Nikonparrothead: They use contract photographers now (Dave Black comes to mind) and will do that or take advantage of wire services. Heck, contract photographers have been shooting the swimsuit issue for how long now? Stock photography doesn't enter into it.
But I looked at a recent SI and it had virtuallyno advertising. I suspect a cutback to monthly is in its future as well.
I haven't bought a paper magazine in probably a decade, and going back further probably only a commemorative issue for some specific historic event. Almost everything I read nowadays is digital, even for work-related matters. So many professional and government journals are now online.
FinDERP: Perhaps a name change to reflect the new business model?
Samuel Dilworth: I have a feeling the horrible little α6000 is going to take this.
After using Nikon SLRs and DSLRs for more than 3 decades, my Sony A6000 is a breath of fresh air. Absolutely loving it.
I know what you say and i get your point, i think you miss my point, i am not a snob and i know how to use Photoshop.
Anyone can take a photo and manipulate it but there comes a point when you are not seeing what the eye sees and instead you are seeing a fantasy, nothing wrong with that, some of these photoshopped images look superb, some look overprocessed, as another example i am not keen on supermodels that get all their imperfections photoshopped away, beauty is of course in the eye of beholder and we all have different tastes.
Photography is all too often manipulated after the fact and done so aggressively, a little photoshop is fine but i think people go overboard with it these days, tools can be used for good but can also be used for bad and i prefer to see as little manipulation as possible.
I did wet darkroom using Ansel Adams Zone system techniques where the tonality of negatives were manipulated during film-development, and the print was manipulated with dodge-and-burn techniques, selection of paper grades, and toning in different chemicals. All that is now achievable digitally. I don't see anything different from what used to be done chemically. When you see a photograph like Ansel Adams' Moonrise Hernandez, that is unlikely what the eye viewed. The resulting photograph is art because it brings to bear the photographer's seeing skill, plus his craftsmanship to create a piece of art. Not sure if everyone appreciates that.
Paul Liukas: Great camera, great specifications, but lack of emotions like XT1. Camera like a brick too modern and too cold for me. If you are tired of pixel peeping like me and want to get a joy from photography, camera should be with soul :) Fuji will spoil many of us with soul and light lenses. I don't want to use D810 anymore, except for product photos (need)..
Anyway great job Sony!
Yes the XT1's external dials for S and A are useful, and I'd appreciate those being aded to the A7 design too. Selection of cameras are always a compromise.
I think the XT1 looks ugly, but I adore the Sony 7 series minimalistic looks. Among the Fujis, the X100 and X-E series look nice but the others look very tired. The XT1 looks like a battle tank, in all the wrong sense of that word.
ulfie: Nah... I'm waiting for the digital 8 X 10 camera with IBIS.
I'll settle for the day that technology gives us a small camera that can deliver the quality that 8x10 sheet film gives us. Film quality is fixed, but digital is inching closer towards that peak of the mountain. Who knows, in your grandkids' generation.
40daystogo: I'm just struck how close the Sony A7R is to the Pentax 645Z. For the dpreview test chart, I focus on the left hand side with the line-drawing of the group of people standing in front of the easel. The A7R is actually better than the Pentax 645Z, merely from resolving the detail of the black and white etching. Maybe the Pentax exceeds the A7R in other areas such as tonality, etc. But is it worth the significantly greater expense and massive weight increase?
It's a given that the medium format will be superior. The question is, is that extra IQ sufficient trade-off for the benefit of a substantially more portable set of equipment? Sure, at the micro level of the moire, the Pentax wins, but at a more macro level, such as the playing card, the Sony A7R seems to match the Pentax quite well. And presumably the gap could close even more with the rumored 50MP sensors coming out in the next generation A7R. Whatever it is, in a couple of years, the performance of the A7 series could start matching the Pentax. Of course the Pentax will also improve, but the Full Frame would have gotten to the point of "good enough" for even critical applications.
@Michael Piziak - yes, in response to your message, I did that. The portion I tested was the line drawing of the group of people looking at the artist's easel. The back of the easel has lots of lines that are evident in the Phase One test shot. Even at 400 ISO and 16000 ISO, the A7R seems better at resolving those lines that the Pentax 645Z. Comments?
Dabbler: Please let it have a reasonably quiet shutter, or a silent one as in the A7s?
The 3 features I was hoping for in the next generation A7 series were: faster focusing, quieter and even silent shutter like the Lumix GX7, and IBIS. I am in no hurry to upgrade, so am prepared to wait for the 3rd generation A7 to get the quiet shutter before I step into full frame.
