this body is huge, but there are some issues one can discuss. X-trans sensor is not everyone's thing. Then, 1/4000th only, lenses that cost a fortune, and last not least a kit that is just 150$ cheaper than a A7 kit at Negri shop. For the rest, I think that Fuji made a huge job, but, let's first see the results. Unless they give the algorythm to third party sotware developpers like Adobe, Phase One, DXO and similar, the X-trans sensor is for me none of interest. As I said, let's see the results first. All in all, I am tempted by such a camera. I wait what Sony will bring as a NEX-7 replacement first as well.
Samuel Dilworth: This rampant kitsch (which runs amok on sites like 500px) is destroying our ability to see. It’s like the ‘loudness war’ in music: everything is turned up to eleven to attract attention. More is without exception more in this world.
So it follows that if a dog is good, and a pot-bellied toddler is good, putting the two of them together at sunset on a misty farm is even better. (Duh!) If you formulaically combine:
• fluffy pets• children• sunsets• snow• backlit mist• flowers• bucolic artefacts• fabrics blowing in the wind• blurred backgrounds• very warm, highly saturated colours
… you arrive, as Shumilova did, at the apogee of this aesthetic – the equation can’t be denied! – even though you’ve truthfully created an absurd parody of beauty.
As this garish view of the world becomes normalised, it becomes harder for people to see other, better possibilities.
Now, let's see what Elenas photos target. It are our feelings, the relation of a child and animals, the gratefull behavior of children and animals, showing to us thigns that we have forgotten, and the comments some do show that clearly. We are not here to teach other people what to do and not, to comment what their shots are not about or should be about, it will not change them, not the content of each photo, and not the view of the subject that this photographer has. Elenas photos are excellent, they transmit a message to each of us, at least to those who have eyes to see, ears to hear, legs that make them walk like humans and not like cripples, and brains that do not rot like eaten by leprosy. Maybe we need a new Jesus to teach you all what is right and what is wrong, or to give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to GOD what is GOD's. So, stop preaching, look, see, think, and stay, or pass by.
All those criteria are those one generally takes to compose photos for good effects and subjects, but du not forget red chairs, red lanterns, lace embroided knickers and so on. If we count all what make people look at a shot and appreciate it, lets put tits and butts in first place and after that anyone can start making the inventory, what is total stupidity. You can take just anything that the variety of possibilities the nature offers to you and compose a good shot. What counts is the message a shot brings over. Some simply are absurd, some are nonsense, some are mindblowing, some might be brainwash, some might touch your feelings, all is about the goal you want to reach. After all, the best shot is the one you take by surprise, the snapshot without composition or specific subject. That is what makes the eye of a photgrapher, and even then, each of us sees it in a differnt way. You saw it, others just passed by, searching for something else, or, maybve, nothing.
whtchocla7e: My brick wall shots are better!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Paul Farace: I accidentally found myself standing on the very spot that Ansel Adams shot his famous "Moonrise Over Hernandez, NM" (1941) in 2012... he used an 8x10 I used a Canon 50D... point is that except for the church and a few headstones in the cemetery, little was identifiable... what was flat ground in 1941 had become heavily forested (trees and scrub) and homes and structures. Earth and man are dynamic... constantly changing... also the choice of format and lenses are crucial for making comparisons. Adam's print shows the mountain range... my shot couldn't... a bit too wide.
but man only changes his tools, not his brain. We still believe in the same crap, like GOD and similar bullsh.., we kill for the same reasons, we hate for the same differences to ourselves. On the end, the more we change the more we stay the same, all we do as a change, is go faster. We displace 20 times faster than once, we learn in one life what ancients needed 10 lifes for, we get the information in one day that asked you 10 days before, we kill in one push of a button the people we killed in 10 wars in ancient times, messages are instantly, need no 20 days anymore to be carried, and so on. But, do not forget, the faster we run, the earlier we reach the end. Even nature runs faster, by every rise of CO2 levels by nature, not by humans.
