JahRastafari: Camera of the year is of course the magnificent Canon EOS 7D Mark II. With a whopping 84% review score, achieved despite a mediocre image quality from the year 2012.
Their marketing department possibly already has the "camera of the year" posters drawn up ready to print and send out to all the camera stores.Just in case it matters to someone, they'll be happy to take that money.
Peiasdf: OMG, the Olympus forum is going to mobilize like it did last year and secure all the top spots.
EDIT: hmm, not much stuff from Oly on the list. A dull year for Oly when competitors came out strong. A7S, A7 II, a6000, X-T1, NX-1, GM5. Next year there is the replacement for EM-5 so that will be exciting.
They've run enough Sony's to create "spoilers" and split up the votes on them. The A6000 and A5100 in one category and the A77II, A7II and A7S in another.
nudibranches: Idea is you will love the camera so much you will stump up $20,000 (or god knows how much) to buy it at the end of the month... :)
If that's the idea, why bother with the whole contest idea.Just have a "demo day" road trip.
spzphoto: Is there any information if the Mitros + will have any kind of cross brand compatibility?To be more specific, I would like to know if a Mitros+ for Sony can trigger a Mitros+ for Canon in manual mode or (even better) in TTL.
I already own a Mitros+ for Canon and I am thinking of getting a Sony a6000 as well. So if there is some sort of compatibility it would make my choice easier.
Sony's hot shoe can support a standard device.BUT, the foot on the flash is definitely not going to mount on anything else. And to support TTL on these units, I can't see how they could to that without adding the extra tab on the front of the "foot" to contact with the extra pins on the shoe. So, I'd think it's a safe bet that these flashes won't even physically mount properly on anything but a Sony MI shoe.And, will likely have issues mounting even in most cold shoes on light stands.
aris14: Ι hate proprietary flash shoes...
There is an industry standard define by International Organization of Standards (ISO 518). This is apparently not publicly distributed for free, but common belief is that it defines the size of the shoe and only a single pin electrical contact in the middle, with a ground on the sides. All this supports is physical mounting, and sync.Sony's multi-interface shoe fully support that standard.Nikon and Cannon, and just about everyone else also supports that. But all have added onto it for various reasons, power saving, TTL and HSS to name a few. But, I don't believe any of these features beyond sync is supported between any manufactures.The "foot" is an whole different story, and Sony does use a proprietary foot on flashes. They will not fit on any other manufactures shoe without taking a grinder to it. And I'm quite sure that foot is used on these new Phottix units, they would have to use it to support TTL.
The Sony MI shoe does support the "standard". It is of the correct dimensions, ignoring the extra pins in the front that do not interfere. And, it has the pin in the middle and the ground on the edge to fire any "standard" device.Of course, those extra pins in the front are what allows it to support TTL, GPS, WIFI, etc. (HSS?) which are all proprietary on any shoe.
Maverick_: This is when Bullsh*t hits reality. Granted consumers are idi*ts, but they aren't that dumb!
There are smart consumers and dumb consumers.
Guess which ones have enough money to afford one of those cameras they were "designing"?
ngc894: I have this camera and am just apalled with the kit lens. It is by far the worst kit lens I ever had. The distortion is terrible, the lens fallout at 16mm is very pronounced and the motorized zoom works miserably. It is almost imposible to acheive the wanted composition because the zoom motor moves so quickly that either the compositiion is too far, too close... and you should keep trying the zoom controls several times until you acheive something close to what you have in mind. All my compacts work better in this respect. I think this kit lens is a shame, and if you compare this camera with Fuji XA1, now for a bargain price, Sony is put to shame. Other than that the body will happily work with a Sigma 19, which is your best option. In any case I am returning it for a refund. To put such a bad kit lens in cameras like these I think is a disrespect to customers IMHO.Cheers
The 16-50PZ might not be the best lens I own. But it and the 20mm f2.8 are the only ones I own that fit in my pocket while mounted on the camera, and sometime the 20mm is just too wide.And looking through all the images I've taken with it, I'm satisfied with the quality. There certainly are better lenses available, I've had them, but the A77 w/ 16-50f2.8 was never going to fit into any pocket I had, jacket or otherwise.
maxnimo: Nice article. I just wish that first photo of the entire aircraft had been taken with something longer than a 2mm lens.
It's parked in a relatively small area packed in tight with a concord, 707 (former Air Force 1) and a 737, maybe one or two other aircraft I can't remember. There's likely no clear view of it from a distance to use a longer lens where it's currently parked, and no where to move it without huge effort (the runway is across the street).
It was a self portrait, all staged, really:).
OK, maybe I had a shot or two to make it more realistic. Or three. It wasn't the whole bottle. Really, it wasn't, that's a big bottle.
