douglasf13 wrote:
Charlie, you're reading my mind about my camera situation. I was also wondering the same thing about an EVF projected rangefinder patch. It seems possible to me.
Perhaps it could be worked out but the issue would seem to be that the EVF/ live view feed have exact and precise registration with the not so accurate optical finder view in order to project the focus info or patch in the spot it must be to be useful. At longer distances, perhaps it could work but not at close distances where the optical finder is not very accurate. That's my un-educated guess as to the issue.
However potentially the most interesting change is on the inside, and specifically the image sensor. The X-Pro 1 uses a proprietary, Fujifilm-designed 16MP APS-C 'X-Trans CMOS' chip that eschews the conventional Bayer-pattern colour filter array in favour of a more complex layout.
It's a new sensor from them. Sony is making sensors for others as we'll, certainly pouncing more means less expensive and more r/d for changing the filter too.
Point is, new design has to be much more costly than revised similar.
Maybe, but I think Tariq may be correct that the viewfinder is a major cost. Pentax, Ricoh and Nikon all use their own CFAs on Sony sensors, and I'm not sure how much cost really went into a 6x6 matrix. Who knows?
h00ligan wrote:
R&d. New sensor design can't be cheap. Lower yield for now. I am not surprised it costs more. There's more tech inside it.
As to focusing this is a bigger deal but...I don't mind x100 like af if mf is actually good (it's crap on the x100)
Seriously, this is more about Fuji targeting those that might desire a M9 and see $1700 as a bargain. It's all about what the market will bear. I don't think we are seeing a reflection of expensive new technology. It's all standard fare other than a new CFA. The new CFA has different layout than BAyer, but it's not like it's made from thin film unobtanium. It will still be made from colour pigments similar to standard Bayer. The choice of pigments alters the spectral response. Nothing revolutionary going on here.
I'm sure that's a part of it...but otoh, they aren't charging 1k for their 'premium' lens. I'd agree the vf is part too
So assuming one gets the 28 or 50.... It's cheaper than the zeiss nex 7 combo no?
It will be interesting to see if fuji can hit market in march, I'll be surprised...that is probably about the time the nex 7 will be coming widely available...and tbh, I like the look of the fuji lenses much more!
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I don't think we are seeing a reflection of expensive new technology. It's all standard fare other than a new CFA.
I have not seen anything else like the heads-up, projected info such as live histo, all shooting info, etc. in a non-prism/TTL optical finder previous to the X100 before. Combining that with the EVF on demand through the same finder seems sort of innovative in it's application for a still camera. Are you saying this is just off the shelf, generic stuff and did not require a large investment in R&D from Fuji?
Edit. I'm guessing you were just referring to the sensor with your post?
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I have not seen anything else like the heads-up, projected info such as live histo, all shooting info, etc. in a non-prism/TTL optical finder previous to the X100 before. Combining that with the EVF on demand through the same finder seems sort of innovative in it's application for a still camera. Are you saying this is just off the shelf, generic stuff and did not require a large investment in R&D from Fuji?
Edit. I'm guessing you were just referring to the sensor with your post?
Sensor only.
The VF stuff is really exciting. But how much is based on X100, which should have helped ameliorate costs?
The X-Pro1 VF is a bit different from the X100. It projects the EVF from the bottom, it has the slide in wide angle lens, and the black shutter is now internal. Granted, they have the same basic idea. Both are pretty complicated and look costly.
The VF stuff is really exciting. But how much is based on X100, which should have helped ameliorate costs?
Yes. They did have to incorporate dual magnification and the accommodation of multi focal lengths into the optical system but everything else - basic design - looks to be shared.
Edit. Douglas pointed out the specific differences above.
It looks like the EVF overlay array is actually coming from the bottom of the camera now to incorporate the magnifying screen. Its pretty cool but apparently this design made it impossible to install a diopter adjuster without compromising the width of the body.
