km25: A cancelling filer to conteract the AA. Nikon used that a while ago, then just did put the AA on the sensor. Canon money saving short cuts are one thing, but on a super highend camera like this one, spend a few bucks and just take out the AA on the given model.
The thickness of the sensor stack. How thick, well, no.....No AA filter is better then canceling. Extra stuff in front of the sensor can never be good.The newest Nikon, D810 is made that way, which is an improvement over using a canceling filter, it was lower cost. Cancelling ok, no filter better.
Correct. It is a matter of costs. Just make all the cameras with and put the cancelling filter on the ones without. But nothing in the path is the best.
A cancelling filer to conteract the AA. Nikon used that a while ago, then just did put the AA on the sensor. Canon money saving short cuts are one thing, but on a super highend camera like this one, spend a few bucks and just take out the AA on the given model.
km25: Or even a small LCD to tell you what is happen. Lens, camera balance. I am not a hater, just that it would be so nice to have a camera, not some electric image ray gun. Shooting is part of the creative process....the changes would be so easy. Give in to the light side Sony!
Let me guess, the LCD on the back and and the EVF. Well so Nikon and Canon will soon be ending the useless B&W on the top of the camera. They will learn from a camera maker with so may years behind them. Sony is an image chip maker...in 1960, no one owned a Sony camera. There were none. They had Leica M3/M4, Canon F1s and the Nikon F. The image look great from a Sony imaging thing, but the are very poor as cameras go. You will never get it. You well have to use a real camera. iPhones are fine phones, but to me not real cameras, for example. Again stop taking my take on Sony personally. It is a poor over all designed camera. With some minor improvements it would a fine camera....with a fine, world class Sony chip. For now it is just PASM with thumb wheels.
Like the screen on a Nikon D750, D810 and all the Canon DSLR. This would be for photographers, not Pixel Peepers. Even Nikon F4 had them.
Or even a small LCD to tell you what is happen. Lens, camera balance. I am not a hater, just that it would be so nice to have a camera, not some electric image ray gun. Shooting is part of the creative process....the changes would be so easy. Give in to the light side Sony!
It promblems takes great pictures. But you have to like the 28mm FL. F1.7 is good. The Fuji X100T is more for the rest of us, it has a single lens only. The price is more reasonable. For a few more grand you maybe able to buy a used M and f/2.0 35mm or 50mm lens.
Now make the camera with a M mount and it would be a great Leica deal.
Not a an other dial. If you got have that PASM dail. You should have a small LCD to tell you all the stuff you need to know.....like DSLRs.
Nick932: Phase IQ260 is $45000, Red Epic-M (sensor) is $25000, so effectively, M246 is a bargain. Bravo Leica with your marvellous innovations. Not any other camera comes even close.
However, I had a brief test the past few weeks and M246 is an excellent camera worth having but I still prefer my M7.
Nick932, Did you really compair the M7 with Film to the M246. I am thinking about keeping my Fuji stuff for digital needs and my M7 with for my main needs color and B&W. I shoot a lot of B&W if I use film. I shoot color only with digital...wich makes B&w an after thought. But would you say B&W film is better then M246?Thanks .
Sorry DP not much of a preview. If the camera came in about 2/3 to 1/2 this cost. I may buy it. It is just over priced. Prehaps Leica should make this camera in an other country. they did with their 35mm SLR. Just too much $$$.
vesa1tahti: Impressive, like most of the Fuji lenses ! Time to switch from Nikon to Fuji ?
Fot it's day the Nikor 24mm f2.8 was a good lens, by todays sandards it would be a little lacking, it does have floating rear elements. I guess Nikon is trying to sell their F1.4. I would be nice if they made a new one. I had one and it producted nice images for me, the best of 24mm Japan had at the time.
Not really, I said the Nikon 24mm F/1.4 was more omney then Fuji. And that Leica 24mm F1.4 is a lot more money. The Fuji 16mm f/1.4 @ $1k is not that bad, compared to the others. The IQ is equal to, if not better.
D810, D610 are full frame cameras. They cost more. A 24mm F/1.4 cost much more then the XF 16mm F1.4. The cameras are very different. The Fuji is a APS-C , not full frame. The Fuji is trageting a different market. To compare apples to apples. You would compare Lecia and Sony FF cameras, in doing so they would be more alike.
km25: This looks like an other fine lens in the Fuji road map. Maybe I should not say this, a carload of optical experps will leave their lack of knowledge with me. Like mouths to a flame. I have the 23 f/1.4 and 56 f/1.2, should I sell my 14 f2.8. THis lens looks a lot bigger. I will take awhile and think it over and wait for the lens to come down a little in price.
An F stop is an F stop is an F stop. F/1.4 is the same in all lens, in all formats WHEN IT COMES TO EXPOSURE. P E R I O D.
I have heard Nikon is has good color in landscape. I like the skin tones better with Fuji. But who shoots just JPEGS-RAW, make your own color, the differrence is not that great. The finished product is on you....the shot is your creation, not the camera.
Yes the dof is not the same, but the F stop for gathering light is. This lens is a 16/24mm lens-that is wide, all these lens are going to have a lot of DOF. I have heard this before.
A 35mm camera and medium format camera, maunal light settings. Both have normal lens, a 50mm f/2.8 and a 80mm F/2.8. The light reading from a meter at a given ISO is f4.0 @ 1/250 sec.. You set each camera at 1/250 sec. and at F/4.0, you would not set the 35mm at F5.6, because ut has more DOF. If you wnt shallow depht of field shoot FF or film with 200mm lens @ F2.0.
But it is a nice lens, about 24 F/1.4 (FF EQL>). Priced better then Leica, Nikon or Cannon. Even the Sigma is not cheap. It should come down in time a few hundred bucks. The point is that Fuji is fine lens maker.
If you got the extra money it is nice. It is like a watch. The price range is huge. They all will tell time. It looks like the sixze of my Billingham.
Back in the 60s it was fashionable to carry your suff in a Army Surplus duffal bag, a small one. No one use camera cases.
km25: The new X-PRO 2 and/or XT-2 will have faster processor, many thing will be faster with the new camera(s). Movies will benefit the most. But for stills the x-trans sensor does so well with sweet 16.
Like Nikon FM or Nikkormat. If Fuji goes more for MP. I would keep my old 16MP, for low light work. I may go back to film. Just carry a digital for low light or take the opposite of what film I have loaned. It would also make for good back up camera. The Fuji is fine system the closest thing to my Leica M7. This X-T10 may also ending up a great second body to any new X-PRO or XT they make. Again to have back up camera and if the camera has more MPs, low light work. I do think the line of Fuji cameras using the x trans may shorten.
km25: A tool for egomanic , or even for the government to keep on eye on you. A great tool for that autobiography you wanted to make, now with pictures and video clips. A device every narcissistic needs and loves, but not as much as themselves.
A weapenized version should both fun and asuming. Senetial destroy!I want to go back to my youth, in the 1960s a phone was just a telephone. And camera was a camera. Just got to figure out how to save JFK and no war in Viet Nam.
People do not want to photographed as it is. You are going to be confronted. There some big people out there, you can bring your lawer. It will give photography (street a bad name) not a good idea. People will find ways to foil these drones. No need for street wars.