nicolaiecostel: I don't want to sound like a troll, but a 20-40 focal ratio combined with a 2.8-4 aperture would have made sense in 1984.
Much higher ISO's are the norm now.
AbrasiveReducer: At the risk of stating the obvious, omitting a zoom, by itself, will be unacceptable to most people. Lamenting the fact that it does not offer anything from sweep panoramas to a built-in phone with hologram generator is really beside the point. It will either give better image quality in exchange for the inconveniences and price or it won't. This is a bad analogy, but shooting 4x5 is slow and a hassle but people did it, and some still do. Why?
but shooting 4x5 is slow and a hassle but people did it, and some still do. Why?
Because the IQ can be stunning. This camera will do it for $1000 and it is compact. I think I want one but will wait and see....
Curlynob: I've owned an X10 for a little over 2 months. It's a beautiful camera that has revitalised my interest and enthusiasm for photography. I'm pleased that Fuji are going to fix the problem, and when the time comes, I will send my camera in to be upgraded. I only hope that Fuji don't throw the baby out with the bathwater...
I like my X-10 too and look forward to getting the new sensor.
arndsan: I think everyone who is serious about photography already noticed that there is better performance in smaller package already out.my coolpix 8400 from 2004 got a sensor from 8.8x6.6 and a good electronic viewfinder and a better lens.Why Nikon can make it half a s good as Sony today.Yes I waiting for the D800
Not everyone wants to carry a Minox. ;-)
ThomasH_always: I am disappointed by the comment of the reviewer about the Optical Viewfinder "a slightly anachronistic touch on a modern compact camera".
I wish Dpreview would have more photographers and less "tech geeks" dominating their commentaries.
Optical Viewfinder (OVF) as of this date is dramatically superior to any existing Electronic Viewfinder (EVF), only the newest Sony OLED viewfinders which I even haven not seen yet personally, seem to getting close to optical viewfinder.
I would not ever buy a camera of any size without a viewfinder, and all the even so expensive add-ons from Leica or Olympus were just so poor compared to even bottom-of-the-line optical viewfinder. Why?
1) The energy of the light passing optical viewfinder is always proportional to ambient light, thus to the light to which your eye is attuned to.
2) Light change is instantaneous, EVF need some adaptation time.
3) Battery use is... Zero!
Of course, the era of EVF might be coming, but is not yet there.
An OVF, for me, is required.