File :-(, x, )
Warren !WSxruxpIJs
Fujifilm announces a new 6x7cm format folding rangefinder camera with built in meter.
Fuck yes.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
Seriously? Got a link?

Relevant to my interests.
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
i hope it doesn't cost a grand. or even five hundred. i'm cheeeeap.
>> Warren !WSxruxpIJs
http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/18141/fujifilm-medium-format-camera/

Let's hope this doesn't go the way of the Fuji Natura, though, and be a boutique item only.

As for older folders, there are a number of different Fuji 120 rangefinders, both folding and otherwise in 3 or 4 different formats. There are also the old Voigtlander folders, the various Russian folding 120 cameras, and others. They've been around for around a hundred years now, so the list is long.
>> Anonymous
Holy fucking DO WANT.
>> Anonymous
>>120313
There's a good chance it will hit the general market. Fuji rangefinders and folders are still very popular in Japan. They're probably the most common medium format camera there, and they're especially common among professional portrait photographers.

It looks nice and I've been wanting another MF camera, so if it's under 2k, I'll buy one.
>> Warren !WSxruxpIJs
Yeah, that's what I'm thinking. It would be the perfect weekend-trip medium format, among other things.
>> Anonymous
Where is my lever wind D:

Seriously what the hell is knob wind doing on a camera designed in the 21st century?
>> Anonymous
What does this do that I can't with my Nikon D40x?
>> des
>>120533
Their older MF cameras have levers and are fairly cheap on the used market at this point.
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
Very nice!
>> Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m
>>120545
If you have to ask......
>> Anonymous
is it suitable for war photography?
>> Anonymous
>>120569

The most important thing for war photography ARE MANLY BALLS OF STEEL. Once you have them then any camera will do.
>> Anonymous
>>120556
I know. That makes this design decision all the more insane.
>> Anonymous
>>120607
It looks as if they might've been designing it to look a little like a Leica M.
>> Anonymous
>>120563

Well, I'm just asking to know because my D40x can do 10 megapixels.

How many MP is this one?
>> Anonymous
>>120611
I'm pretty sure you're a troll, but I'm going to answer anyway.

This camera shoots a piece of a film that's 6x7 inches. Nothing digital about it, except maybe the light meter. One can scan this film, and the number of megapixels one gets depends on the quality and settings of the scanner.

The only other things this'll do that your D40 won't are focus using a split-image rangefinder, fold the lens into the body, and be totally awesome.

Both your D40X and this are capable of producing images with extremely high technical quality.
>> Anonymous
>>120613

Yeah, I was just trolling.

I already know my D40x is better than this piece of junk.

Film, lol. What a fucking joke.
>> Anonymous
I like how it is tagged with "LetsGoDigital"
>> Anonymous
>>120615

Dude, if you're going to troll at least try harder not to be so fucking obvious.
>> Anonymous
>>120608
It's not patterned after a Leica M at all. Maybe a leica III, but even then not really.

It's just a modern re-do of the classic MF folder design. Probably the closest in looks is the Agfa Isolette.

>>120533
Probably because they were very obviously going for a classic camera design on this one, plus the fact that lever wind would probably end up having to be three or four strokes on this camera.
>> Anonymous
fujis other ventures into medium format cameras have mainly been crap.
>> Anonymous
>>120672
Apparently you're an idiot. Most of Fuji's MF cameras have been very good, they just don't have the brand recognition in the US that Hasselblad and Mamiya do. That's mostly because they made cameras for the Japanese market, where rangefinders and compact MF cameras are much more popular than they are here. They never made a basic SLR to compete directly with Hasselblad or Mamiya, so they never caught on here. The main exceptions are the first generation 6x4.5 rangefinders they made that had problems with the lens mounts being too weak.
>> Warren !WSxruxpIJs
>>120613
It shoots 120 roll film and produces a negative 56x72mm in size, a format usually referred to as 6x7cm (NOT 6x7 inches). When you scan a film negative, you get scans in different resolutions depending on the scanner and settings thereon, *not* different megapixels.
>>120672
You're an idiot. Use google.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>120701
>you get scans in different resolutions depending on the scanner and settings thereon, *not* different megapixels.
Resolution nowadays tends to be measured in megapixels. I don't think that "This has more megapixels" will ever sound right to me compared to "This is higher resolution", but like it or not, that's how people phrase it nowadays. So I think the anon's statement is right, unless I'm misunderstanding your correction.
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
Yeah, this is definitely on my list. Well glad all these things are coming out. Was going to get a Sigma 10-20, now i'll prob get the Tamron 10-24... was going to buy a D300 finally but now i'll use that money to get this instead... but what i really want is a view camera... but i guess MF is a nice compromise for LF since it's more portable and i can do more portraits --> street with it
>> Warren !WSxruxpIJs
>>120722
Film resolution is really never measured in megapixels. It's really not a good way to measure resolution anyway. Pixel count (image dimensions) is the only real across-the-board standard of resolution measurement
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>120722
scanners are almost always measured in dpi.
say you scanned a 35mm film on a 2400dpi scanner and then scanned the same film on a 4000dpi scanner, does that mean that the same film has less megapixels???
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
since i'm a coplete noob to MF

Is that lens not interchangable? and is there any news of when it will come out? or is this purely an announcement?
>> Warren !WSxruxpIJs
>>120752
It'll be a fixed lens, an 80mm f/3.5 which is reasonably fast for the format and slightly wide (equivalent to about 40mm for 35mm). So far no news on when it will be released, if it'll be Japan-market-only or otherwise, or how much it will cost.
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
hmm since it's a folder with a fixed lens,

>>120755
hopefully it won't cost too much. The built in light meter is pretty sweet too.

oh well, now just to play the waiting game.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>120747
>Pixel count (image dimensions) is the only real across-the-board standard of resolution measurement
Er. Megapixel == Mega + Pixel == Millions of pixels.

What you're saying sounds kind of like "Distance on a road shouldn't be measured in kilometers, it should be measured in the length of the road traveled"

>>120747
>say you scanned a 35mm film on a 2400dpi scanner and then scanned the same film on a 4000dpi scanner, does that mean that the same film has less megapixels???
No. That means that you can generate files with different amounts of pixels from the same piece of film depending on the scanner settings. Which is what I believe>>120613was saying:
>One can scan this film, and the number of megapixels one gets depends on the quality and settings of the scanner.

I.e., he was trying to make the exact point that you seem to be, that the resolution of a digital file produced from this camera--which is to say, a scanned frame of film--depends on the scanner and scanner settings used.
>> Anonymous
>>120803
Yes, thank you.

And sorry about the inches versus centimeters flub.
>> Warren !WSxruxpIJs
My point is that resolution outside of digital cameras is essentially never referred to in terms of megapixels. Believe me - I work in the industry and deal with these things on a daily basis. It's convenient for referring to the resolution of a digital camera, but that's as far as it goes in terms of applied usage.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>120882
And my point is that it's creeping into common usage at the low end and will probably get to the high end pretty soon. And, additionally, since this is specifically in the context of comparing the possible resolution of a film camera with the resolution you get out of a digital, it makes sense (I.e., "With a good enough scanner, this can be used as an incredibly slow 150 megapixel digital camera")