Kim Letkeman: Fuji's doing some nice work in this series of bodies ... so why on earth is this not a constant f/4? What a stroke of design that would have been ...
Sony 18-105/4 is also a fixed length lens as it does not extend with zoom (which usually adds length as well). However, it is also the reason why it is limited to 105mm. Using a variable aperture lens (which is also slower at longer FL likely allows the lens to be slightly slimmer (although it isn't really slim, but it would be thicker if it were faster), and slightly shorter as well while giving a bit more reach.
You can also look at Minolta 70-210/4 (the beer can) vs Minolta 70-210/3.5-4.5 (the version that replaced the beer can in 1987), the latter is significantly smaller. It is also lighter, but also by virtue of using more plastic.
ThePhilips: MFD (min focusing distance) of 45cm? Ouch.
One of the reason I went with the m43 was that the Oly lenses have relatively short MFD. Helps enormously in tight corners and on social outings.
MFD isn't all that important. You're getting a lens with 1:3.7 magnification with that distance. Pretty good I say.
lacikuss: Unfortunately the water fountain photos were taken with high shutter speeds, I'd like to see those pictures taken at 1/10th or 1/6th of a second hand held...:(
Good light conditions used, just not good to slow down the shutter speed enough... it also doesn't help that yet another stop is lost with ISO 200 as the base. It would take a lot to achieve the slow shutter speed down to test 5-stops of stabilization... unless DPR reviewer actually bothered with it. We're looking at 1s shutter speed handheld at 18mm.
"why on earth is this not a constant f/4? What a stroke of design that would have been..."
Size and weight. Using a variable (and smaller) aperture allows for keeping the size and weight down so that is a compromise.
EssexAsh: and no shots to demonstrate how good the IS is. Thanks for nothing DP.
For a system that claims 5-stops, about 2-stops is too little (I've found pretty much any stabilization system good for couple of stops).
Clearly, not a lens for shooting eye-lids in social gatherings.
jkoch2: The gear set-up in the photo says it all: the camera body itself is a tiny, tiny component of what is involved in industrial-grade video productions. There is a geometric increase in direct cost and post-production investment to obtain smaller and smaller quotients of quality. Those tiny quotients may make a difference in public response to a 10-second TV spot for Chevy.
It's a surprise, though, that a firm would bother with a cumbersome jerry-rig with an a7s, given that there are quite a number of excellent professional video cameras pre-built with good controls, filters, and so on. Is Sony cannibalizing its own sales of such gear?
Another question: why prefer an a7s for an automobile ad? The rolling shutter problem, exacerbated by the feed from the large sensor, might make the Chevys look rubbery as they drive by. Or maybe most of the ad will use those (now ubiquitous) slider and jib shots.
You're missing the point on why a company would go the distance. Business opportunity.
BTW, comment on video quality only after you have seen the results.
Just another Canon shooter: Did Chevy shrink so much in size to require a 600mm lens?
An 8mm fisheye lens does too.
BobYIL: A camera costing only $2.500 has been chosen by some top pros to do the job of an Alexa costing beyond $50.000 and some of us bashing DPR for making it news??
Leave it to Ontario Gone to recommend an FZ1000 instead. Good thing Olympus or Panasonic do not make mobile phones with 4K capability, or else that too would figure in here.
Serickmetz: Well that was stupid, they should have just used a real camera and saved themselves time and money.
Then you're missing the point of why a company doesn't put all its eggs in one basket.
steelhead3: I can't believe they sullied that rig with that old Nikon lens.
Zeiss cine lenses are also quite popular.
Adaptability was always the point of E-mount (also Sony FZ-mount).
pkosewski: They took the A7S and they built this complicated rig, but they used one of Nikon's lenses.This really tells the whole story about Sony E system...
That it is ridiculous to complain about a system which can handle just about ANY system... only limited by the budget and skills of the photo/videographer.
If that is your style, sure you can... especially if your style is to use a macro lens.
Because nobody would ever use a 600mm lens on a FF camera to capture a Blue Whale?
Princess News: Why so many Sony haters? A pro is telling the world of photography how awesome this camera is and many are mad for saying so! I don't get it.
Insecurity of the strangest kind leads to it.
Just another Canon shooter: Imagine how much heavier this would be with a dSLR :=)
Which DSLR? And why DSLR?
That is the beauty of such cameras. Your lens choices are limited only by your own skills and budget.
bgbs: Why not just get an HD camera than making this painful rig?
This is a 4K capable camera rig, with FF sensor.
nerd2: Why they are still making long-flange (mirrored) version of their camera instead of going full mirrorless?
Rishi, I don't see why lenses will be an issue with A-mount. You can pick up Sony 70-200/2.8 SSM II and use a similar lens from another mount. If you desire to keep FOV identical, you can always select a specific FL range to work with (for example, 70-135mm on a77 will compare to 105-200mm on a FF).
Steven Blackwood: This is a real conundrum. While most specs seem to favor the RX10, the absence of OSS seems a real oversight in a camera priced so high. I have a video at Vimeo that illustrates why this is important, esp. at telephoto.The camera used is a 70d with the 18-135 IS lens (which is pretty close to the 200 equiv. on the RX10. The video was originally made to illustrate what people with Nystagmus (wobbly eyes). The video is only 38 sec. long. Oh, and the video is handheld; obviously on a tripod the issue would be irrelevant.
******************************EDIT: Now I am confused. The specs fir the RX10 does say it has OSS but in the head to head video comparison, it seems to say it does not. Does this mean that OSS does not operate in video mode? If not, ny criticism remains. If it DOES operate, forget I said anything: RX10 wins on points (It does have an ND filter!)
Sony uses a combination of digital and optical stabilization for video (only optical for stills), a point that such reviews should include.