A $1,000US for a compact camera! That is crazy talk. We are always told the image processor is the most expensive part of a camera. The sensor in this camera is tiny. Soooooooooo, the camera should be inexpensive, right?
If he is serious about bringing differentiation and different tiers to the brand while respecting the core competencies of the company H should bring a digital version of the "Texas Leica" rangefinder to market. It would be a field camera with a 645 digital sensor and either an OVF, EVF or a rangefinder.
A medium format vertically oriented body would be much appreciated by anyone trying to work in the field as opposed tot he studio. The form factor has been proven by Mamyia, Pentax and more recently Leica with their "S".
Lenses would probably be needed however as the lens suite grows adapters could possibly be made to work. It couldn't be any worse that the wait for Leica to fill in the family of lenses for the "S" or Pentax to fill in their line of lenses for the 645 D/Z.
It would be new and innovative and sit along side the "H" and the "V".
What a self-serving article - trying to justify his position and decision.
Jens Evensen: "We haven't tried the combination with an iPad, but honestly, you really shouldn't be taking serious pictures with your iPad anyway. Come on now."
He-he.. come on yourself Barney. This might be the greatest feature; a really nice big screen
Now why should you take photos with an iPad? Is it because looking at the huge ground glass on a 8 by 10 view camera is terrible? Ya, that must be the reason.
med007: I would love one of these new cameras, especially the benefit of leaf shutter lenses. However, I recently rented the 80MP Phase One with an 80 mm Schneider lens, for a weekend and shot side by side with a Sony A7R and the Sony 55mm.
The keepers with the A7R were more common, even though I focussed manually and looked at the magnified view! The Phase One shots have outstanding appeal too but are flatter and less dimensional and the colors less rich. In printing to 44" or 50" high portrAits of whole body shots, both gave magnificent prints.
The Phase One files are a tad more robust to manipulation, but the Sony A7R are also very well built. Recovery of highlights is nothing short of amazing!
Both sets of prints have amazing impact, but the Sony files, at least as processed by my workflow, are richer. But then one could say that Marisse's paintings I that richness too, but like the Phase One pictures, they have a subtle beauty in addition to being otherwise excellent.
If one looks carefully at hair, from up close, the finer resolution of the 80 MP Phase One sensor is obvious. But at a meter away, there's not noticeable difference in how the hair looks.
I have no doubt that with careful work in Capture One, the Sony images could be made to have the subtlety of the Phase One pictures and the Phase One files could deliver the bolder, higher impact Sony look.
For sure, I'd love to have the Phase One, but I suspect, I might get the added edge using the larger Sony Sensor in the Pentax 645Z.
(But, really, given the bulk of these MF systems, film seems awe dully attractive for small volume, detail-rich photography. None of these systems can improve on a studio picture made with an 8x10!)
The Sony files don't have the same skin tones and shadow roll off of the P1 files. I guarantee it.
SmilerGrogan: People on this site get so crazy about one spec that they ignore the others and set their benchmarks too low. Who cares if it's better or worse than a GH4 or an A7.The real question is how does the video look after grading? Does it output 4:4:4? Or raw video. Does it fall apart in cold weather? How close can it come to the various Arri Alexas, Reds, and the other digital cinema cameras. How does the video look when projected on a 200 foot screen? How does it look when compressed to death by YouTube and watched on an iPhone? That's what's important, not some silly comparison to other prosumer cameras.
And in the mean time the camera still costs too much for what it is......
Let's see: $2,000US for a camera body, $600US for an EVF, $600 for a lens adapter, and you don't even have a lens yet. All so you can have a camera that behaves like an iToy.
Since the new camera is about 15-percent less in cost than the former model, how long will it be before we see incredible downward price pressure on the older model?
vroger1: ...and meanwhile, they still won't repair the M8.
We need to read more of your story. I doubt that is correct. Sorry.
If sensor size maters then why is the medium format (MF) camera industry basically dead? Why isn't there a consumer MF camera if sensor size matters?
I was foolishly holding out hope for this camera. With the "slightly soft imagest, clipped highlights, chroma aberration," no thanks.
Waterengineer: My experience with DxO film pack is a joke.
I purchased Filmpack at Christmas 2012 and have been fighting with it to install properly on a CS5, Windows 7 64 bit machine since then.
I want to use it inside CS5 and it will only install as a stand alone.
I have gone back and forth with DxO for over five months now. They can't even tell me how to do it or provide a utility for it to install properly.
Topaz Labs and Nik software has installed easily and properly.
DxO, their people and their software are a joke. No way I would purchase Filmpack4 or any of their software for that matter.
There have been several claim tickets but here is one number for your reference: #15719. I have corresponded with at least three people within your organization.
What DxO needs is a script that will install the proper files in the Adobe>plug-ins subdirectory as Nik, AlienSkin and Topaz Labs have.
The reason I chose to buy DxO is because after testing I liked the feel of your film emulations the best of the packages commonly available.
I have two engineering degrees and have tried various ways of getting a plug-in install into CS5, including putting the files into the proper directory but hand. No dice it will not work. Works fine as a stand alone but that is not what I want - I want a simple work flow.
If I am having this much trouble, given my education and experience, imagine the difficulty other are having.
My experience with DxO film pack is a joke.
Nikon showing the lens with the optional collar/foot is sort of false advertising, IMHO.
Lenses from this company might actually make me purchase a m4/3 system.
The is at least 40-percent too high in cost. Obviously, the target market is the Leica "want-a-be" crowd. The Leica M9 price leaves a lot of head space for Fuji to make a nice profit, but they got greedy. This thing is no where close to a Leica.
Not the "run and gun" camera I was expecting, wanting or need. And no RAW, uber-disappointed. Sorry Canon.
Who is making the lenses? Nikon? Where are they making them? I bet they are farming out the lens sourcing.
Should be the winner - if it isn't. Excellent work.