Jogger: If i were in the market for a manual focus FF camera, i would get the Sony A7r and adapt be able to adapt every FF lens ever made.
Although, the DF makes sense if you are MFing Nikon lenses without aperture rings... but, then again those are modern lenses designed for AF with poor MFing mechanisms.
@Eleson, you'll soon find out as soon as you will start using your A7(r) with non-sony lenses.... and a e-mount to 3rd party lens adapter.
There will be no information about aperture and shutterspeed available as both can not be metered without Sony lenses or the Sony A-mount adapter. Which means once you've set your aperture (manually) you will need to find out the right shutterspeed. And for that to know you will need to have a lightmeter.
Have fun with your lightmeter and your A7r in full manual....
Juck: Nice, but Alpha 7 is much better.
Good for you!But how do you want to make photo's at larger apertures with your A7 without any bulky adapter, to which you will loose all electronic information about aperture and shutterspeed?
And then the whopping 4 lenses available for your A7.WOW what a great system this Sony crap is......
Rooru S: Hey dpreview, any chance to see high end cameras make it into the test? I mean, like the top top from both Canon and Nikon.
I fully agree DPReview should be more focussed on the 'enthousiast' and professionals.
All the rest will soon be taking photographs with their smartphone anyway - at least that is what all current sales figures are showing us.
123Mike: The Sony A57 beats the lot of these.
Not really though - Sony shooters always seem to have the need to say that their equipment is so much better then anything else on the market.
Is that because you feel you have bought wrongly, but do this to feel better about your purchase decision?
Clive Dickinson: The Sony NEX 6 is much better than these for an all-round camera. Great picture quality, excellent high iso performance, faster AF and very light for travel.
You are throwing out a very much biased personal opinion.
ijak: Carrot dangling, trying to move people into bondage. … Miss a payment and all your interim work is lost.
@Artistico - You are right you don't loose your work.
However you DO LOOSE your assets as you can't open any original PSD files anymore.
What's clear to me is that Adobe is in desperate need for more 'Credit Card' Clients...
Bring back the perpetual license and I will support you again.
Francis Carver: New camera bodies needing brand new proprietary lenses and accessories -- all made by Sony-san and no one else. Corporate bean-counters' dream set-up.
But to use 3rd party lenses not E or A mounted you will loose all electronic information about aperture and shuttertimes.
Therewith you will need a handheld lightmeter or to guestimate to make your photos.
The A-lens converter is huge and makes seem the camera unbalanced.
jonikon: With the A7s alongside their a99 and RX1, it appears Sony is aiming to be the king of of full frame niche cameras using two different lens mounts four different lens adapters and two different flash shoe mounts . Unfortunately for Sony, it is very unlikely that these niche cameras with their pedestrian performance and image quality that can be found in the much more popular Nikon lens mount cameras will ever be sold in quantities large enough to make them profitable for them. The only question is, how long will they keep trying?
The A7 and A7R lacks good support. It consists of only 4 lenses and most of them have an aperture of f4 or smaller.
The only 1.8 is nothing special.
If you want to use A-lenses you will need an bulky converter.Making this 'smallish' camera a not so good alternative.
JackM: Wow. a7R = the new king of res this side of $10,000.
Also A7 lacks 'fast' lenses. That doesn't make you a happy shooter for shallow DOF or in Low Light situations. You will need to go up to another ISO region much more quickly due to the lack of lenses with larger apertures.
AlexK-12: I can see two great reasons why Sony gave the a7/r the e-mount:1). The ability to mount all legacy film lenses that already cover the 35mm format2). The ability to use Canon/Nikon full frame lenses and possibly even with autofocus
It seems to me that Sony made the right decision to go with e-mount, even if it means that they have to start from scratch with FE lenses. If I had the need and money, I would sell my a77 and jump on the a7r. One day, perhaps :)
You will still need an adapter to use lenses from either Canon or Nikon. And looking at Sony's (Bulky, did I say bulky?) A-Lens adapter it looks like there is a big unbalance between body and lenses.
Next big factor for Sony is that they only introduced some pretty 'slow' lenses with this camera which makes the need to go into higher ISO regions much faster with the additional negative of loosing shallow depth of field.
Though I think what Sony did here will eventually be the future of DSLR's.
white shadow: Wow! 1629 comments in just a few hours. That must be the new record. There are definitely a lot of keen people out there.
The image quality from this camera is definitely first class. It can even surpass that from the Canon 5DMk3. However, one must beware of the downside which will "break" this camera.
# VERY SLOW AUTOFOCUS ESPECIALLY IN LOW LIGHT.# Sony's usual "not so friendly" user interface.# Current shortage of compatible lenses # Slow tracking and continuous focus
For such an expensive supposely PRO grade camera, there is no external charger. It might be convenient at times to charge batteries inside the camera but doing so will not allow the owner to use the camera. It is also hazzardous as a current surge will destroy the camera.
This is definitely early times. Sony is always good at innovation but lets see whether they will really make an alternatve system camera to rival Canon, Nikon or even Olympus.
Professional photographers are holding their breath or will they?
Its not really difficult to surpass the Canon 5D MKIII.Time for Canon to start to use new manufacturing methods on their sensor designs. They have been bad in the shadow areas for years now.
