kosmoskatten wrote:
With digital cameras they have some history but they need to ride the success of the X10 and X100 (I believe they are having a success with them) and fortify their position.
They will need to be better with the user interface as I still find them quirky.
Yes, your are right, their user interfaces - and not only that - has always been quirky. I still have a S3pro and S5pro, both cameras were (and continue to be) extremely strong in some limited areas (as skin tone out of the box, plus dynamic range / soft highlight roll-off), but have some screaming limits (resolution, RAW speed, medium grade AF, plus their cluttered menues).
I was always under the impression that Fuji has been struggling to find a clear strategy in the digital market. On one hand they have incredible know- how (for example, how to make colour look attractive and credible, how to translate the good qualities of film to sensors) and keep coming up with interesting innovations, on the other hand their digital products have always been compromised by one or more quirks that make you develop a love- hate relationship most of the time.
I hope that if they really are serious about their trying to get to no. 3 in the camera market, this will give them enough drive to finally come out with cameras that can satisfy in all or almost all respects. High rez, high DR, great colour and enough speed.
So I whish them to sell tons of their new system camera in order to get confidence enough to go further and take the next step upwards. Nobody will really miss their colourful compact cams that come by dozens every 10 months and that hardly anyone can keep apart.
allofthelights wrote:
Interesting to compare the (rumoured) lens dimensions:
Fuji XF 18mm f/2 R
dimensions: 64.5 x 40.6 mm
weight: 116 g
Fuji XF 35mm f/1.4 R
dimensions: 65.0 x 54.9 mm
weight: 187 g
Fuji XF 60mm f/2.4 R Macro
dimensions: 64.1 x 70.9 mm
weight: 215 g
Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* E 24mm F1.8 ZA
dimensions: 63 x 66 mm
weight: 225g
SonyE 50mm F1.8
dimensions: 62 x 62 mm
weight: 202
Quite similar in size, so the Fuji system doesn't appear to give any significant size savings over E-mount.
Is the E-Mount 50 1.8 a Macro like the XF 60? There is currently not a Fuji 23/24mm (except for the x100 itself) for comparison, and shockingly, neither is there a Sony E mount fast normal lens like the Fuji 35 1.4. The Fuji 18 pancake is very small - and has a complex lens design, unlike the E-mount 16 for instance - so if it delivers at F2, Sony has nothing to compare with. So, it's interesting as there really are not direct comparisons which can be made with these systems with regard to lenses. What is amazing is that Fuji is releasing these fast primes from the get go, unlike Sony which even now is still missing important focal lengths like a fast normal.
Hmmmm. This might be enough for me to go Fuji instead of NEX7. I already know that the 7 will not give me top AF glass, since I rejected the ZA 24, nor will it ever love UWAs. But, as of now, my investment in the NEX system is "only" adapters for M and G glass. Question is, though, whether I will like the native Fuji glass, and whether the rest of the body is as good as its promise...
philber wrote:
Question is, though, whether I will like the native Fuji glass, and whether the rest of the body is as good as its promise...
Yes, the system will live or die based on the quality - and range - of these lenses. For me, this is the major weak point of the Sony NEX. If they are unable to make a really superior 1K ZA 24 lens which satisfies you and Fuji can do so for half the price, Sony has a major problem.
At this stage, it is very strange, actually downright unbelievable, that Fuji have not announced ANY zoom lens with this camera. When one knows that zooms account for the huge majority of the market, it makes one wonder why, and how much that can affect their market share. To do it on one camera, like the X-100 or the Leica X-1 is one thing, because they want to combine the advantage of a prime with that of a fixed lens design, but on a whole system?
philber wrote:
At this stage, it is very strange, actually downright unbelievable, that Fuji have not announced ANY zoom lens with this camera. When one knows that zooms account for the huge majority of the market, it makes one wonder why, and how much that can affect their market share. To do it on one camera, like the X-100 or the Leica X-1 is one thing, because they want to combine the advantage of a prime with that of a fixed lens design, but on a whole system?
The XPro1 is from the start aimed at serious enthusiasts and professionals who want the best image quality in the smallest package. Zooms would be larger and likely sacrifice quality as compared to primes so that's the answer. The NEX, by contrast, was initially aimed at the more general consumer hence zooms. Sony later started trickling out primes as the system found success in other niches and Fuji may do the same with zooms but from the start, we can clearly see these systems are different in their initial target markets. How many zooms do Leica offer for the M system? 1 sort of zoom perhaps.
Philippe, just out of curiosity, what were the reasons for your rejection of the Zeiss 24? I must have missed the pertaining post.
As for the X1, it is starting to look less appealing. For us traditionalists, I'm afraid the only option will still be a Leica M, until Sony releases its promised FF Nex and the every unlikely possibilty of a digital Zeiss Ikon.
Fair enough, Tariq. But my question is: how large is the market that Fuji are going for? Much as we might like it here, if it does live up to its promise, and/or our expectations, we are not enough to make it worthwhile for Fuji... The market is still heavily dominated by zooms, including, high-priced f:2.8 glass...
edwardkaraa wrote:
Philippe, just out of curiosity, what were the reasons for your rejection of the Zeiss 24? I must have missed the pertaining post.
As for the X1, it is starting to look less appealing. For us traditionalists, I'm afraid the only option will still be a Leica M, until Sony releases its promised FF Nex and the every unlikely possibilty of a digital Zeiss Ikon.
