Mike99999: Spectacular. This confirms the DxO findings.
I'm happy Sony is following the OM-D route by releasing high quality primes from the start, even if they are significantly more expensive than standard Canikon offerings.
As an owner of the 55/1.8 and 35/2.8 I couldn't be happier and I've begun the process of selling all my Nikon lenses.
I cannot wait for what primes Sony/Zeiss have in store next. I've been playing with the Zeiss Planar T* 85mm f/1.4 ZA and Sonnar T* 135mm f/1.8 ZA with adapter at the camera store. Those lenses are amazing...
@ Andy Westlake" To be clear, these are the DxOMark findings, but presented in our own way."Thankfully, that is not true. This is not the DPR style of late when reviewing a Sony product but a remarkable recovery instead.Let's hope it carries over to the A7R review.
dynaxx: The review template does not ( perhaps it should ) have a section in the Specification page under "Optics and Focus" to show if the camera has auto-focus tuning ( Sony call it AF Micro Adjustment ) which is quite common nowadays in good quality cameras.
I find this very useful on my camera and when I searched the A7 manual it says it can only be done when the LA-EA2 or LA-EA4 adapters for A mount lenses are in use. Can someone explain why there is this restriction ? thanks
Also, because contrast detection autofocus generally happens on the main imaging sensor, hence on the plane the image is taken.
mm1975: For a camera that was reviewed based on default settings, it is amazing how the review was ever done - I am pretty sure the default setting for the power button is OFF.
" I am pretty sure the default setting for the power button is OFF."Touche!
A demonstration why doing this (3rd party MF lenses on A7/A7r) makes a lot of sense. Pretty good! The B&W choice fits the picture and the write-up context.
Nice shot, too! (crop the lowest part of the frame which is OOF maybe?)
Cudos to most commenters so far - a mostly balanced reflection on the quirks in both the camera (peaking implementation could apparently benefit from firmware update) - and the article (practicing manual focus with dirt cheap lenses being one of them).IMHO, a DPR write-up that inspires a good discussion is a good contribution - opposed to ruminating "best gear" polls over and over again, Mr. Britton.Now lets' see the full review....
The many times this poll gets re-used redefines "rumination".
123Mike: The Sony A57 beats the lot of these.
Cane: So funny listening to people's viewfinder battle. Are any of you really trying to convince the other side of something? It's like yelling at clouds.
@naththothanks for delivering another proof of Cane's point. Now continue yelling.
@Hugo"The only way they can make cameras smaller is by putting a hideous EVF in place of the lovely OVF." The EVF lovers use similar language. You call that a "discussion"? Cane nailed it with his observation.So, now go back on your part of the clouds that are yelled at and yelled from.
marike6: I get some UK users complaining about price, but people here in the US and elsewhere forget that the D800 debuted at $2995, less than $500 below the nearest competitor, the Canon 5D Mk III. And the D600 was the first FF DSLR offered below the $2000 threshold.
It's very strange indeed to read DPR reviewers and USA commenters below complain about the pricing of the Df considering it is priced smack between the D600 and the D800, two groundbreaking FF DSLRs in terms of value, bodies that Nikon was universally applauded for pricing so competitively.
So if we agree that the D600 and D800 were extremely competitively priced at launch, how do we possibly conclude that the Df has an "eye watering" high price when it's priced between the D600 and D800?
@ Marike6"...And the D600 was the first FF DSLR offered below the $2000 threshold..."Wrong. That was the Sony a850.
Coliban: I think, there should not be too much attention on outward appearances and things should not be judged on at very first sight. Of course, the DF is a retro camera, but over that someone should not forget that this camera has the sensor of a D4, the sensor from a 5500$ camera for half the price. The ISO, compensation and speed dials will help taking images not in a hurry, but with much more attention and a slow conscious for the composition of an image. I rather complain that Nikon was not radical enough, or too cowardly(?) to accomplish retro design and handling: Why didn't they put a cross-section or a fresnel focus in the DF or an interchangeable focusing screen? Why such a AF sensor field and why only 39 AF points in a very centered place for a full frame camera? This is not consequent enough. Nevertheless, i thing, Nikon has made altogether a nice and very good camera and if i read all the condemning comments here,it seems that the DF will be a sellout. The D4 sensor is incredible
@ C olibanThanks for your dedicated answer. A nice change in this slew of "comments"!
