And if you're the one taking the portrait, for the love of all that is holy do not use a wide-angle lens. Telephoto is more flattering.

Imagine bringing a lady back to your apartment and just when you get to the door, whipping one of these bad boyz out. Deal sealed!

This is very similar to the first Kodak camera from about 120 years ago. It was just a box containing 100 exposures and a little string to trip the shutter. No need to focus or accurately aim it. Just point and release the shutter. Fitting for a company trying to reinvent itself.

Shame about the size and aspect ratio. What I love about my 1st gen Nexus 7 was the ability to slip it into the back pocket of my jeans or the inside pocket of a jacket. Maybe I'll just go with the Sony this time around.

Alas, the 12 year old behind the Walgreens counter didn't know what one was either. Alas, there's no such thing as inexpensive processing, only cheap processing.

This right here is some brilliant composition.

Why wouldn't anyone just buy a mint condition M3 and a few spectacular lenses for that price? I mean, if you're going to go analog, really go analog.

I'm going to make "no chimping bruh!" t-shirts. Brilliant!

Or maybe bring your SD cards to Walgreens and have them print contact sheets. ;-)

Totally agree. What I wonder, though—and this is my own lack of knowledge speaking—is why SLR lenses are so damn big compared to the same focal length/speed rangefinder lenses?

Oh, absolutely. In fact, I often put my Nikon 50mm on my OMD and suddenly I've got a serviceable 100mm portrait lens. One of my great pleasures is using old/weird glass such as (relatively) cheap Soviet rangefinder lenses. The Jupiter 3 and 8 are weird and fantastic, albeit not the sharpest.

This is what I don't quite understand about full-frame mirrorless. Aren't you losing the size advantage on the lenses by not using a smaller sensor? (Sincere question. I really don't know.)

Exactly. The ISO performance renders low-light concerns mostly irrelevant. The only thing it really affects is DOF, but that's going to be acceptable on a full-frame anyway.

I walk around all day with nothing but a 50mm prime on both my digital Olympus OMD and old film Nikon (for when I feel like something deserves film), but sometimes it kills me not to have a little more reach.

I'd love to have a Panasonic pancake lens 24-75 (equivalent) f 1.7-2.8. I wonder if this means they'll be putting one out soon. It would make a helluva kit lens with new m43 bodies.

To me, it's worth the trade in sensor size to have the zoom. The X100 s/t is a magnificent camera, but it's also a connoisseur's piece of gear.

I'm with you. Silver is for rangefinders. Black is for SLRs. (How's that for an arbitrary distinction?)

Literally lol'd at that.

Looking at the Middle East and Africa just makes me sad.

At the size of a baseball, I think it's still too bulky. Easier and just as cost effective to carry around, say, a Ricoh GR or a small M43 system with a pancake lens. (You'd also get better/faster access to manual controls.)