ProfHankD: Wow! It's beating the D800 fairly easily -- didn't expect that. It also blows away the Canon 5D III (there's more detail in the A7R at 6400 than in the 5D III at 50), but that was not entirely unexpected.
It looks like Sony is retaining detail really well in JPEGs while nicely removing somewhat more sensor color noise than the competition that shows up in the raw. This might be the best JPEG engine I've seen in a camera so far.... I will admit to also wondering if the color noise isn't noise at all, but artifacting due to the lack of an AA filter? If so, congrats to the lens used, because that would mean it's well past Nyquist for a 36MP FF sensor....
PS: Look at the Jack in the comparison scene. Interesting that only the A7R doesn't make the Jack's hair go the wrong direction with artifacting....
When comparing camera sensors you should compare RAW images not JPEGs. Its useless to say that it beats Camera A or B judged on a JPEG comparison.
HowaboutRAW: Just a Photographer:
You see I’m not saying what the “norm” should be, that’s what you’re doing–despite claiming that’s not what your doing. My point was that the “norm” has radically changed in the last 10 years with the introduction of better and better sensors for DSLRs.
Then the D4's sensor is not a normal sensor–in ten years time it’s high ISO capacity may very well be normal.
You can limit your high ISO use (and here “high ISO” will mean something different 5 years in the future), but you can only legitimately speak in generalities about your preferences.
In fact many seek out the D4 (and now will seek out this Df) to be able to shoot in lowlight without a flash and without the blotching and banding problems that shooting at high ISOs with both the D610 and D800 can incur. And that seeking good equipment for high ISO shooting is perfectly normal.
In fact black cats in the dark would be hard for the D4, so that could inspire further development of better lowlight sensors.
For you the D4 sensor is something very special - To me its just another sensor. Not really sacred. Technology might have already surpassed this sensor in the laboratory.
You are telling us what the norm should be (which for you is HIGH ISO photography) I am not into this. All of this defending what you do is in your head. Thats why you have an urge to respond to all things that do not fit in your line of thinking. - I am just feeding you knowing that you can't stand what I am saying ;)
But as said I don't withold you to take photos of black cats in dark knights. If thats what you like, then all is fine. Nobody will behold you of not doing so!
Zalllon: I think Nikon missed the mark here. Even though the technology in it may not be the latest, the look of the camera will pull people in. I have relatives that are interested in this camera, but they all cannot get over the price. The funny thing is, one of my uncles has an old D70s and saw this camera show up on the web and got all excited till the price was announced. Then he was hell bent on getting a newer, retro looking camera so he ended up getting an Olympus EM5. I'm not going to compare the 2, but all I'm saying is this look gets old film guys excited, then turns them off. If nothing else, this could help cheaper competition for non-pro shooter.
Well Howabout - meaby its as 'quiet' as a D800 or D610 which are ear deafening. ;)
The Df is clearly not a D4. There is only one thing it shares with it and that is its sensor....
Its clearly also NOT a follow up on the D700 otherwise the Df would have had a 51 point AF and the 92K colour sensor out of the D4 as well. Just like the D800 has.
What is it that makes you defend this camera so much as you do?
Sound like you actually regretted of buying it. I am sure its going to be a good camera like you say. It is only not comparable to a D4 and its not a D4 mini either.
mosc: Am I just completely uninformed? I thought the D800 sensor was completely superior to the D4. The main reason the D4 had so few MP is the sensor is older, sold in too small a volume to bother upgrading frequently, and showing some crazy burst numbers with that massive shutter apparatus requires processing a lot of data very quickly so keeping MP down helps.
HowAboutRAW why should I stop telling that? - Just because you are constantly hammering down that 12800 and above should be the norm?
No way I will stop making these high ISO settings a littlebit ridiculous.Sure they can come in handy. But out of all photos most people will take. I am sure that only a handful of shots will be above ISO 12800. Unless your occupation or hobby is taking photos of black cats in the dark...
You may dislike that most people will not go above ISO settings of 6400. However I think you are smart enough to know that what I say is the actual truth.
Also I am not telling anybody what the norm should be - If you want to shoot above 12800 thats fine. The camera is fully capable of doing so, though I am sure that a vast majority will never use it.
Now you stop telling me what the norm should be ;)
lmtfa: Nikon, first a laughable UW camera now this. Where's my Yashica TL Super and Nikonos IV?
Such comments as from Imtfa do come from trolls only.Most of the times also known as 'just a jealous guy'.
Pakio: What? No ISO 50? Why in the hell they make sensors up to ISO 12000, who needs that? I want to shoot at F1.4 in daylight!
Pakio is actually fully right - There is more sense to support a base ISO 50 or even 25 then there is to go up to 204.800 ISO.
Who doesn't want to be able to shoot full open at f1.4 / f1.8?
I have much more need for that then I have for ISO settings above 6400.
HowaboutRAW doesn't understand that if you buy a 1600 dollar lens you don't want it optically getting 'scr#wed' by a 99 cent (actual manufacturing cost) ND filter that changes colour accuracy.
Come'on HowAboutRAW - How often does one shoot above 12.800 ISO? Most people never come above 1600-3200. That's where most people will stop.
Most photography is being done on daylight or indoors with good lighting anyway. 100 - 1600 ISO is being used by 90% of most shots.
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review