Tariq Gibran wrote:
Unfortunately for those who plan to use adapted alt lenses, I suspect the camera may lack a built in focal plane shutter and, instead, use a lens shutter. Otherwise, I'm not sure why Fuji would restrict a professional camera to 'just' 1/4000 sec, the same incidentally as that available in the lens shutter in x100. Also note that on the shutter dial, none of the speeds are in a different color which typically would mark the highest sync speed. That also could indicate that all speeds sync and thus the lens shutter - and wow, 1/4000 lens shutter full sync would be groundbreaking stuff just as on x100 though it would be nice if it's always available at any aperture. It is a mock up though so that could also explain the shutter dial. IF it will only use Fuji lenses though, that might not be such a bad thing as they will likely be up there with the best lenses available with regard to optical quality....Show more →
Agreed about Fuji lenses. It may negate the need for alt. lenses for many. Just throwing ideas out here, but I wonder if the Fuji has an electronic first curtain, which could be a potential reason for the 1/4000
JamesBeach wrote:
I have no idea what your iPad anecdote has to do with anything.
It shows what kind of user interface 3 year olds learn and understand. In a few years time, those 3 year olds will be the driving force of technology, and they are not going to buy some device with a keyboard just to keep Microsoft alive. iPad is just a part of that technology. Most people in Asia are buying Samsung or one of the many Chinese brands.
It's like the disappearing viewfinder from compact cameras. It's nice that Fuji launches cameras with useable viewfinders, but they are really niche products for enthusiasts and dinosaurs. A vast majority of those growing up today will never take photos using one.
I used to work with mainframe computers some 30+ years ago. Remember IBM, Amdahl, Burroughs, Digital, CDC Honeywell Bull etc.? Those were household names at that time, and a desktop computer was some text editing device that would cost as much as a new car. Telephones were attached to the wall with a piece of wire and if anybody suggested that it would have been a good idea to build a camera into the device...
15 years ago, most people did not have a mobile phone, and those who had had a Nokia, an Ericsson or a Motorola. Ericsson is gone, Motorola mostly exists in North America and Nokia is mostly selling cheap phones at cut throat margins. The world is changing.
michaelwatkins wrote:
Unlike Burroughs, the Viewfinder will make a triumphant return, thanks to technology.
(ex Data General gear pusher here)
It would be nice if you're right, but I'm afraid it will be a niche product. Kudos to Fuji, a company that keeps several niches alive and innovate within areas that most corporations have declared dead ages ago.
I'm certainly crossing my fingers that we'll see more viewfinder equipped (or really good optional EVF) cameras going forward because like many others in my peer group our eyes are or have already started to become less flexible. If an aging population is the expectation for a while going forward, and if technology now allows makers to produce very usable EVFs, it doesn't seem to me to be a stretch to believe manufacturers will rise to the occasion.
If not, well, I can always go back to film. Assuming there still is film.
I think the distinction is usually optical vs efv and I suspect Jorgen was thinking the reference to 'viewfinder' was assuming the optical kind. The really nice thing about what Fuji is doing is not forcing the photographer to choose one or the other - you get both and can use whichever you prefer.
Most consumers given a choice of a P&S camera with a typical viewfinder or a P&S with live view, 90% will choose live view because the viewfinders are garbage for the most part, but give them a large high rez EVF, and things could swing the other way.
The only reason I'd buy Fuji's mirrorless is to use my lens collection on, if they make it such that only their lenses will work with it, I simply won't buy it no matter how good their glass is. I therefor think if they do use an in lens shutter it will be in addition to a focal plane shutter.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I think the distinction is usually optical vs efv and I suspect Jorgen was thinking the reference to 'viewfinder' was assuming the optical kind. The really nice thing about what Fuji is doing is not forcing the photographer to choose one or the other - you get both and can use whichever you prefer.
No, I'm thinking all viewfinders, and mind you, I don't like the development. I've been to press conferences lately where journalists are taking photos for publication with their iPads. Hopefully, there will always be "real" photographers out there using "real" cameras with viewfinders, but again; I'm afraid it will be a niche product in the future, and much more so than today. Cheap p&s cameras will more or less disappear anyway, since that market is being taken over by other mobile devices, mostly phones. It's important to remember that a vast majority of those taking photos just want memories and not necessarily quality.
Remember Aunt Margaret's photo album? Great memories for her, boring photos for you. Nowadays, those memories only last until the next phone upgrade, but such are modern times. Everything is disposable, even our past.
