joao 43: How does it compare to Zeiss 55mm FE? Since Sony users can use this lens it would be useful to know. The 55mm was according to DXO the best 50mm after the Otus, what's you opinion Andy Westlake?
walgarch: I'm a Pentax user and I'm completely appalled by how some Pentaxians are acting. It's as if some people need something to complain about otherwise they're not happy.
I for one congratulate how well Fujifilm is doing. I believe in their philosophy as strongly as I do in Pentax's. But honestly, there are some users who are really killing my experience here on DPR.
Thank you for the review Andy!
Looks like a winner.
But flash synch speed and especially fastest shutter speed should be better in a camera of this class. All those nice, fast primes with Fuji but you either have to stop them down or slap some filters on them to shoot in broad daylight.
The amount of whining over this gold review is amazing. There's no pleasing some people.
Now I just wish Pentax would delay their next camera release as long as possible to avoid any further drama over a Pentax product review.
bluevellet: I don't know why other mirrorless manufacturers don't encourage other companies to join them. They accept third party lenses and some accessories but not much else.
I'm also curious to know how m43 lenses will work on Super 35. Cropped mode? And will there be special lenses by JVC to better take advantage of the super 35 sensor?
Unfortunately, even my information Is out of date. I didn't know about Panasonic's stake in JVC had dwindled even more since the Kenwood merger.
Panasonic only has 37% share in JVC. Their stake in it diminished greatly when JVC merged with Kenwood in 2008. As others told you, stop spreading inaccurate information.
I don't know why other mirrorless manufacturers don't encourage other companies to join them. They accept third party lenses and some accessories but not much else.
Smokymtnhiker: It can't record 4K internally so it requires additional equipment? That's a joke, right?
Sony: Make Believe... It Can Do 4K
Just a Photographer: Why buy this camera if it doesn't work out of the box as advertised?
4K video is only there when you buy additional hardware.12 MP on itself is not of these days anymore, although it will deliver good images at high ISO's (if Sony Digital Imaging doesn't screw up, like they often seem to do - Great sensors, but bad camera development).
Oh come on, say that my previous comment was bullocks because the FE 24-70 lens is an optical masterpiece sold at insane discount or something. Or just let the comment pass entirely if you have nothing on-topic to add.
I don't know why things have to be personal. New product, new discussion. People are likely to disagree. Get over it.
Forever Young: Forgive my ignorance...Where can I enjoy 4K Video? My TVs are only HD, my computer monitors are HD! What is the benefit of 4K Video over 2K? So I can crop? In still photography it makes sense to have higher and higher resolution, up to a limit of course, as I can have large prints with high MP photos, but for videos? Is there any 'everyday' benefit of having 4K over HD? Will they look nicer on a HD screen? Or it is only for professional film making and large screens? If so, why put in in an amateur body?
Some computer monitors are out there. You can view some Youtube videos in 4K.
And yes, you can crop 4K videos. And yes, downsampling a 4K video to 1080p will look better than a native 1080p recording, if done right.
dlinney: "Sony told us that recording 4K footage internally would have meant moving away from the small footprint of the A7-series body. That's why only HD resolutions can be recorded to the internal SD card". This doesn't make sense to me. Even in Sony's own publicity shots the camera is surrounded by additional gear on substantial rigs. So why is the small form factor of the A7 body so important? Seems like a rationalisation of cost saving through using an existing body shell even if that shell brings disadvantages.
Despite the fine print, Sony still gets the headlines for a 4K camera so they get a few more sales that way.
That and the other market the A7s is after is the low light demons from Canon and Nikon, but without the fast AF and machine gun contunuous shooting. These people are likely not that interested in 4K.
Sony just wants to limit it in other ways. No internal 4K recording and limited bitrates even when recording externally.
I think there's also Sony not wanting to cannibalize its high-end camcorder sales. It's probably the real reason for the gimped 4K features on the A7s. Possibly some cost concerns too.
You can also buy flash guns, filters and lens hoods separately. So what?
Try to imagine a DSLR that requires an external recorder just to record 1080p. Video recording is expected to be internal with that class of camera. 4K is not any different. Other cameras do it (even some smartphones!) and near future competitors also are expected to do it. I find Sony's official excuse for this oversight to be quite revealing (style over function).
I'm not against having an option for output, but it should be able to do 4K internally. They can limit bitrates, framerates and what have you, but it should be able to do it in some fashion internally to be able to claim that it can do something... very basic.
FlowerHappy: How many negative comments will we see from the 4/3's groupie's
The groupies don't have to work hard in this case.
4K camera... that doesn't record 4K on its own.
Why are they even releasing this half-baked camera?
Typical of Sony as of late.
They're so eager to rush-release products that should have stayed in R&D a while longer.
Horshack: It's your turn Sony.
Zeiss-branded app coming, Sony will charge 799 dollars for it.
Mike FL: Sony 7 is NO longer a "Weather sealed camera" due to LIGHT LEAK issue.
It doesn't refute what Mike said...
ChrisPercival: What lens was used for the studio scene test?
The 45mm f1.8.
It's a pity they don't use the old 50mm f2 lens from 4/3 DSLRs since it is a bit sharper.
The m43 75mm f1.8 lens could be a better m43 alternative to the classic 50mm since it is also very sharp.
EthanX: 823 comments, excluding mine.
More than half of those are 5 months old and merged from some previous Pentax article/preview.
I hate when DPR does that.
NameFinder: The new Olympus E-M10 as well as E-M5 and E-M1 are nice cameras. The classic vintage look, the small size, the picture quality, the in-body stabilizer. I write this as a long-time OM-4 User (still have it).
Of course, Olympus is not Panasonic and an E-M10 or E-M1 is no a GH4.
However, if Olympus decides to include basic video features, this is more than welcome - for example if you like to travel light with basically one piece of gear.
BUT:Why not include the 25 fps for us 50-Hz-people in Europe?Should be a simple firmware upgrade, doesn't it?
Of course, we're in digital times and these 25 frames per second become more and more irrelevant.But for compatibility's sake (with other equipment) they're still very useful.
Frankly: This ignorance from Olympus' side is felt more and more like arrogance (sorry!) and for me a reason to stay away: "Who cares for the other part of the world, WE are 60 Hz and 30p (e.g. in Japan and US) - be it all the others too!"
It's funny because I live in Europe and I only see the flicker mentionned before in the very first second I turn on an Olympus camera, even one as old as the E-PL1. Then, something happens within the camera and I never see the flicker again when the camera is on, whether framing my shots or recording and viewing videos.
So the whole issue of frame rates appears irrelevant to me when just making casual videos.