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.