The ev dial makes this unusable for me but I am curious about how this sensor draws and looks. If its uniquely amazing maybe I'll just glue the dial in Place.
Lotusm50 wrote:
This is quite true. Sony/Zeiss have been in credibly slow bringing lenses to market -- for the DSLR's as well as NEX. I seriously don't understand this. Why bring out a NEX-7 if you only really have one lens that can match its potential quality? NEX-7 buyers aren't going to be interested in a consumer 18-55mm zoom as a standard lens. I suspect most NEX-7 buyers are buying to put alternative lenses on it. Sony has been able to produce some compelling bodies but have been less than convincing/successful with lenses. This is where Zeiss presumably is supposed to come in, but that really appears to be a half-hearted effort at best (for whatever reason). Sony needs to manage this better and see this as a definite limiting factor on sales.
What about the 30 macro and 50/1.8 don't match the Nex-7's potential quality? The 16mm is really the only questionable lens. Don't get me wrong, I don't use any of them, but it's not THAT bad.
douglasf13 wrote:
What about the 30 macro and 50/1.8 don't match the Nex-7's potential quality? The 16mm is really the only questionable lens. Don't get me wrong, I don't use any of them, but it's not THAT bad.
They may not be THAT bad, but they are not generally perceived as THAT good. Part of that is Sony's own fault. It has 3 tiers of lenses -- the general consumers stuff, the "G" lenses, and the Zeiss lenses. If it's not Zeiss or "G", then its consumer crap (whether that perception is accurate or not) and not of interest to "serious" users.
Who perceives non-G or non-Zeiss Sony lenses as crap? There are quite a few good A-mount lenses without these designations, and there's a vast wealth of knowledge from serious users about these lenses over at Dyxum. I've really seen nothing but good reviews of the new 50/1.8 OSS, and I'd doubt any of these aps-c Fuji lenses will stand out above it. Even the lens in the X100, while a good performer, doesn't blow me away or anything. We're still talking about relatively cheap lenses from Fuji, not Hasselblad or anything.
I think people are sorely mistaken if they think that the new fuji will blow a 16/2.8, 24/1.8, 50/1.8-kit on a nex-7 out of the water image quality wise.
That new 16-50 is certainly not crap, feels like a quality piece of glass. I don't think anyone is expecting the fuji lenses to be "mind blowing" or anything like that... As mentioned they are relatively inexpensive. But they'll be good quality, they're supposedly made of metal, and they're akl pretty fast. For me there personally isn't a lot more to ask for.
slungu wrote:
For that money I can get a FF DSLR, so I think my NEX-5N will be around for a while.
I could quite easily be wrong, but I do get the impression that with smaller mirrorless systems like this many already hand an slr (or larger) system as there "main" one, so perhaps a larger format slr vs expensive fuji apsc camera won't be the be the question for many... But if the price is correct I think many will still have to weigh this up pretty carefully...
carstenw wrote:
Why do you think so? The Sony lenses are pretty average, and Fuji is very good with optical designs.
Which sony lenses are "pretty average"? the 16/2.8 is ok, not amazing but ok, and so far I have not seen a non-favorable review of the 24/1.8, 30/3.5 or 50/1.8.
I have yet to see something from the x-100 that leads me to believe that fuji makes magical lenses..
FlyPenFly wrote:
The nex kit lens is pretty darn good actually. It may be the best kit lens currently in production.
Nice that they gave it a metal finish too. It is around double the price of most kit lenses though, let's not forget...
Does anyone think any of the Fuji lenses will actually match or beat Contax G lenses? I doubt it. Fuji made some decent lenses in the past but Sony has made much more interesting excellent lenses presently and with the absorption of Minolta has far more resources. This is perhaps why it's frustrating that did not channel that into more nex primes. Supposedly 2012 is the year of new Sony nex primes.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Offering pre-orders on Amazon only - and only Amazon - before camera and lenses are even officially announced seems almost like Fuji may be putting their toe in the water/ doing market research for pricing. The lenses seemed very reasonably priced yesterday but then we get a body only price even higher than what we expected to see lens + body. Really curious to hear what Fuji officially announces with regard to pricing. I'm starting to think a $1700 16MP APS body might be hard to swallow as now the "kit" becomes about $800 more than we previously expected.
So you think that they on impulse decide to do market research less than 24 hours before release, and adjust the price accordingly? This is a listed Japanese company, and I can reassure you their decision-making process does not work this way.
Well Sony has supposedly taken on the feedback and re-worked the plans for the future line up, so perhaps you'll see something sooner rather than later. I think saying Fuji have made some "decent" lenses in the past is an understatement, that sort of knowledge doesn't just disappear, I see no reason to doubt why the lenses won't be good quality. But then I'm not as scrutinizing as most (I guess) when it comes to lenses, for me build colour and AF speed most important... when I find lenses with the build I want the other optical qualities are almost always there... I don't pixel peep, or corner peep, so I'm pretty relaxed in that regard.
Was anyone else refreshing dpreview at 9am this morning? I feel like a fool
There is no reason why this Fuji camera should cost more than a NEX 7, it should actually cost less, as its spec is a bit less. That could be pride on Fuji's part, thanks to the resounding success of the X-100's launch, or it could be the price on pays for being a specialist player aiming for a niche segment, rather than a heavyweight aiming for a mainstream segment...
Be it what it may, this price has somewhat dampened my enthusiasm...
allofthelights wrote:
So you think that they on impulse decide to do market research less than 24 hours before release, and adjust the price accordingly? This is a listed Japanese company, and I can reassure you their decision-making process does not work this way.
Contract market research companies do all sorts of crazy stuff on behalf of their clients.
philber wrote:
There is no reason why this Fuji camera should cost more than a NEX 7, it should actually cost less, as its spec is a bit less. That could be pride on Fuji's part, thanks to the resounding success of the X-100's launch, or it could be the price on pays for being a specialist player aiming for a niche segment, rather than a heavyweight aiming for a mainstream segment...
Be it what it may, this price has somewhat dampened my enthusiasm...
I always considered Fuji's last offerings on the pricey side - both the X100 and the Bessa, but that's a very ersonal opinion.
philber wrote:
There is no reason why this Fuji camera should cost more than a NEX 7, it should actually cost less, as its spec is a bit less. That could be pride on Fuji's part, thanks to the resounding success of the X-100's launch, or it could be the price on pays for being a specialist player aiming for a niche segment, rather than a heavyweight aiming for a mainstream segment...
Be it what it may, this price has somewhat dampened my enthusiasm...
The price is seriously high IMO. But maybe the lenses and IQ will be superb so it might be decent value in the end. Anything less and I can't see the value.
