I liked the Leica Q the first time I saw it ... when it was called the Sony RX1.
As a Nikon DSLR user I would have jumped on this camera ... if it used the SB-600/700/800/900 etc. flashes (and Pocket Wizards) that I already use with my Nikon gear.
It looks like Nikon still doesn't understand that serious photographers also like the idea of lightweight mirrorless system cameras. :(
PicOne: I wonder if this camera as described, is really a surveillance camera, and perhaps whether there are any legal issues involved using this?
Unfortunately, I'm sure lawyers would argue two counter points:
1) The camera has an on/off switch that the wearer must activate before the camera "automatically" captures images.
2) The user is knowingly wearing an automated camera which captures images and is walking into private property without deactivating said camera.
I'm sure this device can be used for all types of creative time lapse work ... but there is that potential for criminal misuse ... and even the potential for "unintentional criminality" (breaking the law without criminal intent or malice) that could result in users paying expensive fines, legal fees, or spending time in jail just for wearing this gizmo around their necks in the wrong places.
That was the first thing that came to my mind. I suspect that if this device becomes popular in the US we'll see at least one court case in the news where someone is prosecuted for illegally recording someone. Heck, we've already seen many cases here in the US involving people using cell phone cameras to secretly record photos and video. I just did a quick Google search and, based on laws prohibiting the use of hidden cameras, you could "potentially" be prosecuted just for walking into another person's home or business with this camera turned on in the states of Hawaii, Alabama, South Dakota, Minnesota, Maine, Kansas, Delaware, Michigan, Georgia, and Utah.
Title of next month's article: Hasselblad responds to bankruptcy criticisms.
JK, I know one camera flop isn't going to bankrupt the mighty Hasselblad. It just pointless for Alessandrini to try to argue this camera isn't just a Sony NEX-7 in overpriced Hassy clothing.
The camera for people with more oil money than brains.
Granted, manual focus isn't a big deal on extreme wide angle lenses like this because the DOF is huge ... but I think the only thing holding back Samyang from rivaling Sigma and Tamron is the lack of AF in their lenses.
I would have been interested in this bridge camera if it had a hot shoe for external flash. I just don't see the point of a camera this big that doesn't have a hot shoe.
rmbackus: That pixel resolution is a strong argument, that pixel-counting is for the consumers market.In the analogue era no professional photographer was worrying about Tri-X or Panatomic-X grain.I never encounter pixel limits in digital pictures, just optical limits.
Although they probably could have used image sensors with higher MP counts, keep in mind that all this data has to be sent a LONG distance back to Earth. Some people complain about how slow the Eye-Fi cards are at transmitting images to an iPad ... imagine how slow the process is for transmitting a massive image file from Mars!
I fully support the development of smaller, thinner batteries that deliver the same or greater charge within a smaller/thinner space. However, the idea of a camera with an integrated, non-removable battery is horsesh!#.
Many digital photographers keep snapping and snapping photos until the battery drains ... then they put another battery in the camera and keep snapping. The days of shutterbugs cautiously limiting their images to a handful of photos largely died with film. People aren't worried about 24 or 36 exposure limits or the cost of developing images ... they just keep shooting until they get bored.
I'd say that the OVERWHELMING majority of casual and serious photographers have ZERO interest in a camera with an integrated battery that cannot be replaced.
Just one more reason I'm glad I bought the 25mm and got rid of my 20mm.
cjhacker23: And no hotshoe... Not even one of their bass-akwards Minolta hotshoes. WTF.
They do if they care about better looking flash photos.
I'm sorry, but someone at Sony suggested calling a new technology "WhiteMagic" and NOBODY said, "Hey, we probably shouldn't call it that?" Next from Sony, the new Sony VAIO laptop with "WhitePower" for extended battery life!
All I want is an official statement posted on the Fujifilm website with specific instructions for current X10 owners to get the sensor replaced with the new sensor by Fujifilm service. This issue is big enough that Fujifilm should have a dedicated support page to submit a sensor replacement order, get an order number, and allow people to print out a form to send in with their flawed X10 and get the sensor replacement done without calling and sitting on hold for a Fujifilm service rep who doesn't know what you are talking about.
Wow! If Adobe can make this work in real life as good as it did in the demo then we may never need in-lens or in-body image stabilization ever again.
These cameras look like what I expect my 5-year-old daughter to draw if I asked her to "draw a picture of a camera." Someone at Nikon was paid money to design these?
Honestly, I have no interest in "another" proprietary lens system. I feel like we've already got too many of those and the problem is getting worse with compact system cameras. Fujifilm either needs to stick with the Nikon mount or (if they are going in the direction of an interchangeable X100) they should go with an existing compact system lens mount like Micro Four Thirds or the Sony NEX lens mount. As far as I know Micro Four Thirds is the only "open" standard so that probably makes the most sense.
Fujifilm will probably ignore common sense and develop another proprietary lens mount ... then they'll go bankrupt and be purchased by Ricoh. ;)
I would love to see a side-by-side photo of the E-PL3 and XZ-1 so I can see how much bigger the E-PL3 is than Olympus' flagship compact.