[JJ_SO]

The FP is more boxy and less easy to use than my old EOS M. That takes a lot of effort, to make a camera this unergonomic. For the rest, it lacks an AA-filter, not sure why. And it lacks a mechanical shutter, of which they say the lack is one of the reasons why this camera can be this small. Nonsensical, the much smaller EOS M has a mechanical shutter. They say it has a sensor with very fast sensor read out to minimise rolling shutter. Fast? No... the 1/15th flash sync shows it is just as slow as other cameras. That means the same rolling shutter issues as for instance the RP and other cameras in silent shutter mode, and a standard issue with big apertures/short exposure times. And artificial light banding issues.

The odd 45mm f2.8's purpose is clear now, to be paired with the FP as small combination. I don't get that idea though, the big thing about FF is to be able to use bigger apertures, but with this lens you do not have that FF advantage.


Oh well, no doubt Sigma will have another big hit on their hands.

AA-filters is Canon's way to cover their outdated sensors. Other companies are a bit more advcanced .
"The much smaller EOS M" was not a FF body, last time I checked. 
The electronic shutter I also don't understand fully.  
And after reading the first paragraphs of Sigma's marketing blurb I got the idea the author smoked a FF-Foveon prototype before he bowed over his keyboard. 

As to the advantage of big apertures: good trick to turn arguments upside down, no? "mirrorless has to be small and lightweight and cheap because of no more mirror" "FF needs to have big apertures, although that makes the lens big and heavy or expensive or both".

That's why bots can't be successfully used in forums, they reply far too logical...