I have several criticisms of this article (obvious flaws in the review):
1. Problem with the 1/60th shutter speed
This criticism doesn't cut it when most cameras do the same in Program/Aperture priority mode.
2. Related to the 1st point - camera shakeThe writer needed 1/100th shutter speed to get a sharp picture using a 50mm prime lens.
More fundamentally a question of the writer's technique (or lack there of!). Most photographers can get great shots at far lower shutter speeds. I can easily shoot handheld at 1/15th or 1/30th no problem (without image stabilisation). 1/60th is plenty sufficient according to the reciprocal rule too.
3. Inability to get sharp focusAgain a huge flaw with the review - the writer uses what he conceded were bad lenses - hazy, cheap ($10!), flawed, ancient (65 yrs old!) - more suited for the scrap heap.
How does one blame the A7's focus peaking/viewfinder etc. for being not good enough to purchase?
If you want half-decent pics, use decent lenses!
Der Steppenwolf: Great quality. I can see Nikon and Canon sh****** their pants now. Thank you Sony for giving us an alternative.
@samhain - OVF whiner eh? Small FF with an OVF is an oxymoronic statement (contradiction in itself).
You guys juz don't get it.
*Hint - 1. Look inside Sony OLED EVFs on the A7/7R, RX, A99/A77.2. Turn on all or some of the following:- Pitch & Level real-time indicators- focus peaking- rule-of-third/square/rectangle grid lines - real-time HISTOGRAM- press depth of field preview- point up at the bright sky (highlights), then down at the ground (shadows)- shoot video like a pro thru the EVF, not like an amateur holding it at arms length - review stills/video like deja vu in the EVF in bright noon sunlight in Omnimax sharpness.
*Hint 2 - No more- tilted horizontals- looking at silly [-3, -2, -1, 0, +1, +2, +3] exposure meters- spot, partial, centre-weighted, matrix metering BS- spending silly money on focusing screens for yr stupid OVF- spending on silly massive eye cup over your LCD to shoot video like a pro- shoot 1st, lower cam, chimp at LCD, bring up cam- wanting OVF
spiderhunter: It appears that Canon and Nikon are so complacent with their toaster-sized DSLRs that they are blind to what is going around them. They can reduce the size of things but they just don't do it. The song "the times they are a-changing" comes to mind. Sure, they still have their lion's share of the pro market but I feel Sony has rocked the boat. The Sony FF mirrorless are still not there yet when it comes to AF tracking abilities ( but great for non-action work) and battery life but given time and more RD, they will get there. I hope the size of truly capable pro models will get lighter, not heavier.
Hand phones got lighter and smaller. The early models were gigantic by comparison. Compactness and portability is what manufacturers should aim for. Yes, there is a limit as to how small FF lenses can go but striving to reduce sizes and making things lighter are surely the way to go.
Go Sony, go! Show them the way!
@Hugo808 - Yet another one mouthing off without actually having tried it.
Its the same excellent one in the A99 (1 yr ago) & A77 (~2 yrs ago). Only goes to show how outdated ppl can be. Still clutching to yr sacred cow periscope-technology OVF invented more than a century ago for submarines & film eh?
The thing that only allows framing & guessing what the picture will look like?
Those using it know they'll NEVER go back to pentaprism/OVFs. U forget it's not an OVF because it's so real. I won't bother listing the whole laundry list of advantages but suffice to sum up the conceptual breakthrough.
Its about seeing EXACTLY what the sensor is seeing BEFORE the shot. Which in turn is EXACTLY what the image looks like in Photoshop. Sony OLED EVFs can do that. Not LCD EVFs in other crap.
Understand the implications? Nope, cos u're still chimping at the LCD display like a chimp. *Hint - Its truly real time image preview, not delayed-near-real-time-trial-&-error-shoot-1st-think-later-BS.
xc1427: how about the start-up time ? I heard about 3s. If so, it is really disappointing.
There was a similar issue with the A99 when it was first released. However, the first firmware update really improved the start-up time to the point that most A99 users don't complain about it anymore.
