Same concept as the old Contax AX, which focuses by moving the film plane. In this case, it moves the lens towards/away from the sensor plane. Nothing new, really.
Zvonimir Tosic: As some suggested, I shall too; with this insane resolution, they could have gone wider, 28mm or 24mm lens. And for this relatively small camera with nothing to grab on, how increased number of pixels will affect image quality? This camera will register even smallest hand or camera shake — is the lens stabilised?
Harold66, so are you trying to say that you don't move at all when taking pictures? If that's the case, you need a zoom lens, not a fixed focal length.
What is the practical difference between a 40mm and a 35mm? Virtually zero. If you have to nitpick between a 5mm difference, you can always adjust by moving what's called your legs ;).
It actually reminds me of the Sony A900, especially he pentaprism.
35mm is the classic "street" photography focal length, halfway between a normal lens (50mm) and a wide angle. You will hardly need stabilization with this focal length (the traditional formula is to match shutter speed with focal length so with 35mm, you need 1/35 seconds or faster shutter speed)unlike a tele lens. Of course there are always exceptions.
papa natas: At ISO 409 600...Can it be used by radiographers?Can it read minds?I mean it's so dark inside my head....What can one shoot at ISO 409 600?
maybe it will know if you have gone to the 'dark side'...
This might just be the first camera in the world that can capture ghosts straight out of the box. Some Chinese company is going to come up with an add-on that will make it a portable CT-scanner and can actually measure how big your kidney stone is.
Chris Weller: Am I the only one that thinks a version of this sensor is going to end up in a Nikon DSLR by Christmas anyway?
Even if it doesn't, while this camera certainly has a bunch of great new technology as a Nikon shooter who primarily shoots sports, wildlife (birds mostly) and my kids running around, this camera cannot compete with a Nikon D810 or a 750 or a d4 for any of those types of photography.
They don't have serious telephoto lenses, I'm guessing the AF will still not be close to as good (which is absolutely critical for that type of photography).
And for the IQ geeks (like I would have to think you are if you buy a 42 MP camera), the 11+7 bit Raw thing cripples this camera. Which makes it inferior to the D810 for Landscape and Portraiture.
It's a really nice camera, but my belief is that it falls short of the best camera Nikon offers for every single major type of photographic type (sports, wildlife, portraits, landscape.
I might be in the minority, but I also prefer OVF
Sony DOES have a 500mm f4 and a 300mm f2.8 in A-mount, which works fully with E-mount with the LE-A adapters.
If the new PDAF system works a swell as the one in the A6000, then there is no reason why anyone can't get more than decent pictures of the subjects you mentioned.
RandyPD: ..and they had to go with almost the exact same shape as the GoPro...I see a lot of originality here..
There are many shapes of cameras. If you look at these 'action POV' cameras, there is basically only one manufacturer who adopts a 'squarish brick' shape and that is GoPro. Others have a separate lens attached via dongle to a the recording unit, others have a camcorder format. So basically they copied the GoPro size. If they did it to take advantage of the GoPro popularity and USE accessories meant for the GoPro, so be it. I'm just saying they have no imagination (which is true).
..and they had to go with almost the exact same shape as the GoPro...I see a lot of originality here..
Just another Canon shooter: Thank you for that comparison.
At ISO 3200, the noise levels are more or less the same but the 5D3 and the A7R images have more detail. At ISO 6400 maybe - maybe, the A7S has some slight advantage. Above that, the shadow cast destroys the 5D3 and the A7R images.
That's simply the higher MP of the two cameras coming into play.
Uhmm...isn't that ISO shoe kinda like Sony's?
I wonder if the reviewer used any adapters with a an AF confirm chip on it...I used one for m42 lenses and it helps in lower light.
Serious Sam: Just love so far what all the Sony fan boys says about this camera. I don't own an A7 or A7R but there is enough review on the net to give us some idea.
I get extremely annoyed when fan boys say things like “It is not the equipment’s fault, you have to custom to it…” Ah… it doesn’t bloody focus correctly and that’s my fault OMG.
About the focus peaking, if I pay 2K for an FF body, I will expect the system to work. This is a standard feature for all mirrorless. My crappy G5 can focus peaking in almost any condition. Why can’t a 2K Sony do that? I have never been an NEX fan and I guess I never will be.
All those of you who glorify about how good you expensive Canon/Nikon glass work on A7, read what he is writing. He is using some cheap lens and looking at whether A7 is good platform to use it. I never understand why you want to mount Nikon/ Canon lens on a non-native body. Then again one reason why people is doing this, because the FE lens range is crap.
I think one of the main challenges for focus peaking for the A7/A7r is that the DOF for full frame is way less compared to 4/3s. The G5, even at wide open apertures, you can get good sharpness across the whole frame.
If the sensor size won't make you look like a 'pro', maybe the camera size will...
Might as well buy the regular DSLR lenses and get adapters..
zigi_S: To all you sony fanboys out there. SLT isn't the same tech as on sensor pdaf. SLT still has a mirror! And it's nothing new. The SLT concept is old and only a desperate manufacturer like SONY would try to market it like inovation. It will be funny when mew canon M models will AF much better than the NEX system. Where will be the new tech from sony then? Sony's on sensor PDAF is inferior to CANON's. It loses light!
The A77 is a much older camera and on sensor PDAF has been implemented on the A99 (more as a supplement to the regular AF system). The A99 is also older than the Canon 70D.
marike6: The best show in TV since The Sopranos and a good read but to say that "film was never sharp" totally discounts something like a 4x5 contact print or a drum scanned Velvia slide. And sharpness is but only one aspect of IQ: DR, smoothness of gradations, color fidelity, grain are all equally important.
He didn't say film was never sharp. He said film was "never THIS sharp". Meaning digital was just sharper.
Michael Ma: Fill lighting will be a concept for the history books since we can just slide a lever in the near future. I'm guessing it's gonna take many updates to photoshop to get this right, but it will happen eventually.
Next up, maybe we can add IR sensitive senors that capture a 3D representation of objects so we can add lighting in a 3D space. Also with that 3D information, we can selectively blur objects based on different distances. We can shoot with a deep dof, but recreate a shallow dof shot in post. The Microsoft Kinect already does this with a separate camera. Why not just add those sensors to the RGB sensor now that we got room to play with?
The Lytro already has this technology, where you can select the focus point after you have already taken the picture..