 |  |  |  |  |  |
| The king of the mountain by Dan Paris from Landscape with Wildlife | PA020047.Bald Eagle Approach.2 by Hornsbee from BIF | Couples' oh No moment! by mythshri from Seated Couples | Big eyes by Minas_Eye from Eye - macro/close-up | Bon appetit! by valenttin from Van een mug een olifant maken | THREE BOWLER HATS by FINEART4YPvK from Men Wearing Hats |
Even DPReview TV is shutting down? That's a big ouch :(
Thanks to every staff who made it all possible and all the best
For its size and price, it's just a meh lens
UncoyDP: Pay more for less performance. Seems weird and trendy. Not like a solid advance for cinematography. Perhaps Mr Yamaki should spend more time on Sony and Nikon focus emulation. Canon Art focus is pretty good but adapted/Sony mount and Nikon are no great shakes.
It's because they know these will be niche and not likely going to be big seller.
And it's less about the performance but the look that it can achieve.
I think it's an interesting take at least
Thoughts R Us: I can't help but feel that this camera is literally a game changer: that what it delivers at its price point, for both photo and video, is a breakthrough at this time.
I also believe that Fuji will sell a lot of these, relative to its price point, and that they may be hard to come by at first.
Yes there will be new mount for curved sensor, which will first come to FF.
Curved sensor for MF? Let's see if the GFX can last that long.
Thoughts R Us: I can't help but feel that this camera is literally a game changer: that what it delivers at its price point, for both photo and video, is a breakthrough at this time.
I also believe that Fuji will sell a lot of these, relative to its price point, and that they may be hard to come by at first.
Yes it isn't for me, which is exactly my point. it is trying to be an all rounder camera which isn't attractive when compared to FF.
Either way global shutter sensor is looking more likely, and hoping curved sensor is coming. That plus more utilization with AI, makes FF that much more exciting to look forward to.
Thoughts R Us: I can't help but feel that this camera is literally a game changer: that what it delivers at its price point, for both photo and video, is a breakthrough at this time.
I also believe that Fuji will sell a lot of these, relative to its price point, and that they may be hard to come by at first.
You mean the 1DX? Sure the GFX is bigger, but 1DX can handle every kind of photography and where's the market going? Mirrorless and smaller bodies.
Having an all rounder camera makes it compete against FF, which it will lose all the time.
Slower AF, huge body/lens, less lens choice, price, poor roller shutter.
Hardly any kind of photography needs 100Mpx, outside fashion/commerical.
so no, I don't think I am silly and ill - innformed. It's rather obvious to me.
Thoughts R Us: I can't help but feel that this camera is literally a game changer: that what it delivers at its price point, for both photo and video, is a breakthrough at this time.
I also believe that Fuji will sell a lot of these, relative to its price point, and that they may be hard to come by at first.
Even a MF camera designed to be more capable in different situation still falls far behind FF, at the expense of huge body and price tag and weight.
I honestly don't see this selling well, at all. They should have focused into where MF shooters are, the pros at fashion/magazine
sportyaccordy: I think Sony's focus on technology might be its Achilles' heel. They are leaps and bounds ahead of the competition in technology. Now it's time to get back to the photographic side. Fill in the lens gaps (35/1.8; a basic 24mm; kit telephoto zoom) and fix the ergonomics. Gen 4 should be a rethink of the lineup... a small Mk1 style body at the bottom; A7M4/R4s with new, more comfortable bodies and an A9M2 that balances well with the likes of the 400 GM without add on grips.
I like the body as it is now, the add on grip is removable. It makes it more modular. Love holding mine with a vintage lens for example.
It's not just the body, weight, lens, size that's the issue, it's the combination of all these drawbacks and marginal IQ improvements over top FF cameras
NJOceanView: If Sony is going to get involved with computational photography, they should put stacking and other Pixel 3-like attributes into their RX 100. I can't imagine how it wouldn't be a total industry game-changer.
@tkbslc Archiver has given you a list of what computational photography means and why it does not need multiple sensors.
You can have computational photography without multiple shots from multiple sensors.
Random Troll: OK, gimme what you've got.
RP stands for...
I've seen "rest in peace" and "reduced power". Any other nominations?
Return please
iAPX: with 2 stops to 3 stops slower lens, it's underpart and would been destroyed by 100MP f/1.2 or f/1.4 FF sensor in a more compact body.
Even a f/1.8 basic lens will bring much more light totally!
I just don't see the point of larger sensors limited by far slower lenses.
I also doubt the dynamic of the sensor could catch the current one on FF.
I understand that selling MP is working well, and size does matter when lenses are serving them well, but it is not the case here.
@ BJL I should clarify my point is flagships with top models.
It's why panasonic, Canon, Nikon all want to get into the FF mirrorless game as their next big investments.
There are two main reasons why MF is ideal in film: MF look, resolution and color tonality.
> MF look is not there from GFX, I am not the first one to say.
In digital format, it's more complicated, luminous landscape reviewed A7S and said it has the MF look. (though what's a MF look is subjective).
> Resolution
About printing big:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZNr24yVD9s
Sharp lens matters for big print, more than resolution.
> Color tonality
imo this is the arguable advantage, but there are so much variables to color, even opening up different post processing software have impact on them.
There's more important parameter than sensor size, even if we ignore other important aspects of a camera. And that's sensor tech and FF sensor is rapidly growing and competitions are just about to start.
iAPX: with 2 stops to 3 stops slower lens, it's underpart and would been destroyed by 100MP f/1.2 or f/1.4 FF sensor in a more compact body.