I'd think they would be able to do the same shortly with the A7/A7R, since CPUs only get faster and code can always be optimized.
jonikon: With the A7s alongside their a99 and RX1, it appears Sony is aiming to be the king of of full frame niche cameras using two different lens mounts four different lens adapters and two different flash shoe mounts . Unfortunately for Sony, it is very unlikely that these niche cameras with their pedestrian performance and image quality that can be found in the much more popular Nikon lens mount cameras will ever be sold in quantities large enough to make them profitable for them. The only question is, how long will they keep trying?
@jonikon - Given your obvious alignment with Nikon and therefore utter ignorance, here's a shocking fact - Nikon is merely bit part player.
Its no longer the photography industry, its a semi-conductor industry. Look at how AMD fares against Intel and gasp.
There are only 2 serious players. Canon & Sony. Look at their annual reports' revenue figures compared to puny Nikon's revenues.
Reason? Canon & Sony make their own imaging sensors, lenses and electronic components. The entire vertical.
@HowaboutRAW -Nikon buys sensors from Sony for their top cameras, the D600/D610/D800, which says it all about the best in the industry. Hell even DxOmark says so. That is the only reason Nikon isn't dead yet, compared to the juggernauts, Sony & Canon.
Then again everyone buys from Sony too - Olympus, Panasonic, Pentax, smartphone makers. Selling to them is smart - semicon wafer fabs cost billions and you need sales volume.
Canon's top execs said it all - the only player they fear is Sony.
Scottelly: Frankly, I think someone at Sony is on crack. They should have been ready at launch with a whole group of 9 or 10 lenses, including a kit zoom (like a 28-90mm f3.5-5.6), a premium zoom (like a 24-105mm f4), a long zoom (like a 100-300mm f4-5.6), a standard prime (like a 50mm f1.4), a premium wide prime (like a 35mm f1.4), a macro (like a 100mm f2.8), a portrait lens (like a 135mm f2), a premium long telephoto (like a 300mm f2.8), and a super-wide zoom (like a 15-24mm f2.8). Then they could go from there, offering a longer telephoto, like a 500mm f4 prime and a super wide prime, like a 14mm f2.8. Eventually they could make an 85mm f1.2 to compete with the Canon L flagship lens. ALL of the new lenses should be weather sealed, and they could all be very good quality and priced to beat Nikons and the Canon L lenses. You don't launch a new line of cameras with no lenses! It's not like they don't have the ability to make lenses or something! I don't think I'll ever understand Sony.
The A7/A7R do not have image stabilization in the body for the sensor in any case.
The Alpha mount lenses do not have any optical image stabilisation anyway cos the Alpha 99 etc. have stabilisation in the body.
What do you lose with Sony's adapter?
If you really want professional FF performance including the priceless 3-4.5 stops gain through image stabilisation with ANY lens, you stick with the Alpha 99/77 etc.
For sure the AF will be much faster than the 3rd party stuff like Metabones (where they conceded it is not really usable). All auto functions are supposed to work.
@Scottelly + @km25,
I'm so sick and tired of the ignorant idiots who mouth off and moan/whine about a lack of lenses when they do not have the faintest inkiling what they are talking about.
All those lenses you want are already available on the Alpha mount full frame, in fact there are far BETTER stuff. You are supposed to use the A-E mount adapter to put back the short flange distance of the A7/7R back to what an Alpha is!
I have the holy trinity (Carl Zeiss) CZ16-35mm f2.8, CZ 24-70mm f2.8, 70-200mm f2.8 - what else would I need for 99.9% of my needs? The rest, I rent or borrow - usually the 100mm macro and Carl Zeiss 135mm f/1.8 Carl Zeiss T* - the latter of which is a legendary masterpiece.
& you are moaning about wanting a 135mm f2.0? Or worse - whining about crappy stuff like kit lenses & consumer crap?
I don't think you even belong to the league of full-frame photogs. Period.
Kodachrome200: All this stuff about how you dont need AF is sort of misguided. modern cameras are not designed to be manually focused. without using live view or the focus confirmation light your not going to get tac sharp focus. certainly you wont be able to manually focus on the fly the way you were able to with old school SLRs
Maybe that's cos you all are stuck on the old paradigm of optical view finders.
Heard of focus peaking? Electronic viewfinders ...
High praise indeed and long may it continue for innovation's sake.My next prime lens (macro) decision would certainly involve considering Sigma.
This also brings to mind what I have said long ago. Optical View Finders are dinosaur/submarine/WWI tech. That is why the focus is impossible to ascertain in the viewfinder.
