Joed700: This is definitely a beauty. The silver version looks even more classic, just like a Leica lens. However, the price is on the high side because the DOF is at around f/3 to a FF 35mm equivalent. Not the best for isolating your subject. WR is absolutely a plus. Couple with the XT-1 and you are ready to conquer any unexpected conditions...
35mm f/2 of any format has similar DOF. The Fuji DOF would compare to about a FF 50mm f/2.8 as the Fuji has a FF 53mm FOV. Light gathering capability of the Fuji is FF f/2.
Tom Caldwell: The big problem is not that Sony fixed the A7R problems with their technical wizardry, and fixed up the interface along the way, but the bald way the original A7R owners were gypped by buying a camera that had solvable issues.
Now we are artfully told that the first investment was really just a fully paid up Beta run model and now they will happily take more money for an upgrade with the fixes now applied.
Oh that I should be so happy not to have been sucked in and made the first purchase.
How about a discounted price for A7R owners now stuck with a flawed camera body that is far from worn out? This camera seems to have so many "problems" now solved that it must only be one step short of land fill.
Fuji X100? At least Fuji kept the firmware flowing and improving the camera well after the camera was discontinued. At the end of the day, most were happy.
The Name is Bond: Lenstip has a review of the the 50mm copy http://www.lenstip.com/425.1-Lens_review-Yongnuo_YN_50_mm_f_1.8.html
Who cares of a different optical formula. The performance is so poor there was likely no formula crunching or optical QA at all. The lens was barely acceptable sharpness stopped down in the center. This says to me Yongnuo does not know what they are doing in regard to optics and you get what you pay for.
Lenstip did a full test of the Yongnuo 50 f/1.8. The results were dreadful. One would hope this would better, because it can't be much worse.
Tony Bonanno: I don't understand why DxO doesn't address the Fuji X sensor cameras. The Fuji X is not a huge market, but it is certainly an important one and seems to be growing in popularity by leaps and bounds. I shoot Nikon, Canon and Fuji systems, but until Fuji is supported, I won't support DxO.
DXO has a lot of excuses on the X-trans sensor that no other RAW converter company seems to have. Now, what's the excuse for the lack of support for the Fuji X-A1? Bayer CFA and all.......Ah, now I understand more clearly.
Usee: Still unreliable ISO numbers from Fuji,which should be mentioned and taken into account...
Fuji: 1/60 @ F5,6
Canon / Samsung: 1/100 @ F5,6
...at the same scene with ISO 200 setting!
Again, the Fuji ISO numbers are sadly nearly one stop beside reality......otherwise probably a fine camera. ;-)
So the Fuji is pushing the ISO 3/4 stop. Penalize it with 1 full stop in the comparator, and it still looks better than the others at extreme high ISO. And don't forget to penalize the E-M1 a 1/2 stop as well, because Fuji is not the only one who is pushing the ISO numbers.
ManuelVilardeMacedo: No trolling, but judging image quality purely by this studio scene comparison, I'd have to say the Canon is the winner. The Nikon belongs in a lower rank and it shows quite badly here; the Olympus is good but doesn't come as close to the Canon as the X-T1. The latter (just like the Olympus) seems to have quite a bit of moiré, which may not be due to the absence of AA filter because it doesn't show with the Sony Alpha 7R. Besides, the Fuji seems a bit highlight-happy, even more so than the Olympus. Of course I'd need to confirm these findings in the field, but as it stands the pecking order would be: 1 - Canon; 2 - Fujifilm; 3 - Olympus; and 4 - Nikon. The first three cameras are extremely capable, but let's not forget that, being a DSLR, the Canon has an optical viewfinder and (arguably) better AF performance.
Spool the ISO up to 25600, and re-evaluate the Canon sensor. The Fuji is terrific at high ISO. Heck, throw the Df in the comparison and the Fuji still holds up pretty well.
yabokkie: hope 25/1.8 can replace 20/1.7 as the default lens on m4/3". 20/1.7 isn't a good lens but has been the best one for m4/3".
This is one area I have to agree with yabokkie on. Olympus and Pany should be pushing their standard lenses faster in speed for the DOF control. f/1.8 in m43 does not really cut it. Is ok for the tele lenses, but that is slow for a m43 standard. 1 stop faster would have made a big difference. Unfortunately, the fast Voigtlander lenses are manual focus and very expensive. Seems like a void in the m43 system between f/0.95 and f/1.8.
