Revenant
Joined on
Jul 29, 2011
|
Comments
 |  |  |  |
| A house for sneakers by fotoselect from Feet, shoes, anything to do with HUMAN feet | A Sunday Stroll by TexasGal from call any vegetable | Green roots by cand1d from Lichen and moss | Start of study by Shirsendu Bandyopadhyay from Seven Story plots - Rebirth |
chaos215bar2: I'm confused. Two 4k sensors only gives you half 8k resolution. If this is producing 4 view 3D video, you're also further sacrificing resolution to capture multiple points of view, capture information about the incoming angle of light rays at each pixel, or some combination thereof. (Under optimal circumstances, wouldn't you be dividing your total resolution by at least 4, meaning that with two 4k sensors, you get at most half 4k resolution per view?)
In what sense is this camera 8k?
"In what sense is this camera 8k?"
In the marketing sense, if nothing else.
justmeMN: Canon makes twin versions of their 5DS. Why not make twin versions of their future FF mirrorless camera? With their automated/robotic manufacturing, that would be easy to do.
One version would have a standard EF-DSLR mount.
The second version would have a mirrorless-specific mount, with an adaptor for EF-DSLR lenses.
That would settle the debate over which mount they should go with. :-)
The 5DS twins have identical body designs, though. Your suggestion would require two different designs, because of the different flange distances.
audiobomber: The two systems, MILC and DSLR as described, do not need to be from the same brand. I am doing this very thing with my Pentax K-3 and a Sony a6000. I have a complete Pentax system (approximately 14 lenses) and a limited Sony system, with primes covering 18-90mm equivalent. I also have a Sony 16-50mm to mimic a compact, and an 18-105mm for its video capabilities. I have several adapters to mount Pentax lenses on the Sony body.
Canon and Nikon shooters don't need their makers to build a new MILC system, there are already plenty of choices available.
It might not matter to everyone, but the available alternatives don't address this, though:
"But it still gives your existing, faithful users the benefits of full compatibility with your flash systems and other accessories, along with familiarity with your menus."
Ben Herrmann: Am really enjoying these Chris and Jordan videos (always have). They have great chemistry and I enjoy the humor. Being an "older timer," they (in a round about way) remind me of that ole' comedy duo - Abbott and Costello who were popular in the 40's and 50's. Chris being Costello, whereas Abbott is Jordan (I know, I know, I'm really stretchin' it here).
In addition, they cover lots of ground in their reviews, which IMO, really helps. Both Chris and Jordan are quite fluid in their talking points which keeps your attention to the review at hand. Glad to see that DPReview landed them. And am certainly looking forward to more.
Let's face it, there are tons of video reviews out there - some are boring, while other reviewers are, like....errrr - Prima Donna's. Chris and Jordan hit the right mix and are naturals doing these reviews.
This TG5 looks like a sure winner. Now let's see some 1" models of the same genre - but they will be much more expensive obviously.
It sounds typical of a camera from an 'obscure' manufacturer. They do unique stuff that the major manufacturers don't, but the implementation is quirky and leaves a lot to be desired.
Frankinidaho: No Ricoh? Oops, forgot. This is dpreview.
Both the Ricoh and SeaLife will be included in the upcoming written roundup, according to Jeff Keller, so I doubt they were excluded from the video review because of some nefarious reason.
thenoilif: Why choose a model # so close to the X100 series?
"But this camera doesn't have the same form factor as the X-T10 or X-T1 lines."
The T in the name suggests that it does have the same form factor. The comparison with the X-A5 is probably meant in reference to the feature set, not the look of the camera. So, an X-A5 with an EVF hump added in the middle.
sirhawkeye64: The bigger thing is they still haven't found a way to get these to record full 4k30p for at least 30 minutes.... Granted there is the X-H1 for video, but for those who want both in the same body, this is still going to be a let down even on the newest of bodies. (For me it doesn't matter, but for those who want a stills and video camera, this might be a aspect worth look into). It seems like 30 minutes is the norm for other brands, so I don't quite understand why Fuji can't do it (I know it has a lot to do with cooling in general, but if they want to compete with Sony's high-end APS-C line (ie. the a6000-series), they had better figure it out soon).
Plus I am doubting this was a "leak" but more like a "tease" done on purpose.
@focalphotography
Yes, because of EU tax laws, but Fuji doesn't even offer 30 minutes.
D7000ShooterUK: Why does it have "X" as part of the name of it does not have a X-Trans sensor???
Yeah, Fuji introduced their so called 'X series' before they launched the X-Trans technology. And the lens mount used by their APS-C system cameras is called the X-mount.
cSalmon: My thoughts, if you guys did reviews of any other camera segment on the market without Raw everyone including the reviewers would be up in arms. Here it's 2018 and the attitude is still we would like it if the manufactures could maybe do this.. until then we're going to give praise with 4 stars.
