Steve Spencer wrote:
Well that is puzzling to me. Their 18mm (28 equiv) and 23mm (35 equiv) are f/2, and then they decide to make the 14mm (21 equiv) f/1.4? Not sure of the logic behind that. Personally, I would have preferred a slower lens that should be smaller with fewer aberrations; f/2.8 would have been plenty fast for me. Oh well, perhaps with software correction they will be able to produce decent results and keep it at least fairly small. I still think that will be a very big challenge, however.
Indeed. It is odd. I don't think Kayce Baker would have made that mistake as she's pretty knowledgeable of all things Fuji as well as the Marketing Director but who knows, it could have been just a verbal mistake/ accident. She did say she was really looking forward to that lens right after stating it was 1.4.
bluetsunami wrote:
The EVF should be fine since you'll be seeing what the sensor sees
Isn't finder hybrid? Not sure how it will work with removable lenses..I am not even sure how to word it since I don't know the complete mechanics of it (testing using X100 wouldn't be conclusive, I think)...
Can one rely purely on result of viewing through the lens or is the result combined? Hmm..
Krosavcheg wrote:
Isn't finder hybrid? Not sure how it will work with removable lenses..I am not even sure how to word it since I don't know the complete mechanics of it (testing using X100 wouldn't be conclusive, I think)...
Can one rely purely on result of viewing through the lens or is the result combined? Hmm..
Hybrid means its can be an optical finder or an electronic one. You manually switch between the two.
And I really think a 14mm lens doesn't need to be an f/1.4 lens. I hope Fuji considers why people find the CV 12 and 15 so appealing. A f/1.4 lens would definitely be something of a crown jewel of the line thought and it comes off as Fuji flexing their ability.
Boy, that's a noisy environment. I'm guessing it will be fairly quite in single shot mode (for a focal plane shutter) with a lens mounted to muffle the sound.
Krosavcheg wrote:
Isn't finder hybrid? Not sure how it will work with removable lenses..I am not even sure how to word it since I don't know the complete mechanics of it (testing using X100 wouldn't be conclusive, I think)...
Can one rely purely on result of viewing through the lens or is the result combined? Hmm..
Parallax lines are projected in the ovf and a magnification screen increases area to maximize framing area. The evf sees what the sensor sees as stated.
Reading the hands-on on the ephotozine page there's this excerpt...
Value For Money
Price TBC. The price is expected to be in the premium mirrorless camera market between the NEX-7 and Olympus PEN E-P3, body only with the lenses available seperately.
The variance in info regarding the estimated cost of the body is pretty crazy. $1699 sounds reasonable for the kit but not just the body.
chiohkeh wrote:
I tend to disagree. As an owner of a 5D MKii I am quite sure that even downsized, at ISO 6400 I would recognize not only the noise, but also a lack of detail(sharpness) and accuracy of colors.
However Hugo Poon claims to have some full size images on his PBase account. Check them out there....
I'm not blown away, yet. I see a lot of NR going on in the night images. It's also possible that the 35mm lens has some field curvature by the looks of it. The buildings in the central area are quite sharp, but not at the top of the frame, though granted, those were at around f/3.5 and infinity scenes are usually better done stopped down more... the one with the buildings way at the bottom of the frame does prove that the lens can produce sharp results at the edge of the frame - I guess if that is where the focus point was.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
It was actually stated by Fuji's Kayce Baker so it's probably correct re the 1.4. Probably will rely heavily on software corrections is my bet.
I too have mixed feelings about this. I'm skeptical, yet also hope they actually produce it. While it probably won't be amazing for landscape applications, it would be very welcome for lowlight reportage type use. For those looking for optimum stopped down performance, then the CV15 f/4.5 would be a good alternative. Having used the CV15 on the NEX-5N, I found it was acceptable for indoor use, but the ISO was always up around 3200. Having at least a couple more stops would be a welcome degree of flexibility, even if it's 'only' f/2. I might get the XP1, or whatever other X mount camera Fuji produces just for this lens (if it's decent).
chiohkeh wrote:
I would never try to replace my 5DMKii with this camera, however I do think that this will be replacing my 7D which was my backup prior to this. The 7D cant touch the X-Pro1 in terms of high ISOs, however I will miss the focusing that the 7D provides if I do decide to sell it.
So it's at least a stop cleaner than say NEX 5N?
The 7D is as good as any current crop sensored camera at high ISO except maybe the X100. Haven't tried files from that camera.
Spyro P. wrote:
MF improvements would be nice. After all, all it takes is not gearing the @!$#%@ lens for macro!
But still it will only be good for wide lenses and zone focusing, to get a truly usable MF system they would need an EVF with much better res and dynamic range than the x100's and/or focus peaking. Or a rangefinder patch, either projected from the EVF or optical.
