See my comment on the original PR post. Unfortunately, PRGuy got it wrong, those are the top 10 sales figures for 01-22 October only (and there's always going to be a big rush upon launch).
Still, nice to see that it's doing well (although there's some weird things in there, like the Pentax Q sells well, and the NEX-7 doesn't, and there's no Fuji anything or OM-D in there)
That's exactly it, the Japanese especially love new things.
Continuing the discussion (
) - quite a number of people seem to want full frame. I wonder how keen they'd be when they saw the size and price of the lenses! Really, this boils down to what you want the camera for and what compromises you are willing to accept. If you're looking for a smaller, yet still very capable camera system to
supplement your DSLR, then I'd suggest that you
don't want full frame, as it adds size and cost whilst duplicating capabilities you already have.
In some ways, this mirrors (pun noted!) the currently available systems. I would suggest that Fuji's X-system is very much orientated at those who are looking to change from a DSLR based set-up to something more compact, rather than those who seek to supplement their DSLR with something smaller. Hence why the X-series are physically larger and amongst the most expensive of the mirrorless cameras.
DSLR DSLR supplement point and shoot upgraders
replacement X-Pro1 ------------- NEX-7, OMD EM5 ---------- GX-1, EP3 ----------- EPLx, GFx, Nikon 1
I'm not trying to suggest that there are any clear cut boundaries (nor was I trying to be comprehensive), just that there is a vague spectrum, upon which different cameras exist. As you move further to the left on my spectrum, the more niche the product becomes. Might I therefore also suggest that the further to the left a camera is, the less attractive it becomes to the mainstream manufacturers like Canon and Nikon.
Show Posts
