So far I don't see anything that will pull me away from a NEX7, it would have to beat the 7 in ergonomics, IQ, AF speed/accuracy, viewfinder IQ, manual focus adaptability/focusability, before I would buy it vs. the 7.
michaelwatkins wrote:
Not being a lens designer and thus unconstrained by physics and reality, I have wondered whether Fujifilm (or any maker) could bury within the body one or more lens element that remains fixed regardless of which lens is up front. Is that feasible? Other than trying to create single vendor lock-in (which ultimately wouldn't work) could a maker go with such a design with a view to improving the matching between exit lens element(s) and sensor, as well as overall lens/camera length, or both?
Also, could a handful of pixie dust be inside each camera?
Beni wrote:
Doesn't really work that way, the rear set of elements for a wide angle, normal and telephoto lens are very very different.
it's funny how demanding of cameras we are these days. I remember my Konica Hexar AF, it was capable of great images and had a lot of neat features. And that lens was sweet.
But... If that camera came out today, people would lampoon at least 5 different things about it. They'd hate the: top shutter speed of 1/250, say the Manual focus mode sucks, VF is too small, the AF can't shoot through glass, the focus point not parallax corrected, the small buttons are horrible, and why is there no continuous shutter mode. And I'm sure there are things I'm missing.
Personally, I'd be thrilled if the IQ matches the s/n, dynamic range, and color sensitivity of the 5D2 and the AF speed & accuracy is improved.
Mike Milne wrote:
it's funny how demanding of cameras we are these days. I remember my Konica Hexar AF, it was capable of great images and had a lot of neat features. And that lens was sweet.
But... If that camera came out today, people would lampoon at least 5 different things about it. They'd hate the: top shutter speed of 1/250,
People didnt lampoon a 1/250s maximum shutter speed back in the day?
the march towards an eventual non-leica {or, rather, non-leica-priced} FF digital compact-rangefinder-styled camera system continues.
hopefully within 5 years we will have access to such a product.
I think that, as time marches on and aps-c sensors get better, we get further and further from the possibilty of such a camera. Especially since stills and video are converging with the big camera makers, and Super35 and aps-c are similarly sized.
If by "rangefinder" Adam meant body and lens size, I hope you're right. If you meant optical interface not likely. The advent of good EVFs will come to a point where there an OVF will be a disadvantage.
The move from RFs to SLRs back in film was mainly because one could see through the ens; EVFs have taken it to the next step and not likely to step back to an overlapping image system where interchangeable lenses are concerned. This could only be realistic with a fixed lens, such as the X100.
And that is the most interesting part of this new Fuji's photos to me: the window on the top left side...hmmm.
Why could a rangefinder couplinge be only realistic with a fixed lens? Leica doesn't seem to have an issue. Why wouldn't they pass focal length and adjust he frame lines accordingly?
I should add, it wont be a rangefinder, it will be like the x100
FlyPenFly wrote:
Who would have guessed that Sony and Fuji would be out innovating Nikon and Canon in the digital camera space in 2011 and 2012.
uhhh, anyone paying attention maybe?
Canon has been under whelming for years now (I can say that here, right? I'm not in the Canon forum where the apologists will get me.. ).
I do love the hybrid viewfinder in the X100, seeing the framelines is actually very useful for street photog to see what kind of action will happen.
I saw it today for the first time. I was comparing the x10 (very sexy) and x100 (exquisite VF!!). i have to admit that I like the 12MP sensor in the x100, but can live with the smaller 12MP in the x10. The x10 I was holding had the hood, the black Fuji case, and a panasonic VF attached to the shoe... Very sexy little camera and the most exciting thing (IMO) to come along in years...
h00ligan wrote:
Why could a rangefinder couplinge be only realistic with a fixed lens? Leica doesn't seem to have an issue. Why wouldn't they pass focal length and adjust he frame lines accordingly?
