Sony is finally getting the memo that NEX really needs small lenses. Good job, Sony!
Now if only the 30mm f1.8 would have been a pancake.....
tkbslc: Sony needed to hit one out of the park to compete with Canon and Nikon and instead they just bunted.
19 AF point, 6fps and an EVF no bigger than the OVF on Canon/Nikon. On top of that I lose 1/3 stop of light. Why would I pick this over 5Dmk3 or D800?
OK, fair points. I just feel it is pretty conservative. Sony needs to come out swinging if they want to get a hold in the FF market. They still seem afraid to go big.
I was expecting a Sony SLT at this price point to have a HUGE viewfinder, fast framerates and more "real" AF points. Even if only to win the specs-on-the-box war.
Jos van Dijk: I don't understand why Sony that bought Konica Minolta Camera branch never brought a digital Hexar on the market. Great camera, great lens, great aperture, great settings... They could have done it for a less ridiculous price than what we'll have to pay for this one...
If they could have done it for a lower price, they would have! People say that stuff all the time without anything but hopes and dreams to back it up.
shaocaholica: 2008: You can't put a FF sensor into a four thirds sized body. Its PHYSICS!2012: Shut up internet.
I don't remember anyone saying that. The demand and market for such a camera was and is being questioned.
Sony needed to hit one out of the park to compete with Canon and Nikon and instead they just bunted.
DStudio: I doubt many of the critics of the Q have ever held one in their hand, let alone used one or seen the results. With the current Q, just the small size and the appearance makes you want one, as well as the build quality.
Those who own one give it very high ratings and produce nice images.
How about a 1", 4/3 or APS-C sensor and we call it the same $600 the Q costs?
@Dstudio : you do know that they have pictures you can download on this website as well as flickr, forums, etc. I've seen the pictures.
tkbslc: So I can buy this with a couple variable max aperture zoom lenses for well over a grand, or I can get a FZ200 from Panasonic with a 25-600mm f2.8 zoom and the same size sensor for $500.
Of course, but f1.4 on a 1/2.3" sensor still doesn't give shallow DOF and all those lenses become super telephotos with the 5x crop factor.
If you want to be impressed, spend the same on m4/3 or NEX and attach a f1.4 lens to it.
mgm2: This is a great system. The availability of the adapter puts it head and shoulders above the RX100.
Most DSLR lenses were never intended to resolve at such pixel density over a such a small area. You will likely get soft results.
And like I said.... :)
Why would I need to? It's got a 25-600mm f2.8 lens on it already.
Mssimo: Yes it has a tiny sensor but at least it costs a lot less than its competitors.....Ohh wait a sec...nevermind
Totally missing the point "FTW". Pun intended.
donaldxr: I thought Nikon was making a mistake with such a small sensor, but they're not so bad. But this just seems like a complete waste of money.
NIkon sensor is smaller, but at least it is a whole step up from most $100 compacts and it focuses as fast as a DSLR. There's some reason to own it.
So I can buy this with a couple variable max aperture zoom lenses for well over a grand, or I can get a FZ200 from Panasonic with a 25-600mm f2.8 zoom and the same size sensor for $500.
People who have spent nearly a grand on a camera that takes PnS grade photos would HAVE to give it a good review. Otherwise they would cry themselves to sleep. Confirmation bias demands it.
Rob P: 82mm filter thread on a 55mm f/1.4 lens? Ouch. How big is that beast?
How often are the edges within the DOF? Anytime your subject is off center. And I am not just talking about the very edge. Even at the rule of third lines, a lot of f1.4 primes suck wide open.
Uaru: Fuji X mount, please.
It will be easily adaptable from any of the available DSLR mounts.
Most 50mm f1.4 lenses are pretty awful at the edges at max aperture and also vignette. I'm thinking maybe they decided to see what it takes to make a razor sharp f1.4 prime edge to edge at all apertures and on FF sensors.
At least I hope so, otherwise, why lug around that beast?
way to go Samyang!
CAcreeks: Is the 18-55/2.8-4.0 relatively small (for its range and speed) because it is non-retrofocus?
That's a big part.