68craigdale: The viewfinder is critical part of a camera, I think it is wrong to give any electronic viewfinder such a high rating especially considering their so so performance in low light.
you probabely have never had the opportunity to look into a Sony EVF. Never have seen anything building up there, and, I see the noise of the sensor, what is important when you shoot in the dark. For manual focusing with peaking, an EVF is a must. A OVF is just more bright, and for all the rest it's a pain in the a.. I use both, and EVF is the most fantastic thing I know, Sony EVF, i mean.
naththo: We need to report straight to Sony for problem with JPEG and for the RAW lossy compression. They really need to add feature for option to choose from using RAW max 14 bit or choose lossy compression of 12 bit. And we need to let them know there is a serious side effect problem with JPEG when using High ISO NR on even you are shooting as low iso as 50 or 100, still exhibit banding/posterisation/artifacts. Sharpening is good so far not as oversharpened like Nex 7. Sony people who work at Sony do not come here to see problems here. They expect to hear from you through phone call or email or through technical support. If you don't send, they don't know what is really happening.
"oversharpened, like NEX-7"? I use this camera since it came out, never have seen an oversharpened picture from it. What makes NEX-7 simply special is the fact that the sensor is the most sharp one you can find, what makes it a mess, is that beyond 200 Iso it's a crap. The sensor records that sharp, there is no sharpening in the camera when you work on RAW, and for jpeg, you can ask not to sharpen at all ro to reduce noise, despite that here, it looks like some is still applied, even when shut off. A NEX 7 sensor with a good noise ratio up to 3200 ISO would be a dream machine, maybe in 10 years, who knows.
steelhead3: I noticed that they are using Sony file compression in this camera; I wonder if the forums will be as upset with this development as with the A7.
the sensor is Sony's A7 24 mpix x 2.
SeeRoy: Terrific to see some serious competition for Micro Four-Thirds!
the strange thing is that the depth of the mirror chamber, making the distance to the sensor and the lens larger, reduce the DOF effect. As a young man, I used medium format to get rid of the shallow DOF and get all in depth sharpness, what was a clue with 24x36. That is why I stick to smaller sensors today, the type of shots i usually do need in depth sharpness.
Artistico: I wonder if the day will come that someone will dare make a sensor in a digital medium format camera that is actually several smaller sensors put together rather than one big one. Surely with clever processing, easily available in this day and age, it should be possible to equalise any small differences between the sensors in the output, just like there is processing going on behind the lines to correct CA and distortion in several cameras. If that could make an affordable medium format camera, I'm sure there would be many potential takers.
3x3 APSc sensors would make a nice size of roughly 60x45
size matters, in a satellite this is not important, a 106 sensor array will not fit in a case around your neck. But, some day I could imagine a 3 ccd system for photography. Foveon split in 3 separate sensors, the absolute top.
RichRMA: Medium format cameras are like astronomical CCD cameras; the price never seems to have fallen over the years like consumer camera prices have.
Make that cameras in mirrorless, with smaller body, 48 mpix sensor and a price range of 3000$ for the body, and it sells. The disadvantage of medium format digital is size of material and size of the files. 80 - 250 mb for one shot, so calculate the octocore processor, the 256 gb ram and the 4 x 3 terrabyte disks into your budget right away. Here, all is about size only, starting by the price of the material.
Jeremy Park: geeze how long did it take Phase and Hasselblad to work out CMOS sensors are better for flexibility of shooting ( something most non-studio based photographers need ).... now, if they could only work out that they are way over charging for it.
Nor did Phase one work on it, nor did Hassie. The sensor is the 2x24 mpix clone of the sensor Sony uses in the A7 and D800. It has exactly 48 and a few squeezed megapixels and is exactly the double in size, made by Sony.
AliRoust: Leica must be hating Fuji now....
