|
moonduck posted:Thanks, I figured it had to be something like that. I still don't think Sony's roadmap is as aggressive as it needs to be. I don't have it yet. I was kinda wanting to go with the ZE one because I will most likely buy a 5dmk3 when it comes out and I will want to use it with that too.
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2012 01:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 12:03 |
|
|
keyframe posted:I don't have it yet. I was kinda wanting to go with the ZE one because I will most likely buy a 5dmk3 when it comes out and I will want to use it with that too. I would purchase a ZF.2/ZF lens and then swap out the mount. Its what I'm doing when I pick up an 85mm ZF.2.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2012 02:00
|
|
|
keyframe posted:I don't have it yet. I was kinda wanting to go with the ZE one because I will most likely buy a 5dmk3 when it comes out and I will want to use it with that too. Just keep in mind that almost any other 50mm Zeiss option is going to be cheaper than buying that EOS/NEX adapter along with a lens. I'd either go with the Nikon version and do that mount swap or just go with the cheapest route and get a C/Y version. All of them are going to be incredibly similar optically.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2012 02:51
|
|
|
Someone processed a raw sample from the OM-D and posted the full res output here: http://datenkeule.de/dl.php?file=file1329348705olympus-om-d-e-m5-preserie-exemple9.jpg Not bad, not bad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2012 20:02
|
|
|
Someone did a hands on with the X-Pro 1. Looks pretty nice. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TOk_0kITBg
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2012 21:33
|
|
|
eggsovereasy posted:Someone did a hands on with the X-Pro 1. Looks pretty nice. Cool, that's where I buy a lot of my camera gear. Only thing that bothered me about this was how he stated rangefinder at the start a couple of times when it's not a true rangefinder. Camera looks really nice.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 04:31
|
|
|
Do it ironically posted:Only thing that bothered me about this was how he stated rangefinder at the start a couple of times when it's not a true rangefinder. Yeah, that bugged me too. I mentioned this a while back (maybe in this thread), but why didn't they, or anyone, put a rangefinder on a digital camera. From reading forums it seems like tons of people are chomping at the bit for a digital rangefinder that doesn't cost $7,000. It can't be expensive to do it (a Bessa R(2/3/4) is like $700). 1). Everyone criticizes the manual focus on the X100. 2). Tons of people want a rangefinder 3). You're already making a brand new mount and system and all that. This seemed like the perfect opportunity for Fuji and I feel like they may have blown it. That said, if they improved the autofocus enough I guess it's mostly a moot point.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 05:58
|
|
|
It doesn't seem like any of the consumer mirrorless lens makers are particularly keen on making lenses that aren't fly-by-wire. I would imagine that implementing a mechanical rangefinder system when the lenses aren't themselves mechanical would quickly get complicated. People quite regularly refer to cameras like the Contax G2 as a rangefinder, so I think that the XP-1 probably deserves to fall under that umbrella.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 06:10
|
|
|
moonduck posted:It doesn't seem like any of the consumer mirrorless lens makers are particularly keen on making lenses that aren't fly-by-wire. I would imagine that implementing a mechanical rangefinder system when the lenses aren't themselves mechanical would quickly get complicated. I guess not having mechanical focusing is a cost and/or size saving measure?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 06:19
|
|
|
I'd love to see the entirety of Fuji's X series roadmap. They claim to have been surprised by the X100's success, but they seem to be monstrously good at identifying and filling consumer needs with the X series. I guess anybody can seem agile when Canon and Nikon are licking each others scrotums and stamping out incrementally better black cubes but I want to believe in somebody (anybody!) making a huge dent in the camera market by figuring out what people want and making it. I'm just curious as to how long this whole X series thing has been in somebody's head, whose head it is, what the whole picture looks like now and what the plan looked like before they sold 100,000 X100s.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 06:45
|
|
|
ThisQuietReverie posted:I'd love to see the entirety of Fuji's X series roadmap. What's been floating around, it looks like a 14mm (either f/1.4 or 2.8, both have been rumored, the latter seems more likely) and an 18-72 f/4 IS this year, and then a 28 2.8 (likely a pancake), a 23 f/2 (likely similar optical design to the X100, obviously without the leaf shutter), a 72-200 f/4 IS, and a 12-24 f/4 IS in 2013. moonduck fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Feb 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 07:05
|
|
|
