As a professional photographer I fully understand that equipment is not always pleasing to look at - I used to own a Rollieflex twin lens! However for a family/vacation/survey camera this thing is absolutely hideous - especially with the optional viewfinder attachment. Does anyone remember something called the Vsioflex that attached to Leica M cameras? It made an otherwise panache´looking camera into something that resembled a Russian moon lander.
Although I'm a Canon(pro equipment) guy for the most part; this seems like a better camera than the new G - Especially the fact that it has a built in flash AND a viewfinder. Waiting for the inevitable DP showdown between the latest round of high end compact mirrorless.
pjl321: Is it really that hard to make a high-end water proof camera?
Underwater cameras need all the light they can get so why give this camera a tiny, tiny f3.9 maximum aperture, compounded by using a tiny, tiny 1/2.3" sensor!
All I want is a waterproof Sony RX100M II, beautiful 1" sensor, 20mp, super fast f1.8 lens, 10fps and 1080p60. Too much to ask?
Me too! I love ruggedized cameras but want something along the lines of a Fuji 16 MP. Markets dictate however; is their enough of a demand for pro level camera costing around $2,000?
Foveon? Are you still here dear? Thought you went home years ago.
Still think the WG cameras look more bad-boy than this tub toy.
Sannaborjeson: Just another slow compact for the price of really good mirror less camera. To me the whole concept of such camera is slightly outdated.
What would you say outperforms it in the under $1,000 category?Not being a pain - just really want to know.
The viewfinder on every G camera I've ever owned or used is at best an approximation of what you're actually photographing. But then again I was a Leica M user for many years, so that's a tough act to follow. The G cameras are misunderstood by many; it's so much more than a high end P&S.
Generally macro lenses don't make great portrait lenses; they tend to be too sharp - who wants forensic detail in a portrait anyway? It's not so much a question of focal length or magnification as portrait is a loosely defined term at best. Camera to subject distance has has much to to with perspective (elongation or foreshortening) of the foreground, main subject and background and the photographer's relationship to the subject.
brycesteiner: You can shoot a lot of film for that price, with a larger dynamic range.
Does DPReview do reviews on this equipment?
The entire debate of film vs digital is ridiculous and, as they say say, "purely academic"; it's a matter of quantization. As a middle aged commercial photographer I have a fondness in my heart for the silver processes for everything form Kodachrome to Portriga Rapid - but those days are gone. Film and paper will carry on as a fine art medium just as charcoal pencils and artist's oils are still sold and used. If you yearn for that film look, there are some plug in's sold by DxO and others that look quite realistic. Comparisons are meaningless at this point.( I sleep with a box of 4X5 Tri-X under my pillow - OK)?
Artistico: I wonder if the day will come that someone will dare make a sensor in a digital medium format camera that is actually several smaller sensors put together rather than one big one. Surely with clever processing, easily available in this day and age, it should be possible to equalise any small differences between the sensors in the output, just like there is processing going on behind the lines to correct CA and distortion in several cameras. If that could make an affordable medium format camera, I'm sure there would be many potential takers.
3x3 APSc sensors would make a nice size of roughly 60x45
I believe there was a capture back marketing by Sinar about 15 or so years ago based on similar (multiple sensor) technology. They offered (I think) a single, four and sixteen exposure option for greatest detail and dynamic range. I remember the system was priced comparably with that of a Mercedes S class sedan at the time. I welcome any corrections.
Sam_Oslo: It's probably a photoshop fake, otherwise the logo would read "Hr", LOL.
But the A7r is a much better candidate than NEX7 as a high-price luxury gadget. So this will probably become a reality soon.
Maybe Solidworks™ as well.
Some people also bought gold leaf topped Alpa cameras back in the '70's - I think. I couldn't afford one so I had a pet rock instead. This Hassy looks perfect for stalking the likes of a jackalope and bigfoot. If I were proficient in Solidworks, I'd be hoaxing here as well. Solaris would have been a better name than Solar; a great science fiction story.
I guess Rome has fallen (again):http://www.dpreview.com/news/2014/01/24/phase-one-announces-iq250-50mp-cmos-medium-format-back?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=news-list&utm_medium=text&ref=title_0_0
Either that, or the three little ships Didn't sail off the edge of the earth:http://www.phaseone.com/en/FooterMenu/Press-releases.aspx
Will there be an option to attach it to a folding Fuji 645?
Lawrence33: There was an old song that one of my many mentors would sing while shooting.The 'Opening' line went something like this, " .... park you chewing gum, and razors at the door, drop your ego outside the church 'cause your 'er going to learn some more. .... "I've been at it for a very long time and have worked with many Hasselblads and all the related equipment.You, who have never work with the MF cameras or Hasselblad. And are not engineers, should go sit in the corner and chew on your ego.Go take some pictures. We use to say, years ago, " That's really nice, but what have you done lately ? "
Two different worlds and perspectives. Can't really expect one type of camera or technology to satisfy all needs, methods and styles. It doesn't help to berate anyone for their enthusiasm even if it is uniformed; teach someone kindly and you will be the wiser.
Jogger: Nice, all it needs is an FF sensor.
An X-Trans type sensor 6cm X 4.5cm, 60 megapixels.
srados: I do not understand why FUJI FILM does not drop FILM from name and call themselves FUJI.
As to differentiate it from say Fuji Heavy Industries, which makes things such as Subaru's and aircraft engines.
I knew my Fujica ST 801 would fine it's way home again! It was always such the orphan child of cameras except when it out-shined camera costing 3 times as much with it's image quality. Go Fuji!
creaDVty: Actually Mr. Ian Rawcliffe IS Dr. Hansen wearing a bespoke suit made of exotic wool. And of course he changed his name.
Maybe Porsche will make a minivan.
Who's CMOS would have the best image quality if scaled up to 645 size? Will Leaf and Phase One follow?