The lenses are pretty cheap, the body is expensive. Maybe the thought is that if people are going to throw a lot of m-mount glass on the camera, they make the money on the body and keep the lenses cheap enough that people get new lenses rather than resurrect old glass. It will be interesting to see if the zooms are more expensive than the primes. Lots of m primes, not so many zooms.
Prices are set by the market, not by costs.
Did you see Kayce Baker say in the video that the 6fps is under rated? With a fast card she said 12fps!! Love to see that documented by someone like dpreview. Use the viewfinder, zone focus and shoot that fast without mirror blackout. Yummy.
anselwannab wrote:
The lenses are pretty cheap, the body is expensive. Maybe the thought is that if people are going to throw a lot of m-mount glass on the camera, they make the money on the body and keep the lenses cheap enough that people get new lenses rather than resurrect old glass. It will be interesting to see if the zooms are more expensive than the primes. Lots of m primes, not so many zooms.
Prices are set by the market, not by costs.
The M system is the same way - and it's even an "open" system as well. Many lenses (excluding the Tri-Elmars) are less than half of the cost of the camera. Include the Zeiss lenses, and it's even more heavily weighted to the camera.
anselwannab wrote:
The lenses are pretty cheap, the body is expensive. Maybe the thought is that if people are going to throw a lot of m-mount glass on the camera, they make the money on the body and keep the lenses cheap enough that people get new lenses rather than resurrect old glass. It will be interesting to see if the zooms are more expensive than the primes. Lots of m primes, not so many zooms.
Prices are set by the market, not by costs.
Did you see Kayce Baker say in the video that the 6fps is under rated? With a fast card she said 12fps!! Love to see that documented by someone like dpreview. Use the viewfinder, zone focus and shoot that fast without mirror blackout. Yummy....Show more →
My speculation as well regarding pricing.
The problem is likely going to be the buffer size as far as shooting speed. 12fps will be tough if the buffer only holds 10 frames (some of the specs on the rumor sites posted that number I believe).
corposant wrote:
The M system is the same way - and it's even an "open" system as well. Many lenses (excluding the Tri-Elmars) are less than half of the cost of the camera. Include the Zeiss lenses, and it's even more heavily weighted to the camera.
I think I'll wait for the fury to settle and hopefully the price. Get the body and the wide lens and the m adaptor so I can use some of my m glass for portraits. Still probably over $2500. Looks like a bit more time with the Leica CL for now!!!
Spyro P. wrote:
that landscape sample looked a bit average to me to be honest
sensor and lens alike
I thought the same at first, but the image needs PP. I applied curves for contrast & color saturation, then resize and a smidgen of sharpening. The original image is both very sharp and smooth, with highlights fully preserved. Re the camera design, I like the absence of up-front badges: Fujifilm is often guilty of the tackiest labelling.
It really does look like the corner sharpness is there on the shots I've seen so far. Saw a lot of people complain about how "soft" some shots looked (like the flower one) but I think they have never used a 1.4 lens before... the contrast is pretty low but the sharpness is definitely there.
uhoh7 wrote:
Obviously they are looking to get some RF fans----but seriously: how would you focus the fast glass?
Is the ovf just useless in that case?
Can someone confirm this? Having never got my hands on an x100 I'm unsure about focus... You have dof scale in the ovf, right? But what about focusing on a specific subject with ovf, are you just left guessing? That just wouldn't be good enough for fast normal to tele lenses...
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Yeah, those Leica lenses are quite the bargain!
Considering that most are constantly on backorder, it would appear that there isn't a shortage of buyers and the market could bear even higher prices, as crazy as that sounds.
I agree about the Fuji. Everyone who wants to play will have to buy the body, but many will be coming with their own set of lenses.
As far as Leica is concerned with their digital M bodies, I think it's partly like that, but also keep in mind they have a much, much smaller group of potential buyers. IIRC, it was recently announced that they surpassed 30K M9s, which was more than they originally projected. Therefore the price of the M9 was probably partially set based on their originally anticipated sales volume relative to R&D costs, etc.. and what the market will bear.
