Fujirumors reports: “The Japanese source told me that the weather sealed X coming in January will have double SD card slots. The design? A new source said that the camera body will be “something like OMD (E-M1 – E-M5) shape“.
So after Sony also Fuji will follow the OMD design path 🙂
…
Resumee: Sony, Samsung, Olympus, Panasonic and Fuji. All of them will announce new mirrorless cameras for the February CP+ event!
55 Responses
Logical move. They don´t have small enough zoom lenses to fit their small rangefinder style bodies. I´d prefer they could make some good compact collapsible zoom lenses nevertheless.
bad move and big big mistake. Nobody wants slr lookalike mirrorless cameras anymore. Body should be small and portable.
It´s not the body but the lenses that make a system portable. Most mirrorless bodies, including Olympus and Samsung DSLR shaped bodies, are small enough, some even too small. Good quality collapsible zoom lenses and lightweight prime lenses is all they need. Mirrorless DSLR shaped cameras are ok. It´s only a matter of taste.
If somebody wants dslr shaped body, he or she can buy a dslr. Dslr is much cheaper, optical viewfinder is just better (no lag), body size is equal… compared to E-M1.
I just cant understand this stupid new trend.
Nonsense. An E-M1 is a lot smaller than any DSLR of similar build quality and ergonomics.
Samsung nx (eg nx200 or 1000, but also 300 to a lesser extent) with the collapsable 20-50 or with the 10,16,20 and 30mm pancakes is really a small system.
I disagree.
Retro SLR-style cameras are the hot selling trend this season.
Rangefinders were hot last season.
Based on what information? The A7/A7R and OMD EM-1 are in the Amazon Best Sellers top 20(compact system cameras) now but I doubt it’s solely because of the styling. They’ve only just been released this holiday season and yet you’ve already concluded that SLR styling is “hot” this season.
Olympus must done something right :)… I hope they won’t tell Fuji, Sony and Nikon that E-M5’s selling great not because of the hump, but because what’s inside the camera.
Gee, what a surprise. Despite what ppl may feel about the look of rangefinder or slr types, the fact remains that rangefinder styled cameras with their viewfinder stuck on the far left make holding verticals stupid, especially when three quarters of the camera body is over your eye line. the centered VF of the dslr makes vertical shooting with a bottom battery grip or one that’s built in more comfortable and logical.
The point is that most ppl don’t care for pictures anymore, just the shape of the camera, the brand, how sharp the lens is, iso etc etc, as proven by the techno nerds and the hipsters and the good old fanboys.
Or perhaps not everyone feels the same way as you? The only stupidity here is the guy who thinks that his way is the only way when it comes to subjective matters.
Fujifilm… once the innovator, now the follower? Let me guess… no shutter speed dial or aperture rings either eventually?
Oh no, come on … i hope they are keepin the rangefinder-style. i personally don’t like those “humps”. still waiting about some rumors about the X200 🙂 hope it will look like a bigger x100(s) with the full-frame-sensor and a 35 or 40 mm fast lens ! 🙂
Those humps are necessary if you want a viewfinder. You can’t avoid a hump, whether it’s a slr “hump” or an external Vf hump or even a rangefinder. YOU DON;T NOTICE THE RANGEFINDER HUMP BECAUSE THE REST OF THE TOP OF THE CAMERA IS A STRAIGHT LINE HUMP FROM THE LEFT TO RIGHT. look at all the Leica film rangefinders. You see there’s at least one inch of height from the top of the mount to the top of the camera, it’s only appears that there’s no hump because the shoulders of the camera are raised as well. Take the om-d, look at the top of the prism, now imagine if olympus raised both shoulders and leveled it off into a straight line, the hump would disappear, would it not? The EVf and camera is for “purpose”, ot looks. If you want to have looks, then by a dummy camera leica that doesn’t work and go out and pretend to take pics, if you are more worried about what your camera looks like then how it works. A camera shaped like a rangefinder aint gonna make you more discreet, you can bet your ass on that.
Moot point. It doesn’t matter how you put it. Some would rather take a taller, humpless rangefinder style body rather than an SLR type with the viewfinder bump and smaller shoulders. It’s just a matter of personal preference.
the hump is not necessary i.e. Sony Nex7
The hump is on the corner of the camera on the nex7. You just don’t notice because the other side is raised and leveled. You can do the same thing with an slr…but why would they raise the camera just to make it look leveled? Rangefinders have the whole left side of the camera to house the rangefinder mechanism. There’s still a hump, dont be fooled by optical illusion. the rangefinder has to go somewhere too, just like the slr ovf.
