Problem with mirrorless systems is that they are only compact when the camera has no lens mounted. Perhaps using a pinhole body cap would make it a truly compact camera.
A fortunate landing. If the body had struck the pavement, the damage to the camera would have been worse. The lens hood absorbed most of the energy of the impact.
Gabor Takacs: I have an idea. I'll be fine with 8MP, APS-C size sensor and perfectly clear ISO 100 000 under $1000. Deal, Canon? Oops I forgot to mention that in case you fulfill my wish, almost all of the fast lens' market gonna reduce to zero... :D
Consumers salivate over high resolution models like Pavlov's dogs. Low resolution, high sensitivity cameras sell poorly.
alphaumi: Why MULTI PURPOSE? It has ONLY one purpose to me. Shooting video in the dark.
Scientists use flashes in camera traps. with this camera, flashes are not needed, so multiple pictures are possible with the animal not acting unnaturally because of the flash.
When a camera maker is selling a small number of cameras, it is easy to have a 25% increase in sales volume. A profit of $8.8 million is way better than a loss of even $1, but it is nothing to write home about. Companies that make nothing, such as internet web sites, earn a lot more profit in some cases. Bad news for Olympus is that the world is moving towards full frame cameras. Affordable ff cameras will be the next hot market segment, but Olympus won't be part of it. I wonder how many cameras with 4/3 sensors Olympus can sell if a FF DSLR costs about the same or even less than Olympus cameras.
PhotoFactor: If Sony continues to put out some new APS-C E-mount bodies I will stick with them once my NEX-6 needs replacing. If they don't, then I'm jumping ship. I don't want FF as don't like the size or price.
Recently I saw a news story of robots taking jobs now held by people. One of the robots in that story is a robot caddy and that can follow a golfer wherever he goes without a remote control, making caddies unnecessary. Such a robot will be very popular for wildlife photographers who take long lenses to go hiking. If and when such robots become as ubiquitous as camera bags, we will see the demise of small sensor cameras. Right now, for people who travel by car and don't go hiking, there is no incentive to use small cameras.
plasnu: ALL digital cameras will be FF mirrorless sooner or later, but don't worry, your SLR and APSC lenses will be all backward compatible.
FF yes, mirrorless no. Advcanced amateurs and pros will always favor the real time images of reflex mirror cameras, not the electronic viewfinders used in mirrorless cameras. Besides the removal of the mirror does not offer any additional compactness, because most lenses, including the wide angles, made for mirrorless models are unable to take advantage of the shorter registration distance of mirrorless models. Wide angles designed for mirrorless cameras could have been more compact, but they are not because they are still reverse-telephoto designs just like the lenses on cameras with the mirror. One of the reasons is vignetting. Cameras like the Leica M9 has more compact wide angle lenses, but Leica has to tilt the micro lenses at the edges of the sensor to reduce vignetting.
In fact, telephotos designed for mirrorless models have to be longer than their FF counterparts because the lens has to be extended to compensate for the reduced flange to sensor distance of mirrorless cameras
Mike FL: "Sony will increase its 'presence in the professional market such as photo studios and wedding photography.'"
"professional market" = put lot of buttons and dials to the (small) Body?
Pros don't like electronic viewfinders. Sony will need to bring back the reflex mirror (which is what they are likely to do) if they want to compete with Nikon and Canon in the pro market. Electronic viewfinders have a slight time lag, and that is its Achilles heel. Pros don't like time lags because it could mean a missed shot. Time lags are okay if you are taking pictures of immobile objects, but they are no good for action photography and candid pictures.
FF prices are artificially high for marketing reasons, but FF cameras aren't necessarily larger than APS-C models. In fact, if you look at Olympus 4/3 cameras of the past, they were larger than some APS-C models, despite their smaller sensor. As FF prices fall, we will likely see more compact models. Remember the Contax G series rangefinder cameras? They were FF film cameras. How about the Nikon FG, Pentax ME and MX? They were FF film cameras. When FF sensors are put into entry level models, we will see similar sized FF cameras as the Pentax ME, because it is the pros who demand rugged behemoth cameras, whether they are FF like the Nikon D4 or APS-C models like the Nikon D2X
Franco8: Why do you call it a full frame its a 35mm sensor. A APSC sensor is a full frame APSC sensor.A 4/3 sensor is a full frame 4/3 sensor.Just call it as it is a 35mm sensor
FF is so called because most DSLR cameras have sensors that are smaller than the 35mm format. The FF sensor is the same size as the picture area of a 35mm film camera. Medium format cameras also have smaller than full frame sensors. The sensors that can cover the picture area of a medium format camera is also called FF.
