Great, now my pictures are sharp finally ...
bluevellet: Detail is impressive. High ISO is not so much; barely a stop better than APS-C and M43. I would have liked to check the A7 IQ too to see if the lesser pixel density/MP make a difference in high ISO.
But man, that Phase One image quality is completely in another league. :D
You have to downsample to 16MP and then compare it with MFT and APS-C. It will be much better.
chj: Mirrorless without a touchscreen?! at well over $1000?! Why Sony, why?!!! As much as DPR'ers may pooh, pooh, my recent iphone acquisition has made me realize you HAVE TO have touchscreen for spontaneous shooting.
Yes, big disappointment. I always set my focus point that way. I have ordered an A7 anyway ... will still be using other mirrorless systems alongside it.
Shutter sound is perfect for me, so the model knows when she can change to the next pose even on loud streets.
I have the camera and I love it! High ISO is on par with any other sensors smaller than full frame ... except Fuji X-Trans ... but pretty good anyway.
leschnyhan: Yeah, okay it doesn't have a mic input. On the one hand, most people who are trying to get really excellent audio would use a separate digital audio recorder anyway. But on the other hand--it seems like putting a mic input on the camera would be pretty straightforward, and a shoe-mounted mic would be useful on occasion.
The basic design reminds me a lot of the NEX-6 and NEX-7, and the feature set seems pretty similar to NEX-6 except that the Sony has a physically larger sensor that should translate to better image quality. (And has consequences for depth of field, too.) The one thing that keeps me away from MFT cameras is the MFT part.
And they're asking $999 for this thing? When an NEX-6 is currently available brand new for $798?
NEX 6 does not have IBIS and does not have a tiltable EVF, and other features. MFT has a much better range of lenses. Plus, this is a brand new camera. It will be cheaper when it gets as old as NEX 6 is now.
The difference of sensor size is minimal and there is virtually no difference in DOF control or quality. Olympus and GH3 uses Sony sensors with pretty much the same quality as NEX 5 or 6. Now Panasonic have their own new sensor too, which appears to be quite good.
NEX-5N doesn't need that update.
nanoer: It is clear that who ever master these 4 things will win the war. The lens technology, Sensor technology, Digital Signal Processing (DSP also its SW) and its Marketing. The last 3 are even more important than the first. See how quickly Samsung and Sony are catching up in photography! 30 years ago they were just purely electronic. And Samsung were still an OEM.For us, the only thing we can do is to advance our photography skill. Then, any equipment in our hand will do the same.
30 years ago the Sony camera division was known as Minolta.
Wow! Will buy it!
Well there are lots of other cameras that do this, maybe not to the same extent.
Ganondorf: Why is it that hard to include auto focus Compatibility?
Micro 4/3 can focus just fine at f6.3.
Nice but I already have all the lenses that provide all these focal lengths ...
felix ip: It provided a 4.2X zoom ability, electronic zoom, AF-Lock button, and 0.72X macro ability. Thus, I do think it is an all-rounded lens for a novice.
However, about using macro at 50mm f6.3, I am still sorry to say, "The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak"
Why? You need to stop down for macro anyway.
emircruz: This lens seems lost. Not-so-Macro, Weathersealed, internal power-zoom but not so fast. Sounds like a daytime photo/video beach lens.
I think people were waiting for an m4/3 version of the 12-60 F2.8-4.0 or the 14-54 2.8-3.5.
Personally, I'd keep the 12-50 focal lengths but I'd trade all those features for a constant F2.8 aperture.
I hope the upcomming pannys wont be too expensive.
You can't know that yet. Macro is actually pretty good.
simon65: But, eh, it's enormous and preseumably heavy as well, rendering the whole point of a Micro Four Thirds system, pointless.
It is neither. It is not heavy and not enormous. It has about the same small size as the existing tele and superzooms.
fmian: This lens only confirms Olympus' strategy to dumb down their own current and potential user base.
Give more zoom and a 'power' label, with smaller glass so people can less appreciate good optics.
Market your macro numbers so the number is bigger, confusing and misleading novice buyers.
State in product brochures that the 4/3 sensors are LARGE. (seriously, WTF?)
Start a marketing campaign in which your own cameras are called 'real' cameras. Whatever that means.
It's about as genius as Apple calling the ipad 'magical'.
But 4/3 sensors ARE large. Not the largest ones in the world but very large compared to the average camera. They don't have to get bigger, just better.