michaelwatkins wrote:
Maybe the DSLR makers figure they need to make yet a new line of lenses for a market they are not sure of.
That's why I think Sony, with the hybrid FF rumors, may be the first to get there. I just hope they take rangefinder wides into account and ax the AA filter.
OK, having looked at the new official Fuji samples, I'm more optimistic about the 35mm, and the 60mm looks really good! That said, I continue to be uninspired by the 18mm. Images don't seem to hold up well towards the edges, especially with intricate details, such as vegetation. The stairwell photo also implies a fair amount of distortion, though should be correctable. Perhaps it will be a better reportage lens and when corner to corner excellence is required, a ZM18 or CV15, etc., assuming they work well with the sensor...
You've got to wonder how Sony would actually deal with RF lenses on a FF sensor. I mean, at that size a sensor I would think they would need to go out of their way to design a sensor that would play well with these lenses. But, on the other hand such a sensor would definitely be beneficial to their own lenses if they design any lenses that take advantage of the short register distance (as seen with the 5N and 16/2.8 versus the original NEX5).
In regards to Fuji, I have a feeling they'll produce these 'organic' sensors with larger than APS-C sensors since I don't think using the same large exit pupil and short register distance solution they're using for the X-P1 will work for a FF sensor and MF.
bluetsunami wrote:
In regards to Fuji, I have a feeling they'll produce these 'organic' sensors with larger than APS-C sensors since I don't think using the same large exit pupil and short register distance solution they're using for the X-P1 will work for a FF sensor and MF.
The Fuji marketing person said that the organic sensor is aimed at their industrial business.
rscheffler wrote:
OK, having looked at the new official Fuji samples, I'm more optimistic about the 35mm, and the 60mm looks really good! That said, I continue to be uninspired by the 18mm. Images don't seem to hold up well towards the edges, especially with intricate details, such as vegetation. The stairwell photo also implies a fair amount of distortion, though should be correctable. Perhaps it will be a better reportage lens and when corner to corner excellence is required, a ZM18 or CV15, etc., assuming they work well with the sensor...
+1
Exactly my thoughts. Impressed by the 35 and the 60. I haven't seen a single shot with the 18mm lens yet that has looked great, that is alarming. It seems to have really ugly bokeh too. They claim it has very little distortion and it may well be so but it looks down right fuzzy on most samples, both near and far. I highly doubt it as a landscape/cityscape lens.
I hope to be proven wrong, of course.
The ZM18 would take care of the lower end nicely though, albeit at the expense of two f-stops.
I hope the coming Fujinon 14mm is better, this Fujinon 18/2 seems like a dumbed down kit lens, almost like the Sony 16/2.8, i.e. "decent" but not great.
kosmoskatten wrote:
Exactly my thoughts. Impressed by the 35 and the 60. I haven't seen a single shot with the 18mm lens yet that has looked great, that is alarming. It seems to have really ugly bokeh too.
exactly my thoughts, word by word. Maybe the 18's main advantage is meant to be size. I wonder if any of these lenses block some of the OVF, especially with the hood on.
Also from the samples I get the feeling that either the lens or the sensor is being outresolved by the other. My guess is the lens.
douglasf13 wrote:
That's why I think Sony, with the hybrid FF rumors, may be the first to get there. I just hope they take rangefinder wides into account and ax the AA filter.
Well it's hard to see how they miss the obsessive fixation by camera nerds of all nationalities with RF wide angle lenses, old and new, and the sony nex. Even their own reps have been seen to drool about this. If anything the nex has proved you hardly need any native lenses to sell a bunch of bodies.
On the other hand there is no umderestimating the stupidity and blindness of giant bleeding corporations.
Sony is really ready to go if they would be willing to tweak the sensor--the EVF is here and now, and so is the mount. Just throw in an aps-c crop mode--which they already imply.
They have only two hurdles really: size and wide angle tuning. If they step up the xpro1 will simply asume the position of the x100. Much touted, but ultimately underwhelmimg.
