Artpt: Is there any information on watch camera was used to film this tidbit?
Says at end ..all shot on OM-D EM-1.(Nice demo of blue CA at 3:01 and other places. shooting trees against bright sky! )
Never expected to see this sort of stuff on dpreview
Umm Sony, could you PLEASE do this for A7R???
Thanks for posting this interesting article.Would be very interesting to see a blog on how you actually get in and adjust a lens.Machine name " POLC " Precision Optical Lens Checker
Very clever marketing
Found this..http://www.imatest.com/docs/sharpness/Sorry for all this off topic. Cheers
siggo: Am I the only one who thinks that a LENS test should test the LENS and it's optical properties? Then we can choose LENSES . These tests include the CAMERA as well. Sony offer adaptors for other lenses. How can we choose those lenses when their sharpness was determined on a different (possibly inferior) sensor. Sony will be delighted that their lenses appear fantastic here, in part due to their 36Mpix sensor.Obviously as a Lens/camera combination checking sharpness etc these tests have an important role, but perhaps Sony has opened up the need for camera independent lens tests to be included on sites like this. Apologies for long post and maybe it belongs in forum section
Can't see edit button now.My comment may be wrong, need to check how MTF 50 is found. Apologies. However reviewer himself said good result partly due to sensor.
Am I the only one who thinks that a LENS test should test the LENS and it's optical properties? Then we can choose LENSES . These tests include the CAMERA as well. Sony offer adaptors for other lenses. How can we choose those lenses when their sharpness was determined on a different (possibly inferior) sensor. Sony will be delighted that their lenses appear fantastic here, in part due to their 36Mpix sensor.Obviously as a Lens/camera combination checking sharpness etc these tests have an important role, but perhaps Sony has opened up the need for camera independent lens tests to be included on sites like this. Apologies for long post and maybe it belongs in forum section
OBI656: Because of this update I purchased A7R and what a pleasant surprise ... If Zeiss optics will proof their reputation I will damp my CANON system.
Obviously your store is not in Hungary or you would be needing to get permission from the strangers....tears or no tears!!! 8-)
jhsymington: An update of my post two hours ago - I ran the update again on the A7R and it worked second time round. Ignore the fixed red light but otherwise dead camera and just try again - the update will start halfway through but the second time it concluded successfully. Not a great process Sony!
From posts on other forums there are a lot of users "making errors" some needing 5 or more tries...
Barney, as so many are hopeful the "image improvements" will address some of the issues you highlighted in your review, does dpreview plan to check? eg selective noise reduction overshoot, does it now avoid worst shutter speeds for shake in auto ISO? , jpeg NR etc.
olyflyer: What a stupid idea those Nikon geniuses came up with...
Optional EVF, you have to chose to use a flash or an EVF... the same stupid idea Olympus implemented in their entry level mirrorless cameras. While the flip LCD is nice and useful, the removal of EVF is the craziest thing Nikon could do with this system. No future for me there, glad that I bought the V1 which is probably my last Nikon 1, unless Nikon makes one WITH an integrated EVF.
Yep, as the great philosopher Stephen Wright said "you can't have everything: Where would you put it?" Wanting a usaeable viewfinder in bright light and fill in flash is hardly wanting it all though, it's a given for anyone but the camera phone brigade IMHO.
Jogger: Seems ok for budget video folks.. but, why would anyone buy this for stills when the A7 is cheaper, much smaller, better built, and with 4x the sensor size... at this size and price, you might as well go for the D610.
"I have a lot of Canon glass and it knocks the socks of Sony's launch range for the A7." (EOSHD)???This site gave brilliant results for 35 and 55 Sony A7R lenses.Limited range yes, but 55 one of the sharpest they have tested.
Can someone please point me to some full resolution raw shots using the 55mm and 35mm lens and software to try converting them?
Apologies if I missed it, but you mentioned the diffraction reduction feature, but I can't find any evaluation if it. Assume it would be evident in, say, f16 or higher when comparing jpeg to raw?
I think they should stick this offer where the light is -5EV (where the sun doesn't shine) Once again the people who sell make disproportionally more than the people who create.
Does the 6D lack an anti-aliassing filter?
brancaleone: Are we sure that this picture is an inside combustion engine rather than a transmission differential? Nicely done image but nothing tells me that there's a combustion chamber, a piston, a rod, a crankshaft, or valves.Just a thought.
https://www.google.com.au/search?q=Bristol+Centaurus+Aero+Engine&espv=210&es_sm=93&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=B2ekUr3QHsjyiAfyvYHYDA&ved=0CDsQsAQ&biw=1920&bih=1074#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=OhXQirYkAHpdwM%3A%3BPGef01oZnellRM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.flightglobal.com%252Fairspace%252Fmedia%252Faeroenginespistoncutaways%252Fimages%252F5672%252Fbristol-centaurus-cutaway.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fforums.autosport.com%252Ftopic%252F137848-interesting-1907-engine%252Fpage-2%3B850%3B671 Looks like this picture is of the airscrew reduction gear set on the front of the engine. Is it inside the engine?. Difficult question...maybe it is inside the engine package. Anyway, a nice photo. And this is a photo site not an engineering one!
Meets the rules, nice
Nice...DOES show INSIDE the engine