geoson

I don't think it is disparaging in any way to point out Fuji 's MF past. It certainly explains why they made the GX instead of trying to battle Canon, Nikon and Sony in 35mm.

The news isn't that Sony has these features, but that they FINALLY have these features. After all the pro reviews and user complaints, Sony may finally understand that the user experience is just as important as the specs.

I don't know about a huge margin. All three have unique characteristics despite having the same sensor.

Nikon and others have introduced special anniversary editions in the past. Stop panicking! Next year is an Olympics year. If there is nothing new for next year, then you can panic.

I'm not a Nikon user, so I don't have much at stake here. But I think the lamentations here are overdone. It's only February, and the D500 was a unicorn until it actually appeared. Yes it would be nice to see something exciting, but there is still time, and next year is an Olympic year.

The workhorses are the Nikon D5 and the Canon 1-series. The a99, a 35mm sensor camera, is stepping into the ring with those two.

I can make a case for a high performance APSC vs aan
entry level 35mm. I think m43 should at least be cheaper
than a D500.

There's a feeling that the 1 series has been replaced by the DL series of compacts.

I would not consider a Sony medium format to be a sure thing. They may look at the return on the money spent on 35mm and conclude that another system format is too much, even for them.

@jefftan, have you looked at the m43 forum? People have asked for these new lens for some time. The reason they are coming out with the pro line is because the consumer line has largely been fulfilled. There are already small primes at the consumer level. My Panasonic 42.5/1.7 is a little gem. The pro line is there for those that want it. I also have the 12-35/2.8, another beauty. m43 would not be much of a system without a lens selection for most situations.

As a mirrorless user, I'm happy to see this effort from Hasselblad, even if I could never afford it. They may not be big, but the name still matters, despite the Lunar debacle.

Androole, have you looked at the Pentax K1?

"Get them printed!" Absolutely! Nothing I've shown any other way gets the same reaction as the 13x19 prints that I make.

This is VERY aggressive pricing, and raises questions for future product pricing. Will Pentax offer a lower priced option to compete with Nikon and Canon's flagship pro sports units? What will be their intro price for the next flagship APS-C?

Don't tell me, tell everyone else wailing about the price!

I find the wailing about the price the most amusing thing of all. Not because I'm flush with money, but because we've all seen this pricing scheme from every manufacturer. High opening, followed by gradual decrease, ending with near fire sale when next model is introduced. I purchased a GX7 last September for $599. The only camera I've ever had in the digital era where I did not wait at least a year after introduction is the LX100 (very happy customer, btw). The most aggressive pricing I've seen in the last few years has been from Pentax.

This commentary would have been a great addendum to the review of the LX100. I remember the howling when DPR gave it an 85. I let my sister borrow it when the battery in her Dslr died. Health issues have prevented her from joining me on my photo journeys, but now she can imagine slipping an LX100 in her bag everyday.

Canonites! It's Canonites vs Nikonians!

Leica is as much a lifestyle as it is a camera. A sales success for Leica is far different from what would be a sales success for Pentax.

Mirrorless without a reduction in size? That won't work against current offerings from the mirror-less makers.