cybm: I think A7 is a nice "first" try from Sony,obviously it has to be improved to make it as a TOP product. Even its a full frame machine now (because of things I mention below) I would choose Olympus OM-D EM1 as a hobby photographer.
The most important things should be implemented / improved:- built-in stabilization (sensor shift)- touch-screen- speed up and improve the focus speed and accuracy (weak low light performance)
Focus is fast and more accurate then phase detectReally
aftab: It is an excellent camera for some, but useless for most.
Huh!This is one of the best cameras ever made.90% of photographers will be completely covered by the A7, and then some.
Apparently the Zeiss 55mm is too long for a normal lens, but the 55mm otis and 58mm Nikon aren't. Dpreviewer, an extra 5mm won't make you less attractive (Ho ho).Sorry to bother you with facts but the DOF of 55mm at 1.8 is practically the same as 50mm at 1.4, except the Sony Zeiss lens is actually good enough to use at 1.8, unlike the equivalent Nikon and Canon f1.4s. Sorry to burst your bubble!
Sam_Oslo: The RAW image quality is the most important aspect of such a camera, why is the reviewer keeping such a negative focus on JPEG quality?.
Firstly the jpg quality is great and fully adjustable in settings. Other review sites heavily praise the jpg.However, buying a camera like this to use the 8bit jpg format makes no sense. LR and other programs long ago conquered the work flow issues for jpg, even for journalists.
Sean65: Seems to me that Sony, Olympus,Fuji et al all started to grab market share by producing small cute cameras but are now slowing growing into small SLR cameras.
Lets face facts here, if you're serious about photography and want serious features you also want a camera that is comfortable to hold. and that is exactly why SLR design is so good.
Maybe we're seeing the end of cute retro at last.
SLR design is appalling, but it has no choice due to the bulky, noisy, heavy mechanical mirror box
The A7 is very small compared to FF DSLRs but feels so right in the hand and due to its weight it's not uncomfortable to carry around for hours in my hand.
attomole: It looks like they just decided to build the prototype, and it has some faults, (many fixable with FW though) But it has that full frame "pop" and fidelity smaller formats do not seem to quite deliver, After that the size comparison shot with the 6D tells you all you need to know, a camera this capable has never been this small.
Which features are "Prototype" ?I have used the D800E and E-M1 and the A7 feels like a mature product to me.
Anastigmat: Sony should hire somebody to design the body. Ever since the D900, they have the dubious distinction of being the brand with the least attractive full frame models on the market. The 7R carries on that tradition. It brings back the origami style seen in the Japanese autos of the 1970s. There are more lines and creases and folds than you can find on Keith Richard's face.
Come on. The A7 is very smart. The design is excellent, better then any DSLR on the market
Sam147: Are these reviewers having a laugh? Why would you buy such a camera if you are going to re edit the jpeg files and save them again? Thats how you judge a camera of this class? Baffling
"The processor Sony seems to work with very efficient algorithms, superb control of noise and minimal loss of detail, much better than Nikon in this respect, increasing the sense of sharpness and overall contrast." - Photomagazine
Gordon Laing: “…the out-of-camera JPEGs from the A7 looked superior to the 5D3, at lower sensitivities anyway. In the 20-24 Megapixel class, I’d say the A7 is an excellent performer.”
Imaging Resource is even more emphatic: “Sony seems to have finally gotten a handle on their in-camera JPEG processing, to the extent that they now lead the field, in our estimation.”
SureThe consensus is that dpreview wanted to give the A7 a bad review for some reason.Perhaps Sony does not pay them as much via the gear shop.Many comments make no sense to owners who have oher cameras, like me (e-m1, D800e, etc.)
The e-m1 is the same size, weight and price.The sony handling is better (I have used both, at most it's a taste thing), the e-m1 has slightly faster focuses (but still hunts in low light)The sensor is far inferior compared to the A7, it even has noise in base ISO.Yet dpreview describe its IQ as excellent and yet the A7s as very good.For sure something is going on with this review.
yslee1: Oh wow, look at all the butthurt from the Sony fanboys and A7 owners... even though the review actually states that it's a good camera. Seems that they won't be satisfied until DPReview screams at the top of their lungs (and in all caps) that THIS IS THE BESTEST CAMERA EVER SELL YOUR DSLRS NAO
THat is correct, it is he best camera ever.And most of us have used the othersIt's curious why his review is so biased.I guess time will tell why
Avobanana: Fair points are made about ergonomics and speed. But the reviewer is clearly biased.
But like many others I cannot understand the persistent negative undertone and bias against the camera. One of the camera's biggest strength is the image quality in RAW mode and yet the reviewer chose to chime on and on about the JPEG quality. In the EM1 review, the reviewer praises the impressive image quality which isn't even in the same league. They cost almost the same, no?
Either Dpreview is losing its objectivity or something shady is going on.
CorrectThe e-m1 is the same size, weight and price.The sony handling is better, he e-m1 has slightly faster focuses (but still hunts in low light)The sensor is far inferior compared to the A7, it even has noise in base ISO.Yet dpreview describe its IQ as excellent and the A7s as very good.For sure something is going on
RichRMA: Why is it Sony and Fuji can't do AF in mirrorless as well as Olympus and Panasonic?
