Pics on the new Fuji Mirrorless Rangefinder-like Camera LEAKED !!!

[Kiyatkin]

Here

 

[Kiyatkin]

Looks promising. I wish Fuji great success for trying to fill a missing segment in the camera market!

 

[Alowisney]

They're saying it looks full frame. That could be VERY interesting!

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

That's nice, but...why a new mount? Aren't there enough mounts? Yes, to buy new lenses. But given how they dazzle people with first offerings lately only to dumb them down later (e.g. Lumix GF1 --yes, not Fuji...it's an example...-- and X100), how will they expect people to marry into the mount system?

If it's full-frame, they could use Nikon's mount (they already do for their Sx dSLRs) and then offer their own prime lineup, or do what Panasonic and Olympus have done for the 4/3 and m4/3 systems.


EDIT: oh, duh...the flange blah blah is of course shorter. So of course Nikon's mount (the SLR one) is out of the question --except, of course, via an adapter. Given that M-mount and LTM lenses are all manual-focus...I can see how that would not be the key for an autofocus camera. Hopefully you could adapt M-mount.

BTW, I'm sure the tech in the shots handling the camera will be getting a mighty earful...unless they're in on it.

 

[noimmunity]

Anybody up for Carly Simon's "Anticipation"?

 

[Archlich]

18/2 (pancake), 35/1.4, 60(aperture unknown, but might be f/2), equivalent to 28,50,90 respectively.

It will be Contax G reborn onto an APS-C sensor, with better VF.


-

It's a G instead of M(as X100 is closer to a Hexar instead of a CLE, something absolutely clear from day 1), so if you don't mind, please stop plaguing every thread regarding this system with "why not M-mount" quibbles. Thanks a lot...

 

[Sparrow]

.... where are those Fuji Guy's when one need's them?

 

[jsrockit]

Great...it's looking promising... basically a X100 with interchangable AF lenses. I, for one, do not want a Leica M clone. Let the complaining about no m mount begin! 😉

 

[JohnTF]

18/2 (pancake), 35/1.4, 60(aperture unknown, but might be f/2), equivalent to 28,50,90 respectively.

It will be Contax G reborn onto an APS-C sensor, with better VF.


-

It's a G instead of M(as X100 is closer to a Hexar instead of a CLE, something absolutely clear from day 1), so if you don't mind, please stop plaguing every thread regarding this system with "why not M-mount" quibbles. Thanks a lot...

From your lips to Fuji's ears-- would have to buy another camera, now if I could find a digital home for the G lenses---

Regards, John

 

[bensyverson]

To the people who will be wondering "why a new lens mount," the reason is probably money. You can't just build a new camera with a Canon mount, because there are patents associated with it. So to use the mount you need to license it, which would undoubtedly be more expensive than designing your own.

Besides, the options for Fuji were slim. The Micro 4/3 system has a smaller sensor than they wanted to use. The Sony E mount would work, but would have been expensive (the license is only free for "manufacturers of lenses and mount adaptors"). The M mount is manual focus, needs to support legacy lenses which aren't designed for digital, and they would need to design a few M lenses that could pass scrutiny with the M crowd.

If you think it through, they had only one option: DIY.

 

[bensyverson]

By the way, it will be smaller than full frame. Most likely APS-C. Their press release mentions that the resolution and noise "can rival the 35mm full size sensor," which clearly indicates that it's not FF.

 

[Arjay]

I'd be very surprised if the camera has a zoom OVF. VF eyepiece and front lens are on the same optical axis (see pics #4 & #6). The X10's zoom VF has then on different optical axes to accomodate for axis offset due to the use of prisms.

But it looks like the new camera will have a hybrid VF like that of the X100.

 

[bigeye]

Now we're talking!

 

[NazgulKing]

The only problem is historically, Fuji has a rather short attention span, and trying a new mount might be good in the short run, but hell knows if they will maintain it at all costs.

 

[totifoto]

I was gonna say "Nice" but got this message....."The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 10 characters."

So I´ll try again.

Nice 🙂

 

[hteasley]

Besides, the options for Fuji were slim. The Micro 4/3 system has a smaller sensor than they wanted to use. The Sony E mount would work, but would have been expensive (the license is only free for "manufacturers of lenses and mount adaptors"). The M mount is manual focus, needs to support legacy lenses which aren't designed for digital, and they would need to design a few M lenses that could pass scrutiny with the M crowd.

If you think it through, they had only one option: DIY.

Not really true, to my way of thinking: M mount patent ran out in '98, so it's free to use. They could introduce their own electronic coupling that would permit legacy lenses to mount, while allowing newer Fuji lenses to do modern automagical things.

The reason for the new mount is there's no financial incentive for them to have their camera mount old M-glass. How many photographers out there really care about that? How many of those photographers will want to buy the Fuji? What fraction of a percent of the market is that they're giving up, in favor of selling their own lenses to the broader public?

It will be interesting if an M adapter is possible, of course.

 

[bensyverson]

The reason for the new mount is there's no financial incentive for them to have their camera mount old M-glass.

Right, that was my main point. It may be possible to build autofocus contacts into the M mount, but it would be more costly than a custom mount, and why would you do it in the first place? So you could make a few RF enthusiasts happy for 5 seconds before they start complaining that their Elmar performs better on an M9?

 

[Pickett Wilson]

Ah, they do keep moving the cheese, don't they. lol

 

[jsrockit]

So you could make a few RF enthusiasts happy for 5 seconds before they start complaining that their Elmar performs better on an M9?

Exactly... or so those who don't want to buy the M8 or M9 can complain about how we still don't have a proper mechanical rangefinder solution for their expensive M glass.

 

[v_roma]

The only problem is historically, Fuji has a rather short attention span, and trying a new mount might be good in the short run, but hell knows if they will maintain it at all costs.

Even if they only produced those three lenses, I don't think it would be a bad package at all. Plus, adapaters will flood the market shortly after the camera is released allowing you to use a multitude of other lenses, I think?