mick232: Is the Zeiss 135/2 the same optical formula as the Sony Zeiss 135/1.8 (which is a stellar performer as well but so far hasn't been tested by DXO)?
Go back to the original article, scroll down a little, and recognize that you have just made a fool out of yourself.
Is the Zeiss 135/2 the same optical formula as the Sony Zeiss 135/1.8 (which is a stellar performer as well but so far hasn't been tested by DXO)?
yabokkie: hope we'll have 240p & 300p consumer video within a decade.
Do you live in the 90s?
CopCarSS: I'm kind of curious why they included Ektar when it's one of the few color film options still available. Wouldn't it be far easier to get the Ektar "look" by, you know, shooting a roll of Ektar?
How exactly do you insert a roll of Ektar into a DSLR?
Wow. Sexy. Especially the flash.
Can a camera without flash be called a good choice for social photography? I doubt it.
PixelMover: My god, you can't even say "I like a Big Mac" these days without some Sony shill or 'fan' popping up and saying: "A7 is better"... Is Sony SO worried that the camera will flop? Are the Sony fans SO worried that they might be buying into a system that will be discontinued in 2 years after only 2 lenses have been released? You're more annoying and desperate than those friendly people who come knocking at your door on Sunday morning to spread the good news...Do you really need to bring up the A7 in every unrelated other product just so you can sleep at night? Maybe you think you're showing support, but the ridiculous amount of unrelated comments about the A7 makes it look more like sheer blind insecure panic. Why not simply take some pride in the fact that there is nothing to directly compare it to, as it is the only FF mirrorles DSC. Have some dignity, Sony... please have some dignity.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
Looks like we are somewhere between stage 2 and stage 3 currently.
chooflaki: I have been using the DF for two days now. Great IQ and state of the art manual focus. Does eveything else it should do. I didn't know ugly could be so beautiful. Looks like I will be becoming a hipster.
State-of-the-art in manual focus nowadays is peaking and live view magnification, not a green dot.
Jogger: If i were in the market for a manual focus FF camera, i would get the Sony A7r and adapt be able to adapt every FF lens ever made.
Although, the DF makes sense if you are MFing Nikon lenses without aperture rings... but, then again those are modern lenses designed for AF with poor MFing mechanisms.
@Just a photographer
This is non-sense. You can set any aperture you want, the camera will meter and determine the correct shutter speed. It does not need to know the aperture because it can measure the amount of available light.
Mikael Risedal: Nikon has not optimized the 58/1,4 regarding resolution
So which lens has Nikon optimized for resolution then?
Otus vs 58/1.4G:http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/11/otus-is-scharf
DuxX: Why to buy this after Nikon releases 58mm 1.4G almost 3x less money and WITH AF!?
Because the Zeiss makes the Nikon appear like a toy:http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/11/otus-is-scharf
Frank_BR: I am pretty sure the A7/A7r will be seen as milestones.And from now on, Nikon and Canon DSLRs have become endangered species.
This can quickly change if you keep riding a dead horse for too long. Ever heard of a company called Nokia?
Hey, the studio test scene contains and old Austrian banknote ("20 Schilling"). I used to pay with that for years when I was young.
Pixel peeping makes sense sometimes. Otherwise I would never have noticed.
stratplaya: Sorry if this question has been asked before, but why does a Nikon FX camera always show higher marks compared to the DX camera?
Because the resolution is higher and the pixels are larger.
Smartypants: wow$3K for an A-Mount 70-200/f2.8The prices on many of the recent full-frame A-Mount lenses have been way higher than Nikon, but are they any better?
Did you see the price of the new Nikon 58/1.4? $1699 Even the Zeiss 50/1.4 ZA costs less than that ($1499)
Light Pilgrim: this is so interesting. Now this lens is the very direct competitor of Zeiss 55 f/1.4 that costs 4000 USD. Nikon will come with the AF, which really helps for portraits...especially on AF cameras:-)
Just wondering what is the IQ comparison of these 2? I am sure people will soon do it properly.
The Zeiss competitor to this is the Sony Zeiss 50/1.4 priced at $1498.
Harvey E. Morse: What do you give up or gain by not having the anti-aliasing filter?
@Francis: The K-3 achieves the optional AA effect using its sensor stabilizer. Since the A7(r) do not have a sensor stabilizer, Sony cannot implement this technique, can they?
Vitruvius: I used to shoot film with optical viewfinder and loved it. Then I got the Powershot Pro1 and got used to the electroninc viewfinder. Now I bought new DSLR with optical viewfinder again and I LOVE it! Seeing the scene with my 300 to 600 megapixel eyes is SO much nicer. I don't mind the extra bulk at all anymore now that I know what I was missing. It is simply far more enjoyable shooting now.
You do know that the OVF limits the resolution, right? Nowhere near 300 to 600 megapixels.
mckracken88: very expensive toys.get a real camera like the d800.
Once the A7r takes the first position in the DXOmark ranking away from the D800e, you'll no longer call it a toy.