I'm betting the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 will be sensibly priced. Sigma has made waves by offering lenses much better than OEM -- for less than OEM prices. It's a good strategy.
Alphoid: I'm wondering how much the 0.77x crop factor does for you, relative to economies of scale and the type of engineering that goes into a modern, high-end mass-produced dSLR.
I'd love to see an actual, objective comparison to a D800 with a nice Zeiss lens, a Sigma 35mm f/1.4, or similar. 35mm lenses have come a long ways since the days when I last saw someone compare MF to FF.
I hear all about the magic of MF, but I wonder if at this point, it is still real or just psychosomatic.
A 6x9 sensor would cream the D800, if someone were to make one. That would justify the Hassy purchase price tag too (although I suspect it would cost much, much more to produce).
I'm wondering how much the 0.77x crop factor does for you, relative to economies of scale and the type of engineering that goes into a modern, high-end mass-produced dSLR.
I do wish they'd either stabilize or discount their Sony lenses. If the former, they could work on NEX. If the latter, they'd be cheaper.
Wow. Waiting on dimensions. This seems better than the RX100, potentially, and the second decent all-around compact camera series.
It's funny. The cell phone cameras are getting better and better as main cameras for photographers, while point-and-shoots are getting worse and worse.
Cell phones offer growing sensors, wider apertures, increasingly more programmability and control, and better review. In the meantime, Sony announces a 63x zoom point-and-shoot with an f/3-5.9 lens, and Canon, a D30 with horrible folded optics.
I don't get why someone doesn't make a point-and-shoot with a fixed f/0.95 lens, make it sturdy, and beyond that, make the sensor as large as possible while maintaining form factor.
I wish the Nokia phones would dual-boot Android and Windows Phone. I'd totally buy one of these models if I wasn't taking a risk on Windows but had a choice.
Alternatively, I wish some Android manufacturer would release a reasonable competitor.
It's funny. It seems like Nokia is hampered by Windows (since otherwise, almost all photographers would buy Nokia), and Windows is hampered by Nokia (who doesn't make the best hardware otherwise). If Microsoft had a strategy of choice on all handsets, it would work better for all involved.
Heck, if I got an Android+Windows phone, I'd at least try Windows. If Windows was better (and I've never used it, so aside from knowing how badly Windows sucks elsewhere, I have no idea), I'd switch to Windows.
Fast focus. 4k video. Building on top of an already-successful camera. Assuming the price is in-line with the predecessors, this seems like a home run.
Only bit I don't like: I was hoping the GX7 would signal all MFT cameras were switching to IBIS. Oh well.
The quality of photos from all rugged cameras except for the Nikon AW1 is just atrocious. If someone made a rugged camera without folded optics, I'd surly buy it. It's okay if the lens protrudes, so long as it is reasonably protected. I don't mind no zoom. All I want is good photos. I'm thinking a 1/1.7" sensor and a high quality 24mm-equivalent f/2 lens. GPS. Open wifi interface with Android+iOS apps. Waterproof to 50 feet. Drop proof to 2 meters. Freeze-proof. Dust-proof. Full manual controls (even if through menus) and low-speed RAW shooting. Great automatic modes. At least 30 second max exposure.
Impressive engineering accomplishment. That said, I'd never consider buying or recommend one. What would be much more impressive would be extending the zoom range on an f/2.8 zoom without compromising image quality. Now a 16-105mm f/2.8 -- that would be revolutionary.
If it was not for crappy folded optics, had manual, and maybe RAW I would buy one...
duartix: 1080/60p? Is this a joke? Do we have to buy their cheaper cameras to get the best of their video? Meanwhile their m43 cameras are still featuring a codec and frame rates from the Middle Ages.
Smaller sensor means it is easier to do fast readout. Signals take a while to propagate over long wires.
(Footnote; intentionally slightly oversimplified)
ZhanMInG12: Just building on some reasons why DP thinks the A7 is not a good camera
1. You need to buy a $50 official charger or $10 knockoff to avoid plugging the camera in to charge it.
2. You can’t control minimum shutter speed in Aperture priority mode, and have to use manual mode with auto ISO to set whatever shutter speed you want.
3. The jpegs have too much noise reduction, which can, um, be turned off in the menu.
4. The default controls are bad, but can be easily customized
5. No built-in flash, despite the vast majority of FF bodies not having one.
6. Wifi implementation is not mature at the desktop side, but mobile wifi live view works like a charm.
7. New, high-performing lenses are expensive.
What an awful, crappy camera!
I won't comment on the fairness of silver, since I have not used the camera.
However, 'silver' does mean 'awful or crappy.' In 2013, dpreview reviewed 37 cameras. Of those, 13 got gold, 15 silver, and only 9 were pathetic enough to get no award. Those 9 were all dogs: the Nikon df, several folded optic waterproof cameras, an Android-based camera, a small sensor ILC, and one superzoom.
Once you get into u4/3 or larger cameras, the only ones to not win an award in the past 2+ years are the Nikon df, the Sigma DP1, the Samsung NX200,
As you move up to full frame, the bias towards golds gets even worse.
By dpreview standards, 'Gold' means 'usable.' Silver is 'a bit pathetic.' No award means 'completely unusable. Buy at your own risk.'
Rick Knepper: Here's the thing we all want to know Mr. Hasselblad. Will CMOS help make the camera affordable?
HR: The factory setup for a basic CMOS sensor (e.g. as found in a baby monitor or similar low-end application) is identical to the setup for the billions of other circuits built. The setup for a full-frame or large sensor is identical with the exception of one step -- lithography. The IC die is exposed to light, and you need multiple, aligned exposures. You need a fancier piece of equipment called a step-and-repeat, but the other billion dollars of equipment remains the same.
The setup for a CMOS sensor of the type found in a modern high-end point-and-shoot or cell phone adds quite a few steps over conventional ICs -- BSI, microlenses, etc. -- and is quite a bit more specialized and expensive. Some of those steps are often omitted for larger format cameras (where bigger pixels can compensate), but some are still necessary.
Even the special CMOS processes were much cheaper and more standard than CCD processes last time I looked (which was quite a few years back).
Disappointing. Without competition from the Stellar and Lunar, the Nikon Df family is likely to go up in price considerably.
Potentially. CMOS technology is taking over principally because it is considerably cheaper than CCD. Conventional circuits are manufactured with a CMOS process. A CCD process is specialized and designed only for camera sensors, and is therefore quite expensive. Progress in mainstream CMOS technology, largely driven by tremendous investment in it for normal (non-sensor) circuits, has allowed CMOS to reach parity with CCD in performance.
Of course, once you add microlenses and whatnot, the gap in price closes.
Will that savings be passed on to us? Maybe. I doubt it.
Why not talk about the curvy TVs? Those, in some ways, have more long-term implications for photography, and in particular, UWA photography than anything else announced.
jorden mosley: I know buying great glass is a sound investment, but jeez I could buy an A7 with that amount of money.
...sigh. But it doesn't change the fact that this would be my dream lens for m43 though.
This lens seems like a mismatch for a small sensor. You're right about the A7. Once you get beyond some lens size and speed, a slower prime and bigger sensor just win.
Dream lens for u4/3 might be the Olympus 45mm f/1.8.
I hope Sigma changes its mind, and the Sony version has OS. Sony now has both IBIS cameras, and non-IBIS ones (in e-mount, with adapters).
Man. This or the Hasselblad Lunar... Tough choice.