FF Zeiss Ikon, that's the dream! The Sony FF, NEX like camera will supposedly be A-mount/ NEX APS mount so for use with FF, it will likely end up being a large package due to the depth of using the A-mount part of the mount so that's not a sure option yet if your seeking compact FF. I guess we will have to wait a while to find out for sure though.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
FF Zeiss Ikon, that's the dream! The Sony FF, NEX like camera will supposedly be A-mount/ NEX APS mount so for use with FF, it will likely end up being a large package due to the depth of using the A-mount part of the mount so that's not a sure option yet if your seeking compact FF. I guess we will have to wait a while to find out for sure though.
I see your point about the Nex FF, so we can only hope. As for the Zeiss Ikon, I have been bugging Zeiss for a while now, and they have made it clear that the only reason keeping them from making one is the state of the sensor technology that is unfavourable for the ZM lenses due to the close distance between the rear element and the sensor. The usual corner blur and color shifts. I hope that with the current advances in the sensor technology, especially the organic AA less film introduced by bith Fuji and Sony, I really hope Zeiss would consider it finally.
philber wrote:
Fair enough, Tariq. But my question is: how large is the market that Fuji are going for? Much as we might like it here, if it does live up to its promise, and/or our expectations, we are not enough to make it worthwhile for Fuji... The market is still heavily dominated by zooms, including, high-priced f:2.8 glass...
Sales numbers for the x100 are rumoured to be 300.000 - 400.000 units. Best selling Fuji digital camera ever, by a long shot - sold probably more than S2pro, S3pro and S5pro together. Has only a moderate WA lens, not interchangeable.
The kit X-pro 1 camera + 35mm (= normal on crop sensor) lens costs not much more than the x100. Plus you will be able to change the lens.
To me - also regarding the first reactions on forums - this looks like Fuji will have another home run. Of course only if the camera performs well, or better: Excellent.
alba63 wrote:
Sales numbers for the x100 are rumoured to be 300.000 - 400.000 units. Best selling Fuji digital camera ever, by a long shot - sold probably more than S2pro, S3pro and S5pro together. Has only a moderate WA lens, not interchangeable.
Bernhard
Wow! if that estimate is correct. Seems like it was not long ago Fuji were claiming something like 70,000-100,000 X100's sold.
I think there can be no doubt that Fuji is betting that the success of the X100 will transfer over to a broader user base for an interchangeable lens version - yet still high end enthusiast/ professional. If they can deliver the goods, I believe their timing is impeccable on this one...sort of an embarrassment to Canikon.
edwardkaraa wrote:
I see your point about the Nex FF, so we can only hope. As for the Zeiss Ikon, I have been bugging Zeiss for a while now, and they have made it clear that the only reason keeping them from making one is the state of the sensor technology that is unfavourable for the ZM lenses due to the close distance between the rear element and the sensor. The usual corner blur and color shifts.
Which is interesting, because the ZM lenses were designed in the digital era, and Zeiss was fully aware of issues with digital sensor (they had already produced lenses for the Contax N digital). Zeiss designed the ZM lenses with an explicit nod to digital. You can see this in the wide angle designs which are less symmetrical than their previous rangefinder (or mirrorless, like the Hassy SWC) designs. Yes, they still have issues with sensors. Maybe this just points to the uniqueness of each sensor design (note corner differences between the NEX-5N and NEX-7 sensors) and the increasingly clear requirement that lenses be designed specifically for a sensor, especially for mirrorless/rangefinder designs with short lens registration distances. I wonder if the latest ZM designs work better with sensors than earlier ZM designs (presumably learning and adapting as they go along).
edwardkaraa wrote:
As for the Zeiss Ikon, I have been bugging Zeiss for a while now, and they have made it clear that the only reason keeping them from making one is the state of the sensor technology that is unfavourable for the ZM lenses due to the close distance between the rear element and the sensor.
Haven't Leica with the M8|M9 and Ricoh with Mount A12 proved that it is possible to produce a camera that will overcome these issues - well enough - with current sensors? Surely it can only get better from here.
ken.vs.ryu wrote:
I'd rather get an M8. I'm sure fuji will want a premium for the X1 in the neighborhood of used M8 pricing.
I will definitely look into the X1, but at the end of the day the net positive may be driving M9 prices down. Unfortunately, this doesn't help availability of M lenses at all....
Lotusm50 wrote:
Which is interesting, because the ZM lenses were designed in the digital era, and Zeiss was fully aware of issues with digital sensor (they had already produced lenses for the Contax N digital). Zeiss designed the ZM lenses with an explicit nod to digital. You can see this in the wide angle designs which are less symmetrical than their previous rangefinder (or mirrorless, like the Hassy SWC) designs. Yes, they still have issues with sensors. Maybe this just points to the uniqueness of each sensor design (note corner differences between the NEX-5N and NEX-7 sensors) and the increasingly clear requirement that lenses be designed specifically for a sensor, especially for mirrorless/rangefinder designs with short lens registration distances. I wonder if the latest ZM designs work better with sensors than earlier ZM designs (presumably learning and adapting as they go along).
Well, even most recent Leica lenses were designed for the M9, but they still require corrections nevertheless. I did read in Zeiss brochures that ZM were designed with an eventual Zeiss Ikon digital in mind, but I am afraid by the time sensor technology is advanced enough, the whole RF concept would be obsolete.
