Bottom line, Nikon will fix it and stands behind their product. Give'em that.
Nice looking camera, more then likely takes nice pictures and movies. An also ran camera who's price will drop fast.
OIS used with a wide angle lens is a bit of over kill. The rule of suite speeds is to use your FL say 18mm as 1/18 of a second or faster. If you shoot a 1/4 of a second, hope your subjects a dead or still life, OIS does not make up for subject motion. In tele I can see the advantage . But a well trained photographer can get away with 1/30 to 1/60 in low light. I did with my Nikkor 105 F2.5. OIS in wide and normal range is for the trained. The other two lens Fuji offers look fine, the 16-55mm F2.8 is a choice for someone who knows want they want and how get out it what they need. I will bet'cha this lens is going to have great reviews! But one should also have deep pocks, this not a lens to just 'get' and leave in your camera case.
LBJ2: "which offers a fast maximum aperture of F2.8 throughout its zoom range"
Applying the crop factor, is this new lens really an equivalent f2.8 "throughout its zoom range" or is it really equivalent to 24-83mm f4.2 ?
F2.8 lens, is still F2.8. If use Tri-X at ISO 400 or Iso 1200. F2.8 is still F2.8.
quezra: I like how the same people who love to bash Sony are nevertheless slavish in their attention to every move Sony does or doesn't make... jumping to comment on some very old news (all the lenses shown here are identical to those at Photokina last year).
Inasecurity perhaps? If they don't bash Sony, they fear Sony will take over? They don't seem to bash other brands with nearly the same gusto. What about bashing EOS-M or Nikon 1 or Samsung for their lackluster sales and systems? The difference appears to be that this is the one system that is threatening their beloved brand(s).
Sony comes out with a great idea, FF mirrorless, just behind Leica. But diid the get the bugs out before shipping? No, sutter problems and so on. Lens, when Fuji camera with the X-Pro 1 they had three lens read to go, a wide a normal and short tele. All with reasonable F stops. Sony is now coming out with a road map of lens, not here , but will come. The people at Sony should have held up for a year or two and did it right. Things are coming together now. But the problem with FF ML, is size of lens vs body vs balance. Sony + FF equals no lens. They have a Ziess 35mm F2 that they know works, why are they not using it, the camera now using it is out of date. I do not hate Sony, it is just that maybe the shoud have a few photographers on their staff.
This is not a new dilemma. In the day of flim, shoot with a spy camera like a 35mm or get a real camera and shoot with a view camera ( 4X5 to 8X10 or even bigger). Well we all known the 35mm story. Crowned by the Nikon F. The many pros shoot with the new medium format for size, yes wedding photographer did use 4X5, like Linhoff. But the photojouralist like the 35mm. New lens and film created AN IMAGE WITH ENOUGH IQ to not make photos look amateur and detrack from the image. This what they got from the relaively small cameras and all the small lens they can pack. Thrity-six shoots pre roll. IQ is not every thing, getting the "image" is. With the mirrorless camreas becoming more popular. Will APS(C) create a new new place in photoraphy, just like the 35mm, a little spy camera.
On paper, the Samsung and Fuji look very close. The Samsung loses F2 at 18mm,per the little video. They both have 3 Asph lens and two EDs and MC. OIS on a wide to medium tele is not that useful. For long tele I would what it. But some how IQ must suffer from it. They both look look like nice lens. I think Fuji has abetter over all range of lens and cameras....also the Trans-X sensor with no AA creates very sharp images. And the new X-PRO / X-T are on their way. I like prime less, owned the 24-70 Canon, great lens, sold it, I like primes. So, if you like having only one lens, this may be it for Fuji owners. Knowing the history of Fuji opitics, it will please their owners. So forget the f2.8 is not really F2.8 and it is too big or someone else makes a better. If you own Fuji, you know better.
km25: A Canon 24-70 wt is 805g, 1.77 lbs. The Fuji only is 655g, 1.44 lbs. All fast and wide lens are goinr to large, but this is a one lens for just about everything. Remember, the X-PRO is APS-C and some cameras like the Nikon 7000 series is nearly as big as nomal FF Nikon. The lens factor is 50% less, the wt factor will about the same. Did you exspect an 16-55mm F.95 should only wiegh as much as an 35mm F/1.4. They make other lens that cover this range that lighter, buy one of those. This a Pro level and they work for a living.
F2.8 is F2.8. A FF may have more light gathering, ergo the image is less noisey. That has noting to do with the lens. The lens is not a sensor. Perhaps you can solve Unitified Field, be for you go to bed tonight.
A Canon 24-70 wt is 805g, 1.77 lbs. The Fuji only is 655g, 1.44 lbs. All fast and wide lens are goinr to large, but this is a one lens for just about everything. Remember, the X-PRO is APS-C and some cameras like the Nikon 7000 series is nearly as big as nomal FF Nikon. The lens factor is 50% less, the wt factor will about the same. Did you exspect an 16-55mm F.95 should only wiegh as much as an 35mm F/1.4. They make other lens that cover this range that lighter, buy one of those. This a Pro level and they work for a living.
Billons of years ago, when I shot with 35mm and medium format, when I would take a light reading, I would put that into my lens, 35mm or 6x6,6x7. The ratio of film size to apture as to do with lens size. F2.8 is is F2.8. In land of 4x5 cameras or point and shots. DOF inherent to the foremat via lens focal length. An 8mm FL will always have more DOF then say a 300mm lens....no matter the sensor or fikm size. Even if 8mm is normal.
lexvo: Updated my X-T1 yesterday. Thanks Fuji!
And I bought the MCEX-16 extension tube last week!
Thanks again, will be getting the MCEX-16.
Thank You. Do you think they are good deal?
Can you stack them?
Flashback: A wooden grip? Hmm...
Any of you guys remember the days, when a decent Hi-Fi unit, had to have wooden side cheeks!
But, the handle probley feels good.
What is the mag range on it, how much for the MCEX-16? Also what lens are you using? Thanks for the info.
A sign of the times, a Leica camera from the 1970's, if keep up well. Will operate today and great photographs. If they had even todays sensor technology then, the digital Leica would not well operate. Your sensor is dying even as we speak, the rest of the camera is saying in a little voice, give me film it will not dye. HEE HEEE ; ).
X sync 1/50, mistake or ?. What would be nice is a LX100 with interchangable lens. And 16 MP in place pic-a-ratio.
d2f: No matter how Sony improves their camera FE bodies the lens segment of the system is not keeping up with the customer desires for a wider selection of fast and affordable lenses. By comparison Fuji is listening to their customers and the Fuji XF lens development is addressing the desires of their customer base i.e. 56mm portrait lens and other F1.4 solutions. Maybe Sony believes that this segment will be carried by the third party lens makers like Mitakon, but larger third party lens companies like Sigma will be reluctant to support a niche market until the number of end users increases. And there in lies is the catch 22 for Sony. The only saving grace for Sony shooters are the third party the lens adapters, but that is only a band aid on the problem since I suspect most want modern optical designs with AF and IS attributes as well.
No, Fuji is APS-C camera, compare the A7ll to the Nikon D750. The balance and performance is so much better. Fujion glass holds with CZ and Leica, the 16MP Trans X sensor creates high level APS-C images.....Like the XT-1 review here in DP gives. Wold be over all best but for speed and movie isuses, but best still image quality, in less then FF mirrors cameras.
km25: Bareny, do you miss 1/8000 and do you think the removal of the AA would add any real sharpness to in the images.
Bareny, do you miss 1/8000 and do you think the removal of the AA would add any real sharpness to in the images.