tornwald: So far none are able to come close to the Foveon design Sigma has. I am not sure they ever will because they want the best of both worlds. Foveon is uncompromising, it has its weak points, but when used right, the output is unmatched by anything out there.
"Foveon is uncompromising" - it's a compromise in high ISO image quality."output is unmatched by anything out there" - never shot medium format?
Artistico: I think they were onto something with the S and R pixels of their early noughties S5 Pro sensor, giving - at the time - a dynamic range that was way beyond anything else in the market. A sensor concept like that including a decade of other improvements, increased sensitivity, better readout circuits, and higher bit processing could have made one HDR killer of a camera.
Fujifilm seems to have the often misguided business-minded idea that change is better than working with what they have, and so they abandon good ideas to pursue new ones that might not work as well - or perhaps they will?
We'll just have to wait and see about this one, but I think a cursory google search might have told them what they don't seem to know: pixel-peeping photographers have less tolerance to colour noise than luminance noise. Luminance noise can add a bit of a nostalgic film grain look, whereas colour noise is - well - just ugly.
Roland - color noise is quite easy to fix, luminance noise is horrid to fix.
JEROME NOLAS: I don't want FF any more. It's ridiculous what camera makers are putting on the table. This is a quick bang ($) from Sony. If you use Zeiss lenses you'll be fine. But hey you have four!!! lens adapters...and faint double images in A7R. Oh Lord, just scrap it and start with a clean sheet!
Dimit - FE lenses are just Sony branded with Zeiss. These are not Zeiss lenses like ZE series.The Lotus Eater - 50 f/1.2 is one of the worst 50s on a market if not the worst one when it comes to the image quality. This lens was made for portraits and shallow depth of field, not the best sharpness.
jhinkey: Looking forward to the Nikon equivalent to the A7 - hopefully it won't have the A7's flaws.For whatever manufacturer that puts out a compact FX mirrorless body I think one of the missing links are compact primes. I'm not talking about a compact 50/1.8, but rather a set of compact primes something like 85/2.8, 50/2.8, 20/4, etc. that are very very good wide open. Though there are many times f/1.8 comes in handy, most of the time f/2.8 or f/4 works just fine, especially with the high ISO performance of today's FX sensors.I realize that you can't have a compact tele because of the physics or compact f/2.8 ultra-wide angle primes due to telecentricity issues, but a set of compact wide angle to short tele primes would really make FX mirrorless much more portable.
TrojMacReady - just look up at the sales rankings. Eg. Amazon got one, and A7 is far behind the bestsellers.Besides - CIPA also is releasing global sales numbers, and mirrorless are steadily going down.
Martkub70: I reckon this review to be quite critical and camera as underrated. As a very frequent user of A7 - one of first on a local market, when put into sale in Oct 2013, with more than 10T pictures already taken - I can just confirm, that it is far, far better in terms of IQ than any of its SONY predecessors which I have used equally frequently (using digital camers since 1997 - mainly SONY's F828, A100, A700, A77). I am always thrilled by MAJOR improvements in IQ and camera's abilites generation-by-generation (A100 to F828, A700 to A100, A77 to A700 and now A7 to all others. At a same moment, I am still keeping former SONY machines as I still love their capabilites. What can be confirmed as a setback is battery life and start-up times - u can get used to that, also lack of legacy lenses - but with Minolta and other alternatives, who cares. Not much from highlighted cons shall matter to any user. Photographic results are just excellent.
On the other hand you get much better AF, stunningly innovative AF-D mode, and a body that you can actually use with lenses longer than 50mm.
juvx: Sure it has its drawbacks, nothing is perfect but I don't think its advantages have been weighed nearly enough. It is compared to a D600 right? Well try walking around with a D600 with a zoom lens on all day. ITS gets REALLY heavy. Not to mention its size. A7 with lens is about HALF its weight. They say the best camera is the one you have with you and its simply way easier to carry the A7 around. Image quality is just as good if not better sometimes (I only shoot RAW). Sure JPEG quality doesn't look that great ill admit BUT unless you plan on using the pic right out the camera with NO post processing at ALL then why wouldn't you shoot RAW? Or better yet shoot RAW + JPEG ... for quick sharing AND post processing.. its really not as big of a deal as you make it out to be. Start up time isnt great but its never made me miss a photo...2.5 sec max. I personally would rate the A7 a 90 and yes iv owned the D600 as well.
People really need start going to a gym.
I don't know - for years weight wasn't such an issue, and heck: even some of the heavier cameras were sought for (eg. Dynax 9 Ti - still one of most desired film cameras of it's age). But suddenly in last 2-3 years everyone lost muscles and now every gram counts.WTF?!
Anastigmat: That is the advantage of removing the reflex mirror. If the medium format manufacturers are smart, they should do the same with medium format cameras. Doing away with the mirror removes a big source of camera vibration and it drastically reduces the size and weight of a medium format camera too.
"move"? Noone serious will "move" to mirrorless - if anything: they'll build a side-line of products in mirrorless version. Still though the DSLR version will be there leading the pack.There's no such thing as "moving to mirrorless" - if anything: you can add mirrorless to your offer.Seen what Olympus did? They already regret it and consider returning back to DSLRs due to shrinking sales. People love OVFs and there isn't anything out there to change that.
Juraj Lacko: Well now you guys will learn OVF is better for MF
FYI: You can easily buy dedicated matte screens for manual focusing for any modern DSLR (despite of what dPreview said - that also includes Nikon Df).
