SnakePlissken: It's a superficial thing, but why are Sony DSLRs so ugly? I had an A700 and it was very smart looking. I think Canon makes the smartest, most ergonomic looking DSLRs, Nikon cameras are also immediately identifiable by their styling and red flash on the grip, Pentax K3 cameras look very elegant and well made too. In contrast, Sony's DLSRs in the last few years look like they have melted in the sun and are just too lumpen.
I am sure they are fine to use of course and for all the bashing that goes on here, as usual, the classic, legendary photographers of yore (other than large format photographers) would die for any of the digital cameras on the market today and I am sure would not care a jot about offset microlenses and the like that seem to consume people on DPReview.
I have the ugliest of the Alpha: the a900, I also had the second ugliest which you also had: the a700.A 58, A77 and a99 fine looking cameras and look better than canon and especially nikon.Pentax has always been the ugliest second to none.of course is all subjective....
George1958: superb camera, its a pity its a Samsung, otherwise I might have considered buying one.
Macrobokeh, Have you ever worked for or with a Korean company?Everything has to be done the Korean way not the German way. Feel sorry for those German engrs., but I know they will go back home very soon, no matter how much they are paid.These companies we mentioned, aspire to perfection and excellence, at least those are their intention, then they cut corners all the way to the end. Something has to give and it will.
I understand you are excited with your cars, after all you saved a few bucks and feels good. I get that.How can you stand the PVC smell in your cars? when they are new, they stinks of PVC for at least one year. European cars use to smell like that in the 80ies but only for few months.
To make a story short, a Sony TV will last longer than an LG or Samsung, same for a Hitachi air conditioner, it will last twice as a Daewoo. Bosch appliance or Samsung appliance?
In general Samsung and other Korean brands customer service is terrible.Not mentioning reliability and durability.Their stuff always last shorter than european and japanese products.Korean motto is: "we can make it in shorter time, better and cheaper".Which of course is not possible, yet something has to give.
It is more interesting for video, because photos on a 1inch 12mp sensor with a non interchangeable zoom, it s for very basic low end work.
high res image samples for the 90mm G Macro
and check out the crazy MTF chart if you haven't
Of course it is just made up, just to make you happy.
El Chubasco: Nice system, certainly impressive. Would be tempted to buy this camera if its interface did not feel like a playstation.
"The company who makes Playstation, Flat screen TV etc..." typical silly comments which goal is to dismiss Sony camera's products without a valid argument. Well there is not valid argument for that, that is why the silly haters can only come up with statements like the above one.Facts are that Sony is delivering very fine products. They are actually been doing just that for long time.
Well... the photographer is pretty.A part for that it seems a nice camera, plenty good for the job and the video report is very well done.
Does this thing tether?
Donnie G: So far, Sony has managed to deliver 3 different cameras from one body and keep the hype alive for their full frame sensors while keeping production costs as low as possible. Seems like a formula for success. If they can come up with a 4th camera from this body, then they might actually make a profit from the camera business this year. Hope it works for them. :)
Donnie is right. Yet camera business is one of the few division Sony is making a profit. Their mirrorless cameras sell very well in Asia and in some countries they have 51% market share of the whole camera business.In any case it is about time they should steal a page from Apple book. One body/chassis shared by different models. For Apple worked beautifully with laptops, tower computers, desktop and phones. If Sony had done the same with their laptop business, instead of having 10+ different chassis, they probably would have made a profit and kept that division. Same would do for TV sets and HI FI.
Chuck Lantz: Thanks for some very good info. As usual, many of the comments here are of the snarky variety that seem to always accompany any personal viewpoints expressed online.
While contrary opinions are always welcomed, ... sort of, ... the problem is that some good, though shy, shooters would never express their own opinions about the gear they use in fear of being slammed mercilessly by "others" in the comments section. That's a real shame, since it limits what we can all learn from others.
Personally, I've never heard of Chase Jarvis until today, but if he can offer good advice, I don't really care if I have heard of him, unlike some others who have commented. Part of the snarky reply problem may be due to the fact that photography is a rather private and personal undertaking, and not a "team sport." Besides that, many of us are essentially competing against each other for the same clients, which doesn't lend itself to much camaraderie among shooters.
