l_d_allan: Of interest? Michael Reichmann at LuLa mentioned a week or so ago that his eyeball didn't notice the A7s having a DR advantage over the A7r. Apparently, that was confirmed by DxoMark.
They are virtually tied at base ISO, but the majority of photographers cannot always shoot at base ISO, at every other setting the A7S has greater DR - which it was designed to provide.
Impressive noise performance (but anticipated at the same time) but what is more noticeable is how the lack of noise provides greater detail resolve than is provided by more mp...
Noise, in the end, is subjective (not the 'presence' of course but whether it is objectionable) but in judging mere presence it is obvious this sensor is above all at certain settings, and no better/worse at other settings. Additionally bodies like the A7/R, D800/E, D610 are not in the same league whether viewing pixel, print, or web so there really is no debate here.
What should be noticed is the level of detail being resolved by the 'measly' 12mp, especially compared to 24mp and 36mp. It clearly shows there is significant merit in lower mp when the same tech is applied and no appreciable sacrifice in detail. That provides benefits in frame rates, better ISO at all output, and easier workflow. If anyone 'needs' to look at these results it is Nikon. They would realize that if/had they put something like this in a pro body (ala D710) they might have actually had the customer base needed to achieve the 720,000 unit production anticipated in the D800/e which has not seen half that.
jamesfrmphilly: anybody make a fast lens that is also small and light?
There are a great many actually.. but when you come across them you realize what it is that really makes modern lenses larger - autofocus, thick plastics, and image stabilization.. forgo those things and you have hundreds of small fast lenses at your disposal.
Marty4650: This A6000 is a really nice camera, but so is the NEX-6, which can be bought at a huge discount now. Amazon is currently selling it for $520... with lens, and $440 without.
Sony continues to amaze me with their incredible values in camera bodies (but not so much for lenses.)
They have so many irons in the fire right now (SLT Alpha, E mount, FE mount, FF SLT, high end compacts, etc) that you wonder if they risk becoming a jack of all trades, but a master of none?
I think so far they have done a pretty good job of offering innovation, performance and value. I just hope it all works out to profitability for Sony, so their users can look forward to another decade of great cameras.
@VinandI believe others have accurately addressed the rather wishful proclamations.. however the battle that Sony will 'lose' is that the system will likely be abandoned before any significant lineup of lenses are available. The only consumer products Sony has maintained any significant product presence is televisions and video recorders, and even in video recorders they barely maintain any consistency with any one system.Sony prides itself in being on the forefront of innovation, which is great for consumers and competition alike, but as soon as there are x% of players producing similar tech Sony moves on to something else. As a sensor fab they will likely have a 'presence' in digital photography for some time, like they do in many other technology fields, but their product history suggests they will likely not have a photography system to purchase into in the future.
vittorionava: Looking at the small black symbol on the neck of the left bottle in comparison to oly pen ep2, oly omd em5 and pentax k5iis, just to find three different examples, makes me ask why this fuji is considered to offer a lot of detail... It's a mess!
You do understand this is a fixed lens camera right...?Your comparison is not only against interchangeable lens cameras, but images taken using some of the better/best lenses available for those cameras...Regardless of the cameras you chose, you are comparing the upper most left corner of the image to assess lens sharpness?? While it would be great if every lens was sharp across the whole frame, most people with photographic experience (specifically lenses/cameras designed to allow some hope of dof) anticipate some softness along the edges of the frame - where the majority of the time that area is already going to be oof anyway so it does not matter 99% of the time.In actuality, if you make your comparison in other areas of the image the X100S is sharper than the better/best lenses used for testing the cameras you 'randomly' selected attempting to belittle the X100S.Overall the industry considers the X100S one of the best high-end compact cameras available - for many reasons.
...and the irony of it all - the thing that questions the real 'eventual' reason for the patent?? Most of Amazon's product shots are taken in a light-box, because it provides even greater light equalization and shadow correction, as opposed to this 'technique' which is actually more purposeful for portraits than products..
Some where in the bowels of Amazon a greedy little bean counter will eventually suggest to upper management that 'even a measly licensing fee of $0.01 per published photo will make millions'...