LightShow wrote:
The only reason I'd buy Fuji's mirrorless is to use my lens collection on, if they make it such that only their lenses will work with it, I simply won't buy it no matter how good their glass is. I therefor think if they do use an in lens shutter it will be in addition to a focal plane shutter.
That would be interesting if they offered dual shutters but I sort of doubt it will happen. From Fuji's perspective, they may think they will sell more lenses if the possibility of using other lenses is not available and that would probably be the case. With their previous DSLR line based on Nikon bodies and the F-mount, I expect Fuji lost out potential profit by not offering a dedicated mount. I even think this may be one thing that killed their DSLR since the cameras probably needed to be priced higher since no money was going to be made on lenses and other accessories. At a certain point, Fuji probably found themselves priced out of the market for what they would have to charge to make a decent profit - but that's just my guess.
For a lot of pro's, a super fast leaf shutter system and interchangeable lenses offering extremely high sync speeds is a very desirable combination. This would be a pretty unique offering in the marketplace.
Fuji kind of painted themselves into a very tiny corner of the pro digital market. On one side they had the rather unfruitful partnership with Nikon, on the other side, they made cameras for Hasselblad but were apparently not able to release a digital Fuji version of the GX645, for contractual or other reasons.
All the more impressive then that they are able to churn out one attractive niche camera after the other, film as well as digital. Fujifilm is absolutely a manufacturer to turn to for photographers who care more about the photograph than the gear.
What about if they put those neutral density filters infront of the sensor like they did on the x100 (inside the lens?), that might negate the need for anything above 1/4000th. Like many I don't actually need a shutter higher than that, but if I'm using fast lenses (ie 35/1.4) in the daytime even ISO100 can be a push sometimes, so there needs to be something else in the way to stop overexposure. Some sort of neutral density device that can be switched on and off could be one answer. Perhaps the new sensor (assuming it is the newer tech) has some sort of advantage at going to lower ISO as well, so ISO 50, 25, 10 etc could come into use. Speculating, of course.
As for the question of adaptable mounting: Not important for me either. Like others have said, Fuji can make lenses that are "right up there" (and have done), so wouldn't have much interest in anything else. For what I had in mind, I'd only use 2 lenses (3 at MAX). I think I'd agree with Jorgen though, it could push Fuji into a "small pro corner" for made up of very few enthusiasts and pros. We'll have to see I guess.
michaelwatkins wrote:
I primarily used the X100's EVF rather than the OVF because if I can, I prefer to frame accurately in camera rather than crop. Where the EVF had problems was with lag and resolution. For faster moving subjects, especially in lower light, EVF lag was an issue. You could reduce EVF lag with a half-shutter press. Resolution of the EVF was a problem especially evident when using the magnified focus aide or when reviewing images magnified.
The Sony implementation is just that much better and makes it possible to sell a camera that only has an EVF even if some won't buy it because it doesn't offer an optical finder.
Within the X100 community, at least the vocal ones who participate in forms, I'd have to say as a primarily EVF user I was in a minority. There always seemed to be a lot of "give me my OVF or die" sentiment. Some of those folks would not buy another Fujifilm EVF only product unless the finder really was killer and then maybe not even so. It is nice to use the OVF at times - getting a heads up when subjects are about to enter the frame is very useful. You don't get that with a 100% coverage EVF....Show more →
Thanks for that. Having not tried an X100 (downfall of living in the sticks) I wasn't sure of how good or bad either were in reality. One thing I'm unsure of with the OVF, is it not just a "glass box" to a large extent? No way to determine focus, no parallax correction? Does this not sometimes result in OOF photos poorly composed? :S
That was my assumption, which is why I also assumed EVF was what many used, but apparently wrong so would be good to know otherwise.
The X100 is a fixed lens camera that really was designed to be used as an auto-focus camera. I'd always use the EVF for manual focus (i.e. I really had to tweak focus manually, primarily for very close work, or in really dark conditions where AF was hunting to death).
The OVF in the X100 is pretty advanced. It includes a nice heads up display, configurable as to what it presents to you, that overlays key shooting parameters. It does offer parallax corrected framing lines which are usable but not nearly as accurate as the live view via the EVF.
Another word on lag, I would not use the EVF to capture a person walking into my field of view, the lag was that bad. The OVF is far superior in this regard. Sony's EVF is much better than the X10's EVF in this respect.
There is a convenient lever on the front of the camera that toggles the two EVF views; a set of shutter blades closes off the OVF while the EVF is in use. It all works very well. That said the inclusion of more moving parts causes me to worry that those blades will fail and need service though, and have seen a couple of reports of that occurring. That would not stop me from buying another hybrid finder equipped camera from Fuji though.