Come on it aims at the Leica demographic squarely, it's perfectly fair to call it rangefinder. The Sony DLRs are not true SLR either. Are you going to call the Fuji camera EVIL? If you do I am game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 07:37
|
|
|
Doesn't sony clearly call those bodies SLT?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 14:03
|
|
|
poo poo got real over at Olympus: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/02/16/Olympus-Scandal-Arrests-include-President-Chairman-Kikukawa
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 16:19
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Come on it aims at the Leica demographic squarely, it's perfectly fair to call it rangefinder. I don't think it competes with Leica, unless you think it is aimed at people with an M8. I could see some Leica people buying one to compliment their Leicas, but if you own an M9 with more than 1 lens I don't think you'll take a second look. From what I understand with an M mount adaptor and M lens on the x-pro 1 the focusing is an issue, and there's no focus peaking function. I mean are we really thinking that a ~$1700 camera is supposed to compete with a ~$7500 one? I think it's a fair criticism, rangefinder camera has a pretty strict definition, it needs to have a rangefinder mechanism which you can use as it's made for. To be honest I think they could have made this camera a little bit smaller, I don't know if they were constrained by electronics but having an APS-C sensor and not having a full rangefinder mechanism you think it would be smaller than an M9 but it's not. I don't want to make it sound like I hate this thing because I really want to get my hands on one I just don't think you should be comparing it to a Leica, it's apples and oranges. Do it ironically fucked around with this message at 16:39 on Feb 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 16:35
|
|
|
Do it ironically posted:I don't think it competes with Leica, unless you think it is aimed at people with an M8. I could see some Leica people buying one to compliment their Leicas, but if you own an M9 with more than 1 lens I don't think you'll take a second look. From what I understand with an M mount adaptor and M lens on the x-pro 1 the focusing is an issue, and there's no focus peaking function. I mean are we really thinking that a ~$1700 camera is supposed to compete with a ~$7500 one? I don't think that's what he meant. I don't think people with an M9 or a big selection of M-mount glass will look at the Fuji as a great option (honestly, the NEX-7 and Ricoh's offerings are still better), but there's plenty of people who want a Leica-like camera without Leica-prices. Granted, Leica sounds like they're going to come out with some sort of APS-C/H mirrorless sometime this year (perhaps with an R-mount instead of M), but there are lots of people who want a rangefinder-style without dishing out 5K for a body at 2K+ per lens. And again, having to rely entirely on AF without a rangefinder patch never really held up the Contax G2 (which honestly looks and feels more like the inspiration to the XP-1 than any Leica does).
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 21:26
|
|
|
moonduck posted:I don't think that's what he meant. I don't think people with an M9 or a big selection of M-mount glass will look at the Fuji as a great option (honestly, the NEX-7 and Ricoh's offerings are still better), While I agree the Ricoh M-mount module is quite nice, the NEX-7 has been shown to have issues with wide angle rangefinder lenses. The NEX-5N does better in this regard. As for calling the XP1 a rangefinder. No. A rangefinder camera is a camera with--you know it--a rangefinder, and another camera is not a rangefinder just based on similar looks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 21:43
|
|
|
moonduck posted:Granted, Leica sounds like they're going to come out with some sort of APS-C/H mirrorless sometime this year (perhaps with an R-mount instead of M), Oh hey I see Pentax and Leica are thinking along similar lines then. I guess we can look forward to not just one, but two DSLR sized mirrorless cameras. And no the X100 is not a rangefinder and the X1 is not a great system for rangefinder lenses for the above mentioned reasons. It would not be difficult to make a digital rangefinder body. You can build it on the Cosina Bessa chassis, this is basically what Epson did with the R-D1 and it was what I would consider to be a decent hit for an expensive, very niche camera (not X100 level success, but they still go for close to new prices even though they've been discontinued for years). I don't know why they stopped, but if I had to guess they were unprepared for providing good mechanical camera service and got hammered. Not a problem for Fuji or anyone else with a little experience. If someone wanted to, Cosina also has a mechanical SLR chassis, the Bessaflex TM. Digital screwmount body  Another approach would be to revamp the Ricoh GXR system. The sealed sensor-lens unit is a dumb idea and the lens should be broken back out. It should be in three pieces, body unit, sensor unit, lens mount unit. Frequently offer new sensor units, in m4/3, APS-C, and FF sizes. Make the mounts not suck - Ricoh makes