IZO100: This review before the Canon 70D ? Why ?
What is the market share of this toy again ??
@photo nuts:Family sedans outsells sporty coupés, so what's your point?
Dougbm_2: Could be quite interested in this but then again I could just buy an 18-135 for my 50D for about $400 (or 15-85 for about $500). Sure they are not as bright but depth of field will be better.
DoF is either shallow or deep, not better. At any rate, being f/5.6 at the long end makes those zooms both slower and have deeper DoF than the RX10.
Gordon L: I love the concept of a compact full frame camera, long overdue from camera makers. A thousand bucks for a 50mm f1.8? gimme a break. $800 for a 35mm f28? As usual Sony is not delivering decent lens choices. Their marriage to Zeiss is unfortunate. Ziess produces huge over-build over-prices clunky lenses that often test out no better than much cheaper lenses from other makers. Sony nees to take a few pages from Fuji, talk to some actual photographers. I've never even considered the NEX system because of the lens choices.
@rxbot, as JackM says, w/o an adapter to mount existing EF lenses, the the flange distance has to be the same, which means the camera is still going to be bulky. It would be like the Pentax K-01.
An A7 with an an alpha adapter is still smaller than any FF DSLR body. It can also use different adapter to mount lenses from different manufacturers. It's a better approach. It makes more sense than keeping a having a mirrorless body with an SLR flange distance.
Wabznasm: I've confused myself. Can someone please assist a noob? :)
I love using my Super Takumar 55m 1.8 on my NEX 5.Will this lens be suitable for use on an A7 / A7r? Will it change the focal length? and will it be more suitable on one over the other?
As FreedomLover said, FL stays the same and when mounted on the A7, FoV will be back to original (55mm on FF/135mm format), which is wider than on NEX5 (82.5mm with crop factor).
As for vignetting/colour shifting issues, they seems to exist with certain wide angle lenses. Less wide lenses (35mm and up) such as your standard/normal lens shouldn't have any issues.
Paul JM: no OIS at this price ?no interest sadly. Would love a fast wide prime with OIS to use with the Blackmagic pocket
Only 1 m4/3 prime has OIS that is currently available and this is much wider and brighter than that so it is to be expected. Besides, if you mount it on a GX7 or any Oly body, it'll be stabilized.
MarceloSalup: I would hope most of the people reading this site would have those, for sure. I recently added one more: a bean-bag-mini-tripod. It is a beanbag with a tripod head and great when shooting in locations where the mini-tripo is too clumsy: for example, windowsills, held against a light post... the bean bag conforms to the surface really well.
Haven't seen one of those yet so I'll check them out. Personnally, I like those mini flexible tripods (gorillapod). You can wrap them around tree branches, stand them on rocky/uneven surface, etc.
RDCollins: Sorry, Sony, but I need an electronic or optical view finder! The option you offer is far too expensive and compromises the camera's compact size.
At almost $450, the FDA-EVM1K is definitely expensive. Also, there really are no other options. Compare that to the Olympus VF4, which has the same resolution but cost only $280. On top of that, there even cheaper options: VF2 and VF3.Anyway, the RX100II is nice and all but if one needs an EVF, might as well go for a NEX6 or GX7, which are also wifi capable.
Deardorff: 14 degrees? ABOVE zero???
That is not cold. They are claiming it won't freeze up in the cold so why isn't it good to 30 below which is what our winters generally hit when bad weather comes in.
Sounds nice, but I already use my gear in sub zero temps with good success.
It says -10C or 14F, so definitely subzero.
PK24X36NOW: DPR viewfinder size fiction continues. "Dividing (viewfinder magnification) by the crop factor" is essentially an assumption (in this case) that the MFT sensor is 1/2 the size of a FF sensor, which it is not. It is little more than 1/4 the size.
The correct relative size calculation is as follows:
17.3 * 13 * 100% * 1.48 = 332.852 sq mm
35.9 * 24 * 100% * 0.7 = 603.12 sq mm
So the new Oly's "wonder viewfinder is actually little more than 1/2 as big as a typical FF dSLR viewfinder.
