photo nuts: We cannot take what Mr. Maeda says seriously. This guy either has NO CLUE what he is saying, is a compulsive liar or is simply delusional.
Read this DPReview interview in 2013 with the same mad man.
"However, he ruled out the idea of a larger sensor camera along the lines of the Sony RX100 to offer more of an image quality distinction between smartphones and compact cameras. 'I think the market does exist but it wouldn't be very large. We think we have a good balancing point in terms of price, image quality and size. Lots of other combinations are possible, but, once you go below APS-C the next logical size is 1/2.3 inch', he says."
1 year after the interview, we get the G7X with the RX100 sensor. Ha, ha....
I think his point is that previous interviews with Maeda have not been reliable sources of information in the past.
Steen Bay: IQ180 has a wider ISO range than IQ250 (35-3200 vs 100-6400).
35-3200 is ~6.5 stops of latitude. 100-6400 is 6 stops.
Poweruser: SONY, please get rid of the annoying double (or triple) button push for live loupe!
Sony really screwed up the focus magnification controls. There's the 'focus area' shortcut, which lets you adjust the position (but not the size) of the focus area. Then there's focus magnification that takes you into 'focus area' mode before letting you magnify. There's no option to adjust how much you magnify. It's bizarre.
Not to mention that, on the A7, the focus area moves extremely slowly and it loses the area when you turn off the camera. No landscape / portrait position option of course.
It's fully functional, but it sure could use some refining.
Good review and a good overview of where the camera is right now. I can't comment on AF or the native lenses - I don't have any, but the general feeling is right on.
However, comparing this review to my other digital camera (X-Pro 1) it seems like DPR has been much more severe in their A7 review. All of these A7 cons also applied to the X-Pro 1 in spades at the time of the review (but are absent from its 'cons' list): * Limited selection of FE lenses, which are expensive compared to competition* Tools for shooting with third party lenses need improvement* Longer-than-average startup times* Exposure compensation and rear scroll wheel too easy to accidentally bumped
They also critique remote capture, which the X-Pro may not have included (I've never used the functionality). Why the different standards for inclusion on the 'cons' list? Different reviewers?
(It should be noted that the final score for both cameras is 1% away from each other - an accurate result in my mind)
Mark9473: "Not so good for JPEG shooters, Auto ISO users, and photographers who want to quickly capture a moment"
Isn't that like 99% of us? ;-)
Also, taking just the average of the bars on the scorecard gives me a 74% average, not 80%. I wonder how they arrive at the overall score.
I agree it's a significant camera, the first full frame mirrorless and all that, but it appears there was a need to give it an award no matter what the test scores say.
Dpr has said in the past that they weight the various categories - it's not a straight average.
slncezgsi: Pity that the lens is just a single element one. This keeps the camera in the 'loom' world. Doublet or triplet would make the camera much better image taker and not just a cool gimmick.
But I do appreciate the project.
It's open source, go ahead and add the designs you want to see. :)
completelyrandomstuff: Samples look excellent. Perhaps it will simply be a lot better than Fuji?
Absolutely! Any photographer looking to take photos of bokeh should avoid Fuji. They're stuck in the old-fashioned mindset of prioritizing the focused part of the image.
I'm an enthusiastic X-Pro 1 owner, but at this point I can't see recommending it over the X-E2. Especially since the "buzz" about the X-E2 has been that it now has quite fast AF (I have no idea personally).
I suppose the issue is that DP has reviewed the X-Pro, but not the X-E2.
So much territorial posturing in these comments! Everyone here should remember that the success or failure of their favorite camera system is affected very little by the opinions of the readers of dpreview. :)
One thing we can all be certain of is that these cameras are not the last cameras ever made. We'll have plenty more mirrorless full frame cameras - even if everyone else fails to jump in Sony will keep making more (hint: everyone else is going to make one eventually).
By any historical measure, a digital camera with a full frame sensor for $1600 is a great deal! For those who want it, this camera should be great, for those who don't it's just another camera you don't want. We all have lots of those.
Of course, maybe I'm under-reacting and these cameras are the unholy result of Sony sacrificing 100 1D-X's and 100 D4's at midnight under the full moon before an inverted crucifix. /s :p
joe6pack: It is priced too expensively for open source community to pick it up.
If it is $500, this will sell like hot cakes. Developers will put every feature you can imagine on this camera.
$1600 is no barrier to hobbyists, but I haven't read anything about the NX giving better access to the camera than any other Android device. Without a more programmable interface to the camera, I don't see hobbyists being interested no matter the price.
Allochka Emiliana: Nikon got worried about Sony A7 and A7r that they released this rumor in a hurry!
Interesting to note that the first x100 was announced just about 3 years ago at the 2010 photokina. :)
hammerheadfistpunch: The PBS tote and the man purse don't look so bad, but that Bravo 50? wow that's bad. Its not a stylish shape (a square) and the white with black straps just call that fact out.