This is not an invention or new idea to begin with, but even if classified as so the applicant and application do not even fulfill the requirements of declaration:Section 1.63:a:3 clearly requires a statement/oath - 'that the person executing the oath or declaration believes the named inventor or joint inventor to be the original inventor or an original joint inventor.'
--The original inventor--
No one, not even Amazon, could believe they discovered this technique...
StevenE: This is the third highest score ever given by DPR. The two higher scores were given to the Canon 1D mk IV and the Nikon D3S.
The D610 score beats Nikon's D800 and D800E, and the Canon 5DIII.
That is all great and well.. however this is not a review site for refurb equipment.. It is new equipment, and as those products hit the street (...sometimes..P).
Your point is certainly a valid consideration for like-minded buyers, however it is completely irrelevant to the review and the category based scoring - which was the op inquiry, and my response/clarification.
Now time to put a finger to a shutter instead of a keyboard.. =)
Size and weight have little to no factor in the categorization of the cameras, and while the $1000 between the D610 and D800 may be no issue for you, that is a top end lens purchase and a considerable difference for the other 98%. I am happy you enjoy your D600/610, or have chosen that over the D800, however there is little comparison/similarity between the D610 and D800 other than they are both made Nikon.
As for the categories; I am not defending DPR's quantification by any means.. I do not think the front plate on something like the A7 and A7R warrants those falling in different categories when all else is essentially identical... Or when a brand providing 1/10th the high-end lenses gets its new body categorized with other high-end bodies. However build quality and materials, as they would factor in serviceability of more intensive use, are a valid measurement aspect of one camera against another. Especially when functionality accompanies the higher build quality and materials.
MRM4350: I fail to see the issue of the ISO button location, and it's use with the camera to your eye compared to other locations on other cameras. I would prefer it on the bottom button on the left side of the LCD so my left thumb could locate it somewhat easier.
I would prefer it on the top, right side, where all the other settings and dials are...Its placement on most of Nikon's bodies would suggest Nikon does not feel it is necessary to change ISO as frequently as other settings, to which I agree for the most part - especially given the customization one has for auto-iso, but other brands (Canon) seem able to place it in the location of the 'other' shooting parameters.
While everyone may not agree with DPR's categorization of different bodies - the D600, D610, Df, 6D, and A7 are not in the same category as the D800/e, 5DmkIII, nor 1DmkIV, D3s, etc and the scoring is 'within its category'.So it does not score an 87 against the 82 of the D800, it scores an 87 against the 80, 81, 83, and 87 of the five cameras in its category...Consider each category having its own 1-100 grading scale, and not related to other categories.
I was not aware DPR, or the photographic community in general, had begun evaluating camera equipment on the basis of whether the user, or subjective audience, is instantly elevated to being a better photographer simply by holding/using or viewing images taken with said equipment... O.oAn image does not need to awe its audience in subject, composition, or creative lighting in order to represent a technical example of what the equipment is capable of providing. These are 'real-world' shots after all, that means just like the bulk of your 'real-world' shots sitting on 'your' computer there are any number of images that would not impress anyone photographically..Just as one can strip a nut with a $75 wrench, someone else can get the job done with a $5 pair of pliers - the tool is being evaluated here, not the wielder... Enough already.
Gottschalk: I'm confused. I keep reading about the stunning high ISO of the Fuji's but I just don't see it. The pic above at ISO 800 and her hair is totally smeared from NR. I keep comparing iso 3200 pics to my E-M5 and I really don't see less noise...
Stop trolling..The shot was at f2 and her shirt across the front of the shoulders is the plane of focus.. Holding the umbrella the way she is brings her shoulders just ahead of her eyes, and hair - nothing more than a slightly missed focus.Try comparing your m5 to the airplane at 6400 on page three  if you want to see how poorly your m5 compares to one of the best..
jtan163: What's going on with that blue wall? The top edge is very fuzzy or aliased?I don't think it is focus per se, because the bottle and the bottom edge of the blue are similarly sharp, but the top blue edge is ....eeek!Is my spacial perception failing me or is there something odd here?
Focal plane.. the top of the blue wall and the closest portion of the cement at the bottom are oof being much closer to the camera than the bottles, which were the focal point.