You can not compare a telemetric Leica to an A7 or A7R. What bothers Leica is that the picture quality of the A7 series, even with their lenses is in 80% of cases where they tested with M mount lenses, much better. Now, Leica will bring during this year a new model, mirrorless ILS, in APSC at beginning, with AF system and all what other similar cameras have. The only handicap might be the pricing, if they want to go with the market trend, they have to align here. I doubt that many want to pay 1 Grant more for a red DOT, not more then for a double H.
iae aa eia: Wow-wow-wow!, but... More fullframes, pleeeeease! The more APSs, the less expensive FFs are kept from being, and I'm tired of that. I can't stand the fact 20 years ago the poorest of the poor could have an FF and nowadays is this funny situation. And yet, some people, not the poor of the poorest nor even the poor, but the middle-class, debate over and get proud of their 8-mm to 16-mm (equiv) sized-sensor cams. Pff! What a heck!
this eternal DOF story is useless. With any APSC sensor and a fast lens, you can get so much shallow DOF that you do not even see anymore what is in the background. Here is an example of a NEX7 and Nikon 50/1.8
and here one with a 30/1.4 from Sigma
Now, in what does a FF makes that better. It will remain obvious that you get a shallower DOF on a FF, but on the other side you still need a smaller sensor camera to shoot tourist style shots where all has to be sharp in depth. With a 4/3 you can get both, with an APSC you come close, with FF, all in depth sharpness is a nightmare, except if you take more distance.
nathantw: I might be the minority, but I went into a Sony store, stuck my SD card into the A7R, shot some frames with the attached 50mm f/1.8 lens, went home, stuck it into my computer to look at the quality and was utterly not impressed.
Also the camera was unnecessarily loud when clicking the shutter. I was able to hear it on the other side of the store going off when someone clicked the shutter. What the heck? It's mirrorless for goodness sakes.
"In this case it's a nice sensor, but nothing we haven't seen before (Nikon D800)"
It is the same sensor as D800. I have made tests with both, and 3 people in our photoclub, hard Nikon herdliners, have sold there D800 after that to get the A7R. It makes definitly a little better picture, as well in jpeg as in RAW. The difference, when downsizing, is not visible, what matters is the same good, even a bit better IQ in a smallee package. Our club is made of old hares in the photo business, and when you get older than 60, weight matters. I have DSLRs, medium format, and since I have the NEX, the big things take dust. And, I shoot sine 52 years now, so one can not say I not know what I am talking about. My preferred DSLR remains my Fuji S5 anyway.
cxsparc: So now that we all know what utter rubbish these cameras are, please also ignore this thread:http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1255248/108They can't be serious, shooting those pictures with one of those :-)
the miranda forum shows us what this cameras are able to do. Now, if we see some Oly OMD forums, we look NEX-7 forums and so on, we see that all those cameras are able to as good and even in some situations much better. But all that proves nothing, if you know how to use a camera, you make good shots, and today, thare is among the top line of cameras no bad one anymore. I am not jealous on any of that forum shots if I compare them to my NEX-7 shots or the A7 and A7R shots I did. The only issue that will make me buy an A7 is better high ISO performance. If I see the results on 100 ISO, I see no reason to change, one can hardly beat NEX-7 IQ anyway. At this moment I wait what the NEX-7 successor will be, I prefer APSC for the wider DOF, FF is too shallow in most situation in which I shoot.