PenGun: Makes no sense to me. The Fuji X cameras will just murder it in almost every way and cost less.
And stabilization, weather sealing, burst rate, lens selection, wifi, etc.
"Quality is what I need.."
Then why you shooting with an APS-C cam? Go FF or MF.
"Makes no sense to me"
You make no sense.
Mirrorless Crusader: Hmm, I could buy a huge heavy 24-70mm f/2.8 zoom from CANIKON for $2500, or a lightweight portable 24-80mm f/2.8 for $1000 from OLYMPUS. Tough decision, there.
"You skipped right over APS-C to make a point, huh?"
Well a Nikon 17-55/2.8 costs $400 more and weighs twice as much.
Timmbits: I was eyeing this... but I just discovered on camerasizecom that this this is a bit larger than the APS NX300 - isn't MFT supposed to be more compact?
also, does anyone know how this compares to the GX1 and the Oly sensor (in the omdem5, epl5/5, ep5) ?
GX7 has built in EVF that tilts and pop-up flash, with more physical buttons and dials. Also, the sensor is stabilized. These things, which the NX300 don't have, add to the size.
mpgxsvcd: Canon should take note of what Panasonic is doing. Panasonic actually removed some video features(ETC at 60p, multi aspect ratio sensor) from the GH3 that was in the GH2. They said that it was done to give the GH3 the absolute best image quality possible for a 4/3" sized sensor and they appear to have achieved that.
The GH3 still has the excellent AFC during movies that the 70D has. However, it also has exceptional image quality.
I just find it interesting that Canon is now playing catchup to mirrorless.
"who cares about m4/3 format"
I do and seems like Panasonic/Olympus do too as they actually make primes for the system. How many EF-S primes does Canon make again? Also, we've seen fast LV, articulated touchscreen, wifi, etc. on m4/3 (and other mirrorless) before Canon. This from a former Canon user.
brdeveloper: Too many moving parts. Is it shock-resistant?
At least it doesn't have a slapping mirror.
ChrisKramer1: LOL! Only Panasonic could come up with a camera that looks exactly the same as the Sony NEX 7, costs exactly the same but with a sensor that is half the size!
As far as I can see, the NEX-7 are still more expensive than the GX7 ($999). Also, you don't get wifi, touch screen, tilting EVF, real hotshoe, etc. on the NEX-7, let alone access to m43 lenses.
Interesting scores, which shows the NX lenses are basically as good, and in some cases better, than the Nikon/Canon (closest) equivalent.
The macro (19 pts) has a higher score (with better sharpness) than the Canon 60/2.8 (18 pts).
The 45/1.8 has a score (22 pts), higher than the Canikon 50/1.8 (both 19 pts); again with better sharpness.
At 21 pts, the 30/2 is lower than the Nikon 35/1.8G (22 pts) but better than the Canon 35/2 (17 pts on a 7D); but the Samsung is a pancake, so it's pretty impressive.
It seems Canon needs to make more EF-S. Anyway, those Samsung lenses looks good.
yabokkie: a little bit embarassing
When calculating equivalence on 135 format (fullframe), lens speed doesn't change. So, the 24/1.8 is 36/1.8 on FF, which means it has an angle/field of view (AoV or FoV) equivalent to a 36mm FF lens because of the 1.5 crop factor, but the light gathering ability is still F/1.8.
You only multiply the f-number by the crop factor to calculate equivalent depth of field (DoF) on FF, which would be like the FF 36mm lens stopped down to F/2.7. This is either better or worst depending on your preference and situation.
Michael de Ruijter: What are we supposed to do? Grab a fistful of dollars and toss it away?
You can start by doing small things locally, like donating food, clothes, and some time voluteering. Giving money, even a tiny bit, to charities help as every bit counts. No need to "Grab a fistful of dollars and toss it away".
Chris Renton: I'm really interested to hear how the movie servo AF performs tracking moving subjects.. I guess you'll need a STM lens for it to work smoothly?
AF with non-STM lenses should be fine since the lens won't have to go back and forth with PDAF as much as in CDAF. The problem is the noisy AF motor in those older lenses that can get picked up by the mic.