Debankur Mukherjee: This lens seems to be better then the Nikon G type but cannot match the Zeiss Otus but the Zeiss is deadly expensive.........
It can not match the Zeiss Otus to 100% but it matches it at least to 95%. If you take in charge the little less sharpness in the extreme corner edges, it can compete with the Otus without any problems. Go to imaging resource site and see the shots they made with both lenses on the same event, and compare yourself. I would even say that all over, I prefer the Sigma, it seem to me that center sharpness is a bitty better than Otus. Now compare 900$ to 4000$ and then it is easy to make a choice, except if you can waste money without any need to use your brain. Both lenses are razor sharp and respect for Sigma to offer us that quality for that price. The only thing i do not like is this lousy 50mm format, that most people use seldom. I ask myself why lens factories stick so much to that format, it is a dust catcher format. A top notch Art lens in 35 and 24, then a 85 would be a greater deal.
Sonyalpharumors reports this morning a price of 2499£ is offered in England, what will make this camera sell for +3500$. Seems to me that Sony is not interested to sell the thing, and makes a huge present to Panasonic in this matter. 1750$ is the maximum most of us would like to pay for this, beyond that, it is too expensive. Let's not forget that it can not record 4k internally, has a lousy rolling shutter and is slow like a snail in stills shooting. It's only advantage is the same one that Nikon's digital flop has, it can shoot high ISO clean. So, it seems to me that the series of digital flop gets one more member.
RichRMA: It's still a glorified Coolpix, really. I can't really see the point in having interchangeable lenses on a camera like that, except for novelty purposes. Nikon and Canon; the DSLR "boom" isn't going to last forever so would it really threaten your entire existence to release at least 1 (no pun intended) serious mirror-less?
you can do that with a Pana GM 1 too
PrebenR: If they would scale this up to an APS-C sensor it could be interesting.
you can hardly pay there prices with the CX sensor, with APSC it will be off limits. Nikon has a bit the "follie des grandeurs" since a few years
every time I hear the name Nikon yet, I start yawning...
Photomonkey: The new A7s will be the darling/demon of the moment....until the next shiny thing comes along.
I used Nikon for almost 40 years, and there was nothing else for me, and some day a NEX-7 landed in my hands, and I was 40 years back in time with my FM body and MF ability. I could now start making the photo myself again, and not the camera, and I understood how absurd AF is in reality. I do not swear by Sony, other manufacturers, like Olympus give this comfort as well. But, NEX-7 is for me the ultimate thing. With the new Bionz engine form the a6000 cripple, it would be THE camera for me.
Shield3: How do 5 people "own this" already?
that buttons are on this site to give you an opportunity to write something. If that was not the case you would be silent, and since DPR earn money with every click you do, such things are there to trap you, and it does. Why do you think that we need to turn around 4 pages to reach what we want to see or read, or why do you think that a report is split in multiple pages. On each of them is publicity and what ever you do, read or not read them, DPR gets money for this nasty game they play with us. No need to say how boring this site is in reality.
h2k: No touch screen then? Sony?
what do you want to do with touch screen on a video camera?
ProfHankD: This probably was a minimal-effort way for Sony to bring out support for serious 4K, and it gives Sony an interesting read on the market in comparing sales of A7, A7R, A7S. In addition, if this comes out around $2K, Sony is going to sell a heck of a lot of them to would-be videographers that otherwise would buy Canon DSLRs or micro4/3.
I also wonder if this is the last step before the mechanical focal plane shutter goes bye bye -- which should happen sometime soon....
At least we can say now that Nikon is not alone to have it's digital flop. The next D5 will probably have this sensor, :-) for 4 times the pricing of A7S.
Smeggypants: Finally some sense!! Less MegaPixels and better pixel quality
We assist for the moment at a simple balancing act, less pixels, more light, better sensitivity, less resolution, vs, more pixels, less light, lower sensitivity, higher resolution. If some day we see a 24 or 36 mpix sensor doing the same performance as this one in high ISO range, we can speak about a technological revolution. For the moment there is no magick, want more light in the house, make bigger windows, that is thousands of years old philosophy. What you gain by that on one end, you lose it on the other.
Less megapixels and better pixel quality is nonsense. Lower pixels mean just less finer resolution. We come back to the rough resolution we had when the first 6 mpix apsc dslr's appeared. I always disliked the D700 shots for that reason, they looked in resolution and detail the same as my D70 and D40. No FF needed to get this same picture detail and just a larger picture. What wonders me is comparing NEX-7 in 24 mpix to D200 in 10 mpix, both cameras have the same fine and clean rendering. As a 20mpix FF sensor, the D200 sensor system had made sense to me, but not a 12 mpix one. This camera is a video camera that can make photos as well. So, live with that, and know if the IQ and finesse of detail fits you or not. With 20 mpix I had been interested, with 12 mpix I am not. Now, if this helps the A7 to become a bit cheaper, it could arrange me, the 24 mpix is what I need anyway.
aqasem: What if it has,5-axis OISGlobal shutterFully articulated screenin camera 4KHybrid AFsame size and around $2000
you have enough choice on the market in bigger sized real video only cameras, so what do you complain about. Sony has all you need in this matter, look in their video program.