DT200: Interesting point someone made. If you take the A7 with any of its native lenses, you can find the EM1 and a similar native lens that makes a smaller package and gives you close to a stop or more light. Oh, and the EM1 combos cost less too.Why does this matter? If you check DxO the difference in DR is usually around only 1/2 a stop (at most ISOs) and for noise very close to that 1 stop difference (for most ISOs).So when you do a comparison with native lenses, the EM1 is smaller, costs less, gives the same or better IQ according to DxO, gives you IS with each lens, focuses faster, and focuses more reliably in low light. The only win for the A7 is slightly less DoF, which often is not a good thing.FE 35 F/2.8 vs. 20mm F/1.7 (more than 1 stop and no A7 IS)FE 24-70 F/4 vs. 12-35 F/2.8FE 55 F/1.8 vs. 25mm F/1.4 (less than 1 stop but no A7 IS)FE 70-200 F/4 vs. 35-100 F/2.8
This is uselss talk. You do not need FF to get a good shot. At 100 iso, a NEX-7 makes a better picture if you look at full size than A7. This is normal, since pixel pitch is twice as fine on NEX-7 than on A7. A 7 pitch matches 12 mpix APS-C, A7R matches 18 mpix APS-C, 16 mpix 4/3 is same as 24 mpix APS-C. Now, all is in what you want to do. DOF and high ISO noise is the issue, and not all of us do night shots, or want pictures where only a spot in the center is sharp and all around is out of focus, what is an issue you can not solve with larger sensors, except if you make the distance to the sensor and the lens larger, like on medium format, where distance and lens size is given by the mirror that is in between it. DOF can be obtained by hyper fast lenses on any system, a 0.95 Nokton or any 1.4 lens gives you DOF on just any system, without, for sure, being able to reach the one of a FF sensor. 1", 4/3, APS-C and FF, sized to 9x13 prints do all the same good picture.
Jay A: Tried this in a store with a metabones lens adapter to try out some Canon AF lenses on it. Not sure if there was something wrong with the camera or adapter, but it took about 6 seconds for the combo to achieve auto focus.
the goal of using hybrid lenses is to make yourself the job and focus manually, and not let the camera do the job. Canon uses another algorythm for the AF system, and translating that in an adapter ends by some issues in focusing speed. That is normal, and PDAF is different, if you use any dslr lens with adapter, you get that issues. That is why Sony uses an adapter with the contrast detect AF system from A77/99 with translucent mirror to run A lenses on the E system. The LA-EA1 and EA3 have no AF system and work in MF only, EA2 and EA4 have it and are thus bulkier. The issue to get this resolved is that all manufactureres step to a common mount in DSLR and in Mirorless, and a common AF algorythm and detection system. That would really give a kick to the market all over. Imagine one lens park, different brands, one mount, up to 5 bodies for just any need and style and there we go. But, keep dreaming, it was just a nightmare like any other.
J Parker: Wow. Just how revolutionary does a camera have to be to get a gold award? If Sony made a camera that walked on water, some of us would complain that the water wasn't wet enough. I respect DPReview's conclusions (let's be honest -- DPReview's reviews are consistently outstanding and worth the wait). But as with any review, actually put the camera through its paces for yourself and decide if its for you or not. The fact is, whether its Fuji, Canon, Nikon, or Sony, etc., cameras of this caliber perform at a level of excellence unheard of even five years ago. The fact that we can with a straight face nitpick about image quality at ISO 12, 800 only shows that we as photographers have it made.
the best and more simple way to go is to give the camera to a few people, leve them give their opinion, then write a report, say what it has and has not, what to your opinion could have been made better, and then publish that. Forget that notation system, you end by endless discussions with all people to see this different, and there are 7 billions on this planet having all their own opinion, and for each of them, there own is the only good one that counts.Camera brands, like so many things, have become for many a religion, a dogma no one wants to break, so why blow air in the coal to keep the fire burning. That is all nonsense. I use 4 systems, and soon a fifth, but not all people do, some keep one brand only and use it as their religion, and many comments confirm this without any doubt.
Shawn, when I use the A7 and the NEX-7 side by side, and see the handling and knowledge it needs to shoot with any of that 2 cameras, the NEX-7 requires much more feeling and knowledge than A7. The NEX is limited to 400 iso, beyond that you have dusty shots. For all the rest, both cameras have the same advantages, skills, and disadvantages, not to forget the crappy Fuji S5 style menues you find on Nex-7. The NEX-7 ended with gold and one of the best notes Sony ever got from DPR. There is something fishy here, and it smells ..... If I had to evaluate advantages against disadvantages, I would end with a 97% advantages. The sole disadvantage I find is that it is too light and too small for certain types of photography, and here it is Makro that suffers form that. With a tripod, the problem is resolved, but a tripod can be a problem in some situations, insects generally do not wait till you finish setting up your gear. Well let's than wait Canikon to do the same to get gold. (yawn)