rscheffler wrote:
Why would Fuji want to produce a FF camera? It would mean another subset of lenses for an even more niche market, and a good probability for a number of alienated users. As mentioned earlier, do we really need FF that badly if an APS-C system has all the lenses we'll generally need? .
Ahem.....
it's quaint to see APS-C defended as if it's "the future" or something, but please be serious: if this camera had a full frame and MF aids in the OVF it would be game over.
OK maybe not "over" but we'd all be swooning, that's for sure. And it would sell about 10 times what it's going to.
Do I really need to elaborate? The advantages are so huge: speed; versatiltiy; DOF.
If it only works well as a closed system they have lost 90% of the market.
150% of the reason the Nex is a success is it's the most open system ever accidentally produced
If you cannot see that a short register compact EVIL FF, with at least as good a viewfinder as the n7, is the friggin holy grail, and has been for years, you just have not been paying attention.
Like any holy grail, it's an object beyond logic and into the realm of powerful infantile desire, like auto-eroticism...but in this case it's totally logical as well.
uhoh7 wrote:
OK maybe not "over" but we'd all be swooning, that's for sure. And it would sell about 10 times what it's going to.
We would all be swooning for sure but I highly doubt it would even sell more than the current version given what it would cost, probably at least twice the XP1 price at a very minimum. The smaller market/ higher price would assure limited sales. It would be interesting to find out what Fuji projects XP1 sales to be.
uhoh7 wrote:
If it only works well as a closed system they have lost 90% of the market.
150% of the reason the Nex is a success is it's the most open system ever accidentally produced
Absolutely. I like to call it the "happy accident". In the process of designing a thin camera resembling at some level a smart phone they made it possible to adapt almost any lens.
Flies on the wall reliably report that there was no gnashing of teeth in Sony Design HQ over how rangefinder wides would perform on the Thin Camera.
[1] Instead they ran a "how low can you go" limbo contest and awarded the design decision for back focal length to limbo winner Takahiro Kobayashi. Tak-san decided to use his favorite lucky number, 8, as the design spec but his boss Masumoto Watanabe, ever the practical man, knew the lens department would have his genitals if he did that to them thus 18mm was elected. Not too thin, but certainly very thin.
Like any holy grail, it's an object beyond logic and into the realm of powerful infantile desire, like auto-eroticism...but in this case it's totally logical as well.
Auto-eroticism? Is that a car with a camera mount up front?
My infantile desire would be amply fulfilled if a full frame M mount module for Ricoh GXR ever appeared. The way I look at it, they have a modular system which has the lowest barrier to production. If they price the module at anything near sensible they can be sure to sell every single one and definitely raise their profile in the process.
I sometimes think Ricoh is looked on as the kindly but doddering old man on the corner, barely paid attention to or taken seriously (at least outside of Japan). A FF lens module would change that and at the same time allow me to indulge my infantile dreams and desires.
Masumoto would agree. He has a stash of M lenses at his apartment too.
[1] The names have been changed to protect the guilty.
thedigitalbean wrote:
There is stuttering before the AF confirms. Basically the video freezes until it locks on. Thats what I experienced when I tried it out yesterday.
sorry for a little ot, but your images are very impressive! I spent some time looking
through your website, you have some really great images from Africa and the Sierras!
michaelwatkins wrote:
Absolutely. I like to call it the "happy accident". In the process of designing a thin camera resembling at some level a smart phone they made it possible to adapt almost any lens.
Flies on the wall reliably report that there was no gnashing of teeth in Sony Design HQ over how rangefinder wides would perform on the Thin Camera.
I sort of have my doubts about the notion the Fuji XP1 would loose 90% of the market if it were a closed system. Sure, maybe 50% of us but we (alt lens users) certainly don't make up the entire market for this camera, not even close.
"150% of the reason the Nex is a success is it's the most open system ever accidentally produced"
Proof?
Success on this forum, maybe. The ability to adapt any lens to fit a camera only can add to its success, not make it. Alt users do not make up a large percentage of the mainstream audience that these cameras target... don't forget you're a niche market.
Unless you have numbers to back up your claims, of course..
michaelwatkins wrote:
Whatever the number, Fujifilm, or any compact system camera maker, have more to gain by being open than to remain closed.
That would depend upon their body/ lens pricing strategy. Fuji's XP1 body is likely priced so high that they are not going to hurt too much if their lenses don't sell due to folks using alt lenses.
Tariq: perhaps, but to me that is kind of a backwards thinking.
Fuji could of course let you choose a package deal consisting of a body + lens to ensure that they sell lenses. They could do so and still profit from it even when presenting it as a "package deal" at a "subsidized" price.
I don't understand why Fuji should penalize their customers by charging a high price for the body alone. Anyone who buys the X Pro 1 is a customer. If you really like the camera you are quite likely to buy some lenses for it.
And what if I want a second body as a back up?
If they are not including peaking as a feature they have already made a decision to make it a lesser option than the competition. Again, this could be a marketing decision which would say: "we prefer you to buy and use our Fujinon lenses but we will support use of your legacy glass." "But, we won't make it too easy to use them..."
If it has no peaking and iffy fly by wire MF for their own lenses then it is less appealing to some, me included. Especially if AF is sub par.
Shutter noise I am not too concerned with, one needs to hear it with lens mounted before telling if it is too loud, or not.
uhoh7: I don't see APS-C as the future. Not at all, if it were up to me we'd have full frame 24x36 as the base sensor size at least.
Considering the cost of produce and sensor yield I am sure APS-C will dominate over full frame though.