And the table had a red cloth covering it, with a yellowish, stucko kinda off while wall. The colors just didn't work, had to make black and white.
completelyrandomstuff: What prevents me from printing my own, unique, possibly better quality, backgrounds so I could crank out perfectly lit 'outdoor' portraits en masse? I don't think I understand their business model.
The idea could be quite useful for low quality, high throughput head shots, but there is no reason to buy it from this company.
I don't have a 4'x5' printer handy, and would image sending off a job to a professional shop that does, and could print on a surface that's as durable and portable as I would expect these to be might have a similar price.
mike schm: This is a beautiful picture! Please disregard the low votes. It seems some people will give extremely low scores to very good pictures just to assure that their submittal does good.
I actually liked many of the others better myself (no all of them, but a fair number), and think many of the votes I got were pretty fair, and voted other's higher than mine.
While I am glad you enjoy it, I preferred many of the sunny pictures myself, that just wasn't the kinda weather I had when I was out for this so I did the best I could with what I had.
Sounds kinda cool, but ultimately, in a studio, I would think a CNC like motorizes positioning system, probably mounted from the ceiling would be much more practical than a drone.
Wouldn't catch as much attention, I guess?
Gonini: What a coward and cheap move by Sony! So all of their cameras are overpriced? Proof that the company does not stand behind their products. Those defending the price cut (and sony) probably did not buy this camera at its overpriced original price!
Releasing the camera in the first place was a pretty bold move.Investing in the R&D to make it, taking the risk to develop the production tooling. All that invested to come to the market with something most industry analysts probably though would be dead on arrival and no one would be interested in.Now that they've been apparently well received on the market, Panasonic comes along with a less expensive alternative, and good for them too. I wonder if Canon or Nikon will follow along in another year or two?
DavidShea: Some pretty negative comments here - probably because all of them base their criticisms on specs and not actual use. Vanguard make AMAZINGLY good quality products - we've seen epic things from them over the years, and I dare say this bag is the same.This reviewer seems to think it's not bad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtxvTFeqfB0
Weight doesn't magically disappear because it's well proportioned, if you have to carry it, it's weight, something to be minimized. And 10 pounds is a lot to carry all day, and that's just the bag.It's difficult to have sturdiness without weight. With bags of similar quality, and I believe Vanguard is at or near the quality of any other major manufacture, the heavier one is almost always sturdier. But I'll sacrifice that for light weight, cause I will carry my bag.Weight is the first thing I look at with a back pack, if it's too heavy, I pass. I don't roll them around, I carry them on my back. Other people do things differently, but a lot of people still carry their bags because it's the fastest way to move, and carrying around wheels for the bag is a waste.
Kevin Omura: Yikes, first lets take one component out of the equation. The wealth of one of the participants... Then we clearly see that this is basically an issue of who owns the copyright to the images. Once you get past this it's pretty straight forward, Mrs Huff does.
The other component of this mess is somewhat hidden in this story and that is that Walmart used one of these images though unclear how and that seems to be how this ball got rolling.
The importance of this case is that if Mrs Huff should somehow loose then it signals that the photographers ownership of the images is being removed and that the persons depicted in the images are the owners to the photographs. Which would have far reaching effects on every portrait/school photographer/ studio in the country.
And yes it is morally reprehensible that a large corporation should bully some little old lady whose family owned a photo studio. Would be interesting to see what Sam Walton's take on this would be if he were still alive.
The wealth of the Walton family plays a huge part in creating the issue.If I walked into some local studio and had family portraits taken, they'd deliver prints and own the copyright? pretty standard stuff and well established law. If 40 years later, I sued, I can't imagine finding a lawyer that would take the case, and a judge that wouldn't summarily dismiss it. If I took the prints to Walmart to have them copied, assuming they comply with their own policy, they'd refuse to print / copy / etc.So, why's this case different? Because the Walton's have money.
Juck: MAybe I missed it,,, What's the burst/buffer depth for RAW,, anyone know?
Also depending on the write speed of the card, if the buffer is able to clear fast enough it will add at least a few more shots to the ultimate number you are able to get into a burst.
Nukunukoo: Full frame readout on video?
With digital stabilization, probably not. They crop the frame to achieve the stabilization.
The A7 / E mount uses optical stabilization (at least most of the lenses) and is probably what makes the difference.
The in body mechanical / sensor shift stabilization on the A77 / A mount bodies apparently can't handle running long enough for video.
beavertown: 12 fps + 60fps in Jpg, APS-C Sensor, that puts Nikon 1 system to great shame.
Well done Sony.
Isn't that the video mode?
I can buy 10 lens caps for about $10 on ebay: http://r.ebay.com/UCfrqC
Or, spend over $20 to not loose 1, assuming I don't forget where I put that doodad with the magnet (I don't use a camera strap, nor do I wear a tie).
I always make it a point to stuff extra caps in my bag.