Jorginho: It is a mystery to me how dpreview seriously says that the Sony A5100 is an incredibly compact cam etc in their final sentences. We are talking interchangeble lenses and we really know that many lenses of the Sony are far from being compact let alone being good. You'd expect more from any reviewer than just make the mistakes firsttime buyers make buy going for the body and forget about the importance of lenses.....
^^I have no clue what you are talking about. Some context of what you are talking about is badly needed.
Jonathan F/2: Lack of an EVF is a major con against the A5100. Any camera with no EVF/OVF should be bumped from contention.
^^ Yes it may be unless I am on a tripod I hate MF lenses for handheld shooting. I have never used film so i have no technique in using MF lenses so I wasted some money trying them out but learned my lesson and I stay clear of them as far as possible.
Not saying I don't appreciate the build quality of a good MF lens but I need AF and so don't care about going back to MF lenses. I feel MF lenses are best used with film.
@pkosewski - I would wager you are dead wrong about the MF lenses usage especially at this price point. I have never seen anyone in my country using NEX with MF lenses. A few video guys use MF lenses but those are with cameras like the A7s and A7rII not the cheap A5100 and A6000 cameras.
Most of these camera buyers are probably going to stick with the kit lens or at most they will buy a cheap tele lens and use that only.
People who buy these cameras generally use the kit lens and nothing else.
And with the kit lens the camera is pretty compact.
^^ The D3300 does have an OVF.
@Jonathan - Just because you feel an EVF/OVF is a must have there are plenty who don't care for one. Especially since most people in this price range and moving up from cellphones which also lack an EVF/OVF.
dbm305: First fast aperture 85 with stabilisation? Zeiss Batis Sonnar 85mm 1.8 T*!!!!!
They mean the first fast aperture 85mm f1.8 *DSLR* lens. :)
DaddyG: Speaking of the Olympics, do you think any sports pros will be using the vaunted Sony A6300?
If people start listening to trolls of every system out there then where will that leave us ?
People saying Sony AF can match something like a 1Dx II or D4s are obviously trolls who don't know better.
The truth is that while mirrorless systems have come a long way from where they were a few years ago they still have some catching up to do with the best of the best available right now.
That said their performance has improved by leaps and bounds so much so that for 'most' people the performance is more than adequate. Pros however will want the best and the Sony or any mirrorless system for that matter isn't the best at the moment.
aramgrg: Canon lens prices are the most reasonable for me. Too bad they still lag behind in MLC, for like 5 years. My Oly E-PL2 is faster in every regard than M2
@Max - That is old school thinking. The Sony A6000 can do 11 fps and 22 raw frame buffer at $600. The similarly priced D5500 does 5 fps and has a 7 frame RAW buffer and the Canon 80D at $1100 body only price does 7 fps and a 24 RAW frame buffer.
So if you want good fps and speed and don't have the budget for a camera like the 7D mk 2 then a mirrorless camera is your best option actually !
The Canon M3 which is priced pretty close to the A6000 has a 4 fps frame rate with 4 RAW buffer. :P
And please don't tell me you are using Japan sales figures and taking one countries market share and interpolating the data for the entire world ?
^^ Dude Sony doesn't pay me a dime for promoting them so I call a spade a spade.
Sony has a lot of issues like complex menus (they get my goat too !), poor battery life (yeah people say get a spare but charging 5 batteries for a shoot ain't fun), poor high ISO performance (not terrible but not class leading either) etc etc.
However one area where I haven't been let down is AF tracking. Its been better than my earlier A55 DSLT and while I don't shoot sports its rarely let me down.
I use a 5D mk 3 for work from time to time and while the responsiveness is much better overall I don't find the AF to me much better. I get similar number of keepers and OOF frames with either the Canon or the Sony.
If tomorrow Canon comes out with something really revolutionary and doesn't cost a lot of money I may switch to Canon. Sony is what I bought because of money constraints and general familiarity with the system. But if required and I can afford it I can switch anytime.
^^ Great someone calls your BS and rather than graciously choosing to not respond you instead change the topic and post some nonsense to cover up all the BS you posted. Great going ! :)
If there are still slow ass cameras today and you don't mind slow ass cameras then the Canon is best for you. However thankfully most people don't buy slow cameras and Canon MLC don't sell much anywhere in the world.
Retro1976: Wow, is this Sony Central ? Man I would easily pick the Olympus EM10 over the Sony A6000. Olympus has a better EVF, incredible in body IS, touch screen, fast auto focus (with touch AF), wayyyyy better JPEGs, and an incredible lens selection. Dpreview, do explain yourself, your bias is really showing :)
You probably would but there is a reason the A6000 has been way up the mirrorless charts on Amazon for years now. Its still simply a camera a lot of people want.
And no offence to the Olympus but its a smaller sensor camera.
villagranvicent: At least on my computer the shots at 100% view looks pretty crappy. Too much noise, lack of detail and blown highlights. But what the heck, is a SONY right?
So you like to see all your photos at 100% ? Hmm...
