historianx: Sony still cameras = glorified GameBoy stations. Pass.
@historianxHow is your overpriced prehistoric fuji camera with poor af.
Serickmetz: What an ugly unimpressive upgrade. The lens is the only decent part about it and that EVF just adds bulk, plus it's low quality will probably render it unusable
Just another pointless variation from sony to sap every bit of money they can out of the market.
Have you held it in your hand have you seen the EVF.
FYI it has the same EVF thats found in A6000 which is nothing not short of excellent.
ottonis: It is remarkable how some people already bash the A7s and some others already praise it like the new holy grail.
We still don't have any serious review of this camera. What we have are some extremely promising specs that are of particular interest for those people whose main interest is in the low-light capabilities for stills/video.
We have the extraordinary specs and we have some stunning video/stills samples, but I would really wait for some serious and more detailed reviews and testing before making a conclusion about this camera.
Personally, if the A7s is at least one full stop better (with regards to SNR) compared with its A7/r siblings, then it would be of interest of me, as it would put it 2+ stops above the best APS-C cameras today.If on my Nex 5N ISO 800- was the maximum tolerable ISO with regards to IQ/noisefloor/SNR, then the A7s would allow to shoot at ISO 3200 at the same quality, which is just astonishing.
You must be living in a cave
@Richard ButlerSony says that the EVF " With about three times higher contrast and resolving power compared to the original α77".
But you say its unchanged ?
sam james: I am a professional video person and what I am noticing is at ISO 3200 the compression artefacts seem quite visible, comparable to the older 5D Mk2. The 5D Mk3 was about 1 stop faster so this kind of noise would only be visible at about ISO6400. Then what we see in this video is that once the brightness is lifted at around 25,000 ISO the noise issues are less obvious because noise is always more visible on darker areas. I definitely agree that this seems to be shot to underexpose at ISO1600 to amplify the difference at 400,000 ISO. My guess would be that we could actually see quite a lot at the Sony's 1600ISO with not too much noise and the ISO above about 12800 would not really be necessary.Anyway, it looks good, not dissing this camera! Though my Canon c100 has less noise than this at all of the ISO levels up to 52,000 though so I'm not totally amazed!
This eats the C100 for lunch when it comes to low light noise levels.
aruk5: who uses 409600 iso anyway and do pros use isos above 1600 in real life situations? Its well known that lower isos give you better looking clean images than high isos. High isos are best used for some rare emergency situations where capturing a pic in low light using the quickest possible method is needed but the majority of everyday pics can be captured using low isos.
another thing which is bugging me is why do all dslr/mirrorless compact manufacturers still continue to hype the video capabilities when fact is dslrs and mirrorless compacts are designed for still photography. This thing has been going on for almost 5 years what with the 5d mk2 was released with video capability.
If selling video enabled devices is what they want to do how about just releasing affordable 'handicam' style cameras with aps-c or ff sensors. I know there are lots of expensive pro grade models but not cheap ones. Bet they wont release any till this video enabled dslr/ILCE craze dies down!
Most don't use above ISO1600 because lots of noise creeps up,especially in canon sensors.With clean higher ISO people will start using it.
Bhima78: Is this direct from the camera at 1080P? Or is this adding the $1,000 Shogun thing to record it in 4K then downsampled?
From the person who shot it.The only 4k video on the net is the one shot in Japan.Rest of the videos shot in Europe are all 1080p.
Its 1080p direct from camera.4k was not used in this video.
HomoSapiensWannaBe: The fire wasn't blown out at the lowest ISO example. It still isn't blown out at the highest ISO. What is going on?
Due to S-log 2 and extremely insane dynamic range of the sensor
Gesture: $800 MAX.
He was talking about the RX1 not the older R1.
JimmyMelbourne: why isnt this review showing on the clicks page? should be right at the top, has it been correctly linked?
Well i guess it should be named just one
Ulfric M Douglas: Even more little bits of info on the processing side which suggest these A7s and the E-M1 were developed together - orat the very least by teams exchanging a LOT of information.
EVF is different ,the EM-1 uses a Epson LCD where as the the Sony uses a more advanced Sony own OLED evf.The only thing common in both EVF is the resolution.
Lab D: Looks like Sony is giving away bodies and making it back on over priced lenses. The cheaper body and couple lenses is $4000! And that is without any telephotos which will cost even more.
Sony makes their own sensors, rear lcd ,evf and batteries.Where as canon(except sensor) and nikon has to buy them from another OEM.So i am sure they are making money.
Princess Leia: This is not innovation. Sony has been doing the phase detection autofocus with their SLT cameras for a while now. Having said that, it is nice to know Canon is playing catch up.
The SLT tech can still focus faster,while the mirror does rob some light the Sony sensor is still miles better then the canon sensor in DR and HIGH ISO,so even if there is a light loss due to the mirror the high ISO performance is similar to the Canon.
Sonyshine: There are plenty of pics on the internet now showing the screen. It is not articulated, just a tilting screen. You can't fold it away for protection. A backward step from the A57.
By folding the screen backwards in A57 or A65 you can save power where neither the lcd nor the viewfinder is ON but with the A58 or A37 either one will always be ON.
Dpreview where is the preview
James A Rinner: Interesting statement they made when they compared it to other cameras. "and only lags (in image quality) behind the very impressive Micro Four Thirds Olympus OM-D E-M5." What is Olympus doing so well that the smaller sensor out performs this larger one?
Look at file size of olympus jpegs both from in camera jpeg to jpeg got from raw,the file size is much higher then the competition and it has always been that way.
Jens_G: So far, I'm still leaning towards the Sony RX100 - will have to wait for in an-depth review to see how IQ and AF performance compare.
Its no brainer as far IQ is concerned the RX100 should have a comfortable edge,Fuji also has bad AF reputation.
PhotoKhan: I don't get it...all that "real-estate" to the right of the individual items evaluation bars and, still, it gets a "golden award"?
The only individual item where it seems to shine is "Movie / Video mode" whereas something as critical as "Image quality (jpeg) " gets 8/14...far from gold.
This is still a photography site, right?
PhotoKhanPlease provide the review own finding .If you are talking about jpeg,see the studio comparison shots in dpreview and imagingresource.com compared to the competition from canon and nikon its better.
Even the gold award winning canon 5Dmk3 has the following cons"Destructive noise reduction results in mushy JPEGs, even at base ISO""Visible sharpening artifacts at default settings""Heavy-handed noise reduction leads to lack of low-contrast detail at higher ISOs."
pentaxination: It is laughable that the Raw files used here look to have far more chroma noise that the a55 output. First, I abhor chroma noise. Secondly, how can you post this comparison and then fail to acknowledge this difference?
Well you forget its a SLT camera the ISO is boosted to compensate for 1/3 stop disadvantage of translucent mirror
Look at the NEX5n it has the same sensor its better then the A57 in higher ISO,the same applies to the pentax K30.
But the SLT has other advantages faster FPS,fast PDAF when using live view in lcd and video ,these are the advantages which outweigh the disadvantage.