UnitedNations: Such a sad news for JPEG shooters. The overall score is only '1' point better than the X100S which got 81% Gold Award.
Wonderful Raw performance in a small body...but the pathetic JPEG performance is very disappointing.
...And the Score of only 82% while being three times more expensive than the X100S is just not acceptable.
I really see no point in people buying this camera only to shoot JPEG. JPEG shooters should be happy with a OMD E10 or NEX6.
This camera makes most sense for people who need maximum detail and you will get that only with RAW.
justmeMN: Right now, the T3 (1100D) is #2 in Amazon (USA) Best Sellers in Digital SLR Cameras. Smug enthusiasts love to put down bottom-of-the-line cameras, but they sell well. The T5 (1200D) will sell well too.
They sell well because of the Canon brand name. Nothing to do with performance. Unfortunately history has shown big companies fall due to complacency and lets face Canon is getting increasingly complacent of late. If you compare this camera to the 5 year old T3i, the T3i is actually better speced than this camera.
D1N0: Dual controls reserved for the A8000?
The NEX7 was priced at $1200 at launch. This is a $650 camera. I would wager this is a NEX6 replacement and NOT a NEX7 replacement by the price difference alone.
Marvol: Of all the ridiculous criticisms aimed at Sony by DPR over its last few products, this:
"While its 'NEX-like' design is getting a bit stale"
has got to rank as one of the best. DPR is really outdoing itself trying to find fault.
Do I REALLY have to point to every DSLR made by CaNikon looking exactly like the predecessor - and pretty much every other DSLR ever made for that matter - but with a different name badge? The Canon G-series?
And on the other side of course, when Sony DOES come out with a novel design, they get marked down for not being consistent or unable to settle on a good design or whatever.
Truly DPR, the depths you are plumbing. Get a grip.
I have used and shot with 3 different NEX cameras. While their interface is horrible to say the least I had no problems actually using them.
DT200: Big Disappointment. The VF is worse and sensor will either be the same or slightly worse than the NEX 7 due to all the PDAF pixels (just tlike the NEX 6 was slightly worse).Even if the the PDAF works this time, there are still no long lenses with wide apertures to use it with. The 55-210 is too slow and is F/6.3.I guess you could wait for the 70-200mm lens, but its size is bigger than the Canon and Nikon full frame versions which defeats the purpose of the system.For now the NEX 7 is a bargain. Better VF, possibly better sensor and instead use less expense more abundant legacy lenses.
^^ First off Sony has made no claim that its the same 24 MP sensor as in the NEX7.
Lastly I really don't understand this whole fuss with corner sharpness. I just browsed through all the Challenge winners on Dpreview and not ONE of them had anything important in the corners that would spoil the photo.
Dimit: My initial impression is that it's the best compact system camera by far FOR THE MONEY!All nex 6 needed was fast AFand got it! And when SONY disclose fastest AF ever,it's true because this statement is UNDER CIPA PROTOCOL.When DPR states to get it ''with a grain of salt'' they forget that CIPA accounts for VARIOUS autofocusing coditions.I fancy DPR blogs as they are crowded and listen to various comments but the opinions of the reviewers are overrated as they seem to be underexperienced photographers-at least from what I can say by looking at their sample images over and over again.My opinion is that the DPR staff should avoid comments that are non identifiable by just looking at the initial photo and specs of a firstly launched camera.This is what they apparently did today,isn't it?Let's see what their technical review will be AFTER they have the camera in hands.Regards..
@DT200 - If you could post a link to where Sony made such a claim I would like to know.
deckhanddavy: Darn. I was really hoping to see more full frame sensors in compacts this year. Still keeping my fingers crossed.
Sony launched 2 just a few months back. One of them is the cheapest FF sensor camera you can buy new (at launch price).
Don't expect anything cheaper (from Sony at least) anytime soon.
Richard Murdey: And I thought Nikon fans were the ones that complained ...
Both Nikon and Canon are in the same pickle. Their low-mid-range APS-C dSLRs are perfectly good cameras, and have been for some years, but they are no longer attractive options for a lot of people who prefer now to go with something like Sony's A6000 (or GX-7, or OM-D M10, or EX-2) for the smaller size if for no other reason...
No just people with blind brand faith.
Mcdonalds is the largest burger chain in the world but that doesn't mean they make the best burger !
Andrew ATM216: Wow!!!! This is really unbelievable....in 2014 introducing a dslr (even if its entry level) with digic 4....
And the g1 x ll is rumored to have digic 6....so honestly, I am in shock and disbelief about this kind of "innovation" coming from canon....and I have been shooting with canon for over 20 years....