the 645D, which has a mechanical aperture feeler, Nikon can figure it out too. There's zero excuse for requiring manual stop down and stop-down metering on SLR lenses, all the patents for the major systems were filed in the 60s and 70s and should be out of patent. Another advantage would be that you could feel the focus cam on rangefinder lenses, and do things like drawing a line of the actual plane of focus on the screen instead of focus peaking (which I'm guessing doesn't work that well stopped down). Next, make separate technical lens mount units, so you can get tilt/shift movements with some longer register lenses (SLR lenses). You could also make glassless contrast-detect autofocus mounts like the Pentax 1.7X AF Teleconverter, so you could autofocus manual lenses without losing IQ from the teleconverter. Better still, open-source the firmware or let users write scripts for it. CHDK is awesome and it would be amazing if you could get a manufacturer to provide similar functionality on a SLR or mirrorless body. The GXR (and the NEX  ) has shown that you don't need to sell lenses to make a system work, the X100 has shown that there's niche markets for rangefinder-esque units. the R-D1 shows people still want real rangefinders, and the continued demand and extremely high prices for the Fuji GX680 technical cameras show that there is continued demand for a high quality technical camera. The 645D is another great example of the possibilities of niche cameras. Fuji is kicking rear end with the X series but there's still so much more that could be done to support legacy gear, technical photography, and street shooting.TL;DR, make a camera for 
Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 23:05 on Feb 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 21:48
|
|
|
 My dorky impulse buy camera has arrived.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 23:22
|
|
|
Miso Beno posted:
I didn't know they still made cases like that. Do you like it so far?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 23:37
|
|
|
Miso Beno posted:
For some reason your post filled me with rage at my SLT (not a large camera). I really want to sell it and pick up a used e-pl2 or something just for the size. But nice buy 
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 23:38
|
|
|
eggsovereasy posted:I didn't know they still made cases like that. Do you like it so far? I've got the same style case for my GF1, it's great. Got it from a zshop on amazon. They had versions with a top half sized for the pancake lenses or the kit zoom.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2012 23:50
|
|
|
eggsovereasy posted:I didn't know they still made cases like that. Do you like it so far? The top case is cut a little too tall for the body, but too short for an EVF, and the button clasps are a little mushy. Other than that it looks great and feels good. 
wheres my beer fucked around with this message at 01:42 on Feb 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 00:08
|
|
|
I posted in the 35mm P+S thread, but I guess this is the place to be, because I'm a new X100 owner as of today! It's clear and sharp, it's light in the hand and it's very very handsome. Every time I went outside, grumbled and hand-waved and ended up not bringing my DSLR, and then regretted it later, I wished I had a camera just like this - and now it's in my hands. Having said that, god drat, setting up the buttons/menu stuff and getting used to the workflow of it (compared to Canon's system that I'd grown familiar with) is a bit of a bitch. I feel like it could take a WHILE figuring out exactly how I want to configure it to do what I'd like. EDIT: I read the "My X100 Year" blog post linked early in the thread and I must say kudos for that! Really great stuff. strangemusic fucked around with this message at 04:12 on Feb 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 03:43
|
|
|
If you haven't already, pick up a fast SD card, I use the SanDisk Extreme Pro, it really does speed up the write times after taking a picture because when the camera is writing the file, it locks you out of accessing the menu.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 05:28
|
|
|
So with all the new camera's coming out, is the NEX 5N still the "best" choice in the sub-$1000 category? Because I was looking at either the 5N or the E-PL3 and as I understand it the Sony has better IQ. I still really really like the Oly so I haven't decided yet. Oh well, I have until September to decide. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 10:23
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:So with all the new camera's coming out, is the NEX 5N still the "best" choice in the sub-$1000 category? I would say that the NEX-5N has better IQ especially at higher ISO. However, a camera is merely part of a system and once you look at available lenses then the E-PL3 (and other m4/3 cameras) starts looking more interesting as an option.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 10:49
