Maverick_: I came close to get an A7 as I am in the market for upgrade, but the camera has too many important flaws to be used as a serious semi-pro model. It seems that it would make better use as an enthusiast camera.
But we can't ignore the potential of this groundbreaking camera, full frame interchangeable lens in a very compact body. Perhaps in 3 years they'll resolve the focus issue.
If you actually shot with it, you'd probably not notice the flaws at all. Nitpicking is at an all time high.
harold1968: The e-m1 is the same size, weight and price.The sony handling is better (I have used both, at most it's a taste thing), the e-m1 has slightly faster focuses (but still hunts in low light)The sensor is far inferior compared to the A7, it even has noise in base ISO.Yet dpreview describe its IQ as excellent and yet the A7s as very good.For sure something is going on with this review.
The EM1 didn't need to be a larger camera. They could've easily made it smaller but people wanted a larger body, so they obliged. You do have a choice of going with smaller m43 bodies.
Wow..sexy, but FUJI lenses are wallet busters. Still, do want.
jennyrae: does not appear worth $1,600.
f1.2 lenses are all very expensive. The build quality looks superb. However, do not judge the lens by looking at the pictures dpreview takes. dpreview takes 'snapshots', not world class photos.
munro harrap: A friend of mine is quite happy with one of these, but I dont get it, no. The camera is as big as a 35mm full-frame Olympus OM2n and bigger than a D40x Nikon.It is almost as big as my Nikon 7100 and a lot more expensive. With the good f2.8 zoom it costs as much as a new Nikon D800 body, WIERD!!OMD is nowhere near as flexible as the old R1 Sony which was a complete system in itself with a great 24-120mm lens (still the best available-but not on NEX machines).You can then spend another fortune on another set of doubtless excellent lenses, and get Leica quality for less..... but existentially WHY would you do this? Beats me, mate....
Pro photographers asked for a larger body with more buttons. This is what they wanted. Did Olympus have to make it large? No. They did it in purpose because there is a market. On the other hand, they can make an m43 camera as small as the point and shoot bodies. You can pick an m43 in all sizes, but not APS-C.
tecnoworld: This camera is great and has all the features I want. Except for one: sensor size, which I want to be at least aps-c. But for the rest it's #1.
There's only one thing the APS-C does noticeably better than the m43 sensor. You can have nice Bokeh with the m43 but not quite like an APS-C. If that matters to you, pick the APS-C.
Panasonic did something amazing here. The body of a true small point and shoot with a m43 sized sensor. Now, please release one with a fixed 1.8 or f2.0 lens.
King Penguin: Nice camera but sadly crippled by the small sensor.....I'll wait for the FF version from someone else.....
Crippled? It's made small intentionally so those of us who want small cameras and small lenses can pack it with 2 or 3 lenses in the back of the small pouch in our backpacks while mountaineering.
Unfortunately, no thanks Nikon. This camera is cluttered. Absence of video? Does the video feature make the camera heavier, slower, more clunky? No point in taking the video feature out. You've got gazillions of buttons and dials, what's one more for a video button.
Taking good sample pictures has never been dpreview's strength. Might as well just give it to a high school photography student, he/she might do it better.
After about 2 years of carrying around m43 cameras and lenses I can't go back to larger DSLRs. I stuff my m43 and 2 lenses in the small back pocket for a hiking trip and I don't even notice it. What's worse is when you have small kids with baby bottles, clothes, extra food, and still need to carry a camera. M43 is a blessing. Image quality is really good enough for the majority of shooters.
Nice feature set, but wait one year and it'll be $500.
mckracken88: very expensive toys.get a real camera like the d800.
There are a lot of real cameras, but there are not a lot of real photographers.
PhotoHawk: Wow - that announcement is aimed at the heart of u4/3rds. The A7 and A7r bodies are lighter. I don't know about the lenses. But even if they are 100g heavier as a package the benefits of the FF sensor (noise and resolution as a system) would outweigh the small weight savings.At this point you may say that the EM1 has a few things the Sony can't do (IBIS for one). I would imagine that over time Sony will add the innovations missing. But 4/3rds can't be FF. So Sony can match Olympus and Panasonic on features but they can't match the performance the Sony FF sensor provides.
This doesn't compete against m43. the A7 and A7r bodies are lighter than the e-m1 only because Olympus wanted to make it heavier and larger INTENTIONALLY. There are plenty of light and small m43 bodies.
GabrielZ: Wow! I'm gob-smacked by the difference in size between the Alpha and the 6D - that's really a tiny full-frame camera. Impressive!
A rangefinder styled body will remove that large hump viewfinder. The difference in height will allow you to put it into a smaller sized bag or in the rear compartment of a backpack.
There's room to shrink it even more by making a rangefinder styled body.
I'm hoping Olympus will be next to join the FF mirrorless segment.
Pricy lenses, even for the enthusiast shooter.
ugh..no. Leica feminized. Yuck.
luminis scripti: A camera phone will always remain just that: a camera on a phone. It will never "hold its own" against ANY format camera, digital or film, let alone a medium format traditionally used for fashion photography. Yes, it's nice to have a decent camera on your phone, as a last-resort backup, but no one can expect it to seriously become the "tool if the trade."
Nice try Nokia, nice try. *slow clap*
I wouldn't say that. Technology progresses and camera phones are making leaps. Perhaps in a few years, we could see aps-c sized sensor phones with some breakthroughs in optical imaging.