Maurice

Lol, raining 14mm's ? I doubt it !

Indeed. Where's the fun without the hunt ! Classics should have lived, you can't just make a 'new' classic. At least, not when it's unreasonably priced and boring! The Petzval did pretty well for a good price and you actually get something like a collectors edition. The difference here between doing it for the money, or because they love optics, is too obvious. People won't fall for it that easily, Meyer!

Indeed, i don't nearly have enough photography books, but i have on of his. Didn't know the guy at the time i bought it.

I don't think that's true. If the bokeh is nervous due to a difficult background then the non-APD version would be nervous too. There is no lens on the planet that is always perfect. But it is impossible for the APD filter to 'add' any nervousness, all it does is soften edges of the 'circle of confusion' in very specific conditions. Any remaining nervousness is due to the background conditions only.

44 x 33 is just about exactly 4 times the size of APSC. apsc = 365 mm2 44 x 33 = 1452 mm2 4 x apsc = 1460 mm2 fullframe = 864 mm2 mft = 225 mm2

Indeed, people often seem to think that a small maximum aperture is a measure for quality, but of course it doesn't have to be. Good optics are good optics. The only thing to watch out for is if you've got enough light. But this is of course a practical 'issue' only, and mostly down to skill. The performance itself is a 100% Fujinon. Bigger aperture doesn't make a lens better, just more versatile, but also heavier, larger and expensive etc. Know what you've got and how to use it, then you can take on anything of any cost with this bargain.

This is the first time ever for me to hear that. You must be confusing it with some other lens, the 18mm maybe? Because i hear (and see) nothing but good or great things about the 14mm.

You mean this one. Considering the 750mm equivalent, it looks great. I bet you need a proper shutter speed without OIS, or use a tripod.

The X-T10 definitely offers the best deal for your money at the moment for anyone looking at Fuji. While others are competing heavily on price, that's difficult to beat. Since most people only care about 'high specs' for little money, but don't really know what anything means. But honestly i would hate it if they became boringly mainstream, they only need to do well with the (few) people that know what they're getting into imho.

Haha, good point. You could even have a really nice light-sealed custom bracket/mount made for it, with worlds cleanest ground glass and it'd be a bargain. Then make a 100 and sell the other 99.

Indeed the rolling shutter problem is terrible. And somebody already did make that 8 x 10 " sensor. http://petapixel.com/2011/08/25/photographer-makes-his-own-8x10-digital-back-for-the-price-of-a-house/

To be clear, JPG at 100% doesn't make it lossless, just extremely inefficient. The difference between 97% and a 100% (or lack there of! really, i dare you to find a difference ) is not worth the size increase.

But I am not surprised. This is a direct example of the APD filter at work, if this was taken with the 'regular' 56mm it would look exactly like the 90mm and 50-140mm do in the comparison. With 'normal' bokeh, where there aren't as many such highlights that create this specific kind of bokeh-situation the 90mm, 50-140mm, and regular 56mm are all equally creamy.

This rumor sounds like Fuji just started experimenting with the idea, and they don't really know what it's going to turn in to any more than we do !

That would be crazy, of course it's cheaper. Though indeed probably not by a lot.

By the way why is this in Fuji X News & Rumors → General Discussion That is double bad man.

Hover over the image to see the weight, it's 1650g for the Nikon vs 840g for the Fuji, total! That is less than the 28-300 weighs alone. Plus the optical performance is much better. Fullframe sensors really aren't made for such extreme zooms.

The difference is only visible in very specific conditions. 95% of the time it doesn't matter at all, but when it does it can be pretty noticeable.

Street as in buildings, or people ? Because OIS stabilizes your own movement of course, but not that of anyone or anything else.

Don't have it, but let's start with this: http://camerasize.com/compact/#493.359,493.426,ha,t You might want to get the add-on grip. Or a thumbs-up thingy.

So i guess a Hasselblad X-T1 Mercury edition is out of the question too, wouldn't require a new section.

Doesn't require

Why else would they have released a video like this only yesterday

Imagine the 16/1.4 that's two stops faster than the 14mm, or four times the light !

Wait, you mean WR ? or the 56mm ?