Donnie G: The ME20F-SH is a good example of how Canon plays to its strengths by creating entirely new imaging tools that present real solutions to longstanding problems encountered by imaging industry professionals instead of simply imitating what's being done by others. This camera is the only product available that addresses a longstanding need, (30 years or more), in the broadcast and surveillance industries for high quality color video capture in total darkness. At $30,000 a pop, you and I won't be buying one, but Canon will sell boatloads of these cameras to those who need them. Also, expect to see that new locking EF cinema mount on all future Cinema EOS camera bodies. Good job Canon!
How does colors look in total darkness?
goshigoo: It is bigger and heavier than Sony A7 ?!
I always think m43 is about portability.........
At this price, wouldn't it better to consider A7 / A7II, which are selling at ~950 USD and 1400 USD only in Hong Kong...
TRK obviously do not have any knowledge at all about lens/sensor combination mathematics and I count his comments as complete nonsense. And repeating the same crap in many treads. This is worse than spam, because you cannot remove this guy with your spam filter. What's the purpose of this? Are you bored? Please make your own tread and stop destroying the rest. So it's possible not to waste my time on your crap. But of coarse you'll risk not to have some to talk to or write to.
Mike Sandman: Sony, if you're listening out there... fix the RAW compression issue via a firmware update and I'll place my order the next day.
I think the review is on target with its complaint. They say you're a "stone's throw" from being fully equal to a FF DSLR. You'll be a hair's breadth away with lossless RAW, or perhaps an option to save as an (uncompressed) DNG.
@Guidenet. Sorry. I don't want to act defensive or even offensive. Just commenting when I read this mount jumping anecdote. From a mount point of view, I find Sony were consistent. Even Minolta kept their SR bayonet unaltered for a very long period from 1959 to 1985. The connections were forward and backward compatible without need for modifications during the manual SR mount lifetime, until they stopped manufacturing lenses for manual focusing (1990's? later?) I also remember, when Minolta changed to the A mount in 1985 and Sony just continued using that mount, when they bought Minoltas camera division in 2005. Even today supporting the older mechanical AF system. The A mount has existed 30 years this year. The (F)E mount is obvious newer like all other mirrorless systems. Regarding IBIS has every Sony SLR/SLT A mount camera this feature - continuing this Minolta invention and supporting every A mount lens ever made. Finally it made it's way into the newest mirrorless Sony.
It looks like an amazing camera!If Samsung still has the possibility to use Schneider Kreuznack lenses, the lenses also can be superb.
Guidenet.Please help me explain which mounts Sony has jumped around with? I did only know the mirrorless E and the full compatible full frame version FE and the DSLR A acquired from Minolta. Did you upgrade your Nikon lenses from the 60's every time Nikon changed connections?
a silver award for the most advanced mirrorless camera ever made....
koolbreez: With this increased body size, why not a single mention of the "No Flash" issue, especially in the conclussions, as it is a big negative factor? Smaller,lighter models have flashes, why not this one, and why no talk at all about this issue?
Actually I find the A7II very impressive but build in flash offers the possibility to lighten up shadows/portraits in daylight and also trigger other flashes. Love my build in flashes in my Nex 7, Sony DSLT, DSLRs and M43s. When you need it - it's there. They all got it and thanks for that.
Canon apparently made a marketing decision not to cannibalize on it's very popular series Rebel, nD and similar, ending up making a downgraded basic camera even if improved compared to their first attempts. Other companies are not shy and are making mirrorless cameras in many (most) aspects superior to the M3. By the way - what a name for such a mediocre product. The competitors will not hold back their better cameras. Many here are pleased, that they can use this for a backup of their normal Canon equipment, but Canon are apparently afraid to make a really good camera, that could compete with their own DSLRs. (You can also use a Nex just as compatible with your Canon DSLR lenses.) Canon does still not look serious in the mirrorless market and that is a shame for a (former?) leader in digital photography equipment.
Why would anyone buy this camera among the competetion? Does it matter if it comes to US?
Glen K Wells: Jusy my two pennyworth but i think it is a mistake by Panasonic to not provide a built in flash.Ok add-ons are more powerful etc but who are these cameras aimed at?