Sorry unless you are going to truly hit with some stinging criticism at the ridiculous offerings then yes we are going to have such absurd offerings and more importantly viewers will start to see your as content as another time-wasted internet Advertorial.
Well, review scores are usually relative to what's considered standard within the segment in question. If a camera lacks a feature that most of its competitors have, it gets downgraded, but if most other cameras of the same type don't have it either, it's usually not a cause for "stinging criticism".
MikeFairbanks: I haven't read the article yet. But out of curiosity, do any offer manual modes of any type or at least shutter priority?
I'd love to use one for casual surfing photography when I'm out and see others get a good wave, but if I can't crank up that shutter then it's not worth it.
The TG-5 has aperture priority, but no shutter priority or fully manual.
cosinaphile: when a sensor larger than a lentil rears its head in this catagory of all weather wp compacts , wake me.
TCS videos , ...err i mean DPR videos featuring the dynamic range duo [jordan and chris] remain a highlight
There's also the SeaLife DC2000 with a 1" sensor and the expensive Leica X-U with an APS-C sensor.
marc petzold: Fujirumors said, the X-T100 will look like the X-T20, and not like the X-A5 with an EVF.
From the dimensions leaked, the X-T100 is close to the X-T20, but more into depth, the body.
I think they mean that, feature-wise, it's more or less an X-A5, but with an added EVF. Not that it necessarily looks like an X-A5, which the X-T name suggests it won't.
evogt500: So the X-T100 is a XA-5 with evf and bayer sensor. Wouldn't be better to call it a X-E30? I thought the X-T series was DSLR like body.
There's nothing in the description "X-A5 with EVF" that implies the placement of the EVF. We don't know if the EVF is placed in the centre or to the side, but the X-T designation suggests the former.
thenoilif: And people say that Sony realeases too many cameras. Fuji is becoming the Samsung of the ILC camera industry.
From a marketing standpoint, many options are only good if they are clearly differentiated, and if potential customers aren't confused as to what group of consumers each product is targeted at. And ideally, the product names should help you make sense of the product lineup, not confuse you.
ozturert: X100-T vs X-T100. Hmmmm... Someone in Fuji got lazy in naming...
I think the name should always include the year of product release written in Roman numerals, the initials of everyone in the product development team, and maybe the name of the sensor maker, since people are always arguing over that.
Quantum Scientist: Oh wow, another barely marginal updated camera. I can hardly wait. I guess they found an old box of bayer sensors in the warehouse.
This would be a new model, not an update of an existing one. The three-digit name suggests that it will sit below the X-T20 in the X-T range. It seems to be targeted at entry-level users who would prefer an EVF-equipped camera instead of the X-A5. And there are actually many who have been asking for a Fuji camera with both a Bayer sensor and EVF.
wy2lam: Dpr, how can you be so sure it was accidental, to use it in the title of an article?
It's not very common to find a product page on the manufacturer's website before the product has been officially announced. If intentional "leaks" do happen, this is not how it's usually done.
thenoilif: Why choose a model # so close to the X100 series?
They follow the logic of X-T1 > X-T10 > X-T100. This is supposed to be the lowest tier in the T range. However, since the higher tiers are now in their second generation, I think they should have named the new model X-T200 to keep the numbers aligned.
thenoilif: And people say that Sony realeases too many cameras. Fuji is becoming the Samsung of the ILC camera industry.
With the new model, Fuji now will have eight current models in the X-system:
X-Pro2, X-H1, X-T2, X-T20, X-T100, X-E3, X-A5, X-A20
I think the last one is exclusive for China (or maybe Asia), but that's a lot of models. Good thing that they discontinued the X-M line, otherwise the confusion would have been total.
HaoAndHui: It feels like Fuji outsourced their firmware to a cheap company.
"Fujifilm has also announced that planned firmware updates for the GFX 50s, X-H1, and X-Pro2 that were due out later this month have been delayed so Fuji can more thoroughly test them."
So the firmware that's been removed hasn't been tested thoroughly before release?
"When RAW files, which were taken by X-T2 (before firmware ver.4.00), are converted in camera (ver.4.00) or by “FUJIFILM X RAW STUDIO”, they are not converted properly."
Once chance is that the RAW format in 4.0.0 has been changed a little bit for some reason, and the change is big enough that the firmware that used to work no longer works for conversion. Or, if 3rd party RAW editors still work, then someone writing the code for firmware must have just made a mistake. No code review? No unit tests? No testing at all?
"Doesn't cost you a thing."
I'm surprised that so many are thinking about firmware updates as something they get for free. Of course it's not free. As you say, Fuji spends money on this, and that money comes from the customers who buy their products. In other words, you pay for the firmware updates when you buy their cameras and lenses, just as you also pay for customer support, warranty repairs etc.