I used a Ricoh GXR with the M mount module and VF2 EVF for the first time today. Compared to the NEX-5N's LCD display for magnified manual focusing, the view through the VF2 looks as though there is a light gaussian blur filter between the numerical readout overlay and the actual image, to the point where it's challenging to discern accurately focused fine details in the normal magnified mode. However, switch it to 'Predator' mode focus assist, which looks like a gray-tone image with a high pass filter applied, and suddenly in focus details really pop because they appear to emerge from a monotone 2D background.
If Fuji is paying any attention to the alt crowd, they must offer a 'peaking' type feature. However, I found peaking on the NEX to be extremely annoying because half the time much of the image would be swimming in brightly colored outlines, obstructing the ability to discern picture elements needed to evaluate composition. In the GXR's Predator mode, one can still see the picture elements. And as soon as the shutter button is pressed halfway, the image reverts back to normal color. Sony could also learn something here, because it was necessary to dive into the menus to disable peaking when not desired. So far Ricoh's is the best EVF implementation I've experienced based on usability. While it's not the highest rez, it indicates that a not-cutting-edge EVF, such as what might be in the XP1, isn't necessarily an unconditional failure.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Boy, that's a noisy environment. I'm guessing it will be fairly quite in single shot mode (for a focal plane shutter) with a lens mounted to muffle the sound.
It sounds like a typewriter being used by a tired typist.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
The 7D is as good as any current crop sensored camera at high ISO except maybe the X100. Haven't tried files from that camera.
Its good, but not that near the top. The K-5 beats by a full stop in shadow noise, the D7000 about the same.
Mid-tone noise yeah, all the APS-C cameras are just about the same - it's photon shot noise after all. But for read noise (high ISO shadows) the 7D is only "good" these days. Undoubtedly it is "good enough".
rscheffler wrote:
I used a Ricoh GXR with the M mount module and VF2 EVF for the first time today. Compared to the NEX-5N's LCD display for magnified manual focusing, the view through the VF2 looks as though there is a light gaussian blur filter between the numerical readout overlay and the actual image, to the point where it's challenging to discern accurately focused fine details in the normal magnified mode. However, switch it to 'Predator' mode focus assist, which looks like a gray-tone image with a high pass filter applied, and suddenly in focus details really pop because they appear to emerge from a monotone 2D background.
If Fuji is paying any attention to the alt crowd, they must offer a 'peaking' type feature. However, I found peaking on the NEX to be extremely annoying because half the time much of the image would be swimming in brightly colored outlines, obstructing the ability to discern picture elements needed to evaluate composition. In the GXR's Predator mode, one can still see the picture elements. And as soon as the shutter button is pressed halfway, the image reverts back to normal color. Sony could also learn something here, because it was necessary to dive into the menus to disable peaking when not desired. So far Ricoh's is the best EVF implementation I've experienced based on usability. While it's not the highest rez, it indicates that a not-cutting-edge EVF, such as what might be in the XP1, isn't necessarily an unconditional failure....Show more →
The 5N's peaking is reliant on jpeg settings, as well as the peaking level, so it requires quite a bit of fine tuning. Rarely is my EVF washed in color.
If the 14/1.4 is real, I imagine it's meant to be a bragging rights lens for the line - only Leica has an equivalent lens, for $6500-7000, if you can find one.
So let's sum up the downside:
A tiny bit pricey
Big
Loud shutter by 5n standards (this is a big deal really)
Poor Rez EVF (by our nex standard)
OVF seems to exist for framing, not focusing.
No fast native 28 (very stupid--but maybe it will come)
Up side:
Nice buttons.
3 decent or better native lenses
Probably a wonderful sensor.
OVF so you can pretend its a rangefinder.
"Leica-like" cool.
Some decent looking primes, esp the 18/2.
All things considering you gotta give it up to fuji for a serious effort here.
A 14mm f:1.4 suggests that Fuji really don't have any issue with high-angle incident rays at all, either thanks to the sensor design, or the lens. Question is, will the IQ match the spec?
rscheffler wrote:
So far Ricoh's is the best EVF implementation I've experienced based on usability. While it's not the highest rez, it indicates that a not-cutting-edge EVF, such as what might be in the XP1, isn't necessarily an unconditional failure.
Agree with your well put remarks.
I almost did not purchase the GXR because I was aware it had a less than cutting edge EVF, as does the X100, certainly as compared to the NEX. The experience has taught me to separate EVF performance and focus assist (if I care about manual focus that is) - they can be different concerns.
The implementation of the focus assist(s) matters a lot. I'm interested in what Fujifilm has done in this regard... hopefully more than just provide a magnification assist.
uhoh7 wrote:
Loud shutter by 5n standards (this is a big deal really)
are we sure about this? Side by side comparison or just guessing fromm videos?
If so, how much quieter is the 5n compared to original 5? Tried the 5 before and was disappointed with how loud it was, louder than some slrs with mirrors
It's appearing in google uk at £1,299.99 BODY ONLY at a couple of places now... Not so good... Although the places aren't particularly reputable to my knowledge.