Even a f/1.8 basic lens will bring much more light totally!
I just don't see the point of larger sensors limited by far slower lenses.
I also doubt the dynamic of the sensor could catch the current one on FF.
I understand that selling MP is working well, and size does matter when lenses are serving them well, but it is not the case here.
@BJL well glad I reminded you of what threshold is.
> I didn't say revenue advantage, I said the most competitive market, ie most competitors.
> there's only so much you can do with physics, huge lens with body for MF are not going to disappear.
Look at Fuji's 32-64 F4 size and weight, compare it's reach and the DOF to FF 2470 F2.8.
> I am not saying there's no market for it. certainly there is a market for it or it wouldn't get a second gen. At least for landscape photographers this is a decent-ish choice.
But obviously it is aiming to be the next FF. Look at the lens lineup.
But like I said, threshold. No doubt the image from GFX100 is gonna be great.
How much is it better a Z7 with the insane sharp lens, I can already tell you it won't be significant.
I won't bring in mobile photography since it is more unique, I am excited for its future, with light cooperating with sony and google's computation photography magic, it's just a different category imo
iAPX: with 2 stops to 3 stops slower lens, it's underpart and would been destroyed by 100MP f/1.2 or f/1.4 FF sensor in a more compact body.
Even a f/1.8 basic lens will bring much more light totally!
I just don't see the point of larger sensors limited by far slower lenses.
I also doubt the dynamic of the sensor could catch the current one on FF.
I understand that selling MP is working well, and size does matter when lenses are serving them well, but it is not the case here.
@BJL
I do econmetrics for major and you are missing one concept: threshold.
A runner finishing a 100M race at 15s as compared to 16s is great, but if the median is at 16s, taking in the 0.5s tolerance, it is a small significant in a casual competitive race.
But if a runner finishing a 100M race at 10s, while the median is finishing at 11s, taking in 0.5s tolerance, it is a major significance, it means the runner not only is able to run above median but he also has the potential to break world record at 9.5s.
There are opportunity cost in choosing one over another in anything.
But like I said, super35 carries a list of critical cons, from lens lineup, weight (physical and wallet), battery, AF, functions etc, while offering marginal IQ benefits.
Sensor tech is probably the most important element this era of photography, and FF being the most competitive market of all will not fall behind significantly against super35.
iAPX: with 2 stops to 3 stops slower lens, it's underpart and would been destroyed by 100MP f/1.2 or f/1.4 FF sensor in a more compact body.
Even a f/1.8 basic lens will bring much more light totally!
I just don't see the point of larger sensors limited by far slower lenses.
I also doubt the dynamic of the sensor could catch the current one on FF.
I understand that selling MP is working well, and size does matter when lenses are serving them well, but it is not the case here.
@Jaloohan2
This is why I said, it would be more attractive for a normal sized MF sensor and not this super35 sensor size.
This is just a middle ground for proper phrase one cameras and FF, but hardly suitable for neither market.
iAPX: with 2 stops to 3 stops slower lens, it's underpart and would been destroyed by 100MP f/1.2 or f/1.4 FF sensor in a more compact body.
Even a f/1.8 basic lens will bring much more light totally!
I just don't see the point of larger sensors limited by far slower lenses.
I also doubt the dynamic of the sensor could catch the current one on FF.
I understand that selling MP is working well, and size does matter when lenses are serving them well, but it is not the case here.
The sensor was already releasing info in 2017. Not exactly the newest sensors.
Gotta agree.
FF is the better choice in most of the case. You can get far more light in a more compact body with more features suitable for all kinds of shooting at a lower cost.
I would be more excited if a proper MF sensor size is fit into a GFX body. Then it would at least be great for landscape
I honestly don't have any major complain at all.
Any complaints would really just be nitpicks like no time lapse built in feature.
Its everything I was expecting or better.
Fast AF, incredible speed and accuracy. IBIS helps all my MF lens. Battery lasts way longer. Duel card makes reviewing and and sharing the JPEG a lot faster.
Also if anyone bring up the menu mess, you can make your own.
You only ever gonna set up the camera from scratch once. All you would need from then on, is simple custom buttons and your own menu. (You can even choose what to put in at which slot at which page of your menu)
The only thing I need to get used to is the weight. Its heavier than a7s by quite a bit.
TFD: What is old become new, there is a fascination with manual focus lenses and manually focusing a 10mm F5.6 lens might be a snap. manually focusing a 50mm F0.95 with an electronic viewfinder might be harder and don't forget the manual exposure, take a big memory card and expect 1 in 4 to be in focus and properly exposed.
I agree with the comments on price a cheap $300 lens great. $3000 for a lens possibly made in German or China. I think I will keep my Sony/Zeiss 85mm F1.4.
t's surprisingly easy to focus source: I have a Mitakon f. 95
TFD: What is old become new, there is a fascination with manual focus lenses and manually focusing a 10mm F5.6 lens might be a snap. manually focusing a 50mm F0.95 with an electronic viewfinder might be harder and don't forget the manual exposure, take a big memory card and expect 1 in 4 to be in focus and properly exposed.
I agree with the comments on price a cheap $300 lens great. $3000 for a lens possibly made in German or China. I think I will keep my Sony/Zeiss 85mm F1.4.
t's surprisingly easy to focus source: I have a Mitakon f. 95