Interesting concept.<p>For me the deal breaker is the lack of viewfinder. However this might be designed for people who've not grown up with SLR or rangefinder cameras, but phones instead.<p>The ux is <i>interesting</i> it looks like the thumb wheel is the only real physical controls and only works on the selected item. For me thats probably ok, as I only really set the shutter speed during shooting.<p>I wonder what its actually like to use? I wonder how it compares to something like the AliceCamera (<a href="https://www.alice.camera/" rel="nofollow">https://www.alice.camera/</a>)?<p>However, if I was on the market for a camera, of that rough size and quality, I'd probably go for a second hand GFX100, which is around the same price as the BF. Its the only mirrorless camera that is easy to use (in shooting, the setup isn't great) <i>and</i> shows me what the picture looks like live. (I'm looking at you Canon RP)
It's great to see that at least one manufacturer is still willing to release a camera that isn't either a "generic modern" camera or an "film styling but with digital" camera.<p>I love the idea of a smaller body focused full frame camera, though I am skeptical of how useable this camera will be in colder climates. That metal is going to be freezing cold, and those buttons looks hard to operate with gloves on.
before you bag on this, try to ask some questions like:<p>- who is this product trying to reach?<p>- what does it do well?<p>- what do it's designers know that I don't?<p>If you see something that strikes you as weird, there's a reason for it. You're looking at a highly designed product, it's all intentional, try to be curious.
I've spent a lifetime taking photos with all sort of cameras, and in my experience unless someone is paying for the photos I never use a camera that doesn't fit in my pocket, and over half the time that is an iPhone.<p>In UX there is a concept of 'don't make me think' - the camera corollary is 'don't make me carry'.
I think I’m a target customer? I don’t think this is rev for me but I think in the future I could be sold. I own an a7c because I value compactness. I was just in New Zealand and a lot of times I was pretty happy to take photos on my phone. As my purpose was to just be able to take an image in my head and translate that to an actual photo. There are definitely some shots that I needed a bit more technical setup which was great with the a7c but I really didn’t need nearly so many of the bells and whistles. I also don’t really want to have to edit in RAW, ideally I get a good enough image that I can just transfer to my phone and post straight to Instagram with little work.
As someone who knows a bit about photography, not sure this is a good product. It seems to me to be more like gimmick/aesthetic appeal, especially given the price tag ($3000+ AUD?). Like Apple: "minimalist", opinionated, very expensive.<p>In terms of specs it doesn't look very impressive. Doubt it holds up compared to mainstream brands at that price point.
The lack of physical buttons probably makes it less appealing to professionals. Touch controls are just not the same for quick actions based on muscle memory.
I don't get the color modes. It advertises as "no fluff" but includes all these presets, which anyone halfway interested in editing will likely avoid in leiu of their own styles. In fact if you look at all the software features and modes, it's quite standard, not really minimal at all.
You're limited to Sigma lenses. Never used a Sigma lens so I can't comment on quality. But I don't know why you would want to limit yourself, again particularly given the price point.<p>Overall this looks like an aesthetic sell rather than a good photography product. It's for people who want to appear cool with a sleek-looking camera that gives you the popular image "looks" out of the box. And who are willing to accept an inflated price tag for it.
I really wanted to like this (and buy it) due to the aesthetics, but spec-wise it's worse than the Linux s9. Notably missing an in body stabilization, which is important if you intend to use small lenses that don't have stabilization built in.
I think I'll pass this time. Merrill DP2 is still my favorite camera, maybe when (if) they release their next Foveon sensor camera in a few years it will be tempting. But judging by the design trajectory, it will be shaped like a tetrahedron or something.
I wonder if this can recapture the magic of old film cameras. With smartphones, the low effort it takes to capture a photo makes them less interesting. But DSLRs are also overly complicated for someone just wanting to capture something spontaneously.
That’s a gorgeous-looking camera. I am really happy to see Sigma still taking chances on their cameras. The FP is still one of my favorite cameras, it’s fun and really inspiring.<p>Looking forward to the BF.
Has anyone seen the pixel layout on the sensor? I'm specifically curious if they went with an RGBW layout, or are stuck with the off the shelf image sensors.
I want a lens mount "case" for my iphone that lets me connect high end lenses and has its own full frame sensor and image stabilization tech inside.
lmao I was like "wtf is going on with that stick"<p>the slab design I wonder, I made my own camera bodies (for RPi) and the straight edges do hurt your hand<p>The size reminds me of the hype I felt with Sony Alpha Nex-5n when that was new (tiny body and big lens)<p>The body reminds me of Teenage Engineering<p>edit: oh yeah Sigma FP that was another tiny body camera