ZJ24: As others have said, there's a review of this Pentax here [link below]. Given its price for a medium format 50MP sensor, autofocus for that format, adjustable LCD, I'm staggered that there's no full review of this camera on DPR, and that DxO are ignoring it. I'm a Nikon shooter but come on guys, 50MP medium format for under $10K? If it was a Nikon, Canon or Sony the reviewers would be all over it. Or is the idea that it might threaten the overinflated prices for 35mm DSLRs by suggesting that 35mm might not actually be the largest viable format out there?
It probably has more to do with not threatening the other medium format cameras that approach the cost of a small house, for a throwaway camera.As long as cameras are disposable and absurdly costly, there won't be a lot of high end cameras sold.
The biggest load of bull I have read in a long time. But, the percentage of rich people who are too stupid to live is the same as the percentage of poor people.In the early nineties a manufacturer of light meters spent millions developing a spot meter specifically for Zone System photographers. The only problem...they didn't start by finding out how the Zone System worked. They brought to market a totally useless spot meter that was an overnight failure.Dumb rich people will keep this camera afloat. But it is the same kind of mistake. Leica didn't bother to find out what photographers who work in B&W need or how they work.
princewolf: I can't buy one, so doesn't interest me. Waiting for Sony or Fuji to come up with that fixed-lens medium-format mirror-less for under 5000 bucks. Might be a long wait :)
Why Nikon over Sony? Never again. My next camera and all subsequent cameras with be Nikon. Sony will never again get another chance to pull the rug out from under me and stick me with lenses I can't put on an upgraded camera. I don't care if they bring out a 100 megapixel camera tomorrow, priced at two for $5.
Lilien: This is a real bargain.The camera is only $55.000 (A280 with 80 MP) and a 16(!) GB CF-Card is included and don't forget the the Microfiber Cloth!
And lens cleaning tissue and fluid! What a bargain!!!
marc petzold: Where is the 6x9 Medium Format Sony Sensor`? ;)
It doesn't matter. Sony will put it into a mirrorless pocket camera, or sell it to Nikon.Sony has guaranteed they will never get another dime from me. Anyone want to buy an a900 and lenses?
Forty grand for something obsolete in a few years?Gee! I'll take two!!
"products for the world’s most demanding fine art photographers"REALLY?!!!Anyone know any fine art photographers who can afford forty grand for a one-lens entry level model? I mean, real fine art photographers, not the ones playing "The Emperor's New Clothes" with the rich and gullible.Commercial photographers, some of them, might be able to afford this, not fine art photographers.
Nice lens. What are we supposed to put it on?Real photographers need REAL VIEWFINDERS.Selling off my a900 and Zeiss lenses. Sony and Zeiss told me they don't want my money and that, like it or not, I would have to go buy Nikon.
No doubt he will be the first wedding photographer in history to get sued by 50 newlywed couples at once!
What I want/need is very, very simple.I need a box that stores a bunch of megapixels, 36 minimum, 50-60 would be better.Three or four high quality lenses, nothing exotic.A good, 100% optical viewfinder.Apertures and shutter speeds, along with built-in metering.An upgrade path for the future so that I can have exactly the same camera (more or less), with ever-increasing image quality.
Isn't it amazing that Sony built a new camera (a99) with lots of bells and whistles but STILL managed to fail me even on this very simple list?
Anybody want to buy an alpha 900 with some really nice lenses?
WOW!T-Rex is dead!Does this mean all Kodak camera films are done? I guess so.This may go down in history as the biggest mismanagement case ever.After all, photography is not dead, just Kodak.
If this is a copyright violation then every wedding and yearbook photograph is also. So is every painter of the same school who followed the first painter in that school.Obviously, photographer #2 stole the style of photographer #1. Stealing style is not a copyright violation. It is simply a violation of taste and the wannabe rule.
The judge is out of his mind; but then, we kind of expect that from the whole upside down leftist British system.
The judge should instead have fined BOTH photographers for poor taste and boring us with their photographs.
C'mon guys. Don't be so hard on Adobe. What else could they do? They don't have a Steve Jobs they can fire or a New Coke they can try to peddle. They have to do something monumentally stupid!