parallaxproblem: You state in your first paragraph: "The a5100 picks up where the NEX-5 series leaves off"
This is NOT a replacement for the NEX-5T
It is a continuation of the NEX-3 series and basically a mild update of the A5000 to include the latest sensor/chipset and a touchscreen (though you don't mention the touchscreen in your preview)
In comparison to the NEX-5 series:
- it does not have a Metal body. Front plates on all NEX-5 models were alloy as were the top plates on earlier products in that series
- it does not have any form of feature connector so you cannot connect an external EVF or microphone or external flash, as you can with the later NEX-5 models (this is a big disadvantage of the A5xxxx series)
- its LCD only tilts upwards whereas the NEX-5 series LCD's also tilted downwards as well as upwards
- it does not have the top dial of the last NEX-5 series models
PLEASE UPDATE THE INCORRECT STATEMENT IN YOUR PREVIEW THAT THIS IS A REPLACEMENT FOR THE NEX-5T
It DOES NOT have to have feature parity to be a replacement. Sorry that you don't like it, it IS the replacement to the NEX-5 series, deal with it.
Black Box: I don't think Nikon will like Sony's new naming convention.
What about their old naming convention of A700, A300 and the like? I don't think Nikon own a monopoly on naming conventions that go Alpha Numeric Numeric Numeric Numeric.
Black Box: Burst rate 6 fps. Same sensor, same processing engine. WHY artificially reduce speed! Sony keeps shooting itself in all legs of which it has fewer and fewer.
Heat dissipation in the smaller body maybe?
snooked123: where are the lenses? Plz stop churning out bodies and concentrate on lenses.
Yes I hear they stopped all lens design development to produce this slightly remodelled camera. Must have taken every lens designer they have to change that grip material and drop in other items from the parts bin.
Treeshade: Why would beginners pay $200 more for a5100 instead of a5000? For 4 more MP, extra ISO, or the AF speed that no beginners could perceive? The only "consumer" upgrade is the built-in flash.
a5000 is priced too well for another consumer level Alpha to complete.
Beginners having good focus tracking that they don't have to be a genius to operate is surely a huge drawcard.
Would have loved to see some comments on the touch screen on the a5100, considering it is the first Sony to have one with the Alpha UI and one of the big differences to the a6000. Rather than talk about what is the same, covering this difference would be good. Is it capacitive? Does it work well with the menus? The quick interface? Does it have a quick interface? Can it be used for adjusting additional settings in conjunction with the buttons or solely replicates them (if at all).
dbenyakar: Im abit confused.In the comparison table it is mentioned that the a6000 has "Touch-enabled LCD".In the a6000 specs however it says it does not have touch screen.Which one is true?
A6000 does not have touch screen.
007peter: Impressive, but with only a $100 difference between A6000 vs A5100. It look like a bad value. Perhaps, Sony should have sold the A5100 with $200 below A6000.
This depends what features you value. The a6000 is a very good camera for its price, but it doesn't have the video of the a5100 nor the touch screen, plus the a5100 is considerably smaller.
As someone who uses an A7S as their primary camera, the a5100 is actually more interesting to me than the a6000 is, I want the power of the a6000 but in the smallest possible package.
RichRMA: The resolution advantage of the m4/3 is evident all the way up to 1600 ISO. By then, the cleaner A7s image has an advantage. Still, pretty impressive for the Panasonic.
Really? Are we looking at the same test scene? The m43's are bigger, but actual resolved detail is less, even at low ISOs to my eye.
ThePhilips: @abortabort:> And the aspiring amateur HAS to have 4K?
I think I can answer that, because situation really reminds me of the 5-10 years ago when everybody was buying DSLRs to be able to shoot RAW. And everybody was asking "why the amateurs need the RAW?"
The thing is that amateurs need the extra quality - in still RAW, in video 4K - because they make mistakes more often than pros and enthusiasts. If you have a cooked file - JPEG or highly compressed video - options to correct the mistake are very very limited, or non-existent. While with the uncooked files, one has plethora of possibilities to correct almost any beginner's errors present.
So in a way, I can easily imagine the "aspiring amateur" videographers wanting the 4K. It simply opens up many possibilities that were simply not there before.
One sure can't relieve the moment, but with the RAW images and 4K video one can PP one heck out of it.
For those users Badi they would be far better off with something like an AX100 or the many alternatives that will be out very soon, even models like the FZ1000.
abortabort: I find it somewhat interesting that there is no price mentioned when talking about the two adapter modules XLR-K1M and DMW-YAGH. The rest of the article makes it blindly obvious whenever the Sony is more expensive, with the price of the base unit itself then comments about the cost of a 4K recorder (at the moment at least), but when it comes to these adapter modules no mention of price is given only that "The Panasonic DMW-YAGH module is rather more extensive addition" - Is this because the price doesn't fall in Panasonic's favour in this instance? It makes it seem like a positive spin for Panasonic (again) by not acknowledging the massive price difference between the two.
For someone who shoots 1080p and wants XLR mic inputs this not only evens the playing field between the two, but actually swings the other way making the Sony the cheaper of the two - Not saying this is every scenario, but this would certainly be a popular configuration.
I am not. I would have serious concerns of buying an adapter that costs more than the camera with no real intention of being standardised - If you are ok potentially throwing that much money away (resale values will absolutely plummet if it doesn't work on the next model).
It isn't a blind defence of Sony, there are plenty of things I would like to see it do differently. But, as a video shooter this particular topic is quite important to me and MANY others, but is not being well covered here (or anywhere else for that matter). It may not be important to you, but at which point you 'could' have just moved right along - But YOU chose to come and defend your beloved Panasonic and you want to call me a blind fan?
