CeleryBeats: My Fuji XE-2 produces better looking high iso shots. At least in JPEG.
A7 looks to be a great camera. But damn Fuji got some magic going on.
in JPEG yes, cant compare X-trans with full frame 24mp sensor for high iso though in RAW
PerL: So this almost prototype with a native lens line up of about 3 lenses, with 2 sec upstart, AF and frame rate suboptimal for "catching the moment" receives about the same score as the Nikon Df (81 vs 80), a much more refined, capable and mature product (and BTW is the smallest, lightest DSLR - not the D600 or 6D as the review said). And the A7 receives a "Silver Award" which the Df apparently did not deserve.
when you said frame rate suboptimal for catching the moment i stopped reading. I dont think Bresson needed 5fps, and theres nobody better at "capturing the moment" you dont capture that with burst rate, unless youre shooting sports of course.
I don't really get the knock against ergonomics on the A7, it seems to do everything you'd want it to given two dials and an exposure compensation wheel. Setting camera in manual mode and allowing auto iso (WITH exp. comp STILL working, compared to many other cameras where exp comp stops in this scenario), allows to overcome any kind of 1/60th issue.
Overall this did seem overly negative, and while the camera has short comings, those wanting a FF sensor in a tiny package can hopefully look past JPEGs and other minor annoyances rather than flaws. Only real flaws i see this camera have are the start up times and shutter sound, which is fine really but expectation of being quiet comes with mirrorless.
Also about "expensive" native primes that are "slow," first of all they are both weathersealed and amazing wide open. Compare them to fuji primes, which aren't cheap (and not weather sealed OR FF). Just seems like there's some bias here, i've shot with FF DSLR and Fuji, and i love my A7
hope its not just chasing megapixels on this one, the WU-1a thing seems pretty fun though, hopefully its implementation wont be gimmicky.
Will this be a worthy upgrade from a55? If looking at a new camera, will saving $100 bucks and going for a55 for its compact size be a reasonable thing to do?
Andrew Ku: DPR. Could you please comment on noise level at high ISO vs. the A65/77. Especially 3200 and up. If the sensor is the same as the 65/77 the noise should be less since there is more chip per pixel(fewer pixels). Is this correct or are the sensors totally different in specs. I have a 65 but would get the 57 if it has better low light capabilities even if only marginally better. I do mostly wildlife photography at high f ratios and higher shutter speeds. Anyone else who has information please share. Thanks. Also is what is low light performance relative to the Nikon 5100 and 7000?
yes please, this information will decide if i buy a55 or a57 new