Maklike Tier: I love the 'concept' of this camera, but if you have to stick a $1000 prime onto it to get quality shots from it, then you're looking at a $1600 package....with only one lens. For that sort of money you could get an EM5/10 with THREE f1.8 primes, or the EM5 Elite with the Pro 2.8 zoom.
I think Sony is an incredibly innovative and adventurous company, but they really do lack the 'X-Factor' that companies like Fuji and Olympus have.
I understand most of their zooms suck but they have quite a few quality cheap primes like the 35mm f1.8 OSS, 50mm f1.8 OSS and even a good 18-105mm PZ OSS zoom. All these lenses are pretty inexpensive.
Even the cheap 20mm f2.8 pancake is a reasonably sharp lens. With a 24 MP sensor, you will still get more resolution, dynamic range and noise performance than a 16 MP m43 camera with a sharp lens.
The Fuji system has some amazing prime lenses, class leading primes and ISO performance that rivals FF cameras. But the cameras are pretty big and heavy (for a mirrorless camera).
IonPortraits: Those images, more than anything else, show the cleverness of this camera to hide its main disadvantage (too many pixels for the sensor's size ). Once you start doing some proper manipulation though, it all comes to the surface. A good quality compact more than anything else "IQ-wise", and I wouldn't be negative at all if this technological marvel was available in a 6 or 8 mpx version as well.
I don't completely disagree with you but lacking anything else other than DXOMark, its the only real half decent comparison tool around and in that case the Sony is clearly better even though its using a much older sensor than the Nikon.
If we choose to ignore DXOmarks findings we should at least be able to agree that the 20 MP sensor doesn't hinder its performance compared to similar sized sensors.
And the 1 V3 isn't much better in comparison to the other Nikon sensors -
Well if DXO Mark is to be believed. This sensor is better than the ones on the Nikon 1 series which is roughly the same size.
QuarryCat: Nikon - still 3 years behind Canon - but more expensive.Nikon - always to late.
Yes just like the Nikon 14-24mm f2.8, 16-35mm f4, 18-300mm that Canon users had for years !!! :)
dwill23: Sigma 18-35 f1.8 HSM is cheaper and over 2 stops faster. C'mon canon, reverse engineer Sigma's new optical formula and match their quality and I might pay the 33% price premium for your red stripe.
My 17-40 has been a total wedding work horse for me on my 5D3. I know some like to shoot the 24-70 L but the first one was garbage and 2nd one too costly.
However, the price point of the 10-18 sounds like it will move a lot of units, however, it's not that bright.
^^ Who are you referring to ? The ignorant OP or the two other chaps who made sensible posts ?
Thorgrem: I think the 16-35 f/4 is pritty expensive for $1200. Can get the Pana 12-35 f/2.8 or the Olym 12-40 f/2.8 for less then $1000
Canon has an existing 17-55mm f2.8 IS for that price. They won't be able to sell a f4 APS-C lens at that price. :P
Simon jackson: dumb question but vs a6000?
Not true. On sensor phase points are smaller and less accurate. The A99 has 102 AF points on the sensor but they can't help to acquire focus. Only track focus once the main focus points lock focus.
The A77 has proper phase sensors which are bigger than on sensor points and works with all lenses including 3rd party ones.
Vitruvius: Top of page 4 - the SLT mirror does NOT redirect 1/3 of the light. It is about 1/3 of a stop of light.
Interesting that they would NOT have included the on-sensor phase detect AF from the a6000 in this camera in addition to the SLT AF sensors. I have about 7000+ actuation shooting action with my A77 and the AF tracking is actually very poor even with fast lenses and SSM / HSM.The only reason I would have spent an extra $400 on the new A77ii was for the same AF system as the a6000. I wonder why they would not have included this on the A77ii? If it is the same sensor why can't they combine the information from both AF systems? But I guess we will have to see how they compare.
The A6000 has on sensor phase detect points which only work with few lenses . The A77 II has phase detect points but none on the sensor. That means its faster than on sensor points and works with all compatible lenses including 3rd party options.
JT986: I will buy one if they make one for F-mount.
It won't work on F mount. Its designed for mirrorless cameras only. Won't work on ANY DSLR let alone Nikon DSLRs.
AlexBakerPhotoz: Very nice to see the whole workflow and thought process so fully explained. Most people just don't know what a professional photographer actually does and how much thought and expertise goes into making one excellent image. Thank you for your generosity in sharing this is such detail.
Fully agree !!! :)
joe6pack: Before I install it, can someone tell me more about this software?