As my main objective is to use my M-lenses, of which I have six, my main concerns about the X-Pro 1 is whether there is focus assist and how the corner performance will be with wide M-lenses. As the M-adapter will, of course, increase the back to sensor plane distance, I assume corner performance will be a problem without offset micro lenses. In my view, the Ricoh GXR-M is the best camera for this now.
On the new X-Pro 1 lenses, I would have preferred to have a real focusing ring and distance and DOF scales on the lens barrel for zone focusing for street photography — and don't have much hope for something equivalent through "focus by wire" and a DOF scale in the LCD and EVF. I don't find even fast autofocus system, like that of the Nikon D300 of much use for street photography.
I agree Mitch, those are some really vital aspects:
hyperfocal / zone focusing is nearly impossible to achieve swiftly with focus-by-wire but dead easy and always fast on a manual focus RF lens with dof scales.
With the X-Pro 1 Fuji themselves write on their special web site for the X Pro 1 that they had their Fuji lenses specially calculated and modified to allow for the lenses to integrate with the sensor and not the other way around. This means that perhaps the X Pro 1 sensor will not be able to handle RF wides any better than, say the NEX cameras. Potentially worse. Let's not dismiss that scenario just yet. Let's not jump to conclusions either.
No peaking/focus assist at all is of course a major let down. Surely they cannot have omitted this basic feature?
Yep. And a bunch of owners of said lenses who are really eager to use them on the format they were designed to shine on...
but there's no money to be made from old lenses.
Spyro P. wrote:
Yep. And a bunch of owners of said lenses who are really eager to use them on the format they were designed to shine on...
but there's no money to be made from old lenses.
Well, 24x36 is not a magic formula or the holy grail. But it has worked well for a century and bigger is still better. Maybe for guys who started photography with digital, the advantages of 24x26 are not immediately obvious. But as long as we obstinated old timers who have shot years of film are still alive, they will have to cater for us
edwardkaraa wrote:
But as long as we obstinated old timers who have shot years of film are still alive, they will have to cater for us
Nah... they've spent tons of $$$ to educate a whole generation that all that matters in photography is the number of pixels and high iso performance, and that you can get a lot of bokeh from a 10mm lens on a thumbnail sensor as long as the lens is f2. They dont need us.
Spyro: I highly doubt it. There is no information passing from lens to camera and no information relayed to the zoom finder other than focal length.*
No distance info.
And, with longer glass, say 50mm and up already, the patch is probably quite small.
EVF is the setting to use I guess, unless you shoot wide angle glass and zone focus. That would save on batteries too. 300 shots per charge is not much to brag about, they could have improved that substantially I think. Considering how large a camera it is, why don't fit a bigger one in already? A slight fail, me thinks.
Someone said the X-Pro1 has the same sensor as the Sony, but the sony has terrible noise smearing, and this looks much much better. Must say the noise is much more beautiful than my 5D II at 3200 - well at least in these samples. I am not familiar with the Nikon D3s, but any likeness? Maybe I will start using higher ISOs...
kosmoskatten wrote:
Spyro: I highly doubt it. There is no information passing from lens to camera and no information relayed to the zoom finder other than focal length.*
No distance info.
Well if you look at a rangefinder there is a thingo*** inside the camera on the top of the mount. As you focus the lens the helicoid pushes the thingo back and forth and this is what makes the framelines move. So in theory maybe they could build such a thingo in their M adapter to relay focus distance info to the EVF and make the framelines move. Maybe that's why they're still working on the M adapter, maybe it's not a simple flange after all.
***official terminology
kosmoskatten wrote:
And, with longer glass, say 50mm and up already, the patch is probably quite small.
Not a problem, the OVF has multiple selectable magnifications (there is a lens that slides internally in front of the OVF)
Spyro P. wrote:
Nah... they've spent tons of $$$ to educate a whole generation that all that matters in photography is the number of pixels and high iso performance, and that you can get a lot of bokeh from a 10mm lens on a thumbnail sensor as long as the lens is f2. They dont need us.
