with a tag price I couldn't afford for my portraits, as I do that for my pleasure.
I actually use a 85mm f/1.8G Nikon for that, and at f/2.8 it's sharper than everything I tried, and anyway AF or MF-mode, I could not go down to f/2.0 because of the narrow DoF (AF limitations, and my humans limitations too in MF)
But still waiting to see how the Zeiss compare to it. I believe in perfection from the shoot, not LightRoom/Photoshop/others could deliver, and could live with imperfection at least if it serves my artistict view. Too expensive, but what?!?
I toldly agree, people move, a little camera shake. How sharp is enough. Maybe the best real world test would be to take portraits like they did in the 19th century of children. Lifeless. I think lens are more bragging rights then real useful IQ.
Sound like fine lens, but MF and apture ring. High price for these lens. Sounds like Sony is moving towards a Leica M 240. FF mirrorless compact cameras, large lens. To keep the whole package small, No AF lens of any speed. Can the M 240 Leica be the best compermize.
RStyga: The Pentax 90mm f/2.8 D FA 645 Macro ED AW SR Lens costs less than half of this lens and offers weather sealing, shake reduction, and macro focusing in a comparable -not identical- focal length and maximum aperture.
In my opinion, for non-professional use, it makes no sense to choose the S system over the 645. In many case, even for professional use.
Leica is also an APO len, the Pentax is doubt a fine lens. Do not compare. Lots of pro shoot with the Leica and Hassi, also Mamiya.
The camera is a $500.00 with a nice f2-f2.8 zoom lens. It is for grabing quick shots. The cameras that have large sensor have larger price tags, so why have a 1" sensor when one may have a APS-C. Point is how does it work for the person shooting with it. I would have only hoped the movie side of the camera would get better.Oh that $500.00 price tag in 6 months or so, will be $449.00.
lacikuss: Unfortunately the water fountain photos were taken with high shutter speeds, I'd like to see those pictures taken at 1/10th or 1/6th of a second hand held...:(
But, then the water would blur. The OIS is for camera shake, the image motion is control by sutter speed.
JDThomas: Ohhh! Let me be the first to complain about how expensive this camera is! Only dumb rich people can buy this camera!
Yes, even when Hassi used film. They were big bucks. It can be use by a Semi-Pro.
He must think himself a handsome fello, they are so very close to us. This a good example to compel people to kindness to our fellow living things.
doctorbza: The only reason to shoot a rangefinder is because the rangefinder, as a tool, makes sense for your approach to photography.
Once you've established that a rangefinder is the right tool for you, you do not have to spend $10,000. You can head over to KEH and get a used M3 with a Zeiss 50 f/2 for about $1,600. HP5 is available for $6/roll, and a scanner will run you a couple hundred bucks. Chemistry is less than $100 for everything you need. (And for what it's worth, film M's are still nicer than digital ones.)
Should you want a digital body you'll have to pay more. Used M9's are around $3,000 used right now. M8's are about half that.
Even pixel peepers should be satisfied with the ZM lens lineup by Zeiss, and Voigtlander makes well made, reasonably priced rangefinder lenses. You do not have to spend $4,000 on a 50mm lens to use a rangefinder camera.
Rangefinders are expensive, but they can be an excellent tool if they fit your shooting style. Try one and see if it's worth it.
Do not laugh, I use an M7 with a Nikon LS 9000 ED. The image look great.
The lens is too slow, no EVF ( not even opinion ). No 4k. Yeasterdays camera, for the world of tomorrow.
The camera must have an apeochoromic lens. Maybe a Banana Cam was used.
Black and white or color. Images are fine for subject. I would image an eight year old would be able to shoot a nice photo with an easy as pie camera,or I mean phone or was that toaster. The pictures quality is very low. Some photographer in 1930 would get better looking images. Sensors the size of ant's eye are not going to make for great images. Have your fun with your toasters, I mean phones taking "pictures". It is just overload to point of million monkeys at million typewriters, I mean Laptops will sooner or later write War and Peace. Were so sorry uncle Ansal.
Combat By Design: Can someone tell me what the point of Hasselblad is?
Honesty. Can anyone tell me what purpose this company serves (other than catering to the Trumps of the world) by existing?
They do make stuip cameras like the Luna, but High fashion and studio pros thoughtout the world have used and do use these cameras. They are world class period. Your Nikon D7100 just would not cut it.
Just image there is a new 500CMD. Range of about 6-8 CZ lens. all up to date designs with this and perchance a 40MP ecomeny model. A lens shade or two, a prism or two, even some new film backs. Basic model with 80mm F2.8 Planar and 40MP for under 10k. people would by this product and it would have a useful place in photography. Not old used ones, with behind lens metering, all electronic sutters and f stops. Go hold and old 500CM with and 80mm lens, it is very light, electronic improvements would easily give a top speed of 1 or 2k. No hand cranking. T.he film back would have it's own motor. Hassi stop making Lunas, make this camera. People will love it MF and all. Bet'cha.Oooh, brain storm, a mirrorless model with the lCD where the old reflex focusing screen was, leave the one off the back to save money, no need for prism for backward left to right . AF would work with this system, it may kill their oth system , oh well I love fujions. It would be even lighter.
That 90mm is gooing to a very sallow DOF, it will be 135mm f/2.0. The lens I may want is 16mm f1.4. For me 24mm is wide enough, f/1.4 would be nice. What agreat combo, 16mm f1.4, 23mm f/1.4 and 56mm f/1.2 low light heaven.
I agree, a 23mm F/2 and/ or 35 f/2 would be nice lens. For a zoom, 16-48mm F4.0 IOS. would make for nice compact lens, they do have the 27mm f/2.8, not only small low cost, but a good general lens.