EVFs are the only way to go. They are so good nowadays, they even offer focus peaking which would allow the photographer to see the point/areas of focus. Its an essential feature which any photographer needs (if only they ditch the OVF).
mpgxsvcd: Crack! Did you hear that? That was Sony hitting a home run off of Canon's washed up pitcher.
Nikon wasn't even in the game and Olympus and Panasonic were playing against each-other on the Pee-wee field.
Hasselbad was in the stands cheering on Sony and Pentax was absolutely dominating a game of tether-ball that no one cared to watch.
Fuji was artistically creating a master piece at a beautiful pond nearby. However, their brush broke and they spilled the paint everywhere which just made a huge mess.
& where is your source regarding the profit margin for this item? Right then... another post pulled out of your a** ...
For a persistent troll like you, probably only thing left for you is to use a Zeiss lens FIRST before you mouth off... duh!
What is it with writers nowadays. Its not the shutter sound that needs muffling!
Its the mirror slap - a dinosaur legacy of hte film era!
Even during the film era, we used rangefinder cameras for theatre productions that demanded it.
Today, if you want silent, any of the gazillion mirrorless or Sony SLT cameras are already inherently so.
Nikonworks: Apple was and is always over priced.
Android works for me at a much better price.
Ferrari is priced according to the cost of its genuinely expensive high end components and raw materials that is sold to really knowledgeable buyers.
Ford doesn't try to cheat by pricing its cheap low end components to con silly consumers who don't know better.
Zalllon: I like the idea of the android platform better, however the reality is most of us don't have time to spend learning how to tweak. From a marketing perspective Apple has it right, the proof is in the numbers. At work we are all given blackberry phones, but there is a large enough group that have iPhones that they are considering iPhone usage. 4 out 5 people I work with have an iPhone, and my whole team we all have iPhone 5's except for one Samsung Note 2. I have friends with the new Samsung S4, and they both carry extra batteries with them. The girl who has it is looking to switch to an iPhone after yesterday's iOS review.
The proof with the numbers?
70% of the smartphone users in the world are using Android. 20% using iPhone.
Most of the people around me are using Android, as befits the stats from IDC/Gartner et al.
You pulled your stats from where? Some figment of your imagination? Some cuckoo world you dreamed up?
Amateur Sony Shooter: Many wining photos were taken with Nikon cameras. Only one winer with NEX5.
@Raincheck, what and how long have you been smoking to make u so really dumb when it comes to semi-conductor manufacturing matters huh... such sensors are made to the same specs off a production line because any change or customisation increases cost tremendously.
Nikon isn't a semi-conductor company so to even suggest they can tell someone like Sony what engineering to build... tsk tsk... All Nikon did was come up with the firmware and software.
Of course, I'm NOT KIDDING! Yes, no, not, maybe? Go ahead Nikon users, poke back.
Problem is, this 8K prototyping work is not going to be of any help to Sharp for quite a few years yet. Being too far ahead of the times (no available 8K content) may not necessarily be that good for a company in bad financial shape.
If they can beat all their competitors with excellent but affordable 4K or even 1080P OLED 3D displays, that would certainly bring them out of their financial doldrums pronto.
Problem is not the tech sitting in Sharp's R&D divisions. Its their awful strategic mis-steps and poor implementation and execution to market that got them into their current mess.
This is an interesting development indeed. Focusing the image circle from a full frame lens onto a smaller sensor does make good physics sense if you need greater light intensity (+1 stop light) and resolution (MTF increase).
However, I find a lot of info lacking regarding the other irrefutable laws of physics. Additional lens elements between the lens and the sensor entails not just possible diffraction issues as mentioned by some but also additional distortion (pin cushion or barrel), chromatic aberrations, internal reflections and light loss.
The price may well be justified if the 4 additional elements introduced are top drawer ones - ultra low dispersion or fluorite elements or with state of the art coating. The pedigree of the lens designers seem impressive enough.
Jury's out until the real world review results roll in.
Everdog: According to "Just Posted", only P&S cameras and smartphones can be "Camera of the Year" because they sell the best. The D800e and D800 must be terrible!Please tell us who you really are and quit creating new IDs for posting here!
I think the D600 should have won or come in 2nd. Compare it to the Sony A99 which cost twice as much and performs 1/2 as well.
