18 hours ago
 |
WCguy
Lives in
Ontario, Canada
Works as a
Business Owner
Joined on
Nov 23, 2009
|
   |
|
Connect with dpreview
|
Mssimo: I would think the fixed lens quality would influence the overall score of the camera. Still 79%?
earful you are exactly right it did say 80%.I saw the review when it first went up and it was 80%, I went back to the review 30 min. later and it was changed. I wonder why?
New rules have been set in place for the poll to be redone, everyone must use every camera made in 2012 that was rated at 70 or over by Dpreview ,using each camera for a min. of 1 week.Then you will be eligible to vote for what you consider to be the best camera for 2012.
This existing poll that has been put on by Dpreview proves nothing more than fanboyism, voting more for what they own,than what they know. Many cameras brought out at the end of the year haven't been in many hands compared to the earlier year models, so this vote for best camera is just pure fanboy nonsense.
Reinhard136: Pls. someone set me straight here - they have built a bigger camera than a Nex, with a much smaller sensor than a Nex, have finally put a viewfinder on it like a Nex. Don't these people go down to the camera shop to see where the competition is ? I suppose smaller sensor means it can use smaller lenses, maybe, but even if they are eventually smaller and lead to super zoomy type things - will they really be that far ahead of cropping/digitally zooming on a Nex ??
Its actually smaller than the V1 over all and lighter, check the specs out.
RRJackson: SO they made it bigger and clunkier. Well, that sure is a selling point for a camera designed to take advantage of a small sensor. And the lenses are still huge, too.
I completely respect the sensor size and the software/hardware technology of the system, but making it bigger does not seem like the way.
Actuall its smaller and lighter, Maybe read the specs.
Made of magnesium alloy, the Nikon V2 is also a little less wide, taller, and less deep overall, measuring 4.2 x 3.2 x 1.8 inches (107.8 x 81.6 x 45.9mm), compared to the V1's 4.4 x 3.0 x 1.7 inches (113 x 76 x 43.5mm).
Thomas Karlmann: I think the reviewer has concetrated 99% of his attention on areas of no interest to me. I don't care about the relationship with Olympus, nor Hasselblad nor Smart Phones. Nary a word from this guy about new Alpha lenses or compatibility of the a99 with older lenses. I thin he's on a wavelength I would largely tune out. How about a word about firmware updates? Where is the dual-focus of the a99 going?
This 'interviewer' wasted both the Sony-Manager-Guy's and my time
Hmmmmmm and I just wasted my time reading your post.
OldZorki: This is an awesome camera. Give it up, people, most of us cannot afford it - as it is not a main working tool of a pro and not a toy #1 for an amateur.. But how many of us would snap it for a grand?
Sorry bought one, now might buy a second one.
B-rad: Anyone who pays this kind of money for this needs their head examined. PERIOD.
I wonder what you drive, a rattling tin rust bucket? If you do thats your choice and who can afford something better its their choice, but to say others that don't have your mind set needing to have their heads examined, well that says much about yourself.
Thanks for the pics, obviously you are at the Sony Media Show in San Fran. Great shots, can't wait to see your low light shots and raw pics. Glad I pre ordered. Hope to have the camera before Xmas.