keeponkeepingon: One thing I really like about the 3n/5000/5100 bodies is the zoom control for the power zoom allowing full one handed operation.
While I want the EVF and Flash shoe offered on the A6000 I don't have the luxury of using two hands to control the camera.
Why sony would go through all the work to make the power zooms then not put a zoom control on new models such as the A6000 is very puzzling.
Sony probably sees the zoom control as an entry-level feature for compact camera upgraders, who are used to controlling the zoom in that way. The A6000 has another target group.
Boss of Sony: I want: the next full-frame Sony (successor to A7, etc.) announced soon please. Will it be called A8? Or A7ii?
The next FF Sony won't be a successor to the A7 models. High-end models aren't replaced every year. So if there are more FF E-mount cameras coming this year, they will be something different from the A7 series.
Chaitanya S: Sony needs to start releasing some good lenses for mirrorless system and stop pushing so many bodies. Micro 4/3 and fuji x system have best choices of glass options right now.
Five different lens mounts? I count two, A- and E-mount. Each of those has two lines of lenses, for FF and APS-C.
Menneisyys: Given that the ancestor, the A5000, had a, noise-wise, *significantly* worse sensor than its big brother (the A6000), I wonder if the switch to using the current (A6000, D5300, D3300 etc.) stunningly excellent 24 Mpixel sensor means the possible A6100 is introduced with a, say, 30 Mpixel, absolutely excellent sensor.
I was under the impression that the D5300 does use a Sony sensor, and not the Toshiba sensor from D5200 and D7100. Chipworks claims that the D5300 uses the Sony IMX193.It's a bit odd that Nikon use 24 MP sensors from three different sources in their APS-C line-up.
tjobbe: Imaging resource mentions the drop of the sensor cleaning on the new one.
As well compared to the A6000 and Nex5 the screen flips up only as on the A5000 so with dropping the accessory port and the top dial this is really more a step-up of the A5000 than a Nex5 replacement despite the sensor upgarde
Does the tiny flash at least allows to trigger any other Sony flash wirelessly ?
Adding some features and taking away others is typical of Sony. I guess they have decided on a certain manufacturing cost beforehand, and then pick and mix features to achieve that cost.
parallaxproblem: You state in your first paragraph: "The a5100 picks up where the NEX-5 series leaves off"
This is NOT a replacement for the NEX-5T
It is a continuation of the NEX-3 series and basically a mild update of the A5000 to include the latest sensor/chipset and a touchscreen (though you don't mention the touchscreen in your preview)
In comparison to the NEX-5 series:
- it does not have a Metal body. Front plates on all NEX-5 models were alloy as were the top plates on earlier products in that series
- it does not have any form of feature connector so you cannot connect an external EVF or microphone or external flash, as you can with the later NEX-5 models (this is a big disadvantage of the A5xxxx series)
- its LCD only tilts upwards whereas the NEX-5 series LCD's also tilted downwards as well as upwards
- it does not have the top dial of the last NEX-5 series models
PLEASE UPDATE THE INCORRECT STATEMENT IN YOUR PREVIEW THAT THIS IS A REPLACEMENT FOR THE NEX-5T
Interestingly, Imaging Resource makes the same claim, that the A5100 replaces the NEX-5T, and they go on to say that the A5000 (which replaced the NEX-3N) remain in the line-up as the entry-level model.
Even though you are right that the A5100 is in many respects a downgrade from the NEX-5 series, this wouldn't be the first time that Sony has replaced a model with a lower-specced one.
According to Imaging Resource, the A5100 replaces NEX-5T, not A5000. The A5000 still remain in the line-up as the entry-level model, the successor to the NEX-3 line.
tom1234567: Nothing One can not do with a Pentax K3 the Photos were just ordinarysome nice shots but as I say nothing spectacular just photos any armature photographer could have taken themTom G
Photos like that may look deceptively simple, but that's because they were taken by someone who really knows what he's doing.I also fail to see your point of mentioning the K-3. Just because other cameras could be used to take the same shots, he shouldn't have used the D810? Nobody claimed that a D810 is necessary for this type of photography.
xpanded: Sigma DP1 MerrillSigma DP2 MerrillSigma DP3 MerrillSigma SD1 MerrillSigma DP2 Quattro
Now that is strange. Why have they omitted them?!