"...this camera has the sensor of a D4, the sensor from a 5500$ camera for half the price...."Obviously, the other half was left out (FPS, AF module, etc.), which has the potential to render the choice of a speed optimized sensor close to 'preposterous'. Why not the D800e sensor? Lack of AF / MF accuracy maybe, which is less apparent on 16MP with AA filter compared to the scrutiny of 36MP sans AA filter?Only Nikon knows....
Ilebeback: Makes the Sony A7/A7r look like tomorrow's technology at a bargain price.
@ "Bamboozled"Looks like you did not google E Mount adaptors yet. Or, worse, you did - and still did not get the point.
Ralf B: To the owners of "50 year-old non-Ai lenses":Buy a Sony a7 or a7r and the corresponding adapter for a touch of retro design with a lot better MF support (focus peaking etc...) and better IQ according to DXO - just in case you are interested in getting out the best of your legacy glass independent from how you and your cam look while using the resulting image capture kit.
@ "Bamboozled":Google E mount adaptors and you may get the point....
@sandyB:Try to AF a 50 year-old non-Ai lens with the Nikon Df. Compatibility with this type of lenses is advertised as one selling point for the Nikon Df. The Sonys with corresponding adaptors are as compatible at least.
To the owners of "50 year-old non-Ai lenses":Buy a Sony a7 or a7r and the corresponding adapter for a touch of retro design with a lot better MF support (focus peaking etc...) and better IQ according to DXO - just in case you are interested in getting out the best of your legacy glass independent from how you and your cam look while using the resulting image capture kit.
reactivate your a900 production line and put the A7r sensor in. It beats the D4 sensor according to DXO. Leave out video like you did when first releasing the a900 back in late 2008 - according to Nikon you will have an OVF winner now!
Or bring it out with the old MD mount so that legacy Minolta manual focus lenses can be mounted directly - as the a900 caters for an interchangeable focus screen it is easier to adapt it to MF than this current Nikon release...
Can I have one in black with golden logo and letters as "John Player Black Special Edition" so that it will surely smoke the competition?
Ralf B: Nikon on a time travel in reverse to .... 2008: Sony a900 anyone? So Nikon plays catch-up (term borrowed from DPR's Canon 70D elaborations) in their design department 5 years after a lot of CaNikonians labelled the a900 "ugly" and complained about the missing built-in flash (will this Nikon re-incarnation have one or not by the way? From the current screen shots: Rather not). Acquired tastes do change, right?
@marike6 Funny you post "The idea that they are playing "catch-up" to anyone design wise is preposterous"Funny, as in complete ignorance of1. The context of the a900 market introduction in late 2008. FYI, the a900 was attacked back then for its retro, pure photography only approach as DSLR video was making its first appearances at the same time. Why did Sony bring its flagship clearly with the minds of Minolta still a work?2. Five years forward it is the Sony sensor in the A7R rattling the industry while Nikon steps back into 2008 (or even further) with a puristic-looking DSLR to appeal to which market niche? Catching-up with the retro design trend everywhere that is, no more. Ignoring this move as playing to the current retro market trend is what I would call preposterous.
Nikon on a time travel in reverse to .... 2008: Sony a900 anyone? So Nikon plays catch-up (term borrowed from DPR's Canon 70D elaborations) in their design department 5 years after a lot of CaNikonians labelled the a900 "ugly" and complained about the missing built-in flash (will this Nikon re-incarnation have one or not by the way? From the current screen shots: Rather not). Acquired tastes do change, right?
dylanbarnhart: Sony fragmentation continues. Just when you thought the Alpha was great, Sony tells you the SLT is better. Then the NEX came a long with even better image quality in smaller size. Then scratch that, full frame NEX is here. Oh and lenses you bought don't work now. If you're sick of buying lenses, then the RX superzoom is for you. Actually who needs a camera anyways, since we're all using camera phones nowadays. So scratch that and buy the QX lens camera instead. All you really sacrify is image quality.
But really, no matter what lenses you buy today, they won't work for yet another Sony system to be announced tomorrow. But don't worry, there will be adapters.
I thought Sony learned a lesson from their TV days. Guess not.
The Nex E Mount lenses work on the new bodies. In crop mode.