"I wonder how many of the commenters here tried that route?" - apparently: more than tried using manual focus glass with mirrorless cameras. (that's mostly because of how unpopular mirrorless are comparing to DSLRs - and glass like Helios 44M-4 is one of most commonly recommended beginner primes for DSLRs).
The Scurvy Dog of PR: Jesus! Stop using Auto ISO. I NEVER use it. How stupid is that? I have an NEX-7 I ONLY use with old 3rd party lenses and love it. I'm sorry the reviewer 'doesn't get it', but they continue this rant through the entire review. Get over it already!
"ISO is a minor variable in photography." - LOL
HubertChen: Thank you for this great Article. I was contemplating to buy the Sony a7. I am currently using a Pentax DSLR and got very used to shoot exclusively with manual focus lenses in Live-view. Pentax has no EVF option. So I am using a very big LCD viewfinder. The EVF of the Sony is very renowned and considering that the Sony is Fullframe and all my lenses are full frame I was very tempted. Until I read your Article that is.
There are a couple of things I love about my K30 that apparently the Sony does not have:1) With one button press I can engage magnification for manual focusing2) I can dynamically adjust magnification in an instance with the rear wheel3) Shake reduction works exceptionally well. I frequently shoot with my 50mm lens in 1/15s and get razor sharp results4) Almost no jelloing in magnification view up to 200mm.
A pity the Pentax has no short flange mount. You would be very happy with the User Interface. Buttons are where you want them.
"I can dynamically adjust magnification in an instance with the rear wheel" - I don't know about A7, but SLTs do have that."Almost no jelloing in magnification view up to 200mm" - same here.
PWRUSS: Just a note on fast lenses on the A7 / A7R, the Canon 85mm f1.2 works fine. So for most users there is nothing to be concerned about.
I thought it's to make photographs.But seems like I was wrong. Hipsters won once again.
Elaka Farmor: One of the cons "Limited battery life". I have not yet seen any camera with unlimited battery life ;-)
Life's harsh, isn't it? ;)
Dimit: Fact: THE A7 is the best MIRRORLESS camera AS OF THIS VERY MOMENT.Period.Minor improvements can be made in future as in every other manufacturer's model,isn't it self understood?As far as the jpeg's peformance,I can assure it's STUNNING!..and I'm not on a ''noise reduction on'' habbit.Just LEARN the camera and you're OK.The-otherwise respectable-reviewers may find some digitally oriented faults-which one can easily overcome-but ,as far as I can gather seeing their photo samples,they are not experienced ''photographers'' Every sinle camera has it's pros and cons but for what Sony has achieved,this tool is A REVOLUTION,NOT JUST EVOLUTION.Platinum award for those who know!!!P.S. Don't bother with all junk lenses which you can anyway use..FE Zeiss are excellent,bespoke made.No comparison with Canikon ones.
TrojMacReady - people voted with their wallets for cheap-fast. That's compacts, and they get most sales of all dedicated camera.We talk here about preference, not sales number (though A7 looses in both: sales and user preferences).
Rooru S: "But, while it has done a remarkable job creating these two cameras, we feel that some refinements are necessary in order to make them more competitive with the likes of the Canon EOS 6D and Nikon D610."
Why compare it to SLRs when it's a mirrorless we are talking about???
So what - let's run comparison with Nikon 1?Don't be silly.
iAPX: What is the interest of a FULL FRAME mirorless?
If this is size, maybe we should use them with a pancake (there are none), not with the big lenses that are offered. It's even worse when you look at the adapters for old Sony lenses.
Do they have any commoon sense at sony?!?
If image quality is your main concern: use a proper DSLR.
This camera got very little to offer in that regard (mostly because huge lack of any lens line up what so ever. What they have now are... what? 4 random lenses? What a joke).
Akpinxit: "FF" as for now meant "premium" . Not much so with a7 . With its' current handling issues (FPS , JPGs and compressed RAW , lens choice ) this is just another annual model ammature update , which by chance got included big sensor .
?! noone ever used? lol
Rob Sims: Not that I necessarily disagree with points made in this article, but the article does read very negatively - especially considering that this is the cheapest FF camera on the market - the same price as some m43 cameras but with much better image quality (the first important thing...).
I've never taken a JPG photo out of this camera, so perhaps that's why I'm enjoying this camera so much. I'd go as far as to say I'm enjoying this camera even more than when I first got my Nikon D700 five years ago (for almost twice the price), and as a result it's coming everywhere with me (...the other most important thing).
Leica makes rangefinders, not mirrorless. Rangefinders been here long before mirrorless term even appeared.
ragmanjin: Kicking the dead horse again here but this camera, too, was released later than the Pentax K-3. When is that review slotted for again?It would be nice if reviews happened in chronological order rather than by preference. At the least it would save you a lot of back-peddling and accusations of favouritism.Just my two cents.-Raj
@Resom - just to be clear: I'm opposed of scoring camera based on adapters regardless which one it is. Though - yes - you are right: all cameras should be treated the same way when possible.
Mister J: No bult-in flash? No A7 for me then, as clunky add-ons add time, weight, and a camera bag to my load. Looks reasonable otherwise, though since I'm mostly a jpg shooter, maybe not the best to go for. Think the Pana GM1 more me.
Ian - and if you have a build-in flash you always use it for lighting your photos, right? Haven't discovered commander mode yet?
Docmartin: Lossy RAW compression in a FF camera? This is a no go !!!
Sony advertise the A7/A7R as 14 bit colour depth, but apparently it even lags behind the 12 bit of smaller (e.g. MFT) sensor cameras?
Note: lossless compression is not the same as lossy compression.
A7 uses lossy compression.