The one I used wasn't a beta unit.
I'm not sure that I want to start a Cosina rumour based on something as flimsy
as the viewfinder dioptres (! but it would make sense for Fuji to do it. It's
undercut by the fact that Fuji was able to make the X-Pan for Hasselblad - they
can build a rangefinder well enough themselves and I don't think they've ever
outsourced their lenses have they? I'm tempted to think that Cosina would have
done a better job - the Bessa 3's and 4's are very well made.
Yup, it's the firmware. What makes you think it's sigmoid?
Andrew Fildes
afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.soultheft.com
On 05/04/2012, at 1:05 AM, Ken Norton wrote:
>> It's a bit annoying that the pro who had used it for a while gave such a
>> glowing review on video.
>
> Since it was a "pre-production" unit, there is an assumption that some
> of the software bugs will be corrected before release. No need to
> trash a camera that is obviously beta.
>
> But the problem here is that the beta software is never fixed!!!!!
>
> That pro photographer in question is being paid to present the camera
> in the positive light and let the company fix issues that crop up. It
> isn't his responsibility to fix the bugs. Just like Andrew, he has to
> stay on topic. What's the image quality like? Is the overall design
> satisfying? Is it sexy? Leave the software developers alone.
>
> The problem here is that we have come to expect a certain number of
> bugs in version 1.0 of the firmware of every camera. Fortunately, with
> most cameras it is just a small handful of obscure items. With Fuji,
> it's wholesale issues from the basic functionaliy on up.
>
> Andrew alludes to something which I've been been highly suspicious of.
> X-Pro 1 is being manufacturered by Cosina. This isn't a negative by
> any means. This is a company that provides and builds cameras for most
> everybody in the industry. However, when it comes to the firmware, it
> is looking like Fuji outsourced it to Sigma. The firmware doesn't have
> any feel of Cosina to it at all. The problem here is that you have no
> less than two companies involved in the product development and
> manufacturing. Probably three. Cosina building the bodies and lenses,
> Sigma developing the software and Fuji not having a clue how to
> project manage this beast.
>
> Like I said, Cosina isn't the problem. They'll do whatever they are
> told. They have some of the top optical equipment manufacturing
> abilities around with engineers and machinists that know their biz.
>
> The question is "who is doing the firmware?" I maintain that it has
> Sigma written all over it.
>
> AG
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|