bluevellet: EM1 mark II... my body is ready.
Yes, contrast detect is generally more accurate... in good light.
When lighting conditions dim, it gets slower and if your subject moves, you may never lock focus correctly. That's certainly true for Olympus.
Some manufacturers are still better than others. Panasonic probably leads in this department with their cameras with AF certified at -4EV so you can really go in dark places. But it's only good in single shot focus. Forget about actually tracking. So, even for Panasonic, there's still some work to be done to improve AF.
But now that EVF is 2 years old, already used in lower end Olympus products. As a product refresh and in the face of rival cameras using higher-end EVFs, they have to upgrade with the flagship EM1.
Yes, AF is good, was improved upon with firmware updates but it can always be better. AF Tracking still lags (high end) DSLRs, both in accuracy and in lower light.
amonsul: No really. Again taking news form SonyAlphaRumors without quoting the source?http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sony-releases-three-new-sensor-two-of-them-for-micro-four-thirds/
Ultimately, it all comes back to sony.net, not the rumor site network (Alpha or m43)
There's no guarantee with the mark II. Either way, the sensor refresh is coming.
I'm also looking forward to the advancements of PDAF and EVF tech and quite possibly the hi-res option will be available hand-held, as was suggested a short while ago.
EM1 mark II... my body is ready.
Philnw2: I thought DPReview's A7II review was justified to criticize the lossy Raw files. It didn't used to be that way for Sony's files. Nikon's option to select lossy RAW or non-lossy RAW is a much better way to go.
I am disappointed that DPReview treated the A7II so shabby with regard to its Mirrorless FF status. The conclusion states:
Traditionally, mirrorless cameras appeal to users seeking a smaller, lighter option to DSLRs. The a7 II is not particularly small or light, though to be fair, it is smaller and lighter than any full-frame DSLR on the market.
Not only are the A7's lighter and smaller than the full-frame DSLRs, they are also lighter and smaller than some APS DSLRs. That is an amazing accomplishment. Here's some sample weights:
A700 1079gmsA750 750 gmsK3 800 gmsA7II 600 gmsA7R 500 gms
Unfortunately, DPReview chose to exhibit their bias against mirrorless FF. I don't own any A7 cameras - but they are at the top of my list as a future purchase.
If anything, DPR is biased towards FF cameras. But not biased enough to give the A7II a free pass. ;)
Lucas_: I've been shooting for three months with the A7 and close to two months with the A7II, now. The A7II adds almost everything that I wished the A7 had: better sized grip, more robust body, more assignable buttons, faster and, among other features, more accurate AF ( although I mostly use MF ) and the fabulous on-sensor stabilization. The "noise" DPR mentions is only on jpg and actually same ( even less in proper conditions ) as the A7 ( which didn't cause any disturbance on DPR at the time... ). I find it that DPR was in the least careless in having two apparently less experienced new comers reviewing the A7II, a most important camera for the current photography scenario, being another great benchmark launch from Sony. A real shame.
The original A7 review was the same. Fanboys complained about the silver award, they accused DPR of nitpicking and they just wanted an automatic gold to reward the "revolution".
How that particular camera model actually operated? How was the IQ? How did it compare versus other cameras? Utterly irrelevant, apparently.
The Straw Man: Yes its bigger than the A7 and other mirrorless cameras (about the same size as the GH4), but with that you get vastly superior ergonomics - along with better resolution (14-bit raws), AF, AMOLED screen, weather sealing, up to 15fps stills, and 4k/1080p@120fps.
I had the A7/A7s for awhile, but the small buttons became endlessly annoying and some of the ergonomic quirks for functions I frequently use I just couldn't solve - notably adjusting audio and switching between the EVF/LCD always required a trip to Sony's terrible menu's and you couldn't use the shutter button for anything in movie mode.
The NX1 has a dedicated EVF switch and I can change audio settings via the excellent touch screen. The 16-50s lens is one of the better standard zooms as well. It has a few issues like all cameras, but Samsung has shown a willingness to address those via firmware updates. The only updates Sony has done for the A7 is faster startup times and lens compatibility.
F stops can be compared. You just have to take into account "equivalence." The Samsung zoom is about a stop faster on the wide end and just a tiny bit faster on the long end.
Of course, in terms of exposure, F2 is F2 so it's again no contest for Samsung.
