Oranges can't compete with apples in appleness.
jimwa: I own the Alpha SLT-99, the RX1 (waiting for the EVF), and the RX100. I really wanted to vote for all three (because all three are so stellar in their own way).
I really think that Sony has become THE leader in digital photography innovation. And, for those knocked out by the Nikon D800, since Sony makes the sensor in the D800, I am sure that the follow-up to Alpha 99 will have that sensor or one that leapfrogs the D800.
Sony doesn't get the respect that it rightful deserves of late. Going beyond camera of the year, I think Sony should be acclaimed the camera company of the year. If they can keep this up, it will be hard for anyone not to agree.
Maybe Sony can fix it to be awarded the camera company of the light year, but I don't know how they make photographers to buy the phone gadgets.
EduardoJB: The fact that the Alpha SLT-99 has such a low score means only two things: there's not enough people who own it, so they don't vote for it, or they prefer to vote for the cameras they own and the brands they know better, which, BTW, makes this poll very biased and not very useful. I don't own a Sony camera (I own Canon, Olympus and Fuji), but the Alpha SLT-A99 surely deserves a much higher score.
But probably it means the third thing: SLT concept is useless and hopeless, especially for photographers. The whole Sony success is ridiculous - the greatest number of competitors, the lowest score.
JackM: OMD beats D800 and 5D3... riiiiiiiiiight.
Yes, turbocharged pedicab beats Ferrari. It is normal here :-)).
Rocky ID Olympian: Wow, close race between Nikon D800 and Olympus OM-D E-M5
Yes, it is like race between Ferrari and turbocharged Hyundai Getz :-)).
Vlad4D: Is it the pool for Sony NEX haters?
No, it is the poll sponsored by Sony - 4 cameras of Sony, much better cameras of other brands omitted : Canon G1X, Canon 6D, Panasonic GH3, .. .
tommy leong: we all know this is quite arbitary poll, right?
for me, i vote for Sony RX1 for its outstanding full frame compact.at a resoundingly low price ( comparing whats available in the same category )
( although i hate Sony Customer Service )
No, it does not, but needs it to be bought by me. When someone says why vote for, I say why vote against.
No built-in quality viewfinder - no camera - especially for this pile of money.
pseudothomasmerton: I have to admit that I'm one of the few contrarians out there, who voted for neither the D800 or the E-M5. Basically, I voted in terms of what camera I would really want to buy for my own use, and this is what I came up with:
1. Olympus E-PL52. Panasonic DMC-GH33. Nikon D600
The Nikon D600, I think, is a far more significant camera than the D800 for one very important reason: it makes full-frame cameras very accessible, and gives the buyer quite the bang for the buck.
The Panasonic DMC-GH3 is the first truly pro-level mirrorless camera, and seems to pack a lot in a small package. I think this camera, despite it's lack of 1970's 35mm film era SLR's, is a much better all-around camera than the Olympus E-M5, especially when it comes to hybrid video.
But then there's the Olympus E-PL5. Though not as feature laden as the E-M5 or GH3, it has something that really appeals to me: a very small over-all size, that looks just like a p&s camera. Think "stealth" here.
IrishhAndy: You are right. I would add more to no-viewfinder cameras. Even if some long-sighted people (like me) have 2 meters long arms or reading-glasses at hand all the time and shoot with parasol on their heads, they still never will take photographs in the comic gymnastic pose with stretched arms (or arm even) like mamas and papas. It is better to support camera against forehead. For me - no built-in quality veiwfinder - no camera.
zinedi: OM-D is not bad. I know that it is a poll about popularity, not innovation, but this word was mentioned here, so I tell my opinion, too.OM-D is innovative especially in it's retro-style, in it's re-entry to Oly OM roots. That is commendable. But in other features OM-D is not as rare as the current position in the poll shows. Don't remember that it has only 4/3 sensor.Fujifilm X-Pro1 has the same "re-entry to roots" idea, but has APS-C sensor too - very innovative no-AA filter, no-Bayer sensor - which is very significant and unique innovation for the last several years. The second significant and unique innovation is the hybrid-OVF/EVF viewfinder. So - camera with two exceptional features and exceptional IQ and exceptional set of quality lenses should have a better position (but it is only my point of view).
IrishhAndy: Yes, I agree. Revolutionary innovations need some time to develop in perfection, but that's how new ideas and things are born.