I think someone needs to tell the executives at canon to wake up....
^^ There is a large difference between good enough and excellent especially in the tech world.
If you get much better features and performance from a competing product at the same price range then why go for the lower performing one. Unfortunately Canon has brand value and many people will blindly buy all this outdated tech due to the brand.
Just compare it to the similarly priced (at launch. Much cheaper now Sony A58).
samfan: Well if they can pull off a 16mm , why wouldn't they rather make a decent 16-100 or something?
All these superzooms are rather tiring. 'Either get a crappy megazoom or deal with prime lenses' seems to be a message of the day. What happened to good zooms with moderate range and moderate speed? Not pushing the envelope much lately.
@iudex - Sigma has the 17-70mm f2.8-4 lens for Pentax. Pentax also has a 17-70mm f4 which is pretty decent I have heard.
iLandPhotos: hmmm what about VC for sony's a7 and a7r?
^^ You really gonna use a crappy superzoom with a high performance FF camera like an A7/A7r ?
ceaiu: How about a stabilized 16-85mm f/4? Anyone... Tokina?
Nikon has a 16-85mm f3.5-5.6 VR and Canon has a 15-85mm f3.5-5.6 IS. Both are not f4 constant but honestly 1 stop difference with today's modern sensors isn't really going to be a make or break moment for anyone.
Alphoid: Impressive engineering accomplishment. That said, I'd never consider buying or recommend one. What would be much more impressive would be extending the zoom range on an f/2.8 zoom without compromising image quality. Now a 16-105mm f/2.8 -- that would be revolutionary.
Tamron has a 28-105mm f2.8 in the film days. Wonder why no one has tried to replicate that.
peevee1: Nice. But at f/6.3 max... - do DSLRs even focus?
This is hardly the first time a lens has f6.3 at the long end. All of them focus fine. Well about as fine a cheap lens focuses. Don't expect it to compete with a Nikon 18-300mm in focusing speed.
Sigma makes a 17-70mm f2.8-4 which doesn't sell too well as its superzooms.
Even Tokina has a 16.5-135mm type lens which doens't really sell.
Nikon and Canon both have very good moderate zooms - 15-85mm IS USM for Canon and Nikon 16-85mm VR for Nikon.
Miwok: Traveling compagnion?Why would I buy an Fuji XE2 when I can find a Sony NEX-6 for half of the price. I like traveling with a backpack in some not so safe countries, and don't want to paranoid about getting rob of $2k of gear (X-E2 + a couple of glass)
^^ I agree with you that the Sony kit lens isn't in the league as the 18-50mm f2.8-4 but calling it junk is plain ridiculous IMO. I would bet you would fail to figure out which shot was taken with kit lens with sizes as small as the ones in the article.
oselimg: So...Dpreview is largely followed by 4/3 users. That's fine but please don't call a smaller sensor cameras as "innovation" and compare them to bigger sensor ones. It's not because 4/3 is bad, not at all but they are simply governed by their physical structure which can be advantage or disadvantage at times. Neither camera group is a replacement for the other.
Exactly I don't shoot mirrorless cameras. Never will ever buy a m43 camera EVER (just love FF images and m43 will never cut it for me). BUT I believe the EM-1 is deserving of being a winner. Its a very good camera at its price point.
It has no real weakness that would detract from its winner tag.
Everlast66: Regarding the "limited" FE mount lens line-up, it should be taken in account that Sony are building a NEW system here and this is the ONLY mirorrless FF system right now!In a generation or two Sony's mirorrless AF technology will catch up with traditional SLR/PDAF speeds and Sony will be far ahead in lens line-up.Nikon and Canon are only maintaining their existing systems and sooner or later will have to abandon the flappy mirros and bulky prisms and come up with new systems themselves. The 50 year-old lens systems will not be cutting it anymore if they will want to take advantage of the dropped mirror box.We should SUPPORT AND ENCOURAGE INOVATION if we don't want to keep getting minor updates in hugley advertised marketting gimmicks as we do from Canikon.
They are currently #2 in the mirrorless market in Japan ahead of Panasonic which is quite a feat if you consider the limited lens line up.
There are no reliable figures for sales for the rest of the globe unfortunately but in Japan at least they are #2.
Black Box: To sum up 19 pages of the review, Sony Alpha a7 is ambitious but rubbish. It should now be Sony's slogan.
Really. So 'rubbish' products get a silver award ? You should complain to DPR. :P
$1k for an f1.2 lens ? Nice. :)