GSD_ZA: I prefer to put my lens-caps on my lenses
Yeah, but that is a long shutter speed to make up for that kind of density.
bluevellet: Eradicate is such a strong word. The example presented show reflections are still quite visible, just less so than before.
They said "aims to" eradicate, not "does" eradicate. The technology has not been releases to the masses, so there is probably more work they intend to do.
princecody: What's the point of this camera when you have the Nikon D810 & Sony A7r? Is Canon just saying mine is bigger than yours?
A capable camera is more than just the number of pixels on a sensor.
More resolution from the largest stable of lenses?..maybe? These lenses don't fit Nikon, and adapting to Sony is not really an option. There is more to camera systems than the body. The same could have been said about Nikon and Sony (or Minolta) as the first camera to reach 16MP was a Canon D1 something or other, i do believe.
Michael MacGillivray: It escapes me as to why DP Review offers a review -- "first impressions", or otherwise, on a BETA version of a new camera. I'd suggest waiting until you have the real deal, before providing information that may only be "representative".
I would wager if Canon thought there would be any significant change in IQ, they would not have provided DP review with a review copy that may not represent their newest camera accurately. if DPreview waited, they would be beaten to the punch by other reviewers testing the same thing, and any or may not be disclosing it. All the while random posters complain about the lack of coverage for said camera.
antares103: The Note 4 is the latest iteration of Samsung's top-end line of so-called 'phablets'
and yet, it still doesnt support DNG on Lollipop.
The point is it CAN*, but it doesn't. I know iPhones can't either, but I don't consider iPhones an aspiration device. Still prefer my phone over any other, but quite dissapointed in this.
(*caps added for emphasis. I know the word CAN is not an acronym)
The Note 4 is the latest iteration of Samsung's top-end line of so-called 'phablets'
rramjit: Ridiculous review or comparison to omit the Note 4, unless it's because falls in the Phablet category. The Note 4 is the God of selfies. I regularly leave IPhone users gaping at my wide angle selfie.
Ah, obviously spoken from one who has a face for radio, and a voice for silent movies.
ChrisKramer1: Well I (and I suspect millions of others) gave up on Sony because they didn't produce any lenses for the NEX system. After using the G7X for a week or so, I have to say I see no further need for these mirrorless cameras.
"millions of others". Ridiculous. Even for hyperbole, this is absurd. And even if true, "millions of others" didn't give up on Sony, and they are selling quite well.
What E series lens were you waiting for that the G7x now fullfills?
Steve in GA: I’ve never really understood the fascination with the mirrorless concept. Other than offering a smaller body size than a DSLR with a comparable sensor, what advantages does mirrorless offer?
On the other hand, there seem to be a lot of mirrorless disadvantages when compared to DSLRs. For example,
a) DSLR technology is mature. It works, and it works well for almost any conceivable photographic need. Can mirrorless improve on this?
b) The existing catalog of lenses available for major brand DSLR’s is enormous. What can mirrorless possibly offer to compete with the hundreds of, e.g., Canon and Nikon lenses available for APS-C and full-frame DSLRs?
To me, a fairly advanced amateur who used to do pro wedding work back in film days, mirrorless seems like the answer to a question that no one asked.
Horses and buggies had centuries on the automobile. "maturity" is a false advantage. Much of this technology can be carried over to MLC, plus technology from Video and p/s cameras (particularly focusing and EVF). While there may be distinct advantages today with DSLR vs MLC (for some shooting aspects), the advantage is dissipating for tomorrow. Furthermore, if there is no way to improve on the existing lenses with so much heritage, then why are there version "II"s coming out all the time? MLC cameras are perfect for the GAS sufferers, as well, as you can fit more crap in the same size bag, and the spouse thinks it costs less, because it is smaller. :)
"Nikon has, admittedly, made more of a go of it than Canon, producing 10 Nikon 1 series bodies since 2011"
really?! Wow. I would have guessed maybe 6. maybe. The only one I have really thought was noteworthy was the underwater one.
IMO, if you cant fit a wireless remote (with or without an adapter), the camera is a non-starter for me.
Carlos Velasquez: My origianl M doesn´t have Wi-Fi. Is mine the only one?