Read carefuly - I didn't say that APS-C is innovation I said that there are 2 innovations - sensor and viewfinder. APS-C is only an argument for better IQ especially in high ISO and especially in this (mirrorless) camera category.
OM-D is not bad. I know that it is a poll about popularity, not innovation, but this word was mentioned here, so I tell my opinion, too.OM-D is innovative especially in it's retro-style, in it's re-entry to Oly OM roots. That is commendable. But in other features OM-D is not as rare as the current position in the poll shows. Don't remember that it has only 4/3 sensor.Fujifilm X-Pro1 has the same "re-entry to roots" idea, but has APS-C sensor too - very innovative no-AA filter, no-Bayer sensor - which is very significant and unique innovation for the last several years. The second significant and unique innovation is the hybrid-OVF/EVF viewfinder. So - camera with two exceptional features and exceptional IQ and exceptional set of quality lenses should have a better position (but it is only my point of view).
Bobby72: I use my A99 for about 50% in video mode. Before I bought the camera I watched many movies of Canon 5D.3 and Nikon D800 as well. And Panasonic as well. They had one thing in common. They all have lack of emotion. Only for this part it makes easy to choose for Sony. I love movies and I want my videos to look fimish. I hate wenn the video look clinical. Wenn you use the best plasma screens you can easiliy see the difference in how they look between all the brands. Nikon still has a lot to learn in this part. I think Nikon and Canon lovers have to be happy Sony is competing in the same area. This will make there cameras better and more complete in a shorter time. Now there is the need to change even faster than in the past. Be happy!
@gordocooper: Who is in anger? Read your own words. Sure, my opinion is only mine. You speak for yourself - it's allowed I hope.
My personal view is DPReview-rating-resistant. I mean that I observe for some time and on some web sites, that professional independence has gone away in general. It's sad, but business overruns many pleasures of this world. But we still can use our own brain, points and percentages are for fools.
ET2: I'm sure you know what I meant, I'm sure you know that there is not only X-E1. And I've said that EVF is justifiable and acceptable in cheaper mirrorless and compact cameras.
" I think Nikon and Canon lovers have to be happy Sony is competing in the same area."No, Sony's incompetence and incapability to understand photographers' needs and preferences makes CaNi lovers indifferent or amused. True and dedicated movie lovers in majority stay at video cameras.PS : I am a lover of NO brand - I love the best still cameras. Now, for instance - in mirroless category - FUJI shows the right way how to understand photographers' wishes (especially where viewfinders are concerned) - NEX is again more TV toy for cell-phone lovers, than photographer's tool.
Robert Eckerlin: About OVF vs EVF: When photographing, I want to enjoy what I see in the ViewFinder. For me, this is an essential part of enjoying to make photographies.
Question to the fans of EVFs: 1) do you really enjoy what you see with a good EVF? As much as what you would see with a good OVF? 2) Or is that aspect (= enjoying what you see inh the VF) not important for you?
My only experience with an EVF was with a relatively expensive Leica EVF for my Panasonic DMC-LX5. I did not like it at all and returned it. Of course the A99 is in another category than my LX5. Before being able to have an opinion about the EVF of the A99, I will need to grab a A99. But I am nevertheless curious about the answers of the fans of the A99 EVF.
@ Amadou Diallo : If you admit that there is no majority acceptance for EVF it would be fair not to list it in both pro/con lists.
Gionni Dorelli: Worked with an A99 yesterday. If you do not need the resolution of the D800 all the times, the a99 is simply the most complete Dslr camera at the moment.The EVF is just a joy to use and it does not hinder my way of taking photos at all. After a few minutes you would just forget it is an EVF instead of an ovf if wasn't for the wealth of informations that are displayed on it.
The only way I could buy a Canikon again, it would be if Sony stop making these kind cameras.I'm some what old fashion on the way I use cameras, but the A99 just feels natural to use.
@peyotl : Sony itself names it SLT - for Translucent mirror.
"..with old fashioned flip-mirror."Just opposite is true. Semi-transparent non-movable mirror is more old-fashioned - it was very soon replaced by movable mirror which doesn't impair the images. EVF is younger of course, but it has very underestimated parameters till now to be able to compare in purity, colour-fidelity, resolution, velocity and health-harmlessness with OVF.
One correction : Sony A99 is not DSLR regrettably. It has a semi-transparent mirror in the way of light when exposing - it is a big difference - one more dust collector, light reducer and reflection generator.