mosc: Is it impossible that we'd ever see an M-mount AF system?
@mosc - it's possible, but it would require development of a whole new set of lenses, not to mention a whole new set of bodies. And that's not likely for a long, long time because Leica already has the Leica T system which is designed for AF. They'll build that system out for a while before they'd tackle producing an M-mount AF system. You have to remember that Leica is a pretty small company with limited resources. Developing new systems is extremely expensive. And they've already committed to the new Leica T system for AF.
milandro: Yes, minimalism is great, until you need the things that aren’t there. This camera, like many other things in our lives, screams snob revolt to the world of robotic technology by an, apparent, return to the past.
Of course, the fact that the return is only really limited to the looks and some form of Luddism denying autofocus or OIS or automatic exposure, even if and when you are using advanced digital technology anyway, the contradiction apparently doesn’t bother the maker or the wannabe users.
You want to use a film in a Leica? Use an original one! You want to shoot digital with a viewfinder? I trust there are several ways to do that already.
The Fuji X system gives me plenty of retro and technology at the same time. Of course the Konost(eurs) want more, or actually they want less but will be prepared to pay more for that expensive less.
After all there are those who are prepared to pay more for a camera which can only shoot B&W!
I think you're blowing this completely out of proportion. I don't think it's anything other than offering a (supposedly) cheaper alternative to a digital Leica M. Just like buying a Voigtlander Bessa back in the film days, for those who couldn't afford a real Leica. And since it's simply an alternative option to buying a digital Leica rangefinder that can still use M-mount lenses and still shoot digital, it's going to basically do what a Leica rangefinder does, no more and no less. It's a bit silly to expect that this camera should magically offer autofocus or OIS to M-mount lenses that never had these capabilities-- and that if it doesn't offer these things, then it should be accused of "some form of Luddism [for] denying autofocus or OIS..."! LOL. Just because there is a digital sensor behind the lens doesn't mean that a camera can bestow old lenses with new capabilities that the lenses never had to begin with! You can't fault the manufacturer for not making an M lens auto focus!
M-mount is strictly manual focus. If you want AF, that's what the Leica T-mount system is for.
VENTURE-STAR: Who are Konost? Do they have any kind of track record? Where are the company located? Can they seriously compete with the big players?
Even if this re-invented Leica is a good reliable product, you can bet it will be priced beyond the reach of most serious photographers who always prefer to stick with established brands.
I'm a little sceptical about all of this!
@VENTURE-STAR - But the difference is that they aren't re-inventing the wheel here. It's not 3D, it's not eFilm, it's not a new format. It's just a Leica M-compatible digital rangefinder camera. It's building on an established system that everyone is familiar with, but that many people can not afford. If they can make it a less expensive alternative to a Leica M, I think they definitely have a chance.
DotCom Editor: Why?
Because Leica has a monopoly on digital rangefinder cameras? And it's good to have at least one other alternative in the market?
SyedSadaqatAli: Range finder, no autofocus, (not)great looks and what lenses?. If I had money to buy a leica lens, i would have money to buy leica camera too. Until it is within 1500-2000 USD range, it is out of question.
You are forgetting that there are other manufacturers that make excellent M-mount rangefinder lenses that are a lot less expensive than Leica lenses. Voigtlander and Zeiss make some excellent M-mount rangefinder lenses that are priced much lower than Leica lenses.
LFPCPH: May I suggest buying a Canon 5D Mk1 for 400-500$ on eBay instead. Okay you cannot fit an M-lens but then you can mount so many other lenses on a Canon EF mount – Nikon, Olympus OM, Pentax K, M42 screew mount, ect.
And what if you *want* to use M lenses? Also, the 5D with FF lenses is quite a large and bulky camera, especially compared to a rangefinder like the Konost. Taller, thicker, heavier. For example, just compare the weight of a Canon 5D MKI body to a Leica M9. The Leica is no lightweight, because its solid construction and heavy milled brass top/bottom plates definitely add up to quite a bit of weight. And yet, the 5D MKI is still 52% (307 grams) heavier than the M9! I would expect the Konost to be a lighter than the Leica M9, because I don't expect the Konost will be getting the M9's overbuilt tank-like build.
Glen Barrington: I wish this company and this camera well. But is this REALLY gonna sell in numbers large enough to last more than a year and get a few collectors excited?
