More than Eyefocus AF, the AF speed on non-native lenses(Canon) have improved significantly! For people who have thousands of dollars worth of none-sony lenses who want to move to A7R2, this is a great feature.
Random Photographer: In the future, fanboys will wonder what this "Canikon" was as they partake in the Samsony wars.
Samsony sounds like Samsonite for some reason...
Not sure why people are mentioning "A7R2 is cheaper", They are both 3000$+ range.
probert500: To say the a7r is "plagued" with shutter shock is untrue.
Rishi, I use 400mm Sigma lens with OSS and there is minimal shutter shock at 1/100s range, none with a tripod or 1/250s range.Still, I usually use my 55CZ or 12mm Samyang which are almost invulnerable against shaky hands and shutter shocks.That being said, when I tried 70mm Minolta without OSS on 1/100 shutter shock was pretty bad. I would stick to short primes, fast lenses so that you can keep the shutter fast, or OSS lenses with A7R if you want to go handheld.
hypo: Call me old-fashioned but I can't be doing with the phrase "backside illuminated".
Try as I might it only brings up totally inappropriate imagery.
Am I the only one who has this problem?
IMO, should be called "Flipped" optical sensor. Or at least back-sided routed sensor: BRS, hopefully pronounced BURRRRRS.
Frankly, I don't think DSLR users should be concerned too much.I use A7R and it is an amazing camera. However, I see very little difference between a mirrorless and most DSLRs.Mirrorless is pretty much DSLR with liveview. It is slightly more compact, but full frame lenses are quite large so I don't see much point in the size thingy. If you want small, you should probably go Leica etc(and even that is not that small).I heard mirrorless have higher FPS, but no. Bottleneck for FPS in most camera is not the mirror or the shutter element. It is usually the buffer and I know plenty of sport DSLRs with 10FPS.I got A7R because a) I did not own any expensive DSLR lenses, b) A7R that I bought used was incredibly cheap for the quality(amazing resolution, good dynmaic range, good low light, perfect for stills) c) the short distance between the sensor and the lens means any other lenses can be adopted to A7R. And having an OVF should count as a plus(for DSLRs).
Gabriel Chan: So far, non of Sony FE lens have any significant weight advantage compared to the Canon and Nikon FF lens....so what's the point of changing to a mirrorless system if only the body is 100g lighter and all the lens weigh about the same as FF DSLR lens? the FE 70-200 f4 is even heavier than the Canon 70-200 f4
I don't think a7 series was made with weight advantage in mind. Lighter? yeah by little, but a7 was more of "professional grade FF mirrorless camera"
If you want light weight FF mirrorless, go with Leica.
AH!The Fishyeye!Not sure if I should wait for this or go for Samyang's FE version.
Jesus, why do people expect an enthusiast to be anything more than... an enthusiast.He's kind of a guy who got a DSLR and goes around taking seemingly random photos with poor composition trying to learn photography, not someone who spends couple of hours setting up a perfect lighting with a pretty model in a nice studio. This is a pretty good estimation of what an enthusiast's point of view.
Also, he does point of few important things:a) This uber expensive-well for the majority of enthusiasts who owns bodies for under 2Ks- camera is not a magic wand. Enthusiasts should get something cheaper and learn photo until you are worthy of such tool.b)It looks funny carrying it around and a lot of people do care how they look with a camera-I'm looking at you Leica fan boys.c)Good for landscape->bad for sport, slow AF and FPS.
Hi can somebody help me make a decision?I have A7R with LA-EA4 adapter. I only have a 35mm minolta for prime lens which I use indoors. I want a 50~55mm prime lens.
I'm stuck between Minolta 50mm f/1.4 RS vs this: FE 55 f/1.8 CZ-The AF of LA-EA4 is very fast, I would guess that despite the fast auto focusing of the CZ lens, the old A mount lens would focus just as quick.-The sharpness and distortion wise, the CZ seems to have advantage.-At low light, despite light loss from LA-EA4 transparent mirror, the larger aperture would compensate some what.
At the moment, I'm not quite sure what I get from the CZ lens by spending extra 500$.
Moar MFTs! MOAR!
