James First 007: Not a great lens. The DxoMark review got it right…When compare to the 55mm, it is very disappointing…
In fact, the reason why I am staying away from the A7R is because there is no 35mm capable of performing well on this 36 mg camera !
However, the 55MM is an outstanding lens…worthy of its price tag !
James wrote: "Not a great lens". Did you even read the review?
RichRMA: Nothing to write home about for that price. They took the "Sigma" path, making the lens sharp in the centre but not so much the edges. Also, why does the body have to be as large as it is when the elements are so small (35mm f/2.8 only needs elements about 15mm across)?
Just curious, the Sigma 35mm F1.4 same size as Zeiss 35mm F2.8?
I agree with the review. Like everything about the lens except the price. I will pick one up when it drops to $600 used.
Rawmeister: Lets see a serious review on the Sony FE 70-200 f4 OS.It costs 1500 smackers. More than the legendary Canon IS version.
One would suppose it's an even better lens.Pffftttt.
I'm not holding my breath over this vapourware that should define the usefulness of the system. All the other Zeiss for Sony products have been only so-so. Why should things change now, er I mean in the future?
Well, lets see some serious comments first.
McJ: If this was a dslr, it would have been panned as the worst performing camera of the last 10 years. But since it's mirrorless, it magically gets "gold".
I will probably buy this camera myself as a slow digital back for my 30+ year old primes, but I feel sorry for those that buy this as a general purpose camera because it got "gold" in this test.
@McJ, Do you even read the review? or you just skim straight to the award logo?
jeremyclarke: COMPARED TO THE OM-D EM-10
- a6000 has no in-body image stabilization, EM-10 has 3-axis stabilization (not 5 like the pro models, but reviews indicate they kept the most important 3 and it still works the same 90% of the time).- 24pm instead of 16mp (Might give better IQ or might not, guaranteed to fill your hard drive). - Sensor size: Sony wins, bigger and almost definitely better. Do we need the difference?- a6000 has 1 top dial, 1 back dial, compared to 2 top dials on EM-10. I much prefer top dials (especially the top+front one) to back dials so you can maintain grip. - Dial configurability: probably none on a6000 like the NEX 6. EM-10 allows swapping of main dial function and you can assign a "2x2" button that temporarily changes their behavior (i.e. aperture+speed -> ISO+WB). Summary: EM-10 is closer to a7 than a6000 in terms of dials.- Focus peaking/zoom assist: Both have it, OM-D uses touch screen to make it much easier to move around the zoom point for assist.
@Lab, if course it is better. Have you check the sensor performance and rating on DXO website. The 3 years old NEX-7 still beat the latest EM1 by 8 pts. That's a lot in Olympic scores.
km25: 24MPs is a little high for APS-C, I would rather give up a few MPs for better low light use. The 24MP is fine for the mass market, but I think most serious photographer would rather a better balance, leaving 24MP for FF. I fell as if 16-20MP is best for APS-C in all the noise tests I have seen.
Not really. Maybe a bit high for a tiny m4/3 sensor but not for current APS-C and Fullframe sensors.
Noham: Anyone got a good review on the F4 24 -70 - only one i saw was mixed bags... before moving at a7 /a7r or om1 - getting the lense right is crucial (or can wait for nikon and canon to launch their own full frame mirroless.
rsf3127: Since this morning, I believe that the NEX-7 is a great buy at the current prices.
I disagree. A6000 has the new processor, updated and better 24MP sensor, added Wifi/NFC which NEX-7 lacks, plus the most important the new hybrid AF for only $650.
From DPR's CP+ report, "highlight product of the company's year so far is the a6000. Replacing the NEX-6 (and for now at least, the NEX-7 too)".
saradindubose: This SONY looks cool - is it made in Japan or China?
In 2006, I purchased my first DSLR Nikon D40 with only 6MP and thought it was plenty enough for normal use. Boy I was wrong.
justmeMN: From a Photozone lens review:
"The Sony E 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS broke a couple of records but unfortunately not in the positive sense. Its uncorrected distortion and vignetting figures are nothing short of insane."
@justeMN, I guess you're running out of things to fault and now pulling the reviews from photozone? How about no inbody IS? no weather sealed, or no touch screen?
DT200: Big Disappointment. The VF is worse and sensor will either be the same or slightly worse than the NEX 7 due to all the PDAF pixels (just tlike the NEX 6 was slightly worse).Even if the the PDAF works this time, there are still no long lenses with wide apertures to use it with. The 55-210 is too slow and is F/6.3.I guess you could wait for the 70-200mm lens, but its size is bigger than the Canon and Nikon full frame versions which defeats the purpose of the system.For now the NEX 7 is a bargain. Better VF, possibly better sensor and instead use less expense more abundant legacy lenses.
@DT200, you forgot to mention, no in-body IS, no weather sealed, no lenses, and oh yeah no touch screen.
Richt2000: That is a LOT of camera for $650. Lets just hope the AF is as good as it is claimed, and the IQ is as good as the Nex7 at base ISO.
"First impressions" is missingany first impressions so its a wait and see I guess.
Build quality is one thing but IQ is another. Have you had a chance to compare APS-C sensor to m4/3? and please don't tell me they're the same. I'm not here to start a fight either. :)
I agree. $650? that's cheaper than a month old OM10.
Are we still going to get an A7R review or this is it?
Nukunukoo: Nice. Just wished they included sensor shift OIS.
Funny that nobody wants OIS on Nikon Df but suddenly I see many request this feature on A7/R.
km25: If you look at the Fuji X-Pro 1 in low light on Raw, it wins hands down. The A7R looks like sharp noise. The camera will have it's place as created of sharp images, in a light package. The cost is focus speed and that wide angle and fast lens will be very big in ratio to this camera. That Leica lens shorter then 35mm will not work with this camera. A good start for Sony. No dout the users of this camera will be waiting for the A8R. And lens. A wise person would wait for at least for tests and few months.
tell that to these people in Korea.
yabokkie: Sony is more rubbish than rubbish for using a rubbish brand Zeiss.
I love rubbish. Give me more rubbish Zeiss please.