It might function well enough to spur other manufacturers to explore this quasi-rangefinder focusing mechanism, (I'd love to see something like this in m43s, it could revitalize the moribund Pen line, for example); but I would be very surprised if this particular camera was in any way successful.
I don't know why everyone thinks that every product needs to sell in huge volumes. It used to be that cameras sold in much lower volumes than they do today, and that was the norm. But that was in the days when people actually appreciated cameras for being tools of the craft, rather than merely seeing them simply as sales figures and market share stats.
dodgebaena: looks like a more-rounded NEX camera to me. Reinventing the wheel.
Then I guess you think that *every* DSLR is another case of "re-inventing the wheel." After all, DSLRs are a lot more similar to one another in design than a NEX is to a Konost. I don't think this Konost looks anything like a "more-rounded NEX camera." I don't know of any NEX camera that has a large, prominent viewfinder window on its front.
Storky: The most critical issue with this lens is: does it autofocus correctly? That's why I (and many others) swapped the Sigma 35 1.4 for the Canon original. The Sigma may be somewhat sharper, but it just doesn't focus reliably. The USB dock is an admission of this, and represents a partial, duct-tapish solution. And being slightly off focus at 1.4 is much more detrimental to image quality than small difference in optical corrections.
"The USB dock is an admission of this, and represents a partial, duct-tapish solution."
That's like saying that any product that is firmware/software upgradeable is an admission of fault or weakness! How terribly short-sighted. In the modern era, products should be upgradeable through firmware/software updates. It doesn't matter if you're talking about smartphones, cameras, lenses, desktop software, or even automobiles! There should be some mechanism by which updates can easily be installed in order to improve performance, add features, or simply respond to unforeseen changes that didn't exist at the time of a product's introduction!
Very good video. This video proves a great point: that mirrorless can, indeed, handle the day-to-day shooting needs that many people still erroneously think only a DSLR can handle. People need to be informed and educated about the current performance levels of mirrorless cameras. There are a lot of people out there who still think that you *have to* have a DSLR to do this kind of shooting, or that a mirrorless camera can only handle shooting stationary objects in very good light. Of course, there are a lot of people who *hate* this kind of video, because it sheds more light on what mirrrorless cameras are capable of, using real-world demonstrations, because they want to perpetuate the myth that mirrorless cameras are so inferior to DSLRs.
jaxson: There is actually very little between DSLR's and mirrorless cameras, especially when you switch to live view mode on a DSLR.
Mirrorless tends to be packing way more smarts into their devices, and on sensor auto focussing, across the whole frame, is surely where we're headed. I can't see a reason why this couldn't be added to a DSLR for the best of both worlds, for those who want to remain in DSLR land.
Clearly any notions of 'it's lighter and smaller' is irrelevant when you go and slap a big lens on the front of it, and they often don't have particularly comfortable grips either. The tech (wifi, flipscreens, touchscreens, upload to facebook/email etc) and the predictive tracking focussing is surely where the main benefits lie.
Videos like this are great to say that mirrorless is a viable option, and over time surely the tech and EVF's will only get better. We're in quite a cool time for this sort of gadget :-)
"Clearly any notions of 'it's lighter and smaller' is irrelevant when you go and slap a big lens on the front of it"
I totally disagree. Less weight is still less weight. A Canon 7D MKII weighs 910g, a Sony A6000 weighs 344g. No matter what size lens you're using, that's still a half a kg of weight you're not having to carry around. And when you're using a large lens, it's mainly the lens you're holding. The camera is just along for the ride. So I don't think you need a huge grip if you're using a huge lens.
And it's still a nice benefit when you have a camera body that takes up a fraction of the amount of space as a DSLR body. So smaller camera size is still a benefit even when you're using a larger lens. I'd rather be able to pack two mirrorless bodies rather than just one big DSLR body (or even worse, two big DSLR bodies). I believe in always having a back-up, which is a lot easier to do with A6000 bodies. It also helps that an A6000 is less than $550.
mosc: Now if you could just get fuji to give up on bodies and only make e-mount lenses for sony bodies and get sony to give up on lenses we'd have ourselves quite a beast.
@BPD7 - Sony bodies certainly do have their advantages. And Fuji bodies aren't without their own faults and weaknesses. So I would love it if Fuji made lenses for Sony bodies! That way, people who liked Fuji bodies could continue to use Fuji bodies, and those that liked Sony bodies could continue to use Sony bodies but with Fuji lenses.