Ed/Chicago: On that singer sewing machine, what does that 3014 stand for? Is that a model number?
It is 301A, and it is the model number... circa e1950s.. the A designates it was manufactured in their Anderson, NC factory.
JFBee: I wish a Nikon Df was built like this. Maybe they get inspired by Fuji, who got the dials ergonomics right. Let's hope AF performance will match that of a DLSR.
Just about anyone with reasonable experience using Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Minolta, Contax, etc film bodies 'know'... and can show/explain it to you..The grip does not have to be a wax-form of the human hand to be comfortable or ergonomic - matter of fact even that would be uncomfortable to many users - it simply needs to place things under your fingers without too much manipulation.My old film bodies are very comfortable to use, have the shutter release on top of the body, and all one need do is naturally curve the index finger over the film advance lever.. I can assure you it is comfortable unless you have very very small hands..For reference purposes, a body like this does not hang from your fingered grip, it rests on the lower portion of your palm, placing your hand in a more upright angle than modern dslr bodies, and in that position your index finger is in a more vertical position (naturally) easily able to curve over the exposure compensation dial to reach the shutter button.
lorenzo de medici: This looks like a great camera. I don't like the current trend of putting old fashioned round dials on the tops of cameras. The old round dials 30 years ago were mechanical devices. These are just pointless imitations, all the workings are electronic. Ergonomics should take priority over fashion in a serious camera. I can easily adjust aperture, ISO, shutter speed, exposure compensation, metering, and focus mode on my Nikon D600 without taking my eye from the viewfinder. And there are no odd bumps between my finger and the shutter button.
On the contrary - to both.The dedicated dials and wheels provide pro-level shooting access without the size and expense of pro-level bodies. If you do not need/want/prefer to change settings then these body styles are simply not for you.. They do offer access to fully automatic modes though, so instead of complaining about the control access - just do not use them.
Holy fusion Batman! Fuji has built a digital film camera!!It looks/functions similar to my old Canon AE and Nikon FE series bodies (with grip hump added) - provides mirrorless lens flexibility (along with quality system lenses) - and while I would prefer a traditional split prism EVF mode for manual focusing this implementation looks to be the most functional non-optical iteration by anyone so far (assuming it can be used quickly) - provides all shooting functions without having to enter a menu (beyond initial set up if needed) - and does not require any button/dial combinations to change settings. All in a package that includes Fuji's great image quality and noise performance...For the 'always take with me' body, Fujifilm is probably going to get a good bit of my $$.
Does not leave me wanting for anything but the 'may never see' and 'not possibles'.
Retzius: I can't believe this is actually listed as a negative:
"Tools for shooting with third party lenses need improvement"
OK, lets be fair. Next time you post a Nikon review, I want to see "Tools for shooting with Canon lenses needs implementation" as a negative point.
Docking Sony for not giving you a full featured tool set for shooting with non-Sony lenses is just ludicrous and down-right biased. I don't see Nikon and Canon going out of their way to implement 3rd party hardware. To the contrary, Nikon releases firmware updates to hinder it!
Also 'being fair' we have to acknowledge the two things none of the mirrorless bodies are able/willing to provide in this configuration. The first is a design limitation - a MIRROR and optical viewfinder..... and the second is more of a financial issue, and that is electronic support for other manufacturers electronic lenses.. So while Sony may not be currently offering leading support 3rd party lenses, the reality is that no manufacturer will probably ever be able to, or willing to, offer the support needed.. =/
As long as we are 'being fair' one of the primary applications of a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera would be the ability to use 3rd party lenses due to no limitation of lens to sensor distance.. It is a completely valid point to weight in its evaluation, especially when you consider that other mirrorless manufacturers 'do' provide adaptation specifically for 3rd party lenses..Why it is a negative in the case of Sony is because Sony thinks itself big enough that they don't 'need' 3rd party lens use, they are sorely mistaken.. This would however be the exact same thinking we would see from Nikon and Canon - but those two companies actually could validate that logic, Sony cannot.Therefore "Tools for shooting with third party lenses need improvement" is a factor that many purchasers 'will' be considering...