OK Canon, now it’s your turn. What I expect Canon to bring to the table, as always, is excellent build quality and refinement of other people’s ideas. Fortunately other people have taken the risk, introduced many new ideas, and created a new market for compact system cameras. Here is my wish list for Canon (or Fuji, if they’re up to it):
The form factor, hump-less viewfinder, hot-shoe, and sensor of the NEX-7, it would be OK to drop a few megapix to achieve better noise or the ultrafast hybrid focusing and burst rate of the V1. It should have a smoothly integrated user interface and excellent jpeg engine. It should have Sony’s sophisticated processing modes (HDR, Sweep pan, DRO, etc.), 1080p/60 video with still capture. Olympus’ in-body image stabilization and good looks would be nice. At least one pocket able zoom lens and a range of appropriate quality lenses at affordable prices and, of course, adapters for Canon and other’s existing SLR lenses.
Did I miss anything?
dariusk: Megapixelwar is like other wars not the right way. @higher iso iq of the nex7 is worse than nex5. So what is ist for? For all the newbies that buy their first cam and think higher megapix= bette iq??? Eeryone who needs 24 or more pixels will choose mediumformat and not apc. Good idea with the evf but missed the chance to be a real goal. Defenatly a step back in terms of iq. Only for newbies and dummies.
I thought they addressed this pretty well in the review. As someone else said, read page 22. At high ISO the noise is about the same as a 5n, otherwise the 7 has higher IQ due to the resolution. I don't understand why people think this is a step backwards just because it only improves IQ under some circumstances, not all. I would think this is a step forward.
opek: They were using Sony 50/1.8 lense! :)
Is this a JOKE !!??
Canon(Nikon): 50/1.4 Fullframe glass (like Nikkor 50/1.4G)VSSony cheapest "cropped" prime !
Ok, now tell me why not Sony 50/1.4 ??Why not similar optical quality and benefit from "sweet spot" like rivals?
I smell some money behind the scene... ;)
The lead image in the article shows a 50/1.4 mounted. Where does it say they used a 1.8 for the tests? Actually I think DPR should always state at the beginning of their tests which lens they are using.
The "interrupted" liveview problem in the A77 and its brethren is caused by a shortfall in processing power. Moore's law has a history of dealing with such problems quite successfully. The similar "interrupted" liveview in conventional SLRs is caused by the flapping mirror. This is a design problem that can never be fixed without re-designing the system to eliminate the moving mirror, which Sony did.
Whatever you think of this particular camera's several shortcomings, it is a signpost to the future. Ten years from now moving mirror cameras will be collector's items, you won't be able to buy a new one. If we think about them at all it will be to wonder why it took so long to implement a better idea.
Mrpower: I don't see the point in complainig about live view at 8 fps, if you realy use cameras at this speed like me you will know that you cant see much or do much at that speed and that seeing the photo just taken 1/8 of second back would not make that much difference than live view.
I don't see much difference. With the A77 you base your framing on where you see the subject 1/8 sec ago. With your 7D you are basing your framing on where you remember the subject 1/8 sec ago. Either way I think you are basing your framing mainly on a mental prediction of subject motion formed before you pressed the shutter and adjusting on the fly. The A77 approach probably works just as well once you get used to it, have you tried it?
Much has been said about how the lack of live-view in 12fps mode is a deal breaker, but what does that mean really? The Canon 1D mk4 is regarded as one of the best sports/action cameras available, let’s compare.The LCD screen on the back of the A77 is not much use in 12fps, the 1D ditto (“a camera that has evolved to be used with your eye to the viewfinder”).
In 12fps the A77 viewfinder presents a series of stills (refresh rate not specified) so the shooter is looking at what the camera saw “a fraction of a second ago”. In the 1D an image is present in the viewfinder only when the mirror is down (percent of time not known). In between, when the mirror is moving or up during exposure, the shooter must remember what was seen in the viewfinder a fraction of a second ago. Sounds like the A77 has the advantage as the image is available to the eye longer but you would have to try both in practice to see which works best for you.
MikeRan: I have no problem with the review, however, in the pro and con section, I find it interesting that limited control in 12FPS mode is listed as a con.. Shouldn't the fact that this camera has a limited control 12FPS mode (at 24MP and with AF) be listed as a pro?
Also, I believe the 8FPS mode with full control and full AF is quite rare in a camera of this class, no?
I'm a little confused. My last SLR was a film camera where liveview was a non-issue. What does one see in the viewfinder of a 1D mk4 while shooting 10 fps? It would seem one can't see much with the mirror flipping up and down every 1/10th sec.