Clint Dunn: Much ado about nothing IMO. It's really pretty simple....Full frame will ultimately give you better image quality.A) Can you afford itB) Are you a good enough photographer to exploit the quality afforded by larger format cameras.
Or, do you want to futz with it? A pain in the ass camera is more likely to be left behind, and we all know the best camera is the one you have with you.
I can certainly agree that Full frame is not always the ultimate end point to aspire to. I thought it was and bought only FF lenses and such. Then I got tired of carrying so much crap, and invested in mirrorless APSC stuff, and could not be happier. I would say the same could be said for fast glass. 2.8 or wider is not always the best lens for a job. This is the same as saying the largest and fastest car is always the best. I would counter that downtown where speed is restricted and parking a large car is troublesome is a case where this is not true.
I will say that buying full frame lenses in anticipation of going (or maybe going) full frame in itself is not a problem. But people need to be aware that they will need to shift their expectations.
mosc: I actually think the reverse upgrade path makes more sense. There's no reason FF cameras can't utilize APS-C glass effectively. The 36 MP D810 functions very nicely as a 16mp APS-C camera and you get every bit of use out of the lens it was built for.
Think about it. The FF lens on an APS-C body is overly expensive, large, and poorly placed for focal distance. The APS-C glass on the FF body has all the capabilities of the lens including appropriate focal distances, still saves on weight and cost, and the FF body's usability advantages are all still there. In fact, it's a wonder more FF guys don't use more APS-C glass! That Sigma 18-35 f1.8 works very comparably on a D810 to a 24-70 f2.8 FF lens. So too does the APS-C telephoto cheapys offering quite a bit of reach for a lot less money than a cheap FF tele lens with a teleconverter.
If you have two formats to juggle, clearly you want to prefer APS-C glass not FF glass.
You cant put a Canon EFs lens on a EF camera. This only works with Nikon and Sony. Also, some APS lenses will still cover FF image sensors, though I am sure it is a bother figuring out which do and at what focal lengths.
KavehNik: I just purchased a new a5100 kit and i was so excited to use the RAW mode capabilities on Aperture. However, i was disappointed to discover that my .arw file format was not recognized by aperture. So, I went on a wild goose chase trying to figure this out and realized that Apple has recognized .arw files for a5000 and a6000 but not a5100. so I am wondering how could the .arw file be any different shot on a a5100 than the others. This could be a major factor in keeping or returning the camera for me. Am I missing something here? How long before Apple recognizes a5100 and add to that list? Does anyone have a similar experience and found a solution?Thank you
Does apple support the DNG format? The arw format can be converted to DNG and used as a raw file.
And yes, this happens to every new released camera, regardless of brand or editing software.
exdeejjjaaaa: and Sony w/ its stupid hot shoes was left behind
However, I would like to see compatibility with older minolta flashes, like the 4000AF. This compatability can possibly carried forward to the F60M, given the right adapter.
You dont know that the new Sony compatible receiver wont also have the connectors for the other brands as well. There is no reason a remote cant have both.
mosc: when was the last announcement of an A mount lens before this?
last year in Novemberhttp://www.dpreview.com/products/timeline?year=2013&category=lenses
Edgar_in_Indy: I hope this camera finally starts to put pressure on Canon and Nikon to offer IBIS.
It's so obvious that not offering IBIS is just a way to get more money. I can't believe they've been able to get away with it for so long, but apparently their customers have been happy to double-dip, and to buy larger, heavier, more expensive, more complicated lenses, with more possible points of failure, and with compromised optics vs non-stabilized designs.
And the the fact that Sony's IBIS can be combined with optical stabilization is very exciting. I've been speculating for years about whether that would be possible, so I'm glad to see somebody implementing it. I can't wait to see how it performs.
Also, these ratings are just the median time before failure. This means half die before and half die after this stated time. So at 250K shutter actuations, one out of every two shutters have died. This could have been spread evenly from 1-249,999 actuations, or it could be centered around 90K actuations with only a few taking the figure up to the 250K. So this figure is not as telling as many make it out to be. Even if the stabilization mechanism was somewhat less robust than the shutter, it does not add much (if anything) to the cost of the camera, and 1-2 repairs are cheaper than stabilization on even a few lenses, even if you had to rent a camera while one was being serviced.