I think they're trying to copy the look of the Chrome camera bags (and probably other bag makers I'm unaware of): http://www.chromeindustries.com/bags/camera-bags/niko-pack
Danguyfuji: Most of these comments are mostly from people that just don't get it. Raw files are NOT supposed to be finished when they come right from camera. Thats the point. You make them in raw converter. Sharpnes on all files are minimum you have to add it. I will rather have my file in raw a bit smooth, than over sharpened raw files like the ones we see from most of the other cameras. You can ad sharpnes, not remove it! It seems like most of the people on these comments have a lot of gear. They have nikon canon sony olympus pentax fuji. They know eksakly which one is better than the other, because they have all these cameras to compare. I would like to have that much money. I work with canon-nikon-fuji files on a daily basis, and there is no doubt, that when it comes to IQ the fuji is excelent! Fast, no. Weather seal, no.Lot of lenses, no. At these point nikon and canon are better. In my case, for my work, IQ is no 1 and I will live with the bad things.You can't find one camera that has it all
Out of lens sharpness is actual detail. Out of camera sharpness is often modified by the camera's settings. Thus why I mentioned the unprocessed RAW output.
Both sharpening and blurring an image removes information. Both operations remove bits of information to emphasize certain qualities.
Sharpness does not equal detail. Imagine a picture of a knife blade. The edge of the knife ends half way through a pixel. The most accurate rendition of that pixel has some light from the knife and some from the background. However, to our eyes, that looks wrong. If we sharpen the image, we create a clear division between the knife blade and the background by pushing the pixel towards the color of the knife or the color of the background.
The image with the most detail is the image directly from the sensor (i.e. an unprocessed RAW). Any sharpening applied to that data will remove information, but also (usually) make the image look better. This is an inevitable consequence of representing a continuous medium (reality) with a discreet medium (image sensor pixels).
That camera looks pretty silly from the top, but you really can't fault Sigmas on low ISO image quality. Always exciting to see companies trying non-bayer sensors. Best of luck Sigma, I look forward to the day I can't resist one of your cameras (and it seems like it's getting closer).
Najinsky: Android, yay.
This App requires access to the following:
Storage - modify/delete SD card contentsNetwork Communication – full internet accessSystem tools – Prevent camera from sleepingSystem tools – Modify global system settingsSystem tools – Write Access Point name settingsSystem tools – automatically start at bootHardware controls – take pictures
Just what every photographer want's to see when they 'boot' their camera.
Or how about:
- An update is available, would you like to install now or take pictures?- Google is down, can your subject wait?- Your google account is locked, camera is shutting down.- Your google credit is running low, top-up today and receive a 10% discount- Location server indicates photos not permitted in this location, camera is shutting down.- Using a slow 2GB class 4 card? Promotion today only 4GB class 6 only $5.- When you're done taking pictures why not print on HP premium glossy, only $0.99 for 20 sheets while stocks last.
More like: Android, yay.
Now I have a standard, well understood platform as a basis, instead of whatever Canon or Nikon or Fuji has developed. If I don't like the stock firmware, I can install my own version. I can add any feature I want and I can add features other users have created.
Android is a platform, which is open source, and divorced from Google. If you want to run Google's services (maps, etc), you have to play by their rules. If you don't - it's just like any other OS.
CameraLabTester: Marketing Strategy: Make so many options and offerings of essentially the same banana and confuse the consumers to buy them all even if they do the same thing!
Do it all zoom= 1 sales income
Many, many zooms (say 10 items) doing THE SAME THING = 10 times the SALE!
Have you found yourself buying many different lenses in the same zoom range? If so, I suggested that Canon's product strategy isn't your biggest problem. :)
gsum: It's a camera and it's digital but this doesn't seem to have any more to do with photography than an iphone. Perhaps DPReview should rename their site to DG Review where the 'G' stands for Gadget or Gimmick. This site is getting sidetracked from photography into toyland.
If you're under the impression that amateur photography is anything other than 95% toyland, I think you're in for a rude awakening. :)
SheikYerbouti: A zoom lens on a rangefinder type of camera seems to be going against everything that rangefinders were originally designed for. But, as Fuji have demonstrated with their X-Pro1 and X-E1 cameras, it can be done quite elegantly. Still, I'm wondering how useful and how intuitive a zoom will be on these cameras? To me a zoom makes much more sense on an SLR because its through-the-lens view is more suitable for framing and composing an image with a zoom. I think rangefinder photographers are better off with 2, 3 or 4 excellent prime lenses in the bag ...
... which gives me an idea: Wouldn't it be nice if at some point in the future Fuji introduced a high quality, compact, K-5-style SLR that made use of their amazing X-Trans sensor? Maybe Photokina 2014 would be the right time to announce such a camera?
I think the main "problem" with a zoom on a true rangefinder is that you can't update the framelines with the zoom. A zoom at 50mm would work just as well as a prime at 50mm.
AbeNader: Look at the tests at photozone.de ..only the Fuji 35mm and tele lenses works ok....Also cyberphoto.se put a 28 Leica lens on X-Pro1 with poor results. The edges were just smudge. Only sharp in the center. Sony NEX has the same problem...They failed in the sensor design..Check yourselves all the tests at photozone. Both fuji and Nex..Wake up people!
I was looking forward to invest in Fujis new system....but not anymore. :-(
Though it's too bad that the XPro doesn't render pleasing results on wide Leica lenses, it seems silly to dismiss a product as a failure based on its inability to effectively utilize a 3rd parties' lens.
Leica makes great lenses for Leica cameras, but you can't transfer 100% of that performance to a completely different sensor design.