EcoPix: These are modern day 5x4 and 10x8 cameras, in film speak. That part of the photographic market was always small, specialised, expensive, and mostly commercial. Nothing different, really.
Comparing an 80 mp camera with a Rodenstock lens to a Pentax SLR is like comparing a Deardorff 8x10 to a, well, Pentax SLR. Having said that, there is a yawning gap in today's camera line-up, waiting to be filled by a small medium format CMOS-fitted mirrorless body thin enough to take a range of capable tilt/swing lens adapters.
Such a body would be bread and butter for professional studio photographers and very many landscape photographers. With such a huge market, economies of scale would bring prices well down.
If Pentax can make their system SLR for $9000 with dedicated lens, then a mass-produced universal mirrorless MF body should be able to sell for $6000. And the Chinese engineers could do the rest with adapters for Hasselblad V, large format and all the other existing lenses out there.
Well we know who makes Hassy lenses and had a history of MF. So my guess is Fuji will in 2015/16
Andydj: No “Classic Chrome” for the XE-1 ...sucks!.....Time to sell on e-Bay
You're not missing much. I have the XE-1 and the XT-1 now with the new Firmware. Provided you capture RAW It's not too hard to repeat on the XE-1. and I find CChrome Green a bit to 'unfujilike' for my taste (rather flat).
It does puzzle me though why this couldn't have been in the upgrade. After all its just a profile.
Adrien S: This Pentax body seems to be such a bargain for the features it offers...Or at least, it's better than what Hasselblad offers for that price.Pentax really is making things better for photographers.
We have had a discussion that, like Pentax, Fuji might jump to MF, given their declared opposition to FF and a history of MF. But that would be Mirrorless for sure.
Ido S: If I were a Fuji X user I'd preorder this lens because it's probably the best travel zoom for ILCs ever.
I Have the XT-1 and it comes with a £250 Discount for this lens (when available) so i will get this lens. I also have the K5 with the two WR Zooms.
I'm certain that this Zoom on the XT-1 will have a superior IQ to the PK. But I doubt that it will be as water resistant as the Pentax combo, which I have no issues with even in torrential rain.
The giveaway is the poor seals around the SD Card door of the XT-1, and the Battery Compartment on the vertical grip is clearly not (due to the rubber seal arond the DC lead input being 'loose'). And I ain't putting the XT-1 down on a wet surface (see photo above) as water would go straight into the battery compartment. So for anything other than a light shower I will stick with the K5.
Joriarty: The only thing missing is an oversized, square sensor. Let us crop afterwards to our desired aspect ratio, to stay within the image circle. Dedicated portrait mode? Bah. Come on Fuji, I dare you. Do the first square sensor and you'll really give the market a shake up.
It's not proved that Fuji use Sony. indeed there is a strong view that they use a toshiba sensor
rogerhyam: I the words of the cookie monster: "Me wants it but me waits". The $/£/€ thing gets to me. Even with UK VAT it should be 20% cheaper.
£ to $ is 1:1.64 Which, if $999 is correct, should be £609 or £730 with tax. So I for one wont buy until I'm out of the Eurozone! Shame as the UK could do with the Tax revenue.
tommy leong: very NICEi just love Pentax cameras
Some comment about the LX not being a Professional Camera? Well it was the first one at the time with TTL metering. And I still have A FD-1 magnifying optic which has a bayonet mount into the Pentaprism (Can/Nikon just had magnifying adapters). It's actually still very good for identifying specks of dust on the sensor of My K5 & XPro-1.
The main reason I keep with Pentax for DSLR's is (like most people of my years) the K Mount, and I quite happily use many of my old '70's Lenses. Such as the Tamron SP 300 F2.8 & SP90 Macro.
Foe IQ I would defer to Fuji nowadays, and their suite of lenses are unsurpassed for the price. But its not waterproof, which the PK is, using its two kit lenses - For a committed rambler is essential.
PS. the current top Pentax is the K3, when the price drops next year I may invest.
I just don't understand the need to compare DSLR brands in this heated way. They are all excellent.
topstuff: I have to say, purely objectively and not currently as a Fuji user, that the general look and quality of the images from the Fuji camera and lens is very, very pleasing in my opinion.
The IQ is lovely.
They have my attention for sure.
I've glued to my XE-1! Great Focal Length, Great IQ, Great lens...
Octane: Looks great. But everything takes about twice as much screen space now without giving you twice the amount of information. Especially the old tight and compact list of threads was great, but now is a long 'padded' list. Not sure that's really an improvement.