I am certain that people are starting to appreciate smaller cameras and most people are accepting to sacrifice full frame in order to have a smaller kit.
The technology is here already to produce a full frame, small-ish camera, yet the camera makers are so adamant on not releasing one you have to wonder what is holding them back? The knowledge that yesterdays hit can be tomorrows flop in an instant?
If Leica can produce a "crude" electronic full frame digital camera with an intricate optomechanical range finder and sell it like hot cakes despite an astronomical price tag, why can't the other makers release a similar product at half or two thirds of the price? Would not be so hard if you reduce the labor cost and the meticulous range finder assembly and make a full frame EVF camera. Something the NEX7 should have been, if you ask me.
kosmoskatten wrote:
If Leica can produce a "crude" electronic full frame digital camera with an intricate optomechanical range finder and sell it like hot cakes despite an astronomical price tag, why can't the other makers release a similar product at half or two thirds of the price? Would not be so hard if you reduce the labor cost and the meticulous range finder assembly and make a full frame EVF camera. Something the NEX7 should have been, if you ask me.
That would be nice, but a crop camera is more profitable.
If they were gonna do a FF EVF mirrorless, what's in it for them?
Huge R&D costs, having to deal with every weirdo chimping the corners of the sensor with his XYZ legacy glass, having to develop a new range of lenses if they're gonna make any money, and all they'd achieve is to boost Leica, ZM and CV sales because lets face it, they are the specialists when it comes to M lenses. Much easier and more profitable to do a crop, and get people to buy some proprietary lenses because their M glass is just "not the same" on a crop sensor. Or in Fuji's case because "they havent launched the M adapter yet" (major bullshit, if you can make a hybrid OVF with multiple magnifications, how hard is it to make a friggin flange...)
If on the other hand you ARE zeiss and cv who already make such lenses, then yes it would make sense. But Zeiss/CV have capitulated on the camera front for their own reasons. Leica did it, but Leica is an oddball company.
However, a bold company could make a EVF full frame camera specifically for legacy glass and sell enough to make a profit from it, yes? No?
I think, yes. But in reality it might never happen, unless Ricoh will bring out a full frame M module.
You have to give props to Ricoh for making a M module, albeit APS-C. I bet there was quite a few marketing "specialists" that were certain it was doomed to be a failure. But they did release it, and it works better than anything else out there for M-glass compatibility in APS-C. (Not knowing what the new Fuji cam can do.)
If technology brings prices down for full frame sensors over time I can't see why they would not make a full frame version. I would buy two, seriously.
I had a very long answer in preparation, but I am cutting it short. I can agree with you to a certain degree. I was very happy with my last analog outfit, before digital made it's "breakthrough" and Sony announced that "film was dead".
I hope labs never had invented scratches on film though.
Digital has come a long way since, but as we can see there is a new "unforeseen" problem with every new step in the evolution and even though digital has reached a certain degree of maturity I am sure there will be many moons before we are pleased. For real.
kosmoskatten wrote:
Digital has come a long way since, but as we can see there is a new "unforeseen" problem with every new step in the evolution and even though digital has reached a certain degree of maturity I am sure there will be many moons before we are pleased. For real.
Many many moons, and when it does happen it will probably be by accident.
In the meantime they will try every trick in the book to convince us that:
-36X24 is so extremely overrated and doesn't really mean anything.
-Sticking your eye against a tiny television and squinting at grainy pixels from point blank is as good as an optical VF. What's that? A migraine? Must be you need new spectacles.
-Actually no VF at all is also a very good option, why are we beeing so stuck to the past?
-medium format rangefinders never really existed, it was an illusion. You can forget about them now because they never had a reason of existence. Same for pocket full frame cameras, and active infrared focusing, and large format and and and....
-Cameras that are designed exclusively for manual focus are for weirdos who are willing to hand out $7k to an oddball anachronistic tiny german company.
-Any camera that looks like a film camera is as good as a film camera, and worth paying $1.7k for (yes this is sans lens). Even though MF sucks and AF sucks too, and your lenses are cropped to half. Doesnt matter it looks cool.
I'll play along, what can I do.
I'll go with the times, pretend that I'm stupid, keep hoping.
But patience does have its limits...
ontime wrote:
"150% of the reason the Nex is a success is it's the most open system ever accidentally produced"
Proof?
Success on this forum, maybe. The ability to adapt any lens to fit a camera only can add to its success, not make it. Alt users do not make up a large percentage of the mainstream audience that these cameras target... don't forget you're a niche market.
Unless you have numbers to back up your claims, of course..
Well given the hike in prices of alt lenses, specifically the rangefinder ones since the NEX system appeared, especially the 5N? Yes a lot of that is the micro 4/3 systems as well but when a Canon LTM 35mm f1.5 in very used condition is selling at around triple the price it was selling a year and a half ago (just one example!) that does tell a very powerful story.
Just got to figure a way to cram the NEX EVF, peaking and electronics into an X100 body with GXR controls and maybe a 1.3 crop version of this new X pro sensor.
Throw in a native m mount, tilt touch LCD and a dash of IBIS and you would be away laughing...
uhoh7 wrote:
150% of the reason the Nex is a success is it's the most open system ever accidentally produced
That's the best take on the Nex I ever heard .
Despite some shortcomings, like no ISO hot shoe and cable release option, the Nex is incredibly versatile .
Sosua wrote:
Just got to figure a way to cram the NEX EVF, peaking and electronics into an X100 body with GXR controls and maybe a 1.3 crop version of this new X pro sensor.
Throw in a native m mount, tilt touch LCD and a dash of IBIS and you would be away laughing...