As for the heat issue, you still have not presented a cogent argument. So if it is bitrate they will never ever need to displace more heat than what the GH3/4 can achieve? Your assumption that is the only reason to update a body design is just completely misguided.
abortabort: Will DPR be doing nice 'equivalence' charts when talking about the native lens line up considering you are directly comparing two similar cameras of completely different formats this time? Or will that paint a rosier picture for the Sony and therefore be ignored?
Thanks for the clarification Richard. Yes I agree for video adapted lenses will largely be the name of the game (and all that entails).
I just thought it worth pointing out as in the A7/R review this was not covered at all, other than to say that the A7/R had a lacklustre lineup of lenses which, when compared to other mirrorless cameras on an equal footing is not really true. Certainly more mature mirrorless systems have "more" lenses, but that doesn't make the lens lineup uninspiring like was suggested, in fact on an equal footing it is in fact quite the opposite.
I look forward to the review, they are both boundary pushers in their own ways and I completely agree, there is no 'best' here to compare (despite the many comments here to the contrary).
Jorginho: If low light is your thing, balancemay well tilt towards A7s. "may well"' because internal 4K is a serious, serious lack to me.
The better the light, the more obvious the Gh4 becomes as a choice. In general I think this is how it is, the details will be somewhat different. The A7s simply is way more specialist than Gh4 and not having internal A7s means that thebudgetminded videopgrahers will be pushed towards Gh4, I am pretty convinced about that.
Oh dear. So you either shoot an Alexa or a GH4, because a GH4 is great and everything else sucks right? I'm sure that if you are shooting on an Alexa than an A7S with a 'dongle' as you want to call it are just too much? Too big and way too expensive I guess? You really MUST go with a GH4 because it saves a few pennies and a couple grams. I know that is a serious consideration when shooting with an Alexa as your A cam so I'm so glad you cleared that up.
The only one here spilling nonsense with their blind love is you Doc.
I am sure you are very happy with your GH4, it's a decent cam for the money if you are an Enthusiast and would like to tinker with video. Good on you.
I see your point, but is this something people who are learning should be learning? The old 'we'll fix it in post'? What happened to learning from ones mistakes? Otherwise it just becomes a crutch.
Hi Richard, thanks for your response. I would think that considering that there are only 5 lenses you could compare the closest equivalent lenses from Panasonic?
I guess the point is that the Sony range of lenses are portrayed as 'lacklustre' when talked about in solely sheer volume AND they are considered 'slow', in equivalent terms however the story is quite different.
I also think that if DPR are going to follow this path of equivalence when comparing systems that that applies here as well does it not? It is not that often that a comparative review like this occurs where two similar cameras that are worth comparing side by side are very different formats.
dash2k8: Don't know if anyone already commented on this, but as an owner of the A7s, I absolutely HATE the position of the video record button. Would it have killed Sony to place it anywhere else? As it is, pressing the REC button induces a shake that ruins the first 10 or so frames of the video. This annoyance aside, so far it's been great.
Yeah, it is a bit woeful. Lots of complaints about the NEX-7 video button, so they updated firmware to disable it in anything but video, but this design takes it needlessly too far. At least make the shutter button video start/stop Sony, as you can't take stills in video mode anyway (according to the annoying warning).
RRRoger: I can also record Video that is only limited by the huge battery life and my 128GB memory card. I have gone over two hours of unattended continuous recording with the GH4.
The AFF (continuous AutoFocus), DFD (Depth from Defocus), and DOF (Depth of Field) of my 12-35 lens at f/2.8 is so goodthat I can capture (indoor poor light) Bowlers on three sets of lanes at the same time
The only thing the A7s has that I could find usefull is the great LowLight capability. Thankfully the GH4 is more than "good enough" for my use at ISO 6400.
I guess my point is do you really need a GH4 for this?
So which is it, high bitrate or unlimited record time that they had to counter for with a bigger 'cooler' body? Your story keeps evolving...
Obviously now it simply can't be record time, so it has to be high bitrates that are the killer... but to quote you "they can't make it any better than unlimited", well they most certainly CAN make one that has higher internal bitrates...
You wanna call your statements bunk now or should I?
katy C.: Thanks Richard for correcting the price of the GH4, which is now shown as £1299.
Now it can be seen the difference between it and A7S. Especially when the 4k recorder needed with the A7s brings the price up to over £4000! That is £2,700 more expensive!
Clearly the price of the GH4 is an absolute bargain easily within reach of the aspiring amateur.
And yet it still beats these tiny sensors... so what is your point? It seems like you are clutching at the old 'well it's worse than something at this' routine. So what are we comparing here? A7S vs GH4 and it's lack of 4K internal recording or its lower downsampled to 8MP DR than the A7R? Seems to me the GH4 can't compete on DR and the A7R can't compete on video. You can't slice it up every way and say 'it doesn't have this, but x product does. But it also doesn't have this, where y product does', because at the end of day neither x nor y products have what this product does... understand? Thus why my silly remarks about rangefinders.
And you may have missed it, but in screen mode DR is hardly affected, while colour, tonal range, SNR pull massively ahead... but you only got as far as the initial test page and thought 'well that's bad, better go find someone to complain to about this matter'...
Over to you doc
marc petzold: nice comparison:
I guess he could only use his mother in law to shoot this video and his dog to edit it. Pity he scripted it himself as the parrot would have done a better job.
I particularly like the statements of being stuck with slow zooms on the A7S, but WOW look how the Panasonic can adapt these lenses.