I entirely agree. it's no longer easy to pick up on a thread..... scroll scroll scroll....
RussellInCincinnati: Perhaps DPreview should note that this adapter does not cause the current Sony Nex cameras to enter their always-bright-viewfinder mode. This is in contrast to the behavior of a Nex with a Sony Nex flash attached. I.e. when a Nex flash is mounted and activated, the camera can automatically enter a mode where the viewfinder brightness is always reasonable, no matter what manual exposure settings have been made.
One would have thought that their experience with Betamax / VHS would have made Sony realise the error of their ways. They do the same with Batteries and it just convinces me never to by Sony products. Anyway the Fuji XPro-1 is a better camera and fitted with a standard hot shoe.
highwave: So much for the claimed extra sharp images due to lack of an AA filter. Images don't look any sharper than other 16 MP comparable cameras.
ISO performance is stunning on the other hand. But there is something fishy about how the images look. It's as though noise reduction is being applied to RAW regardless of settings. If not than that is really FF rivaling performance on the ISO front.
I agree. As my macro shots prove.
MoltenP: Hmm, I'm not convinced everything is in focus. The playing card is pretty soft, but the foreground items are sharp.
I have the K5 which along with the D7000 is regarded highly. and i can't get the same level of detail with the SP90 lens
shaocaholica: There's a solution many M9 owners have for the lackluster rear LCD. Just lose it altogether. When you shot film, you don't know what the photo looked like till it was developed and that 'charm' is missing when shooting digital so if you're going in for a penny on retro handling you might as well go in for a pound.
MENANT "Taking pictures with a Leica M be it a film one or a digitalone compels the photographer to use it differentky from a DSLR. the rangefinder is unique in letting you see what is outside the area you're going to photograph"
Not true... Any camera with an optical viewfinder usualy has a 'frame' which defines the taken image. Leica is better than most, but not unique.
The Fuji X-Pro1 is the latest challenger, and will be found (when DP Review publish their report) to be where Leica should be for the M10.
But Leica will never match their price point. Nor will Fuji have the 'red dot', unless you get one stuck on.... :-)
Just see the examples in the Fuji forum to see just how good this camera is.. 'Press reviews are sying it's better than full frame'. My own experience over a month of use would agree.
Alex N: Could have been great, but they went and used a small sensor and killed it.
I have an x-100, which is really good except no range/DOF indication on the lens and poor battery life in ON mode. But I can live with that.
The only reason I would pay $1600 to switch to a bigger and heavier body would be to use my M mount 35/1.2 lens again. But the small sensor makes it meaningless.
Just what were they thinking? Why no full frame? I'd have gladly paid a $1000 more, and neither Canon nor Nikon have a problem making FF bodies in that price range.
I think that resolves the dr issue.
If it had a leica badge,it would sell. It's design is as rediculous as the M9. Without.....? The should have followed the Fuji/Olympus retro theme. (Although I think the K5 design is itself a future classic). Plenty examples in the Pentax catalogue.
Summit_pg: Do something sooner than later Fuji. This kind of garbage coming out after the whole aperture blade issue with the X100 is making Fuji products look like junk. Love the X10; hate the baggage it brings with it. Signed: A disappointed X10 owner.
If you take a sunset over the Ocean, you won't be at ISO100 - which seems to be the culprit... . You will be on at leat ISO400 and DR 400 - And you won't get Orbs (or any worse than most. What you will get is shadow detail and no burned out highlights except that big Orb that keeps us alive. I've tried it and Its OK.
As an X10 owner, I realy want to know how many other peoples images have been ruined by 'orbs' - As a %.. For me I ruin far far more by being too hasty with the shutter, and not thinking about the image and composition!
One month On, 1600+X10 shots and no shots 'ruined' Orbs.... :-) Plenty by my haste... :-(
Just to put some perspective on this.. I've had lens dust from an early camera (low hundreds) and that was replaced (Jessops) as soon as they had new stock. WDB I may have had, but not at a level which I have noticed over 1500+ images so far. And under all kighting conditions. Would I by another? Yes, as the advantages outweigh this problem (for me).I think if you look for the perfect camera, you would never own one.
If i had to guess, it is mainly seen by photographers in more sunier climes than the UK mid Winter. What is ISO 100?
I have trust in Fuji to fix this, by firmware or replacement with an X10/II. Pentax did with the early K5's (which had sensor marks). And I'm sure DPReview will keep everyone informed