Thanks again for the hands on info Michael, appreciated. The OVF does seem more advance than I anticipated, with clear advantages over the EVF. RE: Lag: if someone is walking into the frame with the OVF, would it nore make it near impossible to get the focus correct in that given moment? I guess that's where a wider scene, manual focus and smaller apertures come into play? Anyway, sounds interesting, I'll have to wait and see what this new contraption brings.
I guess the other things is whether the lenses will have "real" focusing rings, or be focus by wire again, which seemed to be one of the biggest complaints I read here at the time of release.
Wow, see the X100 at £695 GBP delivered in the UK now. It's been dropping steadily but first time I saw it below £700.
My walking into the frame example was to underscore viewfinder lag being a problem grabbing timing. You can actually improve the EVF lag with a half-shutter press, and in fact you'd want to do that because it would do either or both AF lock and exposure lock. Exposure lock involves moving the aperture blades - when they are in position there is virtually no shutter lag. When they are not in position, shutter lag is enough to be problematic for action subjects. For quicker action I'd generally use the OVF and have pre-focussed the camera and be at the half press of the shutter. The camera in those conditions is as fast as any.
In short, while the EVF isn't up to the same standard as Sony's, it is workable or can be made workable depending on one's shooting style.
As far as manual focus, the later firmware improved the utility of the focus by wire affair but it is no match for a real manual focus lens of course.
michaelwatkins wrote:
My walking into the frame example was to underscore viewfinder lag being a problem grabbing timing. You can actually improve the EVF lag with a half-shutter press, and in fact you'd want to do that because it would do either or both AF lock and exposure lock. Exposure lock involves moving the aperture blades - when they are in position there is virtually no shutter lag. When they are not in position, shutter lag is enough to be problematic for action subjects. For quicker action I'd generally use the OVF and have pre-focussed the camera and be at the half press of the shutter. The camera in those conditions is as fast as any.
In short, while the EVF isn't up to the same standard as Sony's, it is workable or can be made workable depending on one's shooting style.
As far as manual focus, the later firmware improved the utility of the focus by wire affair but it is no match for a real manual focus lens of course....Show more →
To add to the "walking into the frame" techniques, using the OVF is also going to be better than any EVF (unless you had one which displayed area outside the image area - greater than 100% and I'm not aware of any) because you can actually see the person outside the area that will be included in the image (and thus be able to better anticipate them entering the frame).
I wouldn't worry too much about being able to adapt legacy lenses either. Although I've done that a lot on 4/3 and m4/3, Fuji knows how to make excellent glass, and for most purposes, native lenses are easier to use.
Jorgen Udvang wrote:
I wouldn't worry too much about being able to adapt legacy lenses either. Although I've done that a lot on 4/3 and m4/3, Fuji knows how to make excellent glass, and for most purposes, native lenses are easier to use.
i don't care if the fuji lenses are the best ever in their focal length by all measures. some lenses have special character and i want to be able to use them. i like to have choices and the ability to take my lenses and leave a camera brand as well.
Perhaps an issue if you were doing to dump one brand for another, but I'd see this sort of thing as an "additional" system, rather than a complete replacement. Different for everyone though I guess.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
To add to the "walking into the frame" techniques, using the OVF is also going to be better than any EVF...because you can actually see the person outside the area that will be included in the image (and thus be able to better anticipate them entering the frame).
Absolutely. The combination of > 100% coverage and no viewfinder lag is a winning one, and as long as you've pre-armed the camera with a half-press, there's no aperture or shutter lag to speak of either. For some shooters this will be an important feature to base a buy/no buy decision on. I'd expect Fujifilm would like to offer a hybrid finder in the new X ILC camera.
sebboh wrote:
i don't care if the fuji lenses are the best ever in their focal length by all measures. some lenses have special character and i want to be able to use them. i like to have choices and the ability to take my lenses and leave a camera brand as well.
I'm in the same camp too. Will Fujifilm design lenses that appeal to me? To you? To Tariq? Who knows but it'll be one flavour for all.
With the industry now at the point where the development of high quality digital 'system' compact cameras is a reality, it seems to me there'll be more buying these as primary, not secondary, cameras. That describes me at this point. I'd like to be able to use my lenses on whatever digital back makes the most sense for me or for my pocket book or for the task at hand. I will probably not be won over by Fujifilm if they excluded adapted lenses from playing in their pool.
