Spyro P. wrote:
pentax limiteds are for SLRs though, we were trying to think of mirrorless cameras with AF and usable manual rings.
two separate questions going on at the same time: has there ever been a mirrorless camera with a real manual focus ring (no), and does autofocus necessarily mean poor direct drive focus rings - pentax limiteds are the only counter example i can think of, but i hear they aren't that great for autofocus?
Makten wrote:
Those of you who think the X100 looks like a "Leica ripoff", don't you understand that the only thing they have in common is the placement of the viewfinder, and that it is the most convenient place to have it?
I will let this image speak for me. Among all the other similarities, look at the little lever on the front, as well as the slight asymmetry in the bottom edge of the top plate left and right of the lens. there are more similarities on the top plate, as well as the bottom plate hinge design cue from the MP. The back is different, for obvious reasons. IMO most of the differences are among the less successful design features of the X100, such as the back, which is a mess, and the extra dial on the top plate, which looks awkward, to say the least.
Just to reiterate: I find the X100 very attractive, and would even consider getting one for casual use, but I do find it distasteful how close the designs are, without any kind of admission or nod to Leica.
carstenw
Those two cameras have almost nothing in common
and even if they did....so what?
get your Leica and go out and take some pictures
you are spending too much time looking at your computer monitor
and you are beginning to hallucinate
carstenw wrote:
Just to reiterate: I find the X100 very attractive, and would even consider getting one for casual use, but I do find it distasteful how close the designs are, without any kind of admission or nod to Leica.
i think the x100 and leica m look less similar than say a canon 1Ds mkIII and nikon D3x. cameras have never had a lot of creative styling.
Maybe its time for the Leica designers to pull the finger out, maybe employ an Italian and have a red stripe instead of a dot...maybe the Porche design group has some free time.
I do understand the problem though, the thought of greeting someone then realizing too late that its not a Leica around their neck ..is truly repulsive.
OneAnt wrote:
Maybe its time for the Leica designers to pull the finger out, maybe employ an Italian and have a red stripe instead of a dot...maybe the Porche design group has some free time.
Hmmm. The Porsche design group. Wouldn't that make it a Contax then?
If only it comes with a FF sensor with greater than 18 MPixel, inter-changeable lenses and allow the use of other manufacturer's lenses, I'll give up my Canon and Nikon bodies and jump on it.
I really don't care about the ID designer coming from Ferrari or Porsche because both are just as good, anyway this particular design is already looking good and robust, with or without the Leica look. And their sensors are well known by portrait photographers who shoot weddings.
charles.K wrote:
It is interesting in Sony's discussion, that with the NEX 3/5 that they have been suprised, how the NEX's have utilized other legacy lenses.
That's kind of a good job considering sony's current lenses are pretty lacklustre.
I've been pretty uninspired by the next/16mm combo, and the idea of buying a evil camera for say £400 then needing to spend twice that on zm lenses to get decent results drives me mad.
hans98ko wrote:
And their sensors are well known by portrait photographers who shoot weddings.
Well, those sensors were "true" fuji made sensors and incorporated unique technology (Super CCD SR with r pixels for greater DR), unlike the sensor in the Fuji X100 which is not a Fuji made sensor (likely made by Sony). So, the jury is out until we see what the files look like.
johnahill wrote:
That's kind of a good job considering sony's current lenses are pretty lacklustre.
I've been pretty uninspired by the next/16mm combo, and the idea of buying a evil camera for say £400 then needing to spend twice that on zm lenses to get decent results drives me mad.
The kit zoom certainly provides "decent" results. I have been very surprised by it's performance. Not a pancake lens though.
It's on pre-order now at Adorama, unfortunately at the $1200 price mark, not $1,000 as was originally announced. I think I'm going to skip this one at that price point, oh well.
That's change one...let's see what other changes have come since the non working prototype and what the iq is like. I'd still like to be enthusiastic though.
ricardovaste wrote:
Is an extra $200 really significant for a product of this price? I can't see it being myself.
I really think there is a psychological barrier when something goes above $999, particularly if you had convinced yourself it would be $999 to begin with. Now, all of a sudden, such a potential buyer might feel they are being taken advantage of...and that might even be the case regardless of the actual monetary difference. So, I don't think the $200 is the actual issue. It's more one of expectations.
I agree with your thoughts there Tariq :-). I think those that feel hurt will be okay after a while, when the prices drop a bit.
I'm still keen on the camera, but honestly not sure about it (but then, we don't know the real story yet as it's not released). There is still that thought in the back of my mind that a high end NEX would be a better investment (whenever that appears, no idea), but no doubt it won't have anywhere near the level of thought put into it as this camera seems to.
johnahill wrote:
That's kind of a good job considering sony's current lenses are pretty lacklustre.
I've been pretty uninspired by the next/16mm combo, and the idea of buying a evil camera for say £400 then needing to spend twice that on zm lenses to get decent results drives me mad.
I think using a ZM lens on this will give results that go well beyond "decent". Further, there are MANY lenses that are adaptable to the NEX that will give "decent" or better results without spending anywhere near £400. Consider some of the very good Cosina Voigtlander lenses, the Contax G lenses, other rangefinder lenses like those from Konica, Minolta, older Leica, even some of those Kiev lenses will provide perfectly 'decent" results.