Just my two cents worth.
I heard of him once before and looking at his work, it seems to me he is a very good professional.Although most of what I have seen on this video is very similar to what I pack ( I was expecting it to be), yet is always interesting spend a few minutes watching a different take on the subject, by someone who seems to be quite wise in his choices.
Gionni Dorelli: I saw this camera in real life a few days ago. The touch and fell and its look reminded me of a Chinese knock off of a Rolex watch you can buy in Canal Street.
I have no doubt the image quality is outstanding, yet the main reason someone should buy this camera over a D4 is the look, touch and feel. Nikon failed to provide exactly on those 3 points.The camera is a far cry from the original FM2 which it is inspired from. Also it is too big for no reason.
I saw this camera in real life a few days ago. The touch and fell and its look reminded me of a Chinese knock off of a Rolex watch you can buy in Canal Street.
As many pointed out, you could spend many great hours lurking around at their Manhattan store, only to go buy at B&H or Adorama at better price.Sure it was an enjoyable experience at Calumet, but it could have cost you few hundred extras and at the end of the year... make it a few thousands.It is an old way of making sales that does not work anymore.
Complete waste of time. With these lenses the final look is very boring.In my view this kind of exercise is worth only with lenses that have a distinct character. Some old Zeiss, medium format Pentax, Contax or Leica. Just to give an example.
I mean.... a Vivitar from the 80ies??? Nikon 50mm are been proven dogs historically. An old Konika... OMG!
Joachim Gerstl: Anyone still using Photoshop?
I'm sorry to give you this new Joachim, but high end pro retouchers use only photoshop.
tesch: These cameras are going to make Canon the next Blackberry!
@HowaboutRAW"and right now it’s having image quality problems. The Fuji XE1, Olympus EM1 and Samsung NX300 all have better image quality–as too of course the Nikon D800, D610,+D4 (plus the old D3, D3s)."How you can state anything like that?Fuji XE1, Olympus EM1 and Samsung NX300 they do not come even close to image detail and cleanness at any iso compared to the a7s. Colors of course is a subjective matters, yet Sony colors are more than fine.As for the Nikon D800, which is a wonderful camera, looking at the comparison charts on this site, it is barely a match and not quite for the a7r at any iso.I know that comparison charts they do not say the whole truth, yet in my real life experience I have found that they say about 95% of the truth, especially if they are made with current DPReview method.For what I can see on the current comparison charts of this site, if we take the Phase one out of the equation, the A7r is head and shoulders above anything else you can compare it with.
estarkey: Let's be honest. Sony got balls the size of Texas. Ok with that out off the way there is a major problem: Canon's 6D has a max ISO of 102k and this is only 25k? A deal breaker for me.
I LOVE uncompressed video out feature, but what about max ISO in video mode? That is the reason I went back to Canon instead of getting the alpha 77, because ISO 1600 just won't cut it.
Just switch on that bloody light!
CFynn: I hope this inspires Nikon to make a full frame camera the size of the FM.
I dumped all my Nikon in 2002 and all my Canon in 2008.Went with Sony and Phase 1 and so far never looked back.
Francis Carver: Wow, based on the product photos, these two have gotta to be two of the butt-ugliest cameras ever coked-up by man/woman.... only matched in sheer ugliness by their matching ugly-duckling stripped-down lenses.
Depending whether you want a low-pass filter or not, you have to buy one or the other -- or both. I guess Sony have not been following product development news from Pentax -- they managed to put a switch on their K-3 for the user to make this decision on the spot. Oh yeah, and Pentax had managed to put image stabilization/hake reduction right inside the camera's body, where it should be. Revolutionary concept, I know.
An E-mount lens in a camera priced this high? No, thank you, Sony-san. BTW, I saw nothing here on the actual camera review about the PRICES of these cameras, only about the lens pricing. Suspicious....
You cannot say butt-ugly to any other brand of cameras, while you brag about Pentax.Pentax wins the Pulitzer for ugliness every year.