They seem to be better, what are you reading ?I have had all these cameras BTW
DT200: So the D600 is better at virtually everything. Better raw files (by dxo scores), better jpegs, better focusing accuracy, better low light focusing, better focus tracking, faster operation, faster fps, better grip, a real ovf, no vf delay, and almost anything you can think of except size... but once you put one of those $1000 lenses on the a7 or use an adapter the size thing almost disappears. As for legacy lenses the d600 wins there in many ways too because it can auto focus hundreds and hundreds of them by many different manufacturers.
The D600 is better at virtually nothingThe A7 has better build, better handling, better controls, higher IQ, better lenses, smaller, lighter and more features.The A7 focus is very fast, the D600 is slightly faster, that's all
munro harrap: It is very slow, its shutter lag is dreadful (Imaging-Resource A7R)Measured pre-focussed lag is 0.163 secs, and manual focus lag (for all those legacy lenses raved about), is a staggeringly slow 0.261 secs. So no way except for still life will you ever get the picture YOU took.
My mirrorless Sony R1 from 2005 has a prefocussed shutter lag of 0.007 secs, over TWENTY_THREE TIMES FASTER.
Now, as there is no earthly reason why this should be (DSLRs full-frame ones with mirrors were managing 0.039 (1D) and 0.042-0.057 (1ds 1dsMkii, D2x D3 D3x etc ) years ago, Sony is again like so many other companies determined to make you spend and spend by upgrading, because they will sort this out, one, or two, or three models on, instead of having done it now, just as everyone held off putting in dust control , full-frame sensors etc for years and years.Its called programmed obsolescence, duh!!
So the R1 is still a better machine, and its 24-120mm lens is superb. Yours for £200!!
No, the A7 is a very fast camera.For sure it's slightly slower then the e-m1 and some top DSLRs but the review is totally wrong hereAnd yes, I have used all these cameras
dachshund7: I must be missing something, probably because I like the size of my Canon 6D and I don't mind its weight. Is that the whole point, to get a smaller camera to go with your lenses? But many of the lenses would require adapters, and might not auto focus? It just seems like a quite a kluge just to put a smaller form in your hands, with a reduction of features, and a hefty price tag.
The sony FE lenses are awesome and it has more features then the 6D.I agree, this is a rubbish review. Over critical and concentrating on non-issues (I.e. A battery charger is £40, the review implies you can't get one - just plain silly)
bwana4swahili: Nice camera overall BUT VERY DISAPPOINTED in the lack of a good wired/wireless/Camera App for long exposure time lapse images!! Long exposure being in excess of the 30 sec the camera is capable of. An absolute necessity for nightscape and astro photography where imaging session of 20-30x5min or 20-30x10min are not uncommon.
Don't understandYou can use a remote control, even from an android or iPhone
RStyga: A7 is a groundbreaking product in terms of compactness to IQ ratio. It is ideal for using very small lenses, either FE mount or other 'compact-lens' mount such as Leica M39/M.The problem is that adapters come at a rather significant IQ cost in the lens periphery due to manufacturing tolerances (http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/09/30/roger-cicala-investigates-accuracy-of-lens-adapters) and compact FE lenses are not yet available (except for the 35/2). Also, when compact FE lenses become available they will probably be very expensive (so much for touting an inexpensive camera body), judging from the price of the 35/2.So, A7, as a camera, is great (save some ergonomics and construction quality issues) but, as a system, the jury is still out.
There are no construction issuesBest rgds
ZhanMInG12: Just building on some reasons why DP thinks the A7 is not a good camera
1. You need to buy a $50 official charger or $10 knockoff to avoid plugging the camera in to charge it.
2. You can’t control minimum shutter speed in Aperture priority mode, and have to use manual mode with auto ISO to set whatever shutter speed you want.
3. The jpegs have too much noise reduction, which can, um, be turned off in the menu.
4. The default controls are bad, but can be easily customized
5. No built-in flash, despite the vast majority of FF bodies not having one.
6. Wifi implementation is not mature at the desktop side, but mobile wifi live view works like a charm.
7. New, high-performing lenses are expensive.
What an awful, crappy camera!
As 35mm and 55mm (50mm) are 90% of what people shoot! where sony has done us proud! and 24-70 and 70-200 are just about to come out with 10 more lenses this year I am struggling to to know why any other systems lens is necessary.The fact that the A7 can take any other system lens but DSLRs are severely limited is an advantage.
iamatrix: What is dpreview smoking these days ? First they diss the DF now this ? The pictures look so much better than Fuji and Olympus yet the editors seem to drool over these highly overrated camera systems. I guess it's no surprise especially when they gave a gold star to the Canon SL1 for being the first camera to incorporate a 1998 sensor in a small SLR body.
Yeah right, like virtually every review on the internet. All out of step and only the dpreview is in step.Time out on dpreview being the most forumed camera siteWe need to find somewhere else to go
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."
imaging-resource and dpreview as massive rivalsthis is no surprise