The LX100 - no flash and now the GM5?Basic photo punters do not want to carry a separate flash around with them to a friends house or out in their other pocket. Just want to take a quick snap oh hang on everyone I need to find and then attach the flash - hey where did everyone go?A built in flash is one of the functions that make cameras like the E-M10 and the NEX I mean A6000 lines popular.A built in flash is dam useful. If there is no room on top anymore why not squeeze one on the front like the days of old - software or the camera can remove red-eye.
Personally I would not choose a camera without one, I know that counts for zip but it is a feature that I look for. Currently have D610, X-E2, NEX-6 and E-M10.
Gonna start a bring back the built in flash campaign haha.
A good reason for a build in flash is, that it also makes it possible to trigger at bigger flash. Even a small guide number can be used for outdoor portraits, but then there is the sync speed limitation to consider.
Just another Canon shooter: Is the 16-35 that bad or this is an operator error?
adjust your monitor or polish your glasses.
Maklike Tier: Wow, that 28mm f2 is TINY. The bayonetted extensions look very clever.
Adapters of that kind has been done for 75 years. And the IQ can be excellent.
ecube: As I recall, Sony was the first to offer [essentially] digital camera in 1981, the Mavica. In 1995, I used Mavica to document field work. I'm not sure but it seems that Contax was the lens used by Mavica. Around 1997, I tried Minolta D'Image at a traveling Minolta trailer. The so called "Minds of Minolta" merged with Konica and years later, Konica-Minolta was purchased by Sony
Why bring this up? Contax, Minolta, and Konica had GREAT lenses for SLR. Minolta, Canon, and Nikon produced GREAT Japanese lenses that competed with the best of German lenses since the late 1940s. I don't know when Sony stopped using Contax but I assume Sony owns all the lens design and technology pf Minolta and Konica. That said, I am puzzled why Sony seem well behind Canon and Nikon in producing lenses for their DSLR
On an "aside", the best Japanese lens I ever owned was the Takumar lenses from Asahi Optical Company, aka Pentax. That was in the mid-1960s
Be free to correct any of my errors
The 58mm f/1.2 does not have the Minolta AF A mount, but the older SR (MC/MD) manual focus mount (more or less back from 1959). Minolta changed bayonet/mount to the AF A mount in 1985. Sony continued that A mount unchanged. Minolta A mount lenses works perfect on Alpha A cameras.
Valentinian: Barney Britton (6): "one of the main differences in terms of performance between DSLRs and mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras has been autofocus".Well... also the EVF still has to catch-up with the DSLR' OVF...
From my point of view, one of the remaining problems with the mirrorless cameras are the "shutter"lack/interval from the picture you see at the screen/EVF and the resulting image when you'd pressed the shutter. So in that point I agree with you. But for manual focusing (and especially manual lenses) the manual focusing with magninfied and amplified pictures or picture peeking is difficult to match for the DSLRs mate screens.
The mirrorless is not the same as a rangefinder in the film days. What you see on the EVF is the same as you get at the picture. Not an optical substitute. (Lika a monocular build into the camera) As a picture imaging tool, it's more comparable with the large format cameras of the film days. And its much easier to manual focus on EVF (NEX and m43) than on the modern matte focus screens made for autofocus in DSLRs. I've both.
TheDevil: I like that they made the grip bigger. I have big hands and I hated the ergonomics of the first A7. I just wish they would have used the extra real estate and jammed a higher capacity battery in there.
I've several Panasonic M4/3 bodies. Only two of these share the same battery. One of few irritating issues with the Lumix M4/3 cameras. I also have and have had several Sony DSLR's (and a single SLT). They all share batteries.I think it's for the better to have only a few battery lines as Sony have chosen. The company could of course use the DSLR batteries in some of the "Nex'es"
Any new micro four-thirds manufacturer should be welcome.Today Kodak is just a brand name like Rollei and other companies of the past. Kodak may not have made good film cameras for decades, but was one of the leading developers of picture making for a period of nearly 100 years until bankruptcy a few years ago. Great respect from me!
Unfortunately is the best camera of the year not included in this poll..
A lot of the former big players in hardware and software - also some of the best - made some bad decisions or made bad choices in the past. Today they've been bought by competitors (like Adobe), are minor companies or are left to be forgotten. Adobe seems to be one of these in the future, not understanding the human nature and overwhelmed by greed, probably convinced by "marketing experts"
How a company can kill itself in a very short time. Forcing users to other brands. Stupid.