Dimit: Uncompressed 14 bit raw ???No thanks...no need for 100 MB files for something won't even notice in 90% of the cases..
steelhead3 , wrong. Most MF cameras have low DR (check Dxomark) and don't need more than 12 bits. 16 bits is pure marketing nonsense.
Barney Britton, no he doesn't. There is absolutely no evidence that going from 12 bit to 14 bit gives you 2EV more DR. That's a claim you made up with no proof. If we follow your logic, then going from 14 to to 21 bits will give you 7 more EV, and obviously that's a ridiculous claim.
Operator: At least dpreview is honest enough to mark the article as "Featured Story". Sony must pay a lot for this advertisement.
But, makes perfect sense - in the moment they lose money with the mirrorless cameras. Let's see if A7r II will be a success (personally don't think so) ...
Thom Hgan is not a credible source. A few years ago he was claiming Soy is quitting with FF camera. The guy is just hot air.
ET2: Rishi doesn't know what he is talking about. Read this scientific paper. 14 bit is waste of disk space with no benefit.
Yes bur Rishi seem to claim 2EV difference for 14 bit raw which is complete nonense
Rishi doesn't know what he is talking about. Read this scientific paper. 14 bit is waste of disk space with no benefit.
The Straw Man: Cue the Canon haters and the FS7 price comparos. If you think $16,000 is overpriced, you're clearly not the target. This is going to be THE camera for news, reality TV, commercials, documentaries and low budget films - basically the categories the Cinema line currently dominates.
The C100/300 was/is a huge hit, the Mark II drops with 4k, new AF, better codec, 10-bit internal, more DR, more color settings and so on. Plus the lens ecosystem is far better than Sony. And you don't get the ugly Sony colors.
Looking forward to footage.
Bloom doesn't use AF at all and he said it repeatedly. Bloom also thinks FS7 is superior camera ..
From his twitter account
" it doesnt equal. it doesnt even reach"
What Bloom is saying there is that C300 Mk II doesn't equal FS7 and doesn't even reach FS7
Dan Chung also owns FS7
FS7 is not only half the price but does 4K at 60 fps. C300 only does 30 fps 4K
E-mount can not oly use all Canon lenses, but it can use speedbooster adapter, giving it full-frame look, something C300 cannot do due to the mount limitation.
FS7 can use not only Canon lenses, but also Nikon, and Leica M mount lenses, PL lenses, and native e-mount lenses, all at same time. The user isn't stuck to one mount.
C300 does 120 fps only in crop mode. FS7 does 180s fps in full sensor mode.
This is really no contest.
FS7 wins easy
By The Straw Man : "vastly superior AF. "
What AF? C300 cannot AF in video mode. And even if did, the pros don't use AF during videos.
FS7 can not only use all Canon lenses, but it can also use Canon lenses with speedbooster, giving it full-frame look. C300, due to mount used, cannot use speedbooster adapter.
No charger is listed as con, but A7s comes with two batteries external charger. It's not A7 and A7r
Here is A7s unboxing.
Papi61: It probably cost Canon $1k to make, so they have lots of room to deflate the price. Personally, I wouldn't buy it if they sold it for $2k. And it's not because I'm a Nikon shooter, but because the Samsung NX1 is so much better at 4k filming.
1Dc weighs 1.5 KG and FS7 is 1.8 KG. That isn't that big difference.
ChuckTa , FS7 records 4K internally, 10 bit, instead of 8 bit, and 60p (instead of 30 on Canon) and can do 1080p slow motion up to 180 fps, ,XLR ports for proper audio, built in grip, peaking and other video related features (Slog3, zebra), has E-mount and costs about the same as discounted 1DC. It can also behave like FF (DoF and field of view) with speed-booster.
MASTERPPA, mirrorless cameras with shorter flange can adapt Canon lenses, easily, including electronic connection between camera and lens.
So infact, for video at least where AF might not be relevant, mirrorless cameras have far more lenses than Canon mount cameras.
Ergo607: What is flickr?
Your rambling is totally irrelevant. The post is about what kind of cameras are most popular on flickr, and given that flickr has millions of users, it's a relevant statistics about overall popularity of cameras.
Chaitanya S: Is that 90mm Macro a IF and weather sealed lens? in that case I might just go for the Sony A7 and that lens for my carry around camera.
All FE lenses are WR
Jogger: Sony A6000 looks best to me, esp. RAW and fine detail.
balios, these shots are taken at F5.6 .. all these lenses exceed sensor resolution at that step down aperture, so what you are saying is completely irrelevant.
Nick8: As a DxO believer, I noticed that Canon G7X has a higher DxO Overall Score than Sony RX100 III (71 vs 67).It is not a big difference in practical terms, but still an accomplishment, IMO.
Plastek , all modern Sony's sensors (starting with 12 MP CMOS sensor) have built in A/D converter built in in the sensor. Look it up. This is a known fact.
Some cameras may apply raw NR (such as Pentax) that may inflate the scores, but there is not much to do here. There is also color filter that might change the result (a weaker color filter would result in higher DR scores at the expense of color separation, ie some of Nikon cameras). That's about it.
AussieBarb: What about including the Ricoh GR in this line-up? You rated it highly.
GR has F2.8 fixed lens, but given most of these compacts are F1.8 at wide angle, the larger sensor advantage pretty much disappears. The only thing that is left is that the camera has no zoom and worse video..
dxomark scores are based on raw, not on imaging processor. And given the difference is less than 5 points, that means the difference is less than 1/3 stops, as 5 points equal 1/3 stop according to their site,. That means the difference is within margin of error.
stormy_weather: "The a7 II is the world's first full-frame camera with in-body image stabilization" ... really?