papa natas: "...The company has also said it is developing a movie-focused 28-135mm F4 Powerzoom lens. Pricing has not yet been announced for either product..."*****!!!Excuse-me, but I NEED to have the price, pronto!!It's the only blank waiting to be filled on my house's second mortgage application.
if you care about video production in a Pro level, you do not care about cinema lenses, you know they are in a range from 6000$ up. So, as the previous commenter states here, your statement is hilarious. With adapters you can run them all on this camera, and if you use a motorized unit, internal AF values are useless anyway. In video MF is generally used.
webrunner5: This camera is going to be a Canon 5D, Nikon D700 on steroids. Can't wait to get one.
who cares about shutter noise when making video?
Shamael: After having photo cameras that shoot video, we have now a video camera that can shoot photos. How deep we have fallen in the last years. Maybe in a few years it will include a coffee maker, a phone and a TV modulator.
2 mpix for picture ridiculous, for video in FF a step forward. For those who dream of the 500 000 iso clean shot, they are served now. It is just sad, and understandable, that this high iso shooting folly is made on the expense of resolution. 12 mpix is ridiculous and we come back to the time of the first digital consumer camera, Nikon's d70, which had the same resolution with the 6 mpix APSC chip. For me, the day we get a correct chip in 24 and higher pixel count that can do 500 000 iso clean, I will speak about an evolution in sensor technology. Making the pixels bigger and reducing their count is just faking you, it is no evolution at all. Maybe Nikon will now counter attack with a 8 mpix FF for a next D5 or Df II, to get you clean shot at 1 million ISO.
@ revenant, I agree with what you say, but as always, why not give to Caesar what is Caesars and to God what is Gods. Why does Sony not remains in video with video cameras and starts massacring photo cameras with video or making video cameras in photo camera bodies. It looks actually as if Photo shooting has become a secondary thing and is pushed in the corner for video skills. Nikon's Df was a step in the right direction, they just fooled it up with bad AF, too low pixel count, no manual focusing assistance, and overpricing.
Why do photographers not get satisfaction anymore. No NEX+7 valuable replacement, no better and pricey A mount cameras, no A7 for pure MF only without video, and so on. Where ever we look at the moment we read only about HD, 4.22, 4k, 60fps, and so on, simply video everywhere now. Since it seems impossible to make correct video and photo cameras in one, make separate perfect units for both markets like before, instead this apple/orange mixtures.
I do nowhere say it should have 24 mpix, despite that it is a pixel count that is excellent for a FF sensor, if Sony redesigns the 10 mpix sensor in APSC of Nikon's D200 in a 20 mpix FF, that would be a game changer, since that sensor had a rendering that was so good and even today my D200 shots impress me. It is a pity that D200 was limited to 600 ISO, same as is NEX-7 actually. Beyond that it was a noise battle. With today's sensor and software technology we could get a 20 mpix FF sensor that made a real hit. I look what the IQ is, and for me there is no reason that a 12 mpix FF will make anything better than a 6 mpix APSC, except for DOF and dynamic range given to FF. When Nikon D3/700 with 14 mpix came on market, I was impressed by its high ISO ability, but was deceived by the rendering all over, it where shots that where not better than my D40 shots and much inferior to my D200 shots in IQ at 200 iso. Iso 500 000 sound nice, but at what price?
you should read first. I say that a iso 500 000 clean on a 24 mpix sensor was real news, it would be a technological step forward in sensor technology. If you reduce the pixel count, and then rise Iso sensitivity, there is nothing spectacular. It just a balancing game, more sensitivity, less pixels, more pixels less sensitivity. There is not secret to get more light in a house, make bigger windows. If some day we can see clean shots with a 36 mpix sensor at 150000 ISO, then we can talk about a revolution. What we assist to with Nikon's 16 mpix and Sony's 12 mpix sensor game is just redistributing values to what is physically possible at this moment, nothing more, and for that there is no magic and no secrets. 12.2 mpix FF is just ridiculous for a photo camera, but what we have here is video camera for limited use (weak battery, no in camera 4k recording, no pdaf Af system) that is able to make photos as well with limited speed of 2.5 fps. Up to anyone to decide if it is what he needs.
In some way we take away on one side to give more on the other, we call that balancing values. It is a simple calculation, more pixels, less sensitivity, less pixel more sensitivity. So, all of you who are charmed, get one of those and be glad you made a huge progress in Photo and video tech. All is in the faith, without faith you can't be sanctified, that's known since ever anyway. We call that religion, and all religions want from you is your f...ing money, so does Sony.
After having photo cameras that shoot video, we have now a video camera that can shoot photos. How deep we have fallen in the last years. Maybe in a few years it will include a coffee maker, a phone and a TV modulator.
Tomorrow, Sony will officially announce the new A7S, 12 mpix FF, speedy AF like on a6000, 4k video. After that, let's see how fast Nikon will lose it's shoes with it's hyper expensive stuff when the first ISO 250000 clean shots appear on this forum.