@bford"Little Sigma" shouldn't have any problem supporting their own cameras, considering that they developed the file format, and they own the company that developed the sensor technology.Third-party software developers have to do extensive testing and analysis of raw files, usually with little help from the camera manufacturers, to be able to provide support for new cameras. When a camera uses the standard Bayer technology, it's probably relatively straightforward to do that, but when the sensor is non-Bayer, we should really blame the manufacturer for not providing the necessary information to software developers.
The third-party software developers get very little help, if any at all, from the camera manufacturers, who want us to use their own raw converters supplied with the cameras. It requires a lot of testing and analyzing to support a camera, especially so when it uses 'exotic' sensor technology, like Foveon, EXR or X-Trans.Apple probably doesn't think it's worth the effort, considering how few people are using Sigma's cameras.
SpaceDoc: When will Apple eventually support the already old Fuji X10!!! :(
I don't think they will put any resources into supporting a camera that is almost three years old, and which has a non-Bayer (EXR) sensor to make things more complicated. If they didn't do it back then, they won't do it now.
mpgxsvcd: It is funny how a few years ago we would have laughed at the thought of comparing Micro Four Thirds against Full Frame cameras. They really aren’t any closer now than they were then. Both have improved drastically.
However, Dpreview seems to think they are close enough to compare now.
Sensor size isn't everything. We're comparing cameras, not just sensors. Features, performance, ergonomics, build quality, price, availability of lenses and accessories, all of those things are also important when deciding on a camera. The fact that a lot of customers are looking at both of these cameras, clearly shows that they are comparable. There are people in this thread, who apparently made a choice between these two cameras.
MysteryLemon: I would love to buy one or the older Q7. The one thing putting me off is the lack of fast lenses.
I own a Pentax MX-1 which has the same sensor. The zoom lens on it is superb opening to f1.8 at the wide end and not closing down much at the tele end. It's also reletively compact, even when fully retracted at the tele end. It's the perfect all purpose lens.
Until Pentax make an equivelant lens for the Q system, I wont be buying one. F2.8-4 just isn't good enough on a camera aimed at enthusiasts with a sensor this small. Better lenses can be made and affordable too. The MX-1 proves my case.
@Lance WSince that lens is used by Olympus, Pentax and Casio, it could very well be made by another company, like Asia Optical. There are several companies that make lenses and complete lens assemblies for fixed-lens cameras.
ThatCamFan: It looks lovely but I would NEVER pay more than 200$ for this camera, the sensor is TIIIIINY & virtually useless in anything but bright sunlight and MAYBE when it is cloudy.
That's just not true. Anyone who has used an enthusiast compact with a 1/1.7" sensor will know that. My old Canon G12 can produce perfectly usable results (for web use and small prints) up to ISO 1600.
The naming scheme really makes sense. First the Q, then the Q10, then the Q7, and now the Q-S1. Anyone dare to guess what they'll call the next one?
Bernard Carns: Another typical letdown from Canon.The last cameras I've bought have NOT been from them.When are they going to finally do something worth someone's attention?
Canon makes lots of cameras and lenses that are excellent photographic tools, as witnessed by the vast number of photographers who put them to good use. I would think that an excellent photographic tool would be worth a photographer's attention, even if it doesn't meet the approval of gearheads, who are more interested in the latest technology than the art of photography.
joyclick: It will not be something that people want or need but it will be something Canon thinks should be forced on them,like EOS-M etc.
So, how many people do you know of, who were forced by Canon to buy the EOS M?
tom1234567: consumers will buy these cameras and realize they aren’t much better than their phones
Perhaps, but most consumers these days are perfectly happy with the image quality of their smartphones. It's good enough for them. So when a camera offers that kind of image quality, plus an impressive zoom range, then that's actually a selling point for those consumers.
beavertown: Another piece of super junk.
Change the sensor to 1" please.
Still no EVF in 2014?
The SX50 has an EVF, but these budget superzooms usually don't have one. It's the same with the competing budget models from Nikon (L series), Panasonic (LZ series), Fuji (S series) and Sony (H series).
rgs_45: Is the FZ-1000 already available? I have been reading and following updates on this camera since I'm interested in getting one.
How can this be a review if, as far as I know, the camera is not available yet? Did the reviewer got a production model?
I have to admit, it's a very nice review. I hope they will do an update once the production model is available. I will be waiting for the "end user reviews and experiences" before I get one.
The first sentence says that they used a production model. Professional reviewers usually get sample units directly from the manufacturers, so they don't have to wait until the products are available in stores.