Sindreste: Why do you think Fuji is using a LCD-viewfinder instead of a OLED? Is it because it costs less, or is the LCD better in any way?
Well, since there are plenty of OLEDs who are thinner and simpler to implement than LCDs, I doubt that;s the case. However, LCDs are far more reflective as a result have greater outdoor visibility compared to OLEDs. If OLEDs want to have that kind of outdoor visibility, it will require much more power for back lighting.
If you can make a lens +sensor module, why not make lens module and a sensor module? Is that too difficult?
Just one question...DP system looks like MILC...without interchangeable lenses. Do I have to buy all of them as a set or there is an interchangeable lense?
legokangpalla: Be careful what you wish for people..."universal" EVF with HDMI interface: http://www.kinotehnik.com/products/electronic-viewfinder/overviewWell, I must admit it is pretty big, but hey you can't have compactness and EVF both...Just to let you NEX fanboys know, I've used this WITH Nex7, call me crazy, but once you use it, you can never go back to that small thing you guys call EVF...not all EVFs all made equal.But seriously, stop nagging about all these little features cause you can get them if you really want them.
Whilst I like LCDVF no...I did not buy it for the NX series. It would have been funny-by which I mean tragic-if I did. I got it because the 5inch display on Scarlet is good, but have pi$$ poor visibility outside.
A99 is nice...I demoed it with a couple of old Minolta lenses that I had. However, as much as I like EVF as much as OVF-I like them both- I do not see the point of "mirror less " camera that has the same form factor as a full sized DLSR...I mean couldn't Sony just make a Nex8 with similar specs? Also, I do not think SLT provide better image quality than other mirrorless cameras, I mean technically those two mechanisms are the same. ie) It is a MILC!
Also, call me cheap, but 2.7grand for body only MILC? That's kinda crazy...
Be careful what you wish for people..."universal" EVF with HDMI interface: http://www.kinotehnik.com/products/electronic-viewfinder/overviewWell, I must admit it is pretty big, but hey you can't have compactness and EVF both...Just to let you NEX fanboys know, I've used this WITH Nex7, call me crazy, but once you use it, you can never go back to that small thing you guys call EVF...not all EVFs all made equal.But seriously, stop nagging about all these little features cause you can get them if you really want them.
jj74e: I don't get it. Why is an EVF so desirable in this type of camera, that is to say rangefinder-style mirrorless?
Sony is able to put their EVF in the corner of their body (and not a bulgy hump at the top) because their screen sizes are unconventionally at 16:9 and rather small. Fuji also because, well frankly their bodies aren't very compact anyway.
Personally I don't want a 16:9 screen when most of my photos are 4:3, and I don't want a hump to bulk up my camera- wuah la, cameras like the NX300 might be right for me.
Honestly, if all you want is an EVF, look at a camera with an EVF; it's that simple. How big do you think the market demand is for built in EVFs in this product segment? Considering companies are also catering to point-and-shoot upgraders, probably not very.
Hey, if you want an EVF, there's a camera for you. But don't go writing off other cameras that don't have one because it could be the camera for someone else.
"Whoa, you mean, I'm not the only consumer here?"
I've used NEX-7. Canon "Rebel" D600, and NX-200...most of them had EVFs, but I used attachable EVFs anyway because a) I liked it better, b) just because I had it...the point is:Almost any camera that anyone can buy that's not ancient supports some form of EVF one way or another, you just need to find it!
ChrisKramer1: I like the look of it a lot. But without the possibility of attaching an EVF, I will stick with my Sony NEX. The EVF is really useful when you use bigger lenses. Fact is, I couldn't use my Tamron 18-200 without it.
Well, most modern cameras-well that's being generous- have image out function may it be HDMI, USB, etc and can be used with third-party or Samsung EVF kits. I love the EVF on my NX-7 but since my dad wants it, I'm trying to find a new MILC camera. If you are like me and love MILCs, but hate that most of them don't have EVF, wait till the camera comes out and see if there is any compatible EVFs out there. I know for a fact that all Canon DLCRs and MILCs have image sensor out, so you can hook up third-party viewfinders to it.