tmurph: This is a fine camera but so is the Nikon D600 and also the Sony SLT-A99 and so on.This "my camera is better than your camera" school of thought is getting a bit boring, and yes I'm reading between the lines here and again yes, everyone is entitled to an oppinion but comments like..."makes the A-99 look like a P&S" just beggars belief. Go to a good photography gallery and before you enter you're asked to try and identify the cameras used and you will be there all day because there's no way for anyone to tell what equipment the photographer used.Todays cameras are amazing pieces of technology, end of.
I think many on hear are sick and tired of the losers who weir their camera brands like some sort of badge of honor.
They usually have no real talent as photographers so they have to justify the thousands of dollars spent by saying they have the best.
parkmcgraw: Having buildt my own digital devices and many lens systems in some cases making the element groups, do not from the specifications, understand why this lens, a minimalist design composed mostly of plastic should retail for so much money.
A lens with less manual control, more dependent on power and with the removal of the aperture ring, less of a professional tool.
■One “F” Low Dispersion (FLD) glass lens...
All the elements are small in diameter, easy to work, not too hard to polish.
■A floating inner focus...
The lens has some close focus capacity, nothing new.
■Super Multi-Layer Coating...
■A HSM (Hyper Sonic Motor)...
Nothing new, or expensive.
Compensation for using low stacking tolerance plastic.
■Thermally Stable Composite (TSC)...
Better plastic, but still plastic.
■A rounded 9 blade diaphragm...
No pats for doing what you should.
■A newly developed USB dock...
Marketing gizmo, no value to optics. Additional $10 to the BOM?
Economics my friend. You don't base your pricing on manufacturing cost. Its the perceived value placed by consumers who are willing to pay this sort of price and all the camera and lens manufacturers need to maximize their profit margins. They are for profit businesses after all right.
I liked the look of the V1 but they went from no grip at all on the V1 to this over compensated monster grip which removes any chance of making it pocketable.
Greif! something in between would be nice.
Henry M. Hertz: the D600 has a dust problem.
the sensor is attracting dust like george clooney woman.
that should be a headline.. nikon has to fix this.
I'm not sure but my Canon 5d II attracts serious dust as well. This may be a full frame issue. If your newly coming from a DX to full frame than you will certainly notice more dust on FX camera sensors.
a l b e r t: The Fuji XE-1 + the upcoming 23mm f/1.4 lens should match or exceed the image quality of the RX-1 for half the money.
Ya with an EVF and interchangeable lenses no contest for me.
AnHund: PhaseOne IQ180 has a sensor size of 53.9x43.4mm making this so called medium format sensor quite small. But maybe size is not so important anymore?
Now that is a true medium format size sensor. I use medium format film cameras and their is a very true difference regarding size. Larger sensors (or film) creates shallower DOF, stronger subject isolation and a more 3D real world look. Like the difference between APS-C and Full Frame but more so. Its not just the resolution or IQ.
But that sensor goes for around $50K yikes!
I would love to see a lower resolution 10-20mp (hopefully means cheaper) Sensor that is true 6x6 or 6x4.5 format.
The Nex Hassy is the ugliest thing I have ever seen. Revolting is a good word for it but even that fall a bit short.
This one has potential though and I can see some of my precious 500c/m in its design. A chrome and black covered A99 would be cool. The price would probably not be so cool.
The designer should be shot.
SLRist: The price could perhaps be justified if all the accessories were bundled, but Sony are clearly taking a huge gouge here. The price of the lens hood is a clear indication of that.
This kind of money is excessive for what is effectively a disposable camera. At least in the days of film, your high quality camera body wouldn't be rendered redundant every 5 years, and retained a reasonable resale value.
If they shaved off 30% of the price and included an EVF I might be interested, but I can't see enough benefit over my X100 to justify an upgrade.
Rebrand this camera "Zeiss Ikon" and you may sway some Leica buyers. Specs won't thats for sure.
Sony should rebrand this sort of high end camera. Just like Toyota and Lexus. High end buyers are likely wary of the Sony name. Brand this camera "Zeiss Ikon" (if they can) for example and they will see many more buyers
Not excited at all about this one or the 5d mkiii. Sticking with my 5d mkii for a while longer. I see no reason to up/Down grade to either of these. You can still buy a new 5d mkii for under $2000 and have a proven camera with better build, faster max shutter 1/8000 and same(simular) AF.
Not excited about Nikons offering either. However they're FF cameras are superior.
However Sony is another matter. The A99 is very tempting but I can not give up my precious 50mm 1.2L.
So yes I am sticking with Canon and hope that they produce something better so I don't have to part with my precious L lenses.
What if Sony produces a nice Zeiss 50mm 1.2? I'll worry about that if it happens
Looks Like a great camera but why 1/4000 max shutter speed? Forget about using fast glass outdoors without an Nd filter i guess. Pretty sure 1/4000 is still fast enough to stop most action though.
Stollen1234: seriously for $2800 i mean for that price you get Canon 5D II or almost 5dII with all the features...
The price point is high indeed but this is a first of its kind.Sony isn't competing with m4/3 or any other mirror less system with this camera. It is a direct chalenge to Leica.
People said Sigma was nuts when the original DP1 (first true aps-c compact) was released at $600
No viewfinder but an optical viewfinder may work nicely attached to the flash mount. Still for the price it is very hard to justify such a purchase for most. Perhaps in 5 years such an instrument will be affordable and more common.
I would also assume such a camera with interchangeable lenses would be just around the corner.
Good job Sony!
I would love eat this camera with some fafa beans and a nice chiante vfvfvfvfvff... lol
qwertyasdf: Actually the sensor size of the 645D is not 645 right?
Right. The sensor is about twice the size of a 35mm sensor(44mm x 33mm) but still about 2/3 the size of a true medium format 645 film size(56mmx40mm).
I would love to see a full frame medium format camera or back. even at a lower resolution.
Full frame 6x6 or 645 at a lower resolution 10-20mp at a reasonable price would be amazing!
JackM: 55 seems like a random number for full framers.
And how is the DSLR version distinct from the existing Planar 50/1.4?
Would a 55mm lens reduce the slight distortion seen in 50mm close up portraits?
ZAnton: another highly overpriced lens for a few techno-geeks who collect that crap and never shoot?
It's easy to disregard or hate something you don't undertand ZAnton. jsis you are right. However, give a great photographer a point and shoot and you will still get great images, but give him/her a full frame camera, a fast prime lens and be amazed! Furthermore, great image quality is not only solely based in resolution charts, so don't tell me about how horrible Zeiss IQ is unless you have used one.
Stick to your 18-55mm kit lens buddy. You have no clue what you talking about do you.
Richard Thornton: No viewfinder, no sale!
I personally feel that a small viewfinder with around 80% coverage is worthless. It's worthless for framing and worthless for focusing so what good is it. If you can't fit a OVF with at least 95% coverage than don't bother as I will never use it. Good riddance.