PeaceKeeper: That 16mm f/1.4 is enormous. 67mm filter thread? Egad. O.o
I know this Fuji has autofocus, but the old Olympus OM 24mm f/2 I own is tiny in comparison. And by the looks of the elements compared to body size they "padded" the outside of this lens quite heavily. There is no way the autofocus internals take that much space...
This would be a dream lens for me by the numbers, but it looks like it will hang off the front of an XT-1 like a brick. It's as big as the 56mm f/1.2(if not bigger).
I can only hope that the "WR" on this lens is not "provisional" as it is on the 35mm f/2, and they did some serious work to make it bulletproof, accounting for the portly nature of the lens.
First of all, autofocus internals to take up a lot more room than manual lens internals. Plus, today's modern lenses have electronic components and circuit boards inside the lens that simply don't exist in manual lenses. Even relatively simple lenses, like the Panasonic 14mm and 20mm m4/3 pancakes, are packed with circuit boards and electronics:
Secondly, there's a big difference between an f/1.4 lens and an f/2 lens, not to mention the difference between 16mm and 24mm.
I think it's a big naive to think that lens manufacturers are simply padding the outside of the lens un-necessarily.
slippedcurve623: Haha "sony 4d tracking gives the top of the line dslr a run of their money"Wow so many sonyfanboyism on the Internet, assuming its the same technology as the one found in the a6000, my nearly 8 year old 1d mark iii is in a whole diffrent league regarding af performance (accuracy/speed) compared to my a6000, despite all the press that the 1d iii has af problems, and dn't get me started on my 7d mark ii/1dx......there is an reason pro sports photographers use dslr on major sporting events.
Yes, pro sports photographers will continue to use DSLRs, definitely. But for so many other kinds of shooting, lugging around a big DSLR is simply no longer a requirement. Mirrorless cameras like the A6000 pack a lot of technology, performance, and image quality into a much smaller package.
AlanVia: What could Sony have possibly been thinking to put this boat anchor on their nice mirrorless body?
@AlanVia - a lot of us have already been hitting a form of gym: it's called carrying around FF DSLR gear! LOL.
But seriously, though, a macro lens like the 90/2.8 OSS isn't really a walk-around lens anyways. It's not really a lens you're going to pack for travel photography. It's really a special purpose lens, not something that every A7 user is going to want to have in their bag. People will buy it for portraits and macro, not to climb the Himalayas with.
AKH: Sounds like marketing fluff to me. The last 3 iterations of the OMD has about the same sensor IQ and now they try to stuff the cameras with all kinds of gimmicks.
@HowaboutRAW - the point is, everything has to start somewhere. You can't just write everything off as a "gimmick".
BTW, the rate of technological progression happens much faster today than it did back in the early 1980's, three decades ago. That's what happens when computing power has been doubling every two years (Moore's Law).
AbrasiveReducer: Was he even born when they developed the OM film cameras?
It's probably for the better young blood is good for a company. They usually bring fresh, innovative ideas, rather than just wanting to stick with the status quo. I think that's one of the issues with Canon. Old and aging leadership that has become too set in their ways and too conservative. Just look at Canon's Masaya Maeda compare to Oly's Setsuya Kataoka: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7079726133/photokina-2014-canon-interview-mirrorless-in-the-very-near-future
Look how old, up-tight, buttoned-up, and conservative Maeda looks compare to Kataoka. Maeda looks like he works in a funeral parlor, or will soon be laying in one.
Maybe you should learn proper handholding technique. Just look at the hands-on photos in the dpreview article to see how to properly hold a camera when a large lens is mounted. Support the lens with your left hand underneath the lens. This is no different from when we have large lenses mounted on our DSLRs. I guess you're holding an A7 in the way someone might hold a compact point-and-shoot: with each hand on each side of the camera body with nothing supporting the lens. That's fine for a light p&s, but not appropriate for a larger ILC with larger lenses.
No one should be dissuaded from using a lens simply because it's large or heavy, and lens designers shouldn't be dissuaded from making them. If you can't stand using a lens simply because it happens to be large or heavy, them don't. On the other hand, many of us understand that lenses are tools, and sometimes these tools can vary in size greatly.
fmian: So... Don't buy the MKII cause something better is coming soon...I see...
...which can be said about practically digital every camera ever. Lol.