Trubbtele: Goding to buy this lens :-) Small money for high quality!
High quality: yesSmall money for a 50mm: no
snegron2: Ironic how this digital icon image was created with analog film.
@manuel: was it also possible to create stitched gigapixel images with film?
budi0251: Still use WinXP on my Thinkpad R52 (Pentium m 1.8Ghz + 2GB DDR2), mainly because I can't get proper drivers for its display adapter in Win7.
And then some,
I use WinXP SP3 32bit for my desktop PC (AMD X2 3Ghz w/ 4GB of RAM) too.Indeed I lost about half gigabyte of RAM.
Why is that?
Well, I do love simple UI and it simply works for me, to make or change file association, file search features, drivers, etc.Currently most of the time the machine would run Photoshop CS6 with latest compatible ACR & DNG converter. I have no problem (yet) with latest DSLR Raw files.
Then some office stuff & web browser (Firefox), media player classic, and... that's it I think my main use of PC.
Dunno if in the future they would force people to use Photoshop CC or Lightroom 5 in order to open latest future RAW files, then I might upgrade to Win 8.1
A 32bit OS and processor only has an address space of 4GB. You lose some of that because it gets used to address video RAM or other hardware's memory, therefore can't be used for main memory.
mike kobal: Sorry, but a sensor size of 44x33mm cannot be called medium format by traditional definition.This is a APMFS-C sized sensor (Advanced Photo Medium Format System type-C)
"Generally, the term applies to film and digital cameras that record images on media larger than 24 by 36 mm (full-frame) (used in 35 mm photography), but smaller than 4 by 5 inches (which is considered to be large-format photography)."
Large Photon Collider
rrccad: well if they fix the stupid compression sony may just have me as a customer for a pair of A7R's.
The A99 can save in uncompressed RAW? Prove it! I do own the A99 and can tell you that there is no such option.
The alleged shutter issue wasn't about sound but about vibration.The light leak is no worse than in other cameras.And Sony RAW has been compressed since the A900, also on the A99, and nobody ever had any significant problem with that.
Unbelievable how the FUD actually works...
What did we have already?- shutter virbration- light leak- RAW compression
It appears as if the competition finds a new way to spread more FUD about the A7 each month. They must be really afraid of losing market share.
kimsch: So you compare a $30.000 camera to a $2.500 camera and the most expensive is better - SHOCKING!
Well, if you compare the $22.000 Leica S medium format camera to the $300 NEX5N, the NEX5N is actually better (DXOmark).
So price isn't an indicator.
I've heard rumors that Nikon will soon acknowledge the flash issue on the D40 (2006) and offer free repairs.
aeonsim: So an additional 12MP, no AA & full a metal body + the loss of a few things like EFS & Phase detection is worth 4% + a step from Silver to Gold and results in a bit of a change in the tone of the overall review.
Fair enough I guess the change in tone seemed noticeable to me. Is the JPEG image quality of the A7 & A7R actually worse than the A99 as your scoring bars actually seem to indicate?
This must be the first review site I know where products must be launched on the same day to be comparable.
I also wonder which camera in the test group has raised the bar - after all, of all the cameras in the test group, the A99 was the camera launched before the A7, no camera launch in between.
forpetessake: If the AF performance is indeed what Sony claims, then the slaughter of DSLRs, SLTs is about to begin. I wonder what rabbits Canon/Nikon are going to pull out of their respective hats.
Did Canon have many lenses in 1987 when they introduced EOS and did that stop them from becoming successful?
intruder61: I'm sure this little beauty will produce that wonderful Sony trademark ORANGE skin.
Will you please post samples? Because unless you are suffering from jaundice, I doubt you will be able to prove your claim.
Haim Hadar: Very nice, but I fail to see what's so special about entries 2 & 3...
#2 is special because it proves that even with a Sony, you can get blown out skies. This is something nobody would have deemed possible before.
mick232: Full-frame has reached the consumer market. If there was still any doubt about that, here's the proof.
You need to look at market share, not what it's called.
Full-frame has reached the consumer market. If there was still any doubt about that, here's the proof.
Zeisschen: I feel Sony is going to release nothing than outstanding lenses for this FF E-mount. The myth that Sony is not good at lenses is truly a myth for people who used A-mount Sony Zeiss and Sony G glass. These new FE lenses are so incredibly lightweight as well, much lighter than they look like. Product design couldn't be better as well in my opinion. This will be a winner system for sure, not for everyone, but for people who want to travel light but don't want to make any compromise with sensor size and picture quality. Pair this with a little RX100 in your pocket and you are set for almost everything...
Go look here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZJry55GRU0&sns=em
The medium format photographer considers the A7R+55/1.8 an alternative for his Hasselblad H3D-31.
SeeRoy: Terrific to see some serious competition for Micro Four-Thirds!
You sound like someone with a very small ....... camera.
MikeF4Black: So, nice try, but terminally flawed. I always thought Sony was best at making transistor radios.
The review may be flawed, but at least dpreview knows the difference between a transistor radio and a camera.
Ok, let's compare it with the Sony A99. Is dpreview telling us that:- Sony indeed made the JPEG engine worse after 1 year of development?- Sony decreased image quality by removing the SLT mirror?- Sony decreased low-light performance by removing the SLT mirror, which takes away about 30% of the incoming light?- obviously, the SLT mirror increases image quality. Where can I buy more of those, I'd like to add some more of them between my lens and my sensor.- the viewfinder of the A7 is identical if not improved, yet the score is lower
Shouldn't the review scores be at least consistent to some degree?