Almost looks like the Olympus wedge?
I feel much better now. Congrats.
crsantin: Very clever Sony, very very clever. 20 megapixel APS-C with a lens for...$400???That's the initial price too, not the deeply discounted price that comes along at the end of the product's life. The DSLR goes mirrorless. Goodbye micro four thirds, it was nice knowing you.
Not too cheaply made to be GearShop recommended pre-release.
justmeMN: Sony is trying to trick buyers into thinking that a mirrorless camera is in fact a DSLR. That's a sleazy sales strategy.
Many a bridge camera with quite small sensor does the same thing. The real deal is how low in cost can an APS-C sensor camera be. EOS-M on sale, Samsung NX1000, there ain't many. Used and refurb entry-level Nikon and Canon.
iudex: Great pictures, ISO3200 is perfectly usable, I also appreciate variable environments (indoor, outdoor, portraits, landscape...).Btw. is there any DSLR taking better picture than K-500 in entry-level segment or for this price? I doubt it.
You are right. Was not impressed with the kit lens. Samsung puts an excellent kit lens on its NX camera.
Everything good. Using same sensor as other models. Less features. Needs to be closer to $450 or so.
Great trend. APS-C sensor in affordable, compact package, a la Canon EOS-M now and Samsung NX1000.
Nice. I am a circular aperture fan, having worked with many vintage lenses. But there is more to smooth bokeh or out of focal plane rendering than a circular aperture.
Nuno Souto: Oh Sony, this is sooooo wrong! Where is the IBIS which you earlier claimed couldn't be fitted to the NEX series because of size considerations? Who the hell wants a mirrorless camera WITHOUT IBIS? Haven't you learned yet?
I and many others have taken thousands of successful images without image stabilization. It is useful. Yes. Can we live without it. Yes.
Lots of objections. Already Gear Shop listed?
This is right in the Panasonic GH, G wheelhouse. A bit of Samsung's NX5/10/11/20. Olympus OM-D E-5. Most, most welcome. This is what many of use want. Smaller "DLSR" form achieved through mirrorless mount and EVF. Tired of holding the camera out at arm's length and hoping I see the composition. But I want smaller and ability to mount vintage lenses. BRILLIANT FUTURE.
Now, GearShop offers cameras before they are even released. Where is the staff user experience driving recommendation.
And we wonder why the camera industry is struggling. At these prices, I'd buy an entry-level DSLR, time-travel to the future, apply a particle reducer and have a great compact.
Nice article, Jeff.
Ricoh, Casio and Epson were digital camera pioneers and had many interesting designs and approaches in those days. Some of the first "modern" cameras for Casio and Epson were the Casio QV-3000 and the Epson PC850Z.
That Fuji vertical format had a sophisticated interface and the Kodak DC290 (successor to DC260 and last in the line) was an excellent camera with a compact TIFF mode, much like Canon's later compact RAW files.
Scripting the camera by the Kodak DC290-we are only starting to return to that area and the potential has only been slightly explored.
We don't even have APS-C/Full frame digital SLRs with the capacity to "upgrade" the sensor.
Ferling: While I muse at all the little nit picks and updated features posed as huge improvements, I'm still happy that I can switch to manual mode, shoot through a viewfinder, and using the center focus point to take decent photos that will make large prints. Considering that my first DSLR was a $7000 1Ds mk 1, it's all the same for much less. That's a real feature. :)
Focus accuracy.Dynamic range.
I like this camera a lot. But if the final review isn't completed, how is this camera a GearShop recommended?
Exceptional concept by Sigma and looks like first implementation is good.
meanwhile: Why is there no rugged XZ-1? Why is there no rugged S110? Why no rugged LX7, or GR or anything with decent image quality? I really don't understand this camera not existing. Surely there are enough photographers looking for something they can take somewhere there is water around, or their camera might get knocked, or the environment is otherwise not camera friendly but where they want to be able to get quality shots?
Is a quality lens inherently and inevitably breakable? And if yes, why doesn't someone just come out and SAY THAT?
It really doesn't make sense. Think what folks spent on travel adventures (skiing, backpacking, sailing, white-water rafting, etc.). There must be a market for a "tough" camera with the image quality of the enthusiast compact. And if folded-optics it must be, get cracking on it and improve the mode.
Fuji, Sigma, Samsung, Olympus to a certain extent. Not many thinking outside the box.
Deleted pending purge: It is a tough job to build a camera that is equally able to take underwater and dry-land photos, mainly because of the flat ports which are added lens elements that can't be avoided. This reduces the quality of the wide end of its zoom, and is also a reason the zoom range of such cameras is usually short.To have a camera which performs well in both mediums, its port would have to be built as a part of the optical system, and not merely as a water-resistant window.Current amphibious cameras are a compromise.Any manufacturer who envisions a properly built amphibious camera should offer a body that is strong enough for usual diving depths, (-50m), and also a range of lenses for various conditions and purposes. It would be way better than those semi-solutions they offer now. These "tough" models can get wet - but not a single one is good enough to dive with, excepting sub-surface work, and some risky apnea. Instead, they are pocketable. Which really isn't important - to a photographer.
Couldn't Nikon have brought forth Nikonos for the digital age.