U-point is licensed by NIK, but NIK is now owned by GOOGLE, so probably the licensing issue.
The chart of Digital Camera sales as proportion of whole company is interesting.
Black Box: I don't know if it's intentional but I really like the "old" colors of this series. They somehow look very... Soviet, if you like. And they really show what Sochi really is - a dirty overcrowded cloaka with nothing to see, eat or go to. AVOID.
It's not old. These are very typical 90's Mamiya camera using Portra 400.
Another nice documentary with Mamiya 7. Mamiya 7 has already established a classic status for documentary photography.
There is aesthetic issue with film simulation without doubt. They do look fake, and they actually are.
Wye Photography: Personal view to which I am entitled - don't bite my head off.
I find it mildly amusing that thousands upon thousands of people abandoned film in their absolute droves and "made the switch to digital", spent $1000's (the $ is there for the benefit of my American brothers) on the new gear, computers, software only then to mimic film. If I could understand irony, I think that could be ironic.
I use digital, I also use film (B&W, just started to self process colour), I can tell you those "film packs" are just a waste of money esp BW. I can process Tri-X in D76, HC-110, Prescysol and Perceptol and have four different results.
With colour, I get a slightly different colour and rendition from my old Canon kit as I do from my RTS (and those sublime Carl Zeiss T* lenses) kit.
Personally, I think all these film sim profiles, albeit free from Adobe, are a gimmick. Quality film kit is cheap as chips thanks to digital. Buy some, have a go, do if for real. You'll enjoy it!
I use real film, digital and digital film sim.
Film is film, digital is digital, sim is sim. I prefer real film by far and I'll trash all my digital camera, if film camera has the same convenience as digital.
icexe: Dear Hasselblad,
Please, just stop it. You're embarrassing yourself.
I would choose Hassey version over Sony, IF the price is the same or $25 more.
rbryll: Kowa makes truly *excellent* low-distortion machine vision (C-mount) lenses. I could not find better lenses on the market for 3D stereo vision applications, maybe with the exception of some Schneider Optics models costing 5-7 times as much. I hope these new lenses are a success, the company deserves it. (I'm not affiliated with Kowa, just using their stuff).
hmm, I have to see the sample images from those lenses, then.
Too early for April fool.
abortabort: I love all the comparisons to the D800 in the comments here (and to some extent in the reviews), but here's the thing:
The A7/R are not competing with the D800, nor 5D III. They are already very competent cameras and if they are what you are after I am sure a friendly retailer will be able to help you get your fix.
Fact is the A7/R don't have any natural competitors, they offer us something that we've never had before. So the comparisons are largely meaningless. We don't usually compare a D800 to a 1DX now do we? Why? They are both full frames right? Yeah but they are in a different class, that is why most of the time we don't compare them.
But when we find something that defies comparison due to being something completely new, we tend to grasp onto whatever we see as closest, but that doesn't really work does it?
I mean when the iPhone came out I saw lots of comparisons to this and that, Windows Mobile, Nokia E70, Palm Centro, BlackBerry etc. But it couldn't be directly compared because it was something new.
If you are going to try to compare to something, it would have to be the Leica M's, not a D800 or whatever. Think of the D800 and it's ilk as a desktop computer, a workhorse for getting shiz done. Now think of the A7/R as a shiny new smartphone, super cool, but when you compare it to the workhorse it could NEVER replace it right? I mean there are so many things it can't do that the big powerful desktop can do... it's a 'toy' for rich people with more money than sense right?
Yep, now is a time to stand up and proudly condemn the A7/R in the same way you said they would have to prise your Window Mobile, or Palm or Nokia from your cold dead hands and how a smartphone would never be anything more than a gimmick.
Remember that iPhone didn't even have apps. No 3G. No GPS. Battery life was terrible. Couldn't video call... and all the rest.
Now go back to condemning then for not having 30 years worth of accumulated lenses and short battery life. (even though they have 30 years of accumulated lenses).
I don't think A7r is competing FF DSLR, but A7R Mark II probably will.
sgoldswo: Just curious, but other than build quality and resolution (which is a curse as well as a blessing) why is this rated a good bit higher than the A7? To my mind, the A7 is the better of the two, more manageable RAWs, less noisy shutter, faster AF etc.
Not true at all.http://www.flickr.com/photos/martinstelbrink/sets/72157638008570035/
I feel A7 and A7r should share the same score after reading both reviews, considering the price difference and not so much difference other than pixel count.
" the a7R has the unique ability to adapt to nearly every 35mm lens ever made thanks to a wide array of available adapters, most of them limiting these lenses to manual focus."
Not true at all. Most of non-telecentric rangefinder wide angle lens below 35mm is almost unusable with A7r.
Image Samples. So much better than any NEX.
This silver body may look nice with Contax G lenses.
Joachim Gerstl: So that's how you are supposed to hold it. Now it makes perfect sense.
Mylene_777: It's design is so cool but the 'APS-C' logo on front cover looks awkward.
forpetessake: If the AF performance is indeed what Sony claims, then the slaughter of DSLRs, SLTs is about to begin. I wonder what rabbits Canon/Nikon are going to pull out of their respective hats.
There is no reason that the AF speed of mirrorless is inferior to the DSLR forever, because it should be all depends on AF algorithm. SONY focusing system is already more precise and practical for MF than DSLR.
Dear Jeff Keller,
I'm wondering if you actually have touched this camera and write this review. Everyone who actually touched the camera except you seems to have very different opinion about the EVF from yours. It's pretty confusing...
imaging-resource.com says that the A6000's EVF is the clear winner as it produces much more accurate colors and easy to discern details, compare to NEX 6. hmm...