Well, Olympus will be announcing their new m43 (digital OM) camera with a viewfinder shortly. As long as everyone is already in a froth I figure it best to mention that now so you don't have to clean your chins twice.
New Fuji X camera to be announced next week. excited!
- Thread starter thinkfloyd
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 86
- Views 15K
nighstar
eternal beginner
thank god.....!! wouldn't want Fuji to tempt me without Olympus being there to counter them. 😎
funkpilz
Well-known
Am I the only one who thinks they should slow down with releasing new models of these cameras? Olympus are putting out a new PEN every year at least, and I don't need Fuji to keep making more X models. I know it's a competitive marketplace, but whatever happened to longevity? These aren't supposed to be disposable cameras.
/rant
/rant
New camera, new sales. It isn't about longevity, it is about sales.
jsrockit
Moderator
I'm not so sure this is correct thinking...especially the Epson part. How many R-1D cameras do you think Epson sold?
Fuji didn't think the X100 would be as big of a hit as it was.
I believe both Fuji and Epson made the X100 and R-D1 as a labor of love at first.
The larger more respectable manufactuers don't make these retro cams because they make more money with DSLRs... a lot more. DSLRs are the dominant serious cameras of our time.
jsrockit
Moderator
Then I wouldn't look at these threads anymore. These are AF cameras with MF as a secondary option.
user237428934
User deletion pending
Do we really need a new lens mount?
nighstar
eternal beginner
seriously...
rbelyell
Well-known
gavin perhaps you didnt understand my point. i dont want to use legacy lenses on a crop sensor, i want to use them on FF digital.
also i have an olly ep2, panny 20mm and olly 17mm, and i dont agree at all that they perform better than legacy lenses. i have a zenitar 16/2.8 c/y mount that performs way better than the olly, and a zeiss tevidon 25/1.4 that outperforms the panny.
i also dont understand the comment that RF users dont use legacy lenses, thats what much of this forum is about.
also i have an olly ep2, panny 20mm and olly 17mm, and i dont agree at all that they perform better than legacy lenses. i have a zenitar 16/2.8 c/y mount that performs way better than the olly, and a zeiss tevidon 25/1.4 that outperforms the panny.
i also dont understand the comment that RF users dont use legacy lenses, thats what much of this forum is about.
Corto
Well-known
jsrockit
Moderator
Yes, we do... I'd rather have a new lens mount than some old mount that isn't suited for the camera.
nighstar
eternal beginner
i don't understand how a lens mount could not be suited to a camera. aren't cameras built around their sensors and lens mounts...?
now if you mean lenses that aren't suited to a camera (or vice versa) i know what you mean.
*cough*NEX*cough*
celluloidprop
Well-known
The M-mount is 60 years old and isn't designed for any of the electrical contacts or autofocus that new lenses require. That's why it's not suited.
There's no reason for Fuji to deal with all the hassles of designing around the M-mount (compatibility with new lenses and backward compatibility with old) - there will be adapters on the market tout-suite allowing manual control of old lenses, which would be no different from using them directly on a M-mount.
There's no reason for Fuji to deal with all the hassles of designing around the M-mount (compatibility with new lenses and backward compatibility with old) - there will be adapters on the market tout-suite allowing manual control of old lenses, which would be no different from using them directly on a M-mount.
DNG
Film Friendly
Consider This scenario:
the mount lock is on at 7:O'CLOCK, not 3:O'CLOCK.... That can make a difference
And the Bokoh is PS'd..as is the distorted shape to the body...
the overall pattern is VERY similar to a M4/3 mount...
The sensor (what we can see of it), does look like a 3:2 ratio though.
It may be that the Body (modified a bit) with a m4/3 mount may be an Olympus offering. That would not detract from Fuji IMO...
Could it be an APS-C Camera that as an accessory M4/3 adapter with FULL Electrical functions, while Fuji develops their lens line....
That would be Brilliant! You have the few Intro lenses + m4/3 lenses from 8mm to 300 (m4/3)... on a APS-C 12mm-450mm (35mm = 16mm - 600mm)....
So, IF .... this mount can use m4/3 with FULL functionality with a Fuji>m4/3 adapter..... WOW.....
the mount lock is on at 7:O'CLOCK, not 3:O'CLOCK.... That can make a difference
And the Bokoh is PS'd..as is the distorted shape to the body...
the overall pattern is VERY similar to a M4/3 mount...
The sensor (what we can see of it), does look like a 3:2 ratio though.
It may be that the Body (modified a bit) with a m4/3 mount may be an Olympus offering. That would not detract from Fuji IMO...
Could it be an APS-C Camera that as an accessory M4/3 adapter with FULL Electrical functions, while Fuji develops their lens line....
That would be Brilliant! You have the few Intro lenses + m4/3 lenses from 8mm to 300 (m4/3)... on a APS-C 12mm-450mm (35mm = 16mm - 600mm)....
So, IF .... this mount can use m4/3 with FULL functionality with a Fuji>m4/3 adapter..... WOW.....
jsrockit
Moderator
Why does micro 4/3 keep coming up regarding this camera (here and on other sites)?
user237428934
User deletion pending
Some new cameras:
Nikon 1 with only a few lenses
Sony Nex with only a few lenses
Ricoh with only a few lenses
So where is the need for another camera that comes out with 1-2 lenses?
celluloidprop
Well-known
Everyone else drops a couple of kit zooms right off the bat and fills in the good primes later.
If Fuji is, as everyone suspects, going after the nostalgia/street/documentary/etc. market, their lens lineup will be primes from the start, and probably in traditional speeds/focal lengths. (If only because that's the only way it could work with a OVF/EVF hybrid.)
If Fuji is, as everyone suspects, going after the nostalgia/street/documentary/etc. market, their lens lineup will be primes from the start, and probably in traditional speeds/focal lengths. (If only because that's the only way it could work with a OVF/EVF hybrid.)
Well, Fuji is not Nikon, Sony or Ricoh and they want some $ too.
What does need have to do with it?
Why do we need BMWs when there are Audis?
jsrockit
Moderator
When you are not Sony, Nikon, or Ricoh... that when you need another mount. Why would Fuji use someone else mount? There are a few good reasons above why they wouldn't. I haven't seen any good reasons why they would.
We are in the golden age of these types of cameras... and digital formats have not been decided on. There have always been a lot of mounts on the market and there will be more to come. It is up to you to decide which mount works for you and stick with it (well, as long as it doesn't become extinct). Why does it matter if there are 100 mounts on the market? Are you going to use them all?
I can't help but think that those who cry (and this isn't directed at you tom.w.bn) are upset that it isn't a Leica mount (or their other favorite mount). Why should Fuji be in the business of catering to old mounts?
dazedgonebye
Veteran
I've been considering a DSLR in the coming year. Assuming the right lenses, I'd much rather have this.
Similar threads