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Another advantage would be that you could feel the focus cam on rangefinder lenses, and do things like drawing a line of the actual plane of focus on the screen instead of focus peaking (which I'm guessing doesn't work that well stopped down). Wouldn't that require figuring out the distance of every point in the image (at least per pixel on the EVF) to compare to the lens' distance setting? I think focus peaking just detects contrast so stopping down shouldn't be a problem on its own, as long as it doesn't push the ISO high enough that noise starts to blur things or introduce significant diffraction.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 17:20
|
|
|
A true digital rangefinder mechanism would require a second camera sensor offset from the main sensor to generate the rangefinder patch. You can't just make an offset image from nothing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 18:19
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:While I agree the Ricoh M-mount module is quite nice, the NEX-7 has been shown to have issues with wide angle rangefinder lenses. The NEX-5N does better in this regard. Only with symmetrical lens designs, which to be fair, the M9 also has issues with. With any luck, in the future, Sony will tailor their microlens arrays to better handle light from extreme angles. PaulMaudDib posted:Oh hey I see Pentax and Leica are thinking along similar lines then. I guess we can look forward to not just one, but two DSLR sized mirrorless cameras. And no the X100 is not a rangefinder and the X1 is not a great system for rangefinder lenses for the above mentioned reasons. Yeah, it'll be a shame if Leica decides that that R-mount needs a cheaper mirrorless solution but the M-mount doesn't, but I imagine they probably want to utilize that whole system of glass that's out there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2012 18:54
|
|
|
Beastruction posted:Wouldn't that require figuring out the distance of every point in the image (at least per pixel on the EVF) to compare to the lens' distance setting? I think focus peaking just detects contrast so stopping down shouldn't be a problem on its own, as long as it doesn't push the ISO high enough that noise starts to blur things or introduce significant diffraction. HPL posted:A true digital rangefinder mechanism would require a second camera sensor offset from the main sensor to generate the rangefinder patch. You can't just make an offset image from nothing. The problem with doing contrast-detect AF when stopped or with wide angle lenses is that there's not as sharp and narrow a band of peak contrast. Wide open with a normal/tele lens, there's a several foot zone that's sharpest. If you stop down, then there's a big wide range that's sharp and you don't know exactly where the sharpest area is. Is focus peaking good enough to pick out the exact area of focus, or does it just show you that everything is sharp? It would require some slick programming but it could be done. In short, the idea is that you can use the horizon line to figure out infinity, and the vertical tilt and focal length to calculate the camera's position/orientation, factor in the perspective distortion,and guess how close the bottom of the image is to you. You then use the focus cam to try to interpolate the the plane of focus somewhere between you and infinity. It would have lots of caveats, like you can't do it inside, the ground has to be reasonably level, and it wouldn't be accurate to the inch, but it would be better than nothing. A highly technical MSPaint:  Pink = horizon and perspective lines, yellow = plane of focus. The perspective lines would be more keystoned for wider angles, higher heights above ground, or more vertical tilt. Of course you could just make a body that has a real rangefinder built in and lens mount modules that can read the appropriate cam, and I would love to buy one. However, this could supplement CDAF under some situations where it's weak without adding a full rangefinder unit. Software is cheap, hardware is expensive. None of this will happen, but it would be neat. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 01:19 on Feb 19, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 00:07
|
|
|
moonduck posted:Yeah, it'll be a shame if Leica decides that that R-mount needs a cheaper mirrorless solution but the M-mount doesn't, but I imagine they probably want to utilize that whole system of glass that's out there. I was actually making GBS threads on the idea a bit. If you make a SLR-mount mirrorless you ensure that it can't take rangefinder lenses (unless you magic something up that lets the lenses sit down inside the mount). So you lose phase-detect AF, it's huge, it has a limited selection of glass, and all the cool designers laugh as you as you awkwardly straddle the two camera types. If Leica makes a K-01 the Pentax fanboys will never, ever shut up. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 00:21 on Feb 19, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 00:16
|
|
|
HPL posted:A true digital rangefinder mechanism would require a second camera sensor offset from the main sensor to generate the rangefinder patch. You can't just make an offset image from nothing. I will just go ahead and casually keep referring to the XPro1 as a digital Rangefinder, I am not going to use a new made up word to descript Fuji's new focus mechanism. Remember the word "PDA"? it didn't became an universally adapted word until "PDA" became obsolete. When Palm and PocketPC was popular nobody called it PDA.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 01:53