I should add, it wont be a rangefinder, it will be like the x100
leica has a lot of issues with a non ttl optical viewfinder, like lenses needing detachable viewfinders, frame lines being tiny for telephotos, and not having frame lines for all focal lengths...
an actual rangefinder is prohibitively expensive to make for the mass market too.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I don't expect this Fuji to have a rangefinder but Cosina has shown that they can make rangefinders and sell them for a reasonable price.
douglasf13 wrote:
I think that, as time marches on and aps-c sensors get better, we get further and further from the possibilty of such a camera.
I agree.
From what I see and hear from happy x100 owners is that the APS-C sensor produces outstanding images. So by my logic, an improved version combined with interchangeable lenses makes great sense. Besides the current APS-C offering is already quite expensive and I shutter to think how much their full frame version would be.
sebboh wrote:
[leica has a lot of issues with a non ttl optical viewfinder, like lenses needing detachable viewfinders, frame lines being tiny for telephotos, and not having frame lines for all focal lengths...
Those issues aren't even close to as bad as the issues with the X100 viewfinder. Even with just one single lens, you don't know where focus is gonna end up.
sebboh wrote:
not combined with digital sensors.
If you compare the Ikon with the M7, you'll understand how much of the M9 price that is in the Leica logotype.
As the organic photoelectrc conversion layer has a large absorption coefficient in principle, it can absorb enough light in spite of its extreme thinness. Therefore, it is free from spectral cross-talk between tiny pixels when capturing slanting rays of light and does not need any micro-lenses convetionally used for gathering incident light.
The spectral sensitivity of the organic photoelectric conversion layer can be freely controlled by designing organic materials and it is possible to achieve a panchromatic property which does not have sensitivity to infrared light but only to blue, green and red light (as shown in Fig. 2). Therefore, it is not necessary to use a conventional infrafred light cut filter and we can eliminate its problem, a change of infrared cut wavelength and color hue caused by a change of the angle of light incidence....Show more →
So am I right in thinking that
(a) such a sensor design would lessen some of the problems associated with wide angle and digital sensors, with lens designs needing to be telecentric, and the use of micro lenses on the sensor to correct.
(b) no filter over the sensor would lead to a much greater detail.
Yay or nay?
If this tech is in the Fuji LX perhaps it could explain why the 18/2 is smaller than one would expect for APS-C. Perhaps it could explain why the sensor itself supposedly meets and exceeds current full-frame models?
(sorry if this has been discussed before, only just saw it though...)
Makten wrote:
Those issues aren't even close to as bad as the issues with the X100 viewfinder. Even with just one single lens, you don't know where focus is gonna end up.
If you compare the Ikon with the M7, you'll understand how much of the M9 price that is in the Leica logotype.
I really like the Zeiss Ikon finder and I know personally of at least one regular rangefinder user who much prefers it's huge finder to that of any M Leica.
I alos have to wonder if Fuji is making different versions of the x100 as I particularly love the finder in that camera and rarely have AF focus point issues.
ricardovaste wrote:
Anyone care to look over this?
So am I right in thinking that
(a) such a sensor design would lessen some of the problems associated with wide angle and digital sensors, with lens designs needing to be telecentric, and the use of micro lenses on the sensor to correct.
(b) no filter over the sensor would lead to a much greater detail.
Yay or nay?
If this tech is in the Fuji LX perhaps it could explain why the 18/2 is smaller than one would expect for APS-C. Perhaps it could explain why the sensor itself supposedly meets and exceeds current full-frame models?
(sorry if this has been discussed before, only just saw it though...)...Show more →
This new Fuji sensor tech has been mentioned before but it seems a many think it's too soon to see it in a commercial product - but we will see.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I really like the Zeiss Ikon finder and I know personally of at least one regular rangefinder user who much prefers it's huge finder to that of any M Leica.
Now you know two.
From a design/shooting perspective, Cosina's experience is hard to beat. If they entered the digital world (not likely), they'd be a good competitor to what Fuji is offering (or Sony if they actually made some more lenses for their system!).
I love my X100 and have basically been waiting around to see what develops by next spring to go all-in on a new system.
One big missing piece of this puzzle is what 3rd party lenses will be adaptable to this Fuji mount. I am doubting the distance will be as short as the NEX.