And besides, evf is easy to put in bcause there is no mirrores or glass involved..all you need is a square inch area to put the thing. You can technically put it on the bottom of the camera if you want. The point is, optical vf are always better and preffered and you need glass for that and room above the lens mount to happen. Mirrorless has it easy,
The hump IS necessary…it houses the industry-beating 5-axis IBIS image stabilization sensors. The NEX-7 doesn’t have a hump because it only has (like everybody else), TWO-axis stabilization. The Olympus IBIS has rotary-motion stabilization as its 5th axis (which nobody else has), and I’d bet that it has to be a certain distance away from the lens center-line to be effective. All I know is, I shot Chinese Xian warriors headshots at 600 mm equiv. (150mm with the E-M5’s digital 2x extender activated), at a 1/40th of a second exposure, and the shots came out great 95% of the time.
Can´t say better. Totally agree.
Smart move. Now many people are trying to decide between the E-M1 and the A7.
Like this Fuji lodges one in the middle.
However, the E-M1 offers the blazing fast AF, the IBIS and the huge selection of compact lenses. The A7 offers full frame. The Fuji offers none of that awesomeness.
EM-1? Who cares? the em-1 is a m43 camera. Those sensors are noisy even at iso 100 with larger prints. Sorry, m43 is going to be a dead end street, the game will be played on FF street and or at least aps-c. For about 2 grand after tax for the em1? Why pay that much for a camera that has little support, lower resale value,and a company that didn’t do anything during the film slr wars. No one in their right mind would pay more than 600 for any m43 camera when there are clearly better choices for the money. Fast AF for a camera that uss small sensors and their lenses have less glass to move around…big deal. Dslr Af is more than fast enough, and they have bigger problems to worry about then m43 and their puny noisy sensors. I want to get more for my money, not less.
If the full frame or crop mirror-less can pump out small lenses then I agree. The whole point of m43 was smaller size, but when you have lenses like the canon 22mm f2 and the new sony 35mm 2.8 being almost as small as m43 equivalents, the gap starts to close.
Have a look at samsung nx 10mm f3.5, 16mm f2.4, 20mm f2.8 and 30mm f2.0. Tiny, aren’t they? 🙂
Also the nx 20-50mm zoom is tiny for what it is. And the 45mm f1.8 is not much bigger.
Nx1000 or even nx300 + such lenses is for sure competitive in size/weight with m4/3 (at the same fov) and offer aps-c sensor.
Can any NX camera match the size of the Panasonic Gm1? Can you mount M lenses on NX? Can the Samsung APS-C sensors match the performance of Sony APS-C sensors? Can the Samsung lens lineup match the MFT lens lineup? Is Samsung going to keep developing the NX system?
It’s one thing to look at photos and say that the NX1000 is small enough with some lenses, it’s a different thing to build an actual kit you want to use and compare the size and performance that it gives. Samsung have a lot of work to do if they want to build a capable camera system.
I agree that samsung does NOT have a coherent and long term strategy, but…the sensor in nx300 is on par with the best from sony (check dxo mark and the samples from it) and the lenses are, in average, better than the sony counterpart. The iq is better than any m4/3 offering.
The ‘issue’ with M lenses is actually a non issue for most customers, that wouldn’t want to pay that much for legacy (yet very good) lenses.
Give us a break! Four thirds isn’t noisy at 100 iso, not any more than aps-c. You obviously know nothing about this format and have never used it. Either that, or you spend your time on the computer looking at files jacked up to 500%.
Your post sounds so much like a troll.. one has to wonder if you have ever used an m 4/3 camera .
Point is if you cannot get a good IQ from a correctly exposed file from a m4/3rd camera shot at 100 iso, it is VERY urgent that you stop printing yourself or change lab
I have had several exhibits with 4/3 and m4/3rds files in large sizes but maybe you are just posting for the sake of trolling..
Harold
Everyone’s a troll if they don;t like something you like, right?
your comment cracked me up the most. “troll” classic man haha.
Have you shot with an E-M5 or E-M1? Have you ever made a large print with either of these cameras? Have you ever SEEN a large print made with either of these cameras? I’ve been shooting for over a year with an E-M5, and it has a very low noise level. My 24×36’s look great. Something in your response reminds me of the old days…”no one is ever going to give up film…they prefer the softness and film grain of 35 mm film”. He who does not adapt to change will be flattened by the steam-roller of technology.