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:I will just go ahead and casually keep referring to the XPro1 as a digital Rangefinder, I am not going to use a new made up word to descript Fuji's new focus mechanism. It's not a rangefinder and just because the body kinda sorta looks like one doesn't make it so. Rangefinders: 1) Can't focus up close 2) Are prone to parallax error 3) Can't support long lenses 4) Use a rangefinder to focus None of those apply to the Xpro1.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 02:32
|
|
|
strangemusic posted:I posted in the 35mm P+S thread, but I guess this is the place to be, because I'm a new X100 owner as of today! I too just picked up an X100 as a birthday present to myself after eyeing it since last fall. Had the option of getting the Limited Edition Black version but didn't think that the $300 premium was worth it (I bought the case and lens hood too, everything at a slight discount). Now I gotta offload my E-P3 so I can get the E-M5. poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 06:23
|
|
|
I went into Bic camera Nagoya and had a 'play' with the Xpro1 today and spent about ten or so minutes with it. It felt okay in my largish hands, though I was constrained by the wires tethering to the display and couldn't hold it exactly how I wanted to. It's pretty light, but it feels sturdy and while I don't have much experience with the X100, it is definitely a lot easier to access everything and change the settings on the Xpro1. The operation seemed like it might take a while to get used to, but after a bit everything really started to come together and I think I could really learn to love Fuji's hybrid system. I really wish I could use it out in the wild, because there is only so much to take photos of in the store. The displays sometimes set up near Sony's products are great for testing cameras out, it would have been great to have one of those set-up near by to test it. Also, they only had the 35mm and 60mm available to test as apparently all the 18mm had already been purchased. This was true for another store I went to, Top camera. I did have a fiddle with the manual focus before I left. Of course it's not as tactile(?) as a direct system though there was one thing about it I liked. It seemed to responded differently to how fast you turned it; slow movement for fine control, fast for changing the range quickly. Along with the focus scale in the O/EVF, it seemed like a nice compromise. I'm not sure if this was the same as in X100. There's my 2 cents anyway. Oh, and multiple exposure mode will be the new creative scene mode.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 09:09
|
|
|
New X100 owners: look in the plumbing aisle at Home Depot or Lowe's and buy a pack of #7 O-Rings that have a half inch outside diameter and a 3/8ths inside diameter to stretch over your exposure compensation dial. The exposure compensation dial is one of the most useful twiddle-knobs on the whole camera and this gives it the proper tension it deserves for like 2 bucks (for a pack of ten rings). Also buy a soft release of your choosing. I paid $2.50 for mine from Adorama. Coat the threads with a little clear fingernail polish before screwing it in. Best 5 bucks you can spend on this camera.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 09:24
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:I will just go ahead and casually keep referring to the XPro1 as a digital Rangefinder, I am not going to use a new made up word to descript Fuji's new focus mechanism. Then you can expect to have people constantly correcting you, since you are using the term incorrectly. Rangefinder is not just some arbitrary word used to describe a camera, it refers to a focusing mechanism. Do you also call the Panasonic G3 an SLR?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 10:11
|
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Then you can expect to have people constantly correcting you, since you are using the term incorrectly. Rangefinder is not just some arbitrary word used to describe a camera, it refers to a focusing mechanism. Hey don't bring your fancy left coast constabulary to this conversation. If he wants to call his karma a rangefinder, it's his rite.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 17:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 12:03 |
|
|
Clayton Bigsby posted:Then you can expect to have people constantly correcting you, since you are using the term incorrectly. Rangefinder is not just some arbitrary word used to describe a camera, it refers to a focusing mechanism. I call it mirrorless. If I want to take the piss, I call it an EVIL. Fuji cameras include an optical viewfinder, which make them different from the rest. I am calling them rangefinders. If and when Fuji make a "NEX-5n" version of XPro1, which is a XPro1 without the viewfinders, and sell it for around 800-900, I would call it a mirrorless version.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2012 19:21
|
|