Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Fuji X Series News and Rumors' started by BobbyT, Dec 11, 2016.
This is interesting if true.
Yeah I saw that..
Kinda sucks if your name is Leica and you just released a new 16mp APS-C camera called the TL huh?!!
(Although to be fair, Leica probably have enough sensors to cover their production, maybe 8 or whatever )
Sony may indeed have ceased production of its 16mp sensors. But, given that the X70 was introduced less than a year ago and that the X-A3 was introduced very recently, I suspect Fuji may have enough sensors to cover a couple of production runs for both cameras.
Now, as to the X70 supposedly being discontinued, this may also be true. But it wouldn't be the first time I've seen a camera erroneously marked "discontinued" when it was merely out of stock.
If the X70 is, in fact, discontinued, perhaps it's because it wasn't selling well rather than sensor supply. I'm not stating that as a fact - I have no idea. But, fairly or unfairly, reception to the X70 has been decidedly mixed.
...and it came to pass... Fuji's touchy feely X70: Is it all it's cracked up to be?
I wonder if that is due to its form factor? My first MILC was a Sony NEX-5R, and I got a lot of pleasing images from that camera. But once I got a camera with an EVF, it was game over. Having a view finder is a must for me now.
I have long believed the pixel race was over. It should be. To be honest, and having extensively shot with 10MP, 16MP, 24MP, and 36MP cameras I can honestly say the most consistently preferred results by both myself and clients have come from the 10MP and 16MP sensors. The image quality is visually better, if not technically better, and the print quality even at A1 and above is perfectly fine. At the end of the day, the sensor is only so big and adding more pixels means adding smaller ones, which do not react is the same way and I, personally, don't think they are better. If I want more than 16MP I will go for a bigger sensor and by that I mean medium format. Full frame is not all its cracked up to be, my Fuji 16MP constantly produces far better images that my Nikon FF D700 ever did. But then, my D200 (1.5x crop) produced cleaner and finer images than my D700 also. Yes, the low light capability wasn't as good, but the perceived image clarity and depth was far better. I sold more shots from the D200 than the D700 over the same period.
I would like the XT2 for speed of focussing, and perhaps for having dual SD card slots, but I don't want the sensor in it. All of this is of course personal taste and personal preference. But then I always opted for slower films and bigger format (100ISO, medium format) rather than anything 35mm. Its all a matter of taste at the end of the day, but it works for me.
Blythe your post struck a chord with me as I muse over my digital history. It was in 2006 that I bought a Nikon D70s to use in Venice whilst celebrating my 40th wedding anniversary, this camera sported a huge 6 megapixels! since then there follows a trail of Nikon bodies D200, D300, D700, D800 and finally a D810 and quite frankly the D70s out shone them all, as the results I got on my Venice trip have not been bettered by any amount of pixels! As the model number went up so did the weight of bodies and lenses and that led to a rethink. So after looking around and seeing some cracking results from Fuji cameras, I jumped out of the Nikon camp and bought an X-T1 GS with the 18-55mm f 2.8-4, this was followed by the PX of a lot of Nikon gear to obtain a plethora of Fuji gear. The purchase of the X-T1 was a stopgap until the X-T2 was released, I really liked the results I got from the X-T1. If an X-T1 with the X-T2 facilities were produced I would have been a very happy bunny, but then again now I'm very happy with the new X-T2. So after all that waffle it is very sad to read of the demise of the 16 megapixel sensors, which maybe a result of Sony manufacturing problems!
Blythe, you think that you preferred the D200 images because of the CCD sensor? Opposed to the CMOS sensor of the later Nikon bodies.
I had a Pentax K200D with a 10mp CCD sensor. I replaced it wih a K-5 that had a 16mp CMOS sensor. Frankly, other than better high-ISO performance with the K-5, the differences weren't dramatic. The K200D was gifted to my niece a long time ago. She still uses it.
But I'm with Blythe: 16mp is fine for me and I am in no rush to buy any of the new crop (pun intended) of cameras with 24, 36 and more megapixels. Good thing, too. I really can't affird most of them.
Does Leica use Sony sensors, because they have a couple of M models where the sensors are rotting in the camera. But Leica is right on top of it. Send in your camera and in seven or eight months it will come back to you with a shiny new sensor
Their X and TL ones do, the newer Ms (& most likely Q and SL) use CMOSIS, the ones with the sensor problem use Kodak, and the problem is the sensor cover glass, not the sensor itself