No reason for Fuji not to make several types of designs for different customers.
“OMD design path”?
That slr lookalike design is originally designed in the 50’s.
Really? Nobody noticed it till now…
You don’t say? Very observant.
What if they also include a sensor stabilization?
An x-trans on-chip stabilized would be a killer for me.
Not just for vintage lens. But the fixed focale lens are not stabilized. And this would help in some situations
Well, I am about to re-invest in m43 with an OMD. It is not because Ilike the hump though, it is because it has excellent in body image stabilization.
The meaning of the word “mirrorless” is changing as it has nothing to do with form factor, just about the viewfinder technology (if there is a viewfinder at all). It means Panasonic was right from the m43 beginning. 🙂
Oh geeez. Another Om-d copycat. Seriously.
Fuji have their look.. why start to deviate.
Yawnnnn…
Exciting time for camera lovers. Sony, Nikon, Fuji, Pentax….so many choices. Hope there is improvement on the raw of the new Fuji X.
What makes any of these cameras an “OMD alike?” Doesn’t the OM-D just have the same form factor as any 70s/80s era SLR? Why aren’t you calling the OM-D a Nikon FE/Pentax ME/Canon AE-alike?
OMD is not a class of camera. OMD copied the GH1/G1 series since both are m43 cameras with a DSLR hump/shape. Nothing original from Olympus, except that it calls it “retro” but is not. Fuji is much more “retro” with actual aperture and shutter speed dials, like cameras from the 1980’s and earlier.
Please, stop giving Olympus more credit than it deserves.
hate SLR looking mirrorless cameras, they are simply too ugly.
Yep. Ugly and big.. slr size with tiny sensor? Pana GM1 is a correct ‘design path’ for mirrorless. With viewfinder (not mirrorbox style) body could be little bigger.
Yes, tiny bodies are good for everybody, especially to those who work with them all day long and for those tele shooters.
…not to forget, the bigger their hands, the bigger the desire for small bodies…
Ugly to YOU, not to paying customers they’re not. You planning on marrying your camera? An olympus camera with an external EVf is just the same. The Leica m9 is one fat sardine can of a camera.
As usual. Olympus innovates (even with retro) and everyone else copies it – Sony, Nikon, Fuji.
Olympus innovated and created FF ILC system with SLR shaped bodies and Sony just copied it away. Such a copy cats they are.
Nikon did copy themselves, not Olympus.
Would be nice. But they have to do it better. The EM1 looks like Lego cam prototype rubbish. But of course the picture quality is Much much better than the tiny M43 sensor. So it could be a winner.
The E-M1 size is fine as it helps for better handling though the Pentax K3/K5 etc all offer excellent build quality built in IBIS similar size and better sensors all for less money than the E-M1 .The K3 is £200 cheaper than the E-M1 body the also weather sealed D7100 is a whopping £400 cheaper.
http://camerasize.com/compare/#482,485
mFT has one thing going for it that is size if you don’t mind carrying a couple of Kg .You will get access to better sensors , wider range of native AF lenses better flash systems etc.One example sure its not the lightest but it is excellent, a D7100 + Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 makes for a great landscape set up.This kind of sensor quality and DOF at such a wide-angle cannot be matched in mFT for any price F1.8 on Nikon APS gives you the same DOF as F1.2 on mFT. Don’t see any 13.5-26mm F1.2 zoom any time soon do you
The k3 is anwonderful camera indeed. Imo the best aps-c on the market now. And better than omd, again imo.
Yep for a landscape shooter like myself the K3 combined with the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 looks to be a wonderful solution I am not a fan of distorted UWA lenses and often shoot FF with fast 28,35 and 50mm so this would just about do it for me, not small for sure though
Sony a7 sensor is 4 x times bigger than em1’s.. but..
http://camerasize.com/compare/#482,487
🙂
I agree, but the a7 will have very big lenses, alas.
“I agree, but the a7 will have very big lenses, alas.”
That depends how you look at it if you want to compare in a fair equivalent way ie lenses that will give the same AOV,DOF and total light, the Sony 24-70 F4 will do the same job as a 12-35mm F2 would on mFT. The new Zeiss 24-70MM f4 weighs only 50g more than the Olympus 12-40 with OSS built in.