ChrisH37: Read the specs, saw the price, massively tempted as I was about to buy a Sony a7RII anyway.
Then I looked at the lens lineup. I know everyone has to start somewhere, but the native lens lineup is absurdly expensive.
£2000 for a near equivalent to a 35mm 1.8 / 85mm 1.8 combo (31mm and 77mm in Pentax speak). £1900 for a 70-200mm 2.8.
To be fair (I am a Sony user) Sony isn't much better in cheap lenses. The 85mm f1.8 Batis is a $1200 lens and Sony doesn't have a 35mm f1.8/f2 AF lens as yet.
So either you buy a 35mm f2.8 or the MF only Loxia 35mm f2 none of which are cheap.
Of course all of these lenses are pretty new designs while the Pentax lenses are based on decades old lens designs.
dpthoughts: I see two odd things which I dislike.
no 1. it is meaningless to compare a 4-exposure mode like pixelshift to an 1-exposure mode like single-shot in the D810. If you compare properly, you would do it against a series of four consecutive shots, which are merged in photoshop, with or without the help of an action to automate this.
Then, the alleged noise advantage of pixel shift would be what it is: void ;)
no 2. The K-1 steals its dynamic range advantage by means of cheating (doing denoising on raws). Evidence: the ratio between luminance noise and chroma noise appears to be shifted in favour for choma noise. If the firmware doesn't do any denoising, then this ratio must always be constant (due to maths).
This is a plausible explanation, why the K-1 will do so well on reviews, w/o having received a new miracle sensor from Sony. Sony wouldn't give such to Ricoh, so that Ricoh's cams appeared as cheaper and better than Sonys own ;) that never happened, of course.
^^ To be fair the Nikon has much better AF and a far more robust flash and lens selection. A single camera body doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things and is why Nikon and Canon can charge so much and still sell much more than smaller brands like Pentax and Olympus even though feature wise they offer much more bang for the buck.
7seven7: Wow !!! :oThe image quality in PS Mode is as good as the best Medium Format Camera... for the price of the best APSc DSLR !So the Lens makers will come back designing the best lenses for the Pentax K mount !Great !
That will depend on sales unfortunately.
More competition is always good for the customer as it will encourage other manufacturers to innovate to survive so Pentax is on the right track but unfortunately they haven't seen much traction in the market.
bakhtyar kurdi: In theory, it looks really good, but in real life, the PS has very limited use, the only situations I think of is still life and product photography, and in those situations DR is not important, because you have control over the light, for landscape, any movement in tree branches, or even the grass will rune the picture, instead, just use a 3 time longer lens and combine 4 pictures to get a very large and clean picture for the FL you want, there is many good softwares to stitch them, like PS and Gegapan.
Dude enough with your BS please ! The 100mm has horrible AF and if you say you can't use AF for macro work then you have no idea what you are talking about because I know plenty of people who get fantastic results when they know what they are doing.
PS is very nice and I don't discount that. However its still not going to matter much if your subject is out of focus since the lens isn't very good at AF.
alcaher: Im gointo to buy the d500 but i also want so badly the K-1, Forget about those digital medium format big boxes.
This two cameras are going to be the best two dslrs of 2016.
@M Jesper - I am not a Canon user or Fanboi but they have innovated recently like their dual pixel technology that allows you to use your LCD for quick focusing which is frankly awesome especially when trying for some difficult angles that won't allow you to properly manual focus.
Bar none class leading performance 100mm macro ? :P
I am pretty sure that isn't true.
Lenstip tested the lens and found the Canon 100mm f2.8 L lens sharper wide open and stopped down said they were essentially the same which is where all macro lenses are very very sharp.
It is a pretty small lens though ill give it that.
Sid911: And the price - seriously interesting! The camera with the 24-70 f2.8 lens will cost LESS than Sony A7rII body ONLY! And this one has GPS! Outstanding Value!
Well they are different segments. The older A7r is more comparable to this camera since they share the same sensor more or less.
The A7rII has a slightly better sensor but with far better video and is more of a convergence camera.
AF of the A7rII should also be better as the AF points covers a far larger portion of the sensor.
I mean if you are just comparing price then the Sony A7 with kit lens and 50mm f1.8 FE lens is about the same price as this camera but the A7 is again not in the same segment as this camera and so cannot be really directly compared.
LWW: What a load of rubbish about lack of lenses, if you would all get off your sorry rear ends and create some 'image impact' and distract with that lofty ideal, you'll do just fine with what is already available.
@Mr Fantastic Fox - There are plenty of gaps in the Pentax line up. When I first started photography I loved the Pentax bodies but none of the lenses really appealed to me.
Pentaxians love the Limited lenses and while they are beautiful to behold most are based on decades old lens designs and they are pretty expensive to boot at least in my country.
And for a new system there is a lack of budget alternatives to the top end lenses.
Sure Pentax will eventually fill the gaps but there are plenty right now.
UWA lenses that accept filters like a 16-35mm f2.8, cheap modern UWA lenses like the Nikon 18-35mm AF-S, cheaper tele zoom like a 70-200mm f4 etc etc.