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

[Nikon Bob]

I'd argue that for many people, the term "rangefinder" evokes images of a lightweight camera shaped like a Leica,, etc. For most of us, the actual rangefinder mechanism isn't the point.
I really don't care how my camera achieves its focus.
So I'm not going to hold it against the manufacturer for using the term "rangefinder" when describing its camera.
That tells me a heck of a lot more than "small camera with optical finder and manual control."

Exactly.

Bob

 

[Shade]

Well it sounds interesting, but the lenses look kinda ugly from the back. And yes, it looks quite huge! And I think they would just put an updated APS-C sensor from the X100, since developing a FF sensor would cost more money.

I think the mount is large enough for FF sensor is due to because they are probably thinking of introducing an FF camera sensor down the line later on, *IF* they manage to pull this off. So they are prepared, the lenses and mount are designed for FF, and they can just "up the ante" later on with the LX and perhaps change it to FX next year.

 

[mrisney]

It's a newer type sensor. Not sure what, but not Bayer. Fuji is introducing it, and want to build on the sensor technology. They are primarily interested in getting the sensor out there. I was the one who broke the new on photorumors.com about the name and the APS-C format. I heard the story from my local lab that deals Fuji, they knew I was hesitant on buying an X100, and have been hanging onto my Lumix G system - for now. Yes it's an iteration on the X100, with a lens set. But Fuji is apparently keen on getting a leg up into Nikon and Canon's market share. They aren't sourcing the sensor out, they are fabricating it. That's important to note, as Nikon are using Sony's sensors, and Leica uses Eastman Kodak and Panasonic. There aren't many non Bayer CMOS sensor's out there. Except Sigma's Foveon. That's the part that I think most are missing - I think they are blinded by crummy pictures. But the sensor tech is the real news IMO.

 

[kchong]

Interesting info, mrisney. I'd definitely love something similar to their EXR technology. More than willing to drop resolution down to 8mp if it offers great high ISO or DR.

 

[f16sunshine]

I think these pics are BS!
Look at the third picture. The lens has is barely visible but what you can see is a 1.4 as max aperture and a silver trim "ring".
Then the pic with the lens near the mount looks like a mold plastic sigma/canon type build. Completely different build
the mount release looks hokey and is in a weird spot also.
These pics are fakes me thinks.

 

[AndySig]

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

My first thoughts were also that it sounds effectively like a digital Contax G. I'm amazed that nobody has as yet developed a digital body for those lenses.

 

[Jamie123]

Fuji is doing a good job of generating some excitement amongst the rangefinder retrograde crowd. Looks good so far.

This 'crowd' is always excited until the price is announced. 🙂

 

[Bobfrance]

This 'crowd' is always excited until the price is announced. 🙂

You're thinking of Leica. 😛

 

[Roger Hicks]

My first thoughts were also that it sounds effectively like a digital Contax G. I'm amazed that nobody has as yet developed a digital body for those lenses.

This was exactly my thought -- though unlike you, I'd be surprised if anyone decided to hobble their lens designers, constrain their sensor designers, and cut into their potential sales of new lenses, by using an old 'legacy' mount that never offered (or sold) many lenses anyway.

It would make much more sense to offer an APS-C camera with a new series of telecentric lenses -- IF there really is a market for a digital Contax G lookalike (or functionalike). A lot of RFF members would like to think there was, even to the extent of making it an honorary rangefinder, but perhaps this is not the very best place for a manufacturer to do his market research: the phrase that springs to mind is "preaching to the converted".

Cheers,

R.

 

[sig]

I had the impression that the mirrorless system camera market was growing fast, fuji just wants to be a part of it. Their retro design hits home with a lot of customers, i think this will be a success

 

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

There's not a camera that exists that you can demand accurate and fast AF at 0 EV - even the high-end Nikons are going to struggle or require AF assist at that. Contrast detection even moreso - they can't turn technology into magic. Even the best RF user is going to struggle to focus accurately in that kind of light.

I just sold a Polaroid SX-70 Sonar in good working condition. It seemed to autofocus well in extremely dark conditions when I tested it before sale (there was some novelty value involved, in being able to do this!).
Regards,
Brett

 

[Mrbessar4a]

Just dump al the gimmicks, display's etc.
Give me a full frame sensor with a great dynamic range and low noise. I don't care how much pixels there are.

So go get a canon 5D...

 

[Mrbessar4a]

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.

I'm still going to call it a rangefinder, just like I called my Bessa L a rangefinder.

 

[jsrockit]

$4000 = approx. price of this camera and 3 lenses, if it comes to fruition.

Fact or your opinion?

 

[Ken Ford]

I'd argue that for many people, the term "rangefinder" evokes images of a lightweight camera shaped like a Leica,, etc. For most of us, the actual rangefinder mechanism isn't the point.
I really don't care how my camera achieves its focus.
So I'm not going to hold it against the manufacturer for using the term "rangefinder" when describing its camera.
That tells me a heck of a lot more than "small camera with optical finder and manual control."

Same here, although I tend to refer to them as "direct view" cameras. It's the form factor that works for me, I don't particularly care what the actual focusing mechanism is.

 

[froyd]

My first thoughts were also that it sounds effectively like a digital Contax G. I'm amazed that nobody has as yet developed a digital body for those lenses.

I think part of the answer is that manufacturers want to make money on new lenses as well, not just the body.

 

[Roger Hicks]

So go get a canon 5D...

There's a new model WITHOUT all the gimmicks and displays? AND that doesn't resemble a tub of lard with a lens on the front?

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Same here, although I tend to refer to them as "direct view" cameras. It's the form factor that works for me, I don't particularly care what the actual focusing mechanism is.

Well, yes, exactly.

Cheers,

R.

 

[j j]

There's not a camera that exists that you can demand accurate and fast AF at 0 EV - even the high-end Nikons are going to struggle or require AF assist at that. Contrast detection even moreso - they can't turn technology into magic. Even the best RF user is going to struggle to focus accurately in that kind of light.

My Contax G2 focuses accurately in the dark. I suspect the Konica Hexar (AF) does so too. Are there not also SLRs that focus at -1 EV?

 

[Archlich]

I had the impression that the mirrorless system camera market was growing fast, fuji just wants to be a part of it. Their retro design hits home with a lot of customers, i think this will be a success

The body alone is rumored to be at $1,400, a kit will likely cost around $2,000. Given how people whined when the price of X100 announced, I doubt it would be as "successful" as the M43/NEX options that cost 1/2 or 1/3.