DDWD10: I think this body is a natural progression for the X-series. The original rangefinder look worked well with the three original 18mm, 35mm and 60mm primes, but as Fujifilm has moved on to zooms, wider and longer optics, this form factor makes sense as a more flexible alternative. Bigger grip and better EVF make this a better action shooter than the other X-series bodies. I just hope the AF is up to the task.
23 f/1.4 = 35 f/2.1 FF DOF eq35 f/1.4 = 53 f/2.1 FF DOF eq56 f/1.2 = 85 f/1.8 FF DOF eq
Another fast lens is coming this summer and I'm sure a longer fast prime is in the works as Fuji listens to it's customers.
ZoranHR: I m impressed how people who like retro so much style dont mind EVF. Even when it's proportionaly too big for body. Fuji found an exellent way on market,it is very obvious now.
The X-T1 will surely have focus peaking and it is rumored that Fuji is working on colored focus peaking for FW updates. Maybe we will see it here.
jmiki: Like the looks, hope the rumored specifications are true. One item I will miss from the x-pro 1 is the thread cable release. Perhaps it conflicted with the rumored weatherproofing.
Good thought, but the Df has one and is weatherproofed too.
Der Steppenwolf: "and 8 fps continuous shooting, which (if true) would make it the most capable X-series model that Fujifilm has yet produced" First things first, I love Fujis new cameras, but 8fps or 800fps does not mean a thing if AF tracking is as bad as it is so far. DPreview should know that and not embarrass themselves by saying how "capable" camera is that is still not available for testing.
The rumor is 8 fps with AF tracking where the X-E2 is only 3 fps.
The good thing is that Fuji has been incorporating improvements from their newest cameras into their older cameras with FW updates. Let's hope that improved AF tracking and time lapse photography spreads to the existing line-up.
iae aa eia: Wow-wow-wow!, but... More fullframes, pleeeeease! The more APSs, the less expensive FFs are kept from being, and I'm tired of that. I can't stand the fact 20 years ago the poorest of the poor could have an FF and nowadays is this funny situation. And yet, some people, not the poor of the poorest nor even the poor, but the middle-class, debate over and get proud of their 8-mm to 16-mm (equiv) sized-sensor cams. Pff! What a heck!
At what point is a FF sensor pointless? DOF control is the primary separator, and that is mostly covered with Fuji's fast APS-C optics. So, for that extra FF money I can shoot at ISO 12,800 perhaps blow up pictures to poster size. Big deal. The benefits are not worth the negatives (size, weight and cost). Fuji's strategy with fast, sharp APS-C lenses is a solid one as they know that sensors are improving to the point where you cannot tell the difference. The future's, organic sensors will have way more dynamic range and better noise characteristics. This means it will the the optics that limit the system.
Red G8R: Of the three latest mirrorless cameras, EM1, A7/R, and the XT1, the XT1 appeals to me the most and as soon as it's available, I'll be trying it and most likely buying it.
Try it, you'll like it.
Older lenses are typically optically poorer. This is why I like mirrorless crop sensor cameras. They can use the best optical part of these older designs (the center) and they adapt to any lens. The Fuji is also set up with the same type of controls as the old lenses. Sweet deal when I have a few MF Zuikos at home.
Anastigmat: The pentaprism housing is way too big for an APS-C model. Either it is a full frame, or the stylists are running hog-wild.
It's the largest EVF view available. Even larger than the EM-1. The optics take space.
carlgt1: I don't quite see the point in lugging around such a beast and it's not full-frame?
No kidding. The camera is small. The only FF body that is even close to its size is the A7. And the Fuji lenses are much smaller and lighter
The lust for FF is crazy here. Fuji has gone out of it's way to design optics for their APS-C sensor that provide a FF DOF experience. Two primes @ f/1.4 and a 56 f/1.2 (FF eqv 85 f/1.8). More fast lenses are coming. On top of this, they are sharp.
Sensor technology will continue to improve and the need for a FF sensor will diminish if the optics are there, which I think they are. I would gladly have the smaller size and weight of the Fuji.
Stephen Scharf: This looks like it will be the Fuji X-camera equivalent to my much loved Olympus OM-1, which will be killer.
I'm thinking I'll have two X series kits: an X-T1 with the zooms, and the X-Pro1 with primes for the classic Leica experience.
Working out, yab?