osv: wrt a7r jpeg image compression, a quote from imaging-resource.com:""Dave Etchells Mod• 3 months agoHi Yaj - Yes, amazingly enough, these are just in-camera JPEGs. I think by far the best in-camera processing we've seen from any camera to date. This always used to be an achilles heel for Sony, but they've really outdone themselves on the 7/7R. They made a point of this in the initial NDA briefing, pointing out that they were able to produce *very* sharp images, with no halos or "outlines" as they called them from the sharpening process. Very impressive."
They briefed us on the same feature. Sadly our real-world experience just don't seem to live up to the promise of the the sample images they showed us.
Out of context, I can't tell what image Dave is talking about, but overall, we don't share that enthusiasm for the processing.
quezra: Page 14 of the review, under Overall Image Quality you have an incomplete sentence: "Overall, they're not terrible, but we're disappointed to see such limited..." Are there supposed to be swear words here that got censored out or something? :D
No, not swear words. It would seem my over-tired brain wandered off as I was writing that.
sillette: Can not understand what he means when stating that aperture priority always gives a 1/60 sec shutter speed. It will if the correct exposure is 1/60 at whatever aperture is set. The answer: set a larger aperture. I use aperture priority all the time (most of the time) when using manual focus lenses on my Nex 5 or EOS M and have no problem with the camera setting the correct shutter speed to suit the light. When a manual focus/aperture lens is used the camera automatically changes the shutter speed (or ISO, if set to do so). Of course the A7 may operate in a different manner to the NEX.
Yes, there are work-arounds, but most other modern cameras offer more control over the Auto ISO threshold (eg Nikon, which lets you manually select a shutter speed or one of three 'Auto' settings).
By no means does this make the camera unusable, but the Auto ISO system is a little primitive, compared to its peers.
That said, if it were me, I might be inclined to shoot the way le_alain suggest.
The problem is the really simplistic Auto ISO implementation, which uses 1/60th as its lower threshold almost all of the time.
quezra: The question I'd like to ask Barney - which camera has he shot that shoots third party lenses better?
@quezra - we *absolutely* understand the relevance of a (comparatively) affordable camera that lets you use other lenses with their intended field-of-view. That's exactly why we has someone spend time shooting with them, evaluating the usefulness of the tools provided.
For instance (as has been noted on previous Sonys) the focus peaking is tuned such that, when you magnify live view, you often need to stop and switch to a different level of intensity, which is hard to do.
The point is that anyone thinking of buying it needs to know how well it does or doesn't work - knowing that you've bought a piece of history seems like small comfort if it's annoying to use *as a camera*.
Ultimately, though, this isn't a review of the camera (less still a review of these particular lenses), it's a look at the experience of shooting with non-native lenses.
Astrophotographer 10: A surprisnigly negative review. The reviewer clearly is biased against Sony. The excellent manual focusing ability of this camera - the best out there - is suddenly no good.Not my experience at all.Who tests an A7/r with junk legacy lense as well???How about the beautiful Zeiss, Contax g, Contax Yashica, Canon FD, Nikon AIS, Leica R lenses. The images posted from these are stunning.
Noone in their right mind is going to use a 17mm Vivitar which is a lens unsuited to this camera which the reviewer obviously does not know.A hatchet job of reviewing.
@Tone Row - it's more like trying to fit a pair of bald tyres to a Subaru and finding that it's more tricky than you'd expect to change wheels, and that the speedometer suddenly stops working - it's not necessarily the traction of the tyres that's being investigated.
DanielFjall: Where did the picture of the X-E1 with the attached grip go?
We'd never put one in the article (just as the front page image), so it has never really 'gone' anywhere.
But, just for you, I've added one.
timo: Kind of weird poll. Meaningless. One way of attracting website hits though. Plus it has the virtue of obscuring the seemingly embarrassing fact of the K3 coming out top in its centrally important category.
I don't feel the level of interest I used to have in DPR - the commercial imperative seems closer to the surface than in earlier times.
mauritsvw - we have always done all we can to ensure advertising has no influence on editorial policy. Advertising isn't discussed, factored-in or even known about when we're deciding what to write about or when.
The main factors affecting the order in which we review things are: availability of cameras, availability of reviewers and how many people we think will find a review interesting.
eaa: Min. aperture F16?That is not normal for an FF lens, where F22 or 32 are the norm.Why a min aperture even below the diffraction limit?Must be a typo (like the initially wrong weight (85 gr), now corrected to 470 gr.
If the aperture figure is in error, Sigma's made the same mistake.
sgoldswo: I responded to one of Richard Butler's messages back to me below, but I thought I would post this as a new message so it gets seen:
One of the D600 bodies I owned had a duff AF module. It did work, but focus was a hair slower with AF-S lenses (almost imperceptibly), but more importantly the camera was prone to hunt in low light. I was only sure it wasn't working properly when I tried I with some AF-D lenses, where at least 50% of the time it wouldn't focus at all. I'm left wondering if that's what was wrong with the Df body DPR tested.
I think it would be worthwhile retesting AF with another body.
I'll ask Nikon for one when I'm back in the office. If our review does turn out to be based on a mis-functioning unit, we'll amend it.
marike6: From Preview day, I knew DPR was going to give this camera a bad review but few could foresee that they would totally pile on ridiculously pedantic Cons like:
* No two-button card format option* No time-lapse option
But if it has the same AF module as the D610 and D7000 I can't imagine AF would be any different. Besides in extremely low-light the center point AF point (or other cross-type sensor points) is your friend.
