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

[Roger Hicks]

Rangefinder-like - small(er) bodies and lenses, quieter, more inconspicuous.

I'm not sure it's fair to call anything with a EVF a 'point and shoot.' Performance aside, is there anything conceptually different between SLR phase-detection autofocus and mirrorless contrast-detection? You hold it up to your eye and decide what you want to focus on.

So which reasonably versatile digi-cams aren't 'rangefinder-like' by that definition?

Edit: or alternatively, "call it an SLR with the mirror box taken out". It's as close to a small SLR as to a true rangefinder. By all means call it compact, quiet, inconspicuous. But I've had a TLR like that (Tessina) and several point-and-shots.

Cheers,

R.

 

[tbarker13]

I had the X100, but sold it. I loved the camera. The biggest drawback for me was the 35mm lens. I do too much portraiture these days to make a 35mm lens work. If this new camera offers the X100 quality with choices that include 35mm and something in the 75-90 range, I'll happily climb back aboard the Fuji bandwagon.

I'm never quite sure what to make of these "point and shoot" comments that seem to be insults aimed at the X100. Perhaps I'm reading the comments with the wrong tone.
But I've used a lot of digital cameras in recent years, and found the X100 no more "point-and-shoot" than an M8, D700, etc.
The X100 may be easier to treat as a mindless tool. But that's selling the camera short and failing to realize what it has to offer.
The mere fact that you can decide where the point of focus falls (as well as the user's total control over shutter speed and aperture) removes it from the "point-and-shoot" category.
From an operational standpoint, the only real differences between the X100 and the M8 is that the Fuji has a fixed lens and dreadful manual focus. Of course, it's manual focus is nowhere near as bad as the M8's autofocus.

 

[former member]

Hard to judge from blurry pictures, but if they are using standard size screws: the throat of the mount looks too narrow to be a full-frame digital.

I can believe APS-C, 1.5x crop factor.

 

[celluloidprop]

There are relatively few non-SLR digitals with interchangeable lenses (like the new Fuji) and EVFs, and only one with a built-in EVF.

The X100 (and to a lesser extent NEX-7) gets the RF-like tag because of VF placement and styling - you hold it to your eye precisely like a RF, the aperture and shutter speed dials work like a Leica/Bessa/etc. (or any number of older SLRs, of course, but it's been a long time since they were the norm). And I don't think those things should be discounted - holding the camera to your right eye and changing aperture with a ring around the lens is a different way of working from even the NEX-7 (with a series of dials), much less a SLR.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I had the X100, but sold it. I loved the camera. The biggest drawback for me was the 35mm lens. I do too much portraiture these days to make a 35mm lens work. If this new camera offers the X100 quality with choices that include 35mm and something in the 75-90 range, I'll happily climb back aboard the Fuji bandwagon.

I'm never quite sure what to make of these "point and shoot" comments that seem to be insults aimed at the X100. Perhaps I'm reading the comments with the wrong tone.
But I've used a lot of digital cameras in recent years, and found the X100 no more "point-and-shoot" than an M8, D700, etc.
The X100 may be easier to treat as a mindless tool. But that's selling the camera short and failing to realize what it has to offer.
The mere fact that you can decide where the point of focus falls (as well as the user's total control over shutter speed and aperture) removes it from the "point-and-shoot" category.
From an operational standpoint, the only real differences between the X100 and the M8 is that the Fuji has a fixed lens and dreadful manual focus. Of course, it's manual focus is nowhere near as bad as the M8's autofocus.

I think so. Autofocus point-and-shoots with manual override are hardly novel, and some are very good. Think of the Rollei 35AF-M (I think I have the alphabet soup in the right order, but I gave mine away), or the Contax G-series. But 'rangefinder-like'? Not really.

It's a bit like those very cheap toy plastic 'SLRs' with a direct vision finder and no reflex system. They might look like SLRs at first glance -- but not very. I mean, a scale-focus camera like my Olympus Pen W is at least as 'rangefinder-like' as anything with autofocus. All it's missing is the rangefinder. Much like an autofocus camera.

Cheers,

R.

 

[former member]

Tessina: 14x21mm images.

Same as the Sigma, 20.7 mm × 13.8 mm Foveon X3 sensor.

That's what we need. A Foveon sensor in a Tessina size camera.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Tessina: 14x21mm images.

Same as the Sigma, 20.7 mm × 13.8 mm Foveon X3 sensor.

That's what we need. A Foveon sensor in a Tessina size camera.

Dear Brian,

Best idea so far! And you can take care of the lateral reversal with in-camera software instead if flopping the negs in the carrier. I think I recall correctly that the sensor was on the 'floor' of the camera with a mirror behind the taking lens?

Mind you, it might be quite a thick Tessina...

Cheers,

R.

 

[andredossantos]

When I get back into digital I basically have four requirements:

-Compact size
-Manual controls ie: shutter speed dial and aperture ring
-Large sensor
-OVF or quality EVF

I prefer FF but am ok with aps-c (at minimum) IF the native lenses are designed with the classic FL's in mind (like the 23mm on the X100). I especially want a 45mm or 50mm
equivalent not a 50mm that the becomes a 75mm, etc. One of the things that drives crazy about my first foray into aps-c Canikon DSLR's was that you had to buy the classic FL's (primes, of course). Anyway, I'm holding out hope that Fuji hit a home run here (in terms of what I am looking for of course). I was excited about the Nex 7 but have totally cooled on that one since I really am not looking for a camera to mount my manual focus lenses.

Edit: Forgot about some sort of eye level VF! doh! Definitely a req!

 

[Nikon Bob]

'Rangefinder-like'

Or as we say in English,

'Point and shoot autofocus with manual override and an optical viewfinder'.

