RobertSigmund: I knew this movie. A pity he died so early. Maybe because of his big fat belly! :-(
''People die everyday,...and you know what their last thought is? I never got my shot.'
He certain got his shot!
Thoughts: If Nikon didn't charge this sort of money, they would make a bigger loss from 1 series.
It is very expensive to develop a new camera system, I bet Nikon is losing tons of money from this 1 series, yet they manage to continue and charge a premium price, which is probably motivated by some marketing decisions. I don't think Nikon knows what to do next ...
If Nikon didn't charge this sort of money, they would make a bigger loss from 1 series.
This is a dirty business
vroger1: WHAT IS MOST INTERESTING ABOUT THIS ARTICLE TO ME IS THAT THERE IS TREMENDOUS LEGITIMACY TO M-4/3 WITH MORE AND MORE MANUFACTUERS JUMPING ON THE BANDWAGON. THE PROBLEM IS THE NUMBER OF M-4/3 DIGICAMS WITHOUT VIEWFINDERS. NON-AUTOFOCUS LENSES SUCH AS THESE ARE HARD TO HANDLE WHEN NOT USING A V/F. THE ANSWER? ALL M4/3 DIGICAMS SHOULD HAVE EITHER INTEGRAL OR ACCESSORY EVF'S.
You should try waist level shooting if the lcd screen is tiltable, its fun
I could be wrong, but Canon or Nikon bosses may refuse to be interviewed by DPR.
It is really interesting to read these interviews lately (Sony, Fujifilm and Sigma), hopefully, these companies will stay and do well.
Many companies should take notes, Sony, slow down too and stop confusing your customers with your naming system...
Wolfgang Fieger: So the very first NEX camera is still the best NEX camera around. Astonishing. Though it's 3 years old now the NEX-7 still tops or equals the specs of this newest breed.
No, the first Nex were NEX -3 and 5.
MustangJoe: So I was at my local Chevy dealer yesterday and noticed that they had a Chevy Spark on the floor. I started shouting "this thing doesn't have 460 horsepower like the Corvette!" and "it can't even carry 2,000 pounds of cargo like the Silverado!" "What a useless vehicle!" I yelled to everyone in the place.
A salesman came over to me and asked me if I ever visited dpreview.com.
"Yes", I answered, "why do you ask?"
"Well, it explains a lot." he mumbled as he walked off to a different corner of the room.
I would hand over to him a P45 form if i were his boss...:)
topstuff: If DPR do a full review of this camera before the summer, I will be amazed frankly. I don't know why they call these articles "FIRST impressions". It implies that there will be a further, in depth review, when the reality is that for most cameras there will be no such thing.
DPR should just call this a "Review" and ignore the "Initial" bit and the false promise it offers...
The enduring effects of the first impressions? :)
Scottelly: For all you people who are complaining that it doesn't have a viewfinder, I refer you to the new Sony RX100 II, which also does not have a viewfinder. Both have optional viewfinders available, but the viewfinder of the Sigma is only $150, while the viewfinder for the Sony is $450. There are a a lot of cameras that have no viewfinder. It's nice to have the option to add one. If this new camera is compatible with the viewfinder for the older DP series cameras, then it has a viewfinder option, which works quite well, apparently. It's rated highly by users/owners.
Sigma's vf is opticsl,while sony's is electrical and actually a rather good one. Besides, sony offers a tilt screen.
looks strangly attractive
A friend of mine bought a P330, I asked her why she chose this one over many other choices.'It is Nikon!' She replied...
Many people will buy P340 for the same reason, and PXXX in the future...
It is shocking that one of the best camera review site- DPR doesn't have a forum for Hasselblad...
Would it be nicer to have some categories clearly marked so people can be guided to view how the camera perform in different scenarios?
To be fair though, I prefer some very old sample photos taken in London, maybe because I like London so much? :)
Flying Snail: No firmware update can fix a failed concept.
The sales suggest otherwise
A review of a camera serves to provide an important guide to potential buyers whether to consider to make the purchase.
Obviously the reviewer's user experience will determine the final verdict.
It appears to me though, this time the reviewers only tested the camera, not used it as a photographer.
In my view, you might get a quite balanced review by asking the forum users (those brave early adopters) before Dpreview publishes a review, if ever.
Black Box: To sum up 19 pages of the review, Sony Alpha a7 is ambitious but rubbish. It should now be Sony's slogan.
You are quite entertaining... :P
G1Houston: "We're slightly surprised by Sony's strategy here:"
I think we can see a pattern now with SONY's lens road maps. When they introduced the NEX, they had the 16/2.8 as the "walk around" pancake lens, which is too wide. Only recently they introduced a "portrait" lens, but it is 50mm, again too short. The 55mm for the A7 is too long, but perfect as a "portrait lens" for the NEX, but the two NEX lenses mentioned above seem perfect for the A7. I think the lens designers for NEX and A7 must have gotten their assignment folders mixed up. What do you think?
The 35/2.8 is the only lens that can show off the compactness of the camera, a key design/marketing feature. However it is f2.8 and priced at $800. A key reason for this "slightly sueprising" decision, I speculate, is that it will not make the R1X look too overpriced. Is there a photographer in SONY in charge of the lens road map?
I think Sony should spend some money to hire some guys from Fujifilm to manage the lens road map...