That is long overdue. Manufacturers have been profiteering from artificially high prices on FF DSLR cameras, refusing to lower the prices even though the sensors do not cost all that much to make. The old excuse made about 10-12 years ago was the FF sensors were prohibitively expensive. Sony has in fact successfully made even larger medium format CMOS sensors so economically that most manufacturers have switched to them. It takes a slump in the DSLR camera business for manufacturers to finally reduce prices on FF models, but only at the low end, and we are given plastic bodied low end FF models as punishment for not spending more money on more expensive FF models. FF cameras need to come way down in price, and APS-C cameras should be phased out completely. There is no reason for APS-C models since most DSLR cameras are large enough to accommodate FF sensors.
It is only marginally smaller than a 24mm f/1.4 Sigma lens for FF. 85mm x 90mm for the Sigma, 73mm x73mm for the Fuji. That means it is a reverse telephoto design just like the Sigma, even though the Fuji lacks a mirror.
The 7D is a product of Canon's marketing strategy, which tries to avoid competition among its own products. The 7D tries not to take sales from the 1D-X by keeping the sensor small, and it tries not to compete against the 5KIII by keeping the frame rate higher. What people want is a camera lighter, smaller and cheaper than the 1DX, and it is full frame, rugged, and as fast in frame rate as the 7D, but at the same time cheaper than the 1DX.
Unfortunately these lenses cannot be compact because the wide angles apparently are retrofocus designs, meaning they were originally designed for SLR cameras, and their rear elements are not as close to the sensor as are the Leica M series wide angles. Further, the short registration distance means the telephotos will need some extra length in their barrel to compensate. That means, paradoxically, the mirrorless cameras have wide angle lenses that are the same size as SLR cameras, and the telephotos are even longer than similar SLR telephotos.
That is an interesting camera. Until now, only Sony has been able to sell sensors to camera makers. Samsung makes its own sensors, and so did Panasonic, but the other independent sensor makers have not had any orders. The Belgian sensor maker with a 20mp full frame may help bring down FF prices further, because other camera makers (e.g. Fuji and Sigma) may use it.
alegator1: I like #1, I wonder what kind of f setting you have to use to keep everything in fair focus, amazing depth of field.
wide angle lens and small aperture for maximum depth of field. I like the leopard too. It is such a cutie pie.
That is a lovely photo of a charming big cat.
aarif: the A-mount is officially dead
The A mount is not dead. Sony is busy developing FE and E mount lenses because there are few of these lenses, and Sony is selling a lot of cameras with these mounts. Sony needs to upgrade its existing cameras that still have the reflex mirror. I think they made a wrong move embracing the pellicle mirror and they may need to go back to traditional reflex mirrors in their furture DSLR cameras.
Good to hear that their sensor division is making them money. They are the only competitor left that can still battle with Canon. Pretty much gone are ccd sensor makers Kodak and Dalsa, since Sony's CMOS medium format sensors are cheaper and have less noise at high ISO settings than the CCD sensors made by Kodak and Dalsa. Medium format camera and interchaneable back makers are turning to Sony sensors for this reason.
Sony has also won best camera award for its A7 model, meaning that it has finally caught up with Nikon and Canon in image quality. The A900, Sony's first FF camera, was a bit noisy at high ISO settings. Lots of research and development in the imaging division have turned that around. It is good to have competition in the market place. Because Olympus have failed to make a FF, Sony and the upcoming Pentax FF are desperately needed competition that the consumers need to help drive down FF prices, which have remained sky high for more than a decade.
saiko: Does anyone know how do they cut these lenses in halves? Do they cut each component separately and carefully assemble them back? Or do they slice up a whole lens at one go? Always been in mystery to me.
Just take the lens and cut it in half in one operation.