happypoppeye: Awesome ...so you buy a mirrorless camera for the main advantage of being smaller and lighter than an SLR then you put it on the back of one of the biggest heaviest cameras you can find.
Nice shots ...but wouldn't a macro lens work?
Some people, like myself, bought into mirrorless for its flexibility. I love being able to use a wide variety of unique lenses and adapters!
Richard Murdey: Wouldn't it have been simpler / more sane to have made a vaguely cubic, modular block with a lens mount and a sensor and call that a movie camera (like RED) ... rather than "the world's smallest full-frame camera" adapted with a crazy Rube Goldberg exoskeleton like that?
This "camera" shoots 4K. Camera is the key word. It is designed like a camera. If Sony wanted to design a 4K video recorder, they would have done so likely in the way of their VG design.
misolo: Not to nitpick, but the 4k video doesn't use the full sensor, only about 2/3 of it (90% horizontally, 76% vertically, 69% by area).
Well yeah... the video shoots at 16:9 while the sensor is 3:2, so of course part of the sensor isn't being used. The full width, however, is being used along with the necessary height to get the 16:9 aspect ratio. What they're saying is that there is no down sampling of the video or line skipping or any other type of processing to reduce the size.
I can see two great reasons why Sony gave the a7/r the e-mount:1). The ability to mount all legacy film lenses that already cover the 35mm format2). The ability to use Canon/Nikon full frame lenses and possibly even with autofocus
It seems to me that Sony made the right decision to go with e-mount, even if it means that they have to start from scratch with FE lenses. If I had the need and money, I would sell my a77 and jump on the a7r. One day, perhaps :)
At f/5.6, the Sony and Pentax 18-135 lenses appear very similar in sharpness (at least by looking at the stone wall). I figure in most real world situations, they should both be very capable when stopped down to f/8. I know my Sony is very sharp at f/9.
If you don't mind me saying, this is the best picture so far in this contest!
In all seriousness, it's a nice shot and a cool bus :)
Sony shooter here, and I love my a55. It's perfect for me! But I absolutely fell in love with the MP count of the D800 and the image samples that have come from it! It's just a poor college student's dream, though...
Is this Lake Tahoe? I've never seen it look so beautiful!
Delacosta: Came across this old thread while doing a search:
Kinda puts the whole debate in perspective doesn't it?
Apologies to anyone not yet born at the time ;-)
Yeah, way before my time! I'm only 17 and didn't really get into photography until maybe 3 years ago so I've never heard of anything smaller than 9mp XD. My 16mp a55 is perfect for me but I wouldn't complain with 24mp or 36mp!
This is my new favorite photo!
ponyman: Can't help thinking that 24mps is around twice the ideal and hugely detrimental gimmick for a supposedly 'serious' camera.
Even if it is detrimental, you always have the option to choose a smaller size. And 24MP should come in handy at least a few times in it's use.