@Everdog - there are so many of you amateur whiners here it is unbelievable.
The A99 is Sony's top of the line pro body. Compared to other mid-tier bodies like the 5D Mk III and D800 which it is pitched against, its actually great value. If you can't afford it despite the value proposition, just suck it up and make do with your D600. A pro would never regard a D600 as a main body, at most a spare.
The A99 cost more than your D600 because of the pro feature sets - 200K shutter cycle life, 50ms shutter release lag (beating the default setting in the EOS 1DX), in body stabilisation up to 4.5 stops with ANY LENS, zero mirror vibration at ANY FOCAL LENGTH & SHUTTER SPEED, focus peaking, articulated screen, EVF for video and real-time preview, full-time PD autofocus, Carl Zeiss glass - the laundry list is way too long.
It therefore performs way better than the D600. But obviously all that is beyond your level of amateur comprehension. Especially one who has clearly never used the A99.
JacquesBalthazar: When I buy stuff, I look at the price/performance ratio like everyone else, and price is important. But I try and add another dimension to the value equation, and put a high weight on the sustainability/CSR side of things. I am prepared to pay a higher price for items that carry brands that belong to companies who have a publicised policy on those matters. That includes production conditions, fair employment, sourcing policies, environmental impact, etc.
I try and avoid giving my money, directly or indirectly, to sweatshops and environmentally irresponsible producers.
Nikon has a CSR policy. The Nikon point of view is here:
I tried to find information on Pixel's supply chain and CSR policies, and found nothing. They might be a good outfit (their management is proud of their production lines) or they might be pirates, I do not know at all, but if I purchase a grip for my D800, I'll buy it from Nikon, partly for that reason.
That's the kind of blinkered ignorance (cultural or otherwise) that I find sad.
Nikon et al pay a pittance to these same Asian contract manufacturers to OEM these cheap accessories and forbids them from selling to the end users (us). Artificially creates scarcity of supply and bangs a logo on it to reap astronomical profit margins. Ignorant customer gets duped into playing by these ridiculous rules.
Pixel Enterprise makes these same/similar items to sell to the end users at a much fairer price ($100 bucks ain't small change either please), minus the middleman. Pixel also makes a far healthier margin per unit sold. Employees are more likely to be better remunerated if the employers have a healthy bottom line. Both buyer and seller win.
Which is more sustainable? Remove your Western blinkers & think through it please. Its more a kind of values-based, cultural and economic stereotyping you are labouring under.
Operator: Why does the iOS version support so much more features than the Android version?
iOS:Timelapse ModeTimeWarp™ ModeSound sensor ModeShock & Vibration sensor ModeMetal & magnetism sensor ModeFacial recognition ModeLE HDR ModeLE HDR Timelapse ModeDistanceLapse™ ModeMotion detection ModeCable Release ModeStar trail ModeBulb Ramping TimelapseWi-Fi Slave ModeWi-Fi Master Mode (trigger other devices running Triggertrap MobileSunset & Sunrise CalculatorLag-o-Meter
Android:Timelapse ModeTimeWarp™ ModeLE HDR ModeLE HDR Timelapse ModeDistanceLapse™ Mode)Cable Release modeStar trail ModeBulb Ramping TimelapseWi-Fi Slave ModeWi-Fi Master Mode (trigger other devices running Triggertrap MobileSunset & Sunrise Calculator
Will the Android Version always be crippled or will we become a update?
@Photomonkey - If you've never used an Android, it really shows you know. At least try to educate yourself regarding the fundamental differences.
Most users utilize a fraction of Android's functionality because it is far more powerful than any crippled iPhone.
3rd party app devs on iOS do not even get the same SDKs that Apple employee devs get - only second rate SDKs that Apple deigns fit for them. No access to iCrap hardware.
All Android devs get the same SDKs as Google's own employees. If you are good, you can really develop anything Google can. No restrictions on apps listings (unless illegal or harmful). Apple removes apps that compete with Apple's own!
Google encourages rooting! After root, you can install any apps on Google Play. After you jail break your iCrap, you are a miscreant not fit for Apple & must go elsewhere (like Cydia) to find jailbreak apps.
iOS apps are technically never as capable as Android apps. Any diff is due to dev's resource allocation or greed.