You're correct: I thought you were referring to another inexpensive Yashica camera. That said, I have sold photos I made with a disposable camera on occasion.
A good photographer can make good photographs with any camera at all.
Of course you have the right to express an opinion. But when you try to back up an opinion with faulty logic, I have a right to call you on it. Saying that the viewfinder frame line selector is faulty because it doesn't cover your "standard APS-C focal lengths" set is faulty logic ... that's not the intent of the design, at least as far as I can make out. Very few people who have Leica M lenses have the 10, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24 focal lengths compared to the number of people who have 28, 35, 50, 75, 90, and 135 lenses. So if my intent was to produce a rangefinder digital camera that people who already owned a film M and M lenses, and who wanted a "less expensive" digital body that they could use those M lenses on, the first lenses I'd cover are 28, 35, 50, 75, 90, and 135. Regardless of the format or field of view that differs from the traditional M's FF standard. A new Pixii is about half the price of the least expensive new Leica M digital camera: In that context, it meets the criteria of a "less expensive" digital M camera solution, just like the Epson R-D1 did (and note that it was just about the same price point as the Pixii with fewer features and half the resolution... with the same frame line selector scheme on an APS-C format).
I neither like nor dislike the Pixii. I'm interested in learning more about it because it looks like an interesting camera, to me. And Stephen's first impression was that it was nicely made and nicely packaged. So I'm studying it for a little while.
I'm not jumping up and down with money in my hands wanting to rush out and buy one because I have far more cameras already that cover whatever bases the Pixii can cover and I have no need or desire to add to their multitudes. But if the Pixii's design has some advantages I thought I could use, and I felt the urge, I'd go buy one. Although pricey, it's nowhere near as pricey as my 10, 28, 35, 43, 50, 75, 90 and 135 mm lenses are (any two or three of those lenses cost more). And having a decent body with interesting features that can use those lenses, with rangefinder focusing no less, is always interesting to me.
That the Pixii is expensive and has some limitations I'm well aware, as should be anyone who sees it. What it has that's different or special, without regard to its price, is the interesting part.
I also see no reason to disparage the Pixii folks for their efforts, as you have done. They have their ideas for their product and seem to have been willing to put a lot of money and time into realizing them. Whether the product is successful functionally an interesting thing we have yet to discover. Whether the product is successful in some niche of the marketplace, and not necessarily with either you or me, is another thing that's interesting.
G
—
"You can't depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus."
– Mark Twain