Plus, lighter-weight lenses. I think the light weight can be achieved by making compromises of having lesser zoom range. For instance, the APS-C 10-18 achieves its light weight, I assume, by limiting the zoom range to 10-18 (i.e. 15-27 FF). That's a narrower range than the typical 18-35 or 16-35. By having a narrower range, which might be acceptable, we get much lighter lenses. Not everyone wants heavy lenses on their light A7 bodies.
Hi Erez, when taking multiple shots for a panorama, why did you take each of them vertically? Why did you not shoot in landscape-mode (rather than portrait mode) - which might have let you achieve the panorama with less shots? I assume it has something to do with minimising distortion or something like that? I've done a few panoramas and it seems like a hit or miss whether I achieve a balanced final stitched image that is not distorted out of recognition. Perhaps you can comment on the technique used to arrive at a nicely balanced panoramic stitch.
GoneMirrorless: IMHO, IBIS is more for crop cameras where focal lengths are longer. @ 24mm IS is not a big deal. @300mm it is. That's why most long zooms and many long primes already come with IS.
I have a Nikon DX 12-24 zoom without IS, and a Sony 10-18 OSS. I can tell you I really value to lens stabilisation especially in low light. If OSS wasn't beneficial, why did Sony add it to the top-of-the-range 16-35 Zeiss zoom?
Why would anyone carry a 910 gram Canon 7DII, when the latest Sony A7II slightly over half that, and is close to getting the same fast focus, maybe not in this A7 iteration but certainly in the next.
For users that need only a narrow range of lenses, the mirrorless solution seems better, and even that factor will be a moot point in a few years when given enough time to develop Sony's growing range of Sony and Zeiss lenses.
jhinkey: Anticipating the A7RII sometime in the next 6 months I may have to let the A7R go now. I've taken some great shots with it, but the lack of IBIS was limiting for some of the things I do. If the A7II fixes the sensor cover issues, has a less noisy shutter I might grab that in the mean time. The A7R was an experiment for me as a companion to my D800, but has not worked out as well as I had hoped for my style of shooting.
Bring on the innovation Sony - hopefully Nikon will take notice and finally get off it's a** and get a full-frame mirrorless out the door. If they do it can't possibly be any less capable than the A7R and like have far better ergonomics.
@Boss of Sony - WI BE SO PIKI.
Known Member: I really don't like incremental upgrades like this camera. I will be waiting for A9 which is coming out in Feb 2015!
Before the A7II announcement, for me there was a lens problem because I don't like using lenses without OSS/IBIS -- but now with the IBIS in the A7II there is no more problem of lack of lenses. I have a collection of old Nikon AI-S lenses.
rsf3127: Very nice upgrade from Sony.
But I believe Sony should listen more to their customer base in order to become a major player in the upper bracket of the photographic equipment market.
Why doesn't Sony show some respect for the A7 owners delivering a nice firmware update along with the new model? That would be awesome!
There are a few things that I would like to have. For instance: if I set Clear Zoom, I want it to become fixed if I turn on and off the camera, unless I change it again. That would be very easy in a future firmware.
I would also like to be able to set MF magnification in a single click of a button. Nowadays, it is a double click process (it was better in the NEXes).
Stabilized primes would also be a plus, even if the new bodies will have IS. That would show respect for early adopters of their FF mirrorless bodies.
I could not care less for the apps that where the main focus of the last firmware, although they may be of some importance for some user.
From Sony's diagrams in the launch literature, when using an OSS lens, the lens-OSS contributes 2 axes, while the body contributes 3-axes.
Whereas, when using a lens with no OSS, the body contributes all 5 axes.
That suggests to me that OSS always was inferior to full-5-axis IBIS. Hence, that agrees with your comment that 5 axis IBIS trumps OSS.
Auricom: Should they include these features in the A7s then I'b buy one even though it costs that much more!
That would be a killer-low light camera. Imagine - the already amazing A7S sensor that handles high ISO so well, and now add IBIS for using primes and legacy lenses. That would take an already superb low-light camera and make it shoot for the stars.
As for me, I'm waiting for the A7RII. With the 36MP, the reports were it is a beast to get sharp shots hand-held because of camera shake, so added IBIS will help in that respect.
I've heard that, now with IBIS, Sonly FE lenses should omit OSS in order to decrease the weight and size of the lenses. The biggest potential trump card of Sony's FE system -- over Nikon and Canon -- is weight saving, so it negates that advantage if many of Sony's lenses are roughly within the weight range of Nikon and Canon's. So I can see why you'd now want OSS in Sony primes, but consider the greater good to the majority of users who are not early adopters of the 1st generation A7 series.
I'm now really looking forward to the update A7RII, which can't be far away now.
By the way, the only thing that disappoints in the A7II is the increased weight, but I guess that was necessary, given the extra IBIS.