While i wouldn't but it for myself (low light AF, bad jpegs and Limited lens selection), I can respect the ambition behind this camera body. Samsung can improve in the years to come and no doubt it brings competitive pressure on other manufacturers to work harder. We all win.
more people claim to have had this camera than those who claim to own it or just want to own it.
2000+ bucks for that monstrosity.
All I need to know.
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.
7 Years is also the amount of time between the E1 and the E5, the last 43 DSLR.
Personally, if I had to guess, the M mount is probably next to thing to die. Then Sony A mount.
Navved, use math correctly: 2015-2008=7. :p
Credit also goes to Panny for releasing the very first M43 camera.
The OM mount lasted nearly twice as long as the Canon FD mount (replaced by the AF-based EF mount). A whole lot of angry Canon fans back then., but it worked out for Canon in the long run.
Olympus resisted this AF revolution but finally relented with the end of film days. They could have probably adapted the OM mount to the digital era with a new set of AF lenses. They opted to design a digital system from scratch. Those telecentric lenses actually worked quite well, I still own and use some of them, but failed against more entrenched rivals.
M43 is different in two ways, they're not playing catch up but undercut the competition by embracing/creating mirrorless right away (Nikon and Canon are the late comers to this market). They're also not in the margins of market since they started first and still have momentum. Competition is still fierce and the camera market is shrinking, but mirrorless eeks out small gains yearly so that part of the market is safer in the long run.
The G1X... lol
Canon's m43 sensor in all but name. Yes, I'm sure Olympus, the m43 consortium and the whole industry are shaking in their boots at the sight of the G1X. That and the EOS M are Canon's two-sprung strategy against the eventual death of compact camera and DSLR markets. Canon owns the future.
naththo: Fairly soft in some of photos I think might be just from awful amount of distortion spoils the image unfortunately as you had to make a LOT of correction to distortion up to nearly 50% is not good sign.
At least they have the decency of not charging 1600 bucks for this.
Yep. Fix the AF first then the RAWs and all that silly stuff about lower IQ with continuous drive and long exposures. Then reevaluate your lens pricing strategy and definitely do not rush release below par lenses (24-70 f4) and expect people to pay the big bucks.
And as bonus, maybe make good on your original specs and make A7 camera actually weather-sealed. Some people are still under the mistaken impression that they already are.
Mike99999: There's something you reviewers are not getting, and that is the target market.
People buy their initial Nikon DX or Canon Rebel. They like the size. But then they learn there's barely any upgrade path. There's only a handful of lenses and most of them suck. Nikon and Canon force them towards a big and heavy full frame DSLR, nothing to do with the original camera size they fell in love with.
That's why the Olympus OM-D and Fuji X-T1 are so popular. You still have a crop sensor, but at least you get a fantastic lens selection.
And now Sony has their own "full frame OMD". And let me tell you this. The A7 II despite its added bulk is still smaller and lighter than my original D5000, my first camera and the camera that made me fall in love with photography. You get full frame performance in a DX-sized package. It is fantastic for most of us.
This is why the A7 series are so successful as well. So many people frustrated with the Canon/Nikon upgrade path now have another great option.
Ideally, sensor size should not dictate camera body size. It should be irrelevant to camera body design. So no matter needs and preferences, photographers ought to be able to buy the camera body that fits them best individually.
But it's constrained by today's electronics, lagging optics technology and interface limitations, especially with users demanding tactitle, external controls.
When was the last APSC lens developed for E mount? When is the next one coming out, if there's any?
The situation you describe is happening in Sony world. It's smaller, APSC line (that people fell in love with) is given the shaft in favor of the bigger, more expensive FF bodies that get all the lens development.
Many people, including Sony users, would argue that the ideal camera size is smaller than a DX body hence why for example they bought an A6000 (and in spite of poor native lens prospects) instead of a Nikon D5500 or an A7II.
Komakai Okane: How much do visitors to this website pay to have access to a ton of great content: $0.00
The self entitlement expressed by many posters to have what they want and when they want it - and for free, is disgusting.
Perhaps there should be a policy that if you criticize DPR staff you shall be banished from the site forever. Those banished will probably go beat up Ken Rockwell next. This is a photography website, not psychology or a 12 step course on how to be a good boy and play well with others.
I don't support banning people just because they happen to disagree with the staff. There's a relative freedom of speech that I can appreciate, at least for myself. If the price to pay is to tolerate a few bitter users then so be it.
The staff must have a really thick skin considering they have to deal with the offenders and be on the receiving end of their nonsense.