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?
AndyGM: Hmm... I thought JK Imaging's gameplan was to focus (no pun intended) on the Chinese market, where Kodak is still a well known brand (and an American brand at that), and there is a lot of anti Japanese sentiment? The idea being to hoodwink the Chinese public into believing they are buying an "American" camera and none of that nasty Japanese stuff, when in reality they are selling either a modified Japanese camera made side by side in the same factory that said Japanese company uses, or a Chinese knockoff of something that was a Japanese idea in the first place.
I don't think that the Chinese photo consumer is so unsophisticated as you would imply. Also, the cultural as opposed to marketplace sentiments are for the large part unfounded; the most desirable jeans in Iran are genuine Levis brand. If they are made in the USA (few are actually) they are even more highly prized. Go figure.
Plenty of white space there for that Target or Walmart logo. Pixpro, huh? Does the name Kodak mean anything? JK! (Just Kidding)
I'd like to see the rig that was used to make the images, especially the cameramovement mechanism.
TN Args: Can someone in DPR please remove all posts in this thread that are about so-called 'full-frame' (44mm sensor) equivalencies?
What a monumental waste of space and repetition in 10,000 different locations. Not to mention that fact that it's trolling. You don't see this extent of trolling on 44 mm sensor articles, with people relentlessly pointing out how superior medium format or large format sensors are, and the lens/sensor equivalencies converted to 8x10-inch, and how poorly the 44 mm sensor gathers light by comparison with 8x10, over and over and over and over and.....
Once that is done, delete this post too. And I will thank DPR for their efforts.
There must be a source of photographic science, physics or high school geometry you can read up on to gain an understanding of this - rather than incessantly grumbling.
Just need a little help understanding this system; this is an APS-C camera?So the 23mm would give an angle of view of a 28mm or 35mm lens? - compared to that of a full frame (24X36) camera. Sorry in advanced for my lack of knowledge on this.
hpy2bsal: I own a DSLR but I didn't want the bring a backpack of camera gear on a three-week trip through Europe. I bought the X100S specifically because of its compact size and f/2 lens.
I was very nervous whether the 23mm fixed lens would work under all shooting circumstances but there wasn't a single time I wished I had brought a different camera. Whether I was shooting the interior of Notre Dame at night, the expanse of the Swiss Alps, the UCI Road World Championships along the streets of Florence during a torrential thunderstorm, or one of my meals at dinner, my X was the perfect camera. I probably could have sold three X's to fellow tour members once they saw the quality of my images. Attached to the Black Rapid SnapR 35 Bag and Strap and slung diagonally across my chest, my X was super lightweight and easily accessible. Even when handheld, I barely noticed the weight of the camera.
I'm already planning another trip to Europe next year and my X will be the only camera I'm bringing.
Yes. Isn't it a pain to be a real photographer again and have the gumption (polite word used here) to get close and involved with your subjects? Up close and personal with what your photographing?! Next thing you know you'll be asking me to have a telephone conversation with someone. Really!
cjhwang: The only thing for me is that I'm waiting for a 50mm version of the x100s (or x150 or whatever). I love 50mm for street photography.
MY favorite lens is the 50/F1.4 Zeiss. I like the Zeiss for its color/contrast for street photography. It comes out to VERY close to the colors/contrast I want right off the RAW/FILM. Thus, it is MY preferred glass.
Canon lenses USUALLY are softer and warmer in tone (Canon says so themselves, that they make their lenses warmer to get better skin tones), great for people/wedding photography. Nikon/Nikkor lenses have always been sharper and cooler in tone, which is great for Nature/Landscape right.
Of course, with post-processing (PP) you can do whatever you want in the digital age. But if I can save time from PP by using a Zeiss lense instead of others...
So, who cares what others' favorite is? If you know what you like, stick with it and agree to disagree instead of saying, this sucks and that sucks because it doesn't fit YOUR flavor.
Rambling prattle. Or is that redundant?
l_d_allan: I got an official-looking warning email from mail.adobesystems.com, which seems suspicious. Phishing?
I would have expected that the email would have come from adobe.com
I got something in the US mail from adobesystems.com.
Orion, you've definitely seen the inside of my camera bag although, you failed to notice the second camera body, flashgun, spare battery pack and extra AA batteries. 8KG? I'd carry that any day! This represents the tally of your average professional photographer and the likely cause of my back problems. I don't wish to sacrifice too much image quality when I'm off on vacation or photographing for my own enjoyment. I would definitely consider such a camera and would pay even more for a ruggedized/water resistant one.
HAL, open the airlock. seriously, if this camera were ruggedized/water resistant they might have something here.
Fantastic. I'm a bit nauseated though - don't think I'm the Right Stuff for spaceflight of any sort.
Considering what Polaroid did to it's retiree's (went bankrupt and stole their pensions - like Enron) I wouldn't buy a toilet brush with their name on it.
Only certain parts of the lens assembly actually move to perform auto-focus - in auto-focus specifically designed lenses It usually takes an engineer to ground the discussion. As a professional, I'm not sure if this type of lens would be a "fit" for auto-focus. When using fast glass such as an 85 1.2 I find myself constantly turning it (the auto-focus switch) off so I can choose the exact area of selective focus. Great glass will be for now: large, heavy and expensive. This is the way things are until either the laws of physics change or there is a major breakthrough in materials/optical engineering.
Images from a past that's hard to even imagine. Not to spoil the fun but people should know that George Eastman stole the process for coating light sensitive emulsion onto flexible film (and was eventually sued) and he positioned his office so he could monitor female employee's taking bathroom breaks. Yes there was Dickensian side of life back then that was was not recorded on these toys for the rich.
This is Pentax's chance to go after the fat cats pushing their wears at every consumer point. I know that marketing is expensive and breaking into markets is arduous. As good as this camera is it won't make a dent in the market unless it's sold well.
Pentax needs to market their cameras better. They show up occasionally on the bottom shelf without any display materials at most retailers if at all. They make terrific cameras for the money but are seen mostly as an "also ran", especially in New England.
CameraLabTester: One main reason why this lens could not be made as an AUTOFOCUS lens, as some have asked why, is the glass.
Just look at the cross section image showing the 12 elements.
No AUTOFOCUS motor ever built could move those ton of bricks fast enough.
2.14 Pounds (.970 Kilograms)
With great glass comes potentially great images.
Thanks T3 for being the voice of reason here; it usually takes an engineer to ground the discussion. I'm not sure if this lens would be a "fit" for autofocus. When using fast glass such as the 85 1.2 I find myself constantly turning it off so I can choose the exact area of selective focus. Great glass will be for now: large, heavy and expensive. This is the way things are until either the laws of physics change or there is a major breakthrough in materials/optical engineering.