Gosh! How original!

Cheers,

R.

Yes Roger, we know it is not a rangefinder and not original either. Point is quite a few people are willing to accept a digital camera that is similar to a rangefinder in certain aspects only. It is just a matter of combining certain non original ideas in a package that physically is similar to a rangefinder and less bulky than a DSLR. I don't know why anyone would be bothered by the term " Rangefinder like" as imitation is said to be the most sincerest form of flattery.

Bob

 

[Roger Hicks]

Yes Roger, we know it is not a rangefinder and not original either. Point is quite a few people are willing to accept a digital camera that is similar to a rangefinder in certain aspects only. It is just a matter of combining certain non original ideas in a package that physically is similar to a rangefinder and less bulky than a DSLR. I don't know why anyone would be bothered by the term " Rangefinder like" as imitation is said to be the most sincerest form of flattery.

Bob

Dear Bob,

Or 'small camera with optical finder and manual control'. Isn't that enough? It's what I'd be happy with.

My point is that I don't think it's imitation: I think it's people projecting their fantasies onto a camera which should stand or fall on its own merits, rather than being compared with something it isn't.

Yes, it's a hole in the market (though I'm not sure how big the hole is). Yes, I think it's a good idea. I might even buy one. But I'd not confuse it with a rangefinder, any more than I'd confuse it with a scale-focus camera, which is also perfectly feasible with tiny sensors -- why not use 16mm ciné lenses?

Cheers,

R.

 

[bensyverson]

This camera is pretty original. How many digital cameras can you count that have interchangeable lenses, autofocus, and an optical viewfinder? I count one: this one.

 

[jsrockit]

'Rangefinder-like'

Or as we say in English,

'Point and shoot autofocus with manual override and an optical viewfinder'.

Gosh! How original!

Well, it is kind of original in the digital camera world.

 

[Bobfrance]

Well I don't have to catagorise it to find it intriguing.

It's worth noting, for those who are interested, that all the dials, most of the buttons and the hotshoe on that bare metal prototype are black. I suspect the LX could well be black. Something that I sense a lot of people will like.

 

[fireblade]

just another camera that will have its place on the market. fuji are just keeping the "can't afford a leica" market happy. Ricoh have done it, Sony through their Nex/adapter have done it, and the chinese have adapters for every other camera to attach leica glass.
hell..once the nikon FT-1 adapter is released you will get leica glass on the V1....and on it goes 🙂

 

[Bobfrance]

I sold my Leica glass and an M9 is waaay to expensive for a small point and shoot backup to my medium format gear. 😉

 

[johannielscom]

Tip #1: if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is!

I'll believe it when I see it!

 

[Roger Hicks]

just another camera that will have its place on the market. fuji are just keeping the "can't afford a leica" market happy. Ricoh have done it, Sony through their Nex/adapter have done it, and the chinese have adapters for every other camera to attach leica glass.
hell..once the nikon FT-1 adapter is released you will get leica glass on the V1....and on it goes 🙂

Exactly. It looks like a nice camera. Yes, there's (probably) room for a manual, interchangeable-lens digicam, designed as such rather than badly bodged as such. But it ain't the Second Coming, and it's no more 'rangefinder-like' than enormous number of film cameras that no-one ever said were 'rangefinder-like'.

It's just that (in the eyes of many RFF members at least) so many digicams are so awful that they rush to label even a half-decent one, with a viewfinder, as 'rangefinder-like'.

Cheers,

R.

 

[bensyverson]

Tip #1: if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is!

I'll believe it when I see it!

They've already announced the camera system, and this "leak" must be deliberate, to prevent people from buying Micro 4/3 and Sony E cameras for the holidays.

They've announced that the camera will be displayed at CES 2012, with availability in the spring.

In other words, you can be 99% sure this is the camera.

 

[Nikon Bob]

Dear Bob,

Or 'small camera with optical finder and manual control'. Isn't that enough? It's what I'd be happy with.

My point is that I don't think it's imitation: I think it's people projecting their fantasies onto a camera which should stand or fall on its own merits, rather than being compared with something it isn't.

Yes, it's a hole in the market (though I'm not sure how big the hole is). Yes, I think it's a good idea. I might even buy one. But I'd not confuse it with a rangefinder, any more than I'd confuse it with a scale-focus camera, which is also perfectly feasible with tiny sensors -- why not use 16mm ciné lenses?

Cheers,

R.

Well, no point in arguing semantics call it what you wish but I do think just about everyone here has a good idea what "rangefinder like" means as a descriptive. It may not be the most precise description but people get the drift. It does have its own merits and some of them are similar to traditional RFs. Nobody is confusing it with a traditional RF. As for projecting fantasies that could be true in part. Then again there is a big "but" to that also. I personally will settle for an "ersatz" DRF if I am unwilling to or can't afford to pay the freight on a real DRF. Nothing wrong with that either, nobody goes through life without a few compromises. I hope the hole in the market is large enough for the exercise to be profitable for a company willing to take a chance on an innovative blend of non original ideas. Sometimes you just don't need "echt" to be happy.

Bob

 

[Leigh Youdale]

Given Fuji's reputation for lens manufacture I think I'd much sooner have a camera and lens set that was designed by them from scratch and not something that was compromised from birth by trying to make the M system fit and work as well.
And if I was running Fuji I'd be wanting to sell lenses too, not just bodies.
So you have to buy some new glass? Pffft!
The other point I noticed was a comment about Fuji's propensity to introduce something new and after a while move on. Maybe they've changed with the X100/X10 designs, but in case they haven't I wouldn't be planning on waiting a couple of years for a cheap second hand one to fall into my hands.