Revel ruined the very useful photoshop.com photo hosting/sharing site. All that effort and rebranding for something with half the features it had 4 years ago.
rugosa: Nikon blamed slow sales in the Americas, Europe and Asia. I guess sales in the Antarctic were on the increase.
Or we can assume Africa and Australia are doing well.
Low Budget Dave: I don't even understand how camera companies are able to lose money. The markup is huge, and they come out with new products every 20 days or so.
Canon and Nikon make a pretty reliable profit even in a down market, but everyone else breaks even. I don't get it. It costs them a couple of hundred dollars to make a product that they are selling for a thousand.
Where is all the money going? Those commercials with Ashton Kutcher must cost a lot more than I thought.
Where is the money going? R+D. Engineering optics and sensors is not child's play.
Incidentally, Canon is making the most money and they haven't had a major sensor tech update in 5 years. R+D savings = profit.
Picturenaut: "So conventional DSLR users buy more lenses. Mirrorless camera users are more likely to purchase the camera with a kit lens and not many people purchase any additional lenses. Some high-end mirrorless users with Sony NEX-7 or Olympus OM-D buy more but the majority of mirrorless users are the entry-class users."
This explains exactly why Canikon hesitates to move boldly into the mirrorless market, and why e.g. Canon comes up so slowly with new lenses for the M system. For most users their mirrorless cameras are a sort of new compact with better IQ. Interestingly even entry DLSR users obviously tend more to get at least one second lens. Obviously most customers are conservative, and only SLR type cameras represent for them a real system camera.
Doesn't that also mean that Canon and Nikon (and Pentax) should have aimed higher with their mirrorless bodies? Sony, Olympus, Panasonic and Samsung certainly have as of late.
Most $500 DSLR customers only have one or two cheapo lenses, too. Someone willing to drop $1000 on a body is going to spend at least that much on lenses, normally.
tkbslc: If Sigma wants to grow their camera business, they need to put some effort into designing at least one model that has a bit more all-around utility. I am amazed at the detail at ISO 100-200 from these cameras. However, the lack of ability to shoot in lower light, stray more than an hour from a charger, shoot video, or focus on anything moving, means Sigma cameras are not really an option for more than 1% of photographers.
I'm also suprised that with their poor high ISO, they continually affix slower lenses to their DP line. Give us an f1.4 lens and maybe I'm OK being stuck under ISO 1600. And with battery issues, an OVF tuned to the attached lens would be a good solution.
Sigma said they want to grow their business, not me. Look at the products that are most popular, they don't force you to shoot on a tripod.
Who cares what generations of photographers did? That has zero bearing on what customers buy or demand today.
@RitterRunkel: I understood the point just fine. But if he wants to target a tiny niche with this kind of camera, his market share is going to be lucky to even stay at 1%. He mentioned he'd like to grow that. I'm not saying they need to copy Sony, but they could focus on making their cameras a bit less "quirky" and give them some features considered standard in 2010's like HD video and higher ISO.
If Sigma wants to grow their camera business, they need to put some effort into designing at least one model that has a bit more all-around utility. I am amazed at the detail at ISO 100-200 from these cameras. However, the lack of ability to shoot in lower light, stray more than an hour from a charger, shoot video, or focus on anything moving, means Sigma cameras are not really an option for more than 1% of photographers.
Bervilat: What a cool flash unit on the X-T1. How Canikon have nothing like this?
Cool? It looks like an accessory for a 1990's gameboy.
qwertyasdf: Always wanna know, how did they do it?
Lasers from a giant evil robot
Hachu21: Max apertures dug from official Canon samples Exifs:24mm => f/2 (we allready know)31.1/33.7mm => f/3.239.4mm => f/3.6
From the EU samples there is a 27mm (51mm equiv) shot at f3.5, so we know it doesn't drop to f3.6 by 40mm equiv.
todo pana: Did anybody think of taking a picture of this camera actually hand-held...? I mean by the grip?
corbus, your comment also says a lot about DPR today....
Tungsten Nordstein: Oooh, it's too weird. Oooh it's too ugly. Ooooh, it's only a fixed lens. Ooooh, I don't believe the new sensor is any good. Ooooh, it hasn't got an EVF. Ooooh, my pockets are too small. Oooooh, you can't pick it up with one hand, Oooooh ,you can't pick it up with two hands. Oooooh, you can't pick it up with three hands. Ooooh. Sigma how dare you! Oooooh, Oooooh, Oooooh!
Summary of DPReview readers' opinions.
Oooh people complain a lot, including complaints about complainers.
Alphoid: Wow. Waiting on dimensions. This seems better than the RX100, potentially, and the second decent all-around compact camera series.
Dpreview has them in their spec database:
Weight (inc. batteries) 553 g (1.22 lb / 19.51 oz)Dimensions 116 x 74 x 66 mm (4.57 x 2.91 x 2.6″)
Peter CS: Looks very promising! Finally, someone comes out with a 24mm at the wide end - 35mm equivalent- large sensor compact! Looking very much forward to upgrading my G12!
And RX10 is a size class down on the sensor size hierarchy.
Zoron: $600 i buy.....if not no buy
Wait 12 months and it will be. Fixed lens cameras always drop in price every year. Coolpix A is already down to $650-ish gray market.
TFD: kind of big might just as well by a DSLR
The smallest 24-120mm equivalent lens for a dSLR is 4" long and weighs over 1lb.
Hugo808: Looks lovely, just what I need, big sensor, small body, perfect lens range and bound to have good IQ. Form an orderly queue behind me.
"For those of us who don't ignore the competition this camera brings nothing new."
If the competition offered a pancake f2 zoom with a 2x crop or larger sensor, I'd have bought it already This is definitely bringing something new.
pancromat: why do i always have to choose between using an electronic viewfinder and an external flash?! :/
You don't. There are dozens of models that give you that feature set.
JohnFredC: So the flip-up screen essentially kills the camera's usefulness for portrait (vertical) oriented photography from positions other than eye-level.
65% of my photos are vertically composed. What was wrong with the previous flip-and-rotate design? The camera wasn't made any smaller by moving to the new, less useful design, plus the there are more moving parts in the screen mechanism and more ways to break it.
The lens looks great, I'm sure the sensor is adequate, the rings on the lens look, well, useful if two hands are available. The rest?
Not so much.
It's not like the viewing angle of the LCD is 89-91 degrees.
bobbarber: You can get an LX7 for the price of this viewfinder. Give me a break.
Irony is that the add on viewfinder for the LX7 has a $249 MSRP.