How big is the installation? I don't have Lr or PS.
Are there services running in the background even if I don't run the software? e.g. DRM, Update, etc
Review on Amazon isn't so exciting. I understand this is FREE but there are a lot of harm a bad software is capable of doing.
@Joe - Read up sarcasm. :P
Honestly its a perfectly valid question and I enjoy sarcasm but in this case it was a bit uncalled for. Not everyone wants to support DRM and other crappy stuff software companies do.
William Koehler: A handy specification to include would be maximum video clip length(time).
Most cameras can record a max of 29 minutes video to avoid the higher taxes dedicated video cameras attract.
srados: I hate electronic viewfinder.When I look into, my eye focus on the grid on the screen...from what the screen was made off. #1 reason that keeps me away from Sony.
You should give EVFs a second change. They are getting better and better with every iteration. I HATED the EVF on my A55 when I moved from the beautiful pentaprism viewfinder on my A700.
I don't love the EVF but I don't hate it either. I no longer go wow when looking at FF viewfinders anymore and I have gotten accustomed to the advantages of the EVF . Shooting with an OVF camera now seems wrong somehow to me.
JerryKraut: Nice camera. Pity I have given up on autofocus. My subjects are mostly static or slow-moving. Don't see the advantage of draining batteries. I can see why sports or other action photographers need AF - and why most of them use Canon cameras for their purposes, though.
I am neither a sports or action photographer but I always appreciate better AF ! :P
I don't know any photographer who isn't a pro who uses MF only with DSLR so I am not in some minority.
Banhmi: I'm pretty irked that they reduced features from the original a77.
Specifically, I actually really LIKE GPS now, even though I originally thought it was pointless.
They even removed the switch between spot, center weighted and matrix metering.
GPS removal I can understand as they would have had to make different models depending on where you live as for instance the Russia model of the A77 didn't have GPS as they use GLONASS.
But the AF assist beam and the control switch for metering would have max added $50 to the cost. Not sure why they removed these two minor but useful features in their flagship APS-C camera.
Black Box: Nice, light, quite interesting DSLR. Yes, there are "more exciting" cameras. However, given a choice, I'd pick Nikon any time any day. Just think about it for a moment.
In the past 2 years, Sony has started and buried a whole new line of cameras, and is now burying one of the oldest mounts.
In the past 10 years Canon has started EF-S, then EF-M, and didn't do much good with any of them.
Even Samsung already introduced NX Mini in addition to barely breathing NX mount.
The only two mounts with hundreds of legacy lenses are Nikon F and Pentax K. For better or for worse, Nikon respects their customers' habits, providing them with cameras to use their lenses with. And consistency is the sign of class.
^^ I took a generic version of the chill pill and it never worked. :(
Stay away from generics !!! Get branded only !!!
@Sandy_b - That was a rumor. I personally OWN the A37 and it works perfectly with all of my old Minolta screw drive lenses.
@John Clinch - Thank you for your comment John. :)
Unfortunately a lot of people don't know this when buying a camera for the first time. For some they are happy with the kit lens and maybe a telephoto and thats that. However there are significant others who try to buy some old lenses and see that it doesn't focus on their bodies which causes problems.
Its fine in the UK and other developed countries where people can afford to change cameras often, but in developing countries like mine people tend to squeeze the maximum life out of their cameras and so people stuck with such a camera cannot make maximum use of Nikon branded lenses.
In any case, my points do not detract in any way my belief that this is still a good camera. :)
Its the company that I have beef with. :P
sandy b: Lets see, best 24 mp sensor, class leading AF, advanced carbon fibre build, a real optical viewfinder, Excellent FPS for its class, access to the best lens lineup, upgrade possibilty to the best FF camera lineup.
Nothing exciting here, it must suck because its a Nikon.
@Sandy_b - Point accepted. Dpreview's test is dead wrong it seems.
Really so because Nikon started to screw customers right from the D40 means that my statement is BS ?
What great advantage did it offer at the time other than to screw customers ? The D40 is barely any smaller than a EOS 350D.
And its not just Sigma. Even most Tamron lenses won't AF in live view for quite a few Nikon DSLRs.
And lets not forget the 3rd party battery issue .
My point remains whether you call it BS or not. Nikon is screwing customers and you seem to suggest we all bend over and enjoy it. :P
Please read the review. The buffer has 6 JPEG files. If you have any different info please post the links.
Yes it probably tracks focus better but not by much. And the no of screw drive lenses is not insignificant.