Anyway, just like I take their Gold Awards for mediocre cameras like the SL1 or the absurdly small GM1 with a grain of salt, I'd be inclined to take this Df review with similarly small grain of salt. After all, when you call a camera "silly" on Preview day, you then need to back it up in your review.
We'll ignore the fact that the preview and review were helmed by different people.
km25: I the AF really that bad in low light? If it is why have camera that is good in low light? I think the camera is over priced by a lot. A split image on the focusing screen is really needed with the older lens, as a matter of fact interchangeable would be best. The camera has too may problems to be corrected by firmware.
I like the idea, maybe Df ll. 20MP, better AF, interchg. focusing screens and a grip.And all the stuff in the review to bad.
Is this camera silver, gold or what?
Further to that point - lots of people will buy the Df because of its traditional controls and will love it because of them. Equally, you shouldn't be surprised to find that people who have spent a lot of their money on a product like it more than people who haven't - it's human nature (and a well studied psychological effect).
I agree entirely with Thom Hogan when he says people respond to this camera emotionally, so the practicalities of it won't really matter to them. But, as a reviewer, I have to at least try to see it as a rational alternative to a D610 or D800 and, for the reasons stated in the review, I just don't think it fairs well against either.
@sgoldswo - I've shot the D600 and D800 a fair bit, while Barney owns Nikons and used to shoot professionally with them. Both of us found the AF doesn't work as well as we'd expect in low light.
It's fast, but as soon as you move away from the centre point, it's not unusual to find the camera simply won't lock focus (and in focus priority this leaves you sitting there, finger on the shutter with nothing happening).
This seems to be the main point you disagree with about the review. We're happy to ask Nikon for another unit to check this against, but nothing about the Df's AF felt *broken*, just not quite good enough.
Greg VdB: I think this is a very fair review, well done DPR! I just wished that all "interesting" cameras were reviewed as quickly... (the K-3 definitely deserved the same level of priority, if not more so because it is potentially a very important camera for a much wider audience!)
@Greg VdB - looking at the number of people reading our content and searching for the camera on our site, I'm afraid it simply isn't true that the K-3 has a much wider audience (even if it ends up selling more).
The K-3 is also a much more complex camera in many regards, which meant it would have been impossible to review before CES.
At which point the choice is: concentrate on the most discussed, searched and read-about camera of the year in time for Christmas, or write half a Pentax review and publish nothing until late January.
It's not a difficult decision, nor one based on brand preference.
The image quality is very good, which is what keeps the score high. The lower marks it gets for ergonomics and AF performance (which are most of the things wrong with the camera), don't make a big dent in that.
However, the overall reviewer's summary (the award), can more readily factor that in.
aarif: After using it for 20 days I disagree with few point
1)AF coverage might be a bit small but its accurate fast even in low light I also use the D600/D3s2)does not show battery life true but the battery is very impressive 2000 shots easily3)light weight making it easy to carry around
It has a simple 4-bar battery indicator on the shoulder LCD, it just doesn't let you check the % charge or number of times that battery has been charged (as the D610 does, for instance).
@aarif - focusing is highly lens dependent but I've not had much luck getting the camera to focus in even moderately low light (especially with the 50mm F1.8). If shot in all-points, 3D mode it's better but when trying to focus somewhere specific, it sounds like we've had a very different experience from you.
ravduc: The battery door on mine has never fallen off and the silver has the same tone all over without any variations under all kinds of lighting. DPR you must have used a pre-production model and not the final production model.
Possibly because the door is so large on the Df (more leverage?) we've found ours falls off much more often than, say, D800, D600, D610. D7100...
If we hadn't seen people experiencing the same thing on the forums (suggesting it's not *just* the one we've tested), we probably wouldn't have mentioned it. However, since there's no battery grip available, it's odd to have a door that on *some* examples, at least, falls off.
With regards materials and finish - the BKT button on the side of this one is a very different silver tone (it looks like plastic) from the body panels. The front plate of the camera around the lens mount feels more like plastic than the mag-alloy top and bottom of the camera. The transition between a rubber grip on the back and faux-leather on the front just doesn't give off the sense of quality that I'd expect from a camera costing that much money.
It's about more than just the tone of silver.
harold1968: the conclusion and summary of this camera isn't particularly good.its not bad, its a good camera, but many people will form their own judgement based on cost and functionality.Nevertheless it gets 81%. I really don't understand that, simply that dpreview are completely inconsistent with their summaries and their scores.
@harold1968 - that's not a bad idea.
@completelyrandomstuff - that's exactly right. The scoring is as objective as possible and is weighted towards image quality. The award (or lack of it, in this case), is the overall summary from the reviewer's perspective.
Davidfstop: That was quick!!!
How long have most of the non canonikon users been waiting for reviews.
The Df has generated more interest than any other camera this year.
Also, we didn't prioritise it ahead of the Panasonic GM1, nor the Sony A7 and A7R, which are proving to be more complex, so their reviews are taking longer.
But other than trying to respond to reader interest and not putting it ahead of other 'non Canikon' cameras, your point stands.