kpaddler: Similar statement will come from some of the others sooner or later, including Sony....
Sony is doing just fine. In fact, they are in the best position to be the long-term game-changer in the camera industry, particularly as mirrorless continues to mature. And Samsung leaving the camera market only bolster's Sony's position in the mirrorless market. It makes them that much stronger.
@kpaddler- you're really grasping at straws. Sony still supports all aspects of their cameras, including Alpha. And A-mount lenses are supported by E-mount adapters. Obviously, nothing is supported *forever*. Sony even supported MiniDisc for more than 20 years, and only just ended shipments of MniDisc players in 2013!
Donnie G: Marketplace Darwinism strikes again. Won't be much longer before the two M4/3rd camera companies become extinct too. Now you see them, soon you won't. :))
I think m4/3 is doing fine. You also have to keep in mind that Samsung leaving the market only benefits the other mirrorless systems. Just because one company leaves the market doesn't mean that there is going to be a domino effect of multiple other companies leaving the market. Samsung simply decided that the camera business wasn't for them, the same way that Minolta-Konica made that decision a decade ago.
Plus, you'd have to be an idiot fanboy to think that companies leaving the camera business is a good thing (hence your stupid smiley face). That's bad for photography. Less competition, less innovation, less variety. Only you would smile over such a loss.
zsedcft: I don't get why people can't handle that this is not an advert. They are spending more time looking at the most advanced camera with the most advanced sensor that has ever been made (35mm at least). It is actually good enough to be a professional movie camera as well. That is just amazing any way you look at it.
I don't have any investment in the Sony company or Sony gear, but I can recognize when a camera is a game changer. There are cameras that represent a leap forward - the 5Dmk2, D800 and this are the ones that come to mind from the last few years. I would expect each of those to get a similar level of coverage if they were to come out today.
Anyway, we live in an extremely exciting time for camera gear. Stop complaining and enjoy it. You can always skip the sony articles, but you can't say that they are not popular or justified - just look at the number of comments on each of them.
Some people don't like change. Especially when it might be a change from what they've become accustomed to (such as mirrorless vs DSLR, or EVF vs OVF, or all the camera attention being mainly focused on Canon and Nikon, etc.).
I personally like that camera equipment is evolving. DSLRs are great, but there really should be other options in the ILC market. And there really ought to be other players besides the old conservative stalwarts (Canikon) that can bring fresh ideas to the market. Thank goodness for companies like Sony, Fuji, Olympus etc. I like that they are bringing cameras and equipment to the market that reflect a unique point of view that deviates from the standard DSLR point of view. We should really be embracing this diversity, not attacking it.
FotoFrik: Sony is now the leader of the new top-level cameras. I do not know what to write about Fuji or Nikon old sensors ?
@PhotoKhan - "There are about 2-to-1 entries (be it threads or posts) in all forums from each brand on DPR, if we compare Canon to Sony or Nikon to Sony."
That's actually pretty impressive, considering that Nikon and Canon have had decades to build up their usership, while Sony is comparatively new to the market and the Sony FF mirrorless system has only been around since October 2013.
BTW, Sony isn't Samsung. Sony is doing quite well with their mirrorless cameras. Samsung hasn't done quite so well. Two very different circumstances.
Thorgrem: Another A7(x)II article? Lol.
@@RichRMA - the Sony camera bodies are still maturing, the lens system is still filling out, and even the adapters being made for the system are still evolving. The system is like a child just learning to walk, and you're expecting it to run! Give the system some time to mature a bit more. It still hasn't reached the point of critical mass where it offers all the things that a wide range of pro users would need or want. But they'll get there. I think that point will come when the lens system is fleshed out more, the smart adapters for the system are more mature, and they migrate to larger batteries (the current ones are absolutely tiny). They'll also probably roll out a "pro" body, like an A9. A "halo" body. But like I said, the bodies are still evolving and maturing.
@RichRMA - "dump their old system en masse"?!? No. It would be a gradual transition that will take years. There will be a steady attrition of DSLR users over the course of time. That's the natural, realistic course of things. Any expectation that thousands of users are suddenly going to dump their existing system "en masse" is simply foolish and unrealistic. The transition is going to take some time...more time than the transition from film to digital probably; with the film-to-digital transition, you just bought a digital version of your film body. Plus, let's not forget that the Sony FF MILC system was only introduced 2 years ago, and the cameras are still evolving and maturing. In 5 years, I think Sony FF mirrorless bodies will be far more advanced than they are now, and only then will the bodies be truly attractive to a wider swath of pro users. We are still in the very, very, *VERY* early days of this camera system. As I said early, it's only the beginning.
FantasticMrFox: I'm sooo looking forward to the Pentax K-1 full frame real world review once it is released!
@@SmilerGrogan - rather than thinking of FF as being the "new APS-C", I see FF as the new medium format, whereas APS-C has become the new 35mm. FF is going to be for users who have more specialized needs, such as ultra high resolution (28+ megapixels) or ultra-high ISO shooting or shallower DOF. For everyone else (ie, the vast majority of shooters), there's 35mm film...or in the digital age, APS-C format sensors.
@SmilerGrogan - it's absolutely absurd to compare APS-C to Kodak Instamatic. 110 film had terrible image quality compared to 35mm film. It went away because the IQ simply wasn't there. That's not the case with APS-C sensors. APS-C offers abundant IQ for the overwhelming majority of users. In most cases, you'll never be able to tell the difference between an image shot by FF vs an image shot by APS-C. There's no *reason* for APS-C to go away. But there was a reason for smaller film formats such as 110 film to go away: the IQ just wasn't there.
Also, people forget that a FF sensor is considerably more expensive to produce. Therefore, FF cameras will always be more expensive than their comparably-spec'd APS-C camera counterparts. FF lenses are also larger. Not everyone wants to use larger FF lenses. Nor does everyone want to pay FF camera prices. An A6000 that shoots at 11fps is now as low as $400, new. Meanwhile the price for a FF A7 which does 5fps is still $998.
@RichRMA - There is always a beginning to everything. And the beginning often looks as if nothing is really happening.
I think it's a bit silly to compare the "number of pros currently using..." You have to remember that the number of pros using Canon and Nikon equipment is literally the accumulation of decades of Canon and Nikon systems being in the market, whereas the Sony FF mirrorless system has only been in existence since October 2013. These so-called "mass shifts" do not happen overnight. But as I said earlier, everything has a beginning. And we are at the beginning, as we speak. The writing is on the wall. And you can tell your grandchildren that you were there at the beginning.
D 503: Two and a half grand for a consumer electronic device with no real pro support or a Nikon D810 for less. Easy choice.
Believe it or not, there are countless people who are shooting without the need for "pro support". I'm a lifelong Canon EOS user, and I've never needed "pro support." As for a D810, that's only 2.7x heavier and double the size of an A7R II, and it still doesn't have such nice things as IBIS or 4K. For those of us who enjoy traveling with lighter, less conspicuous gear, FF DSLR gear such as a D810 is not really the go-to choice. You can carry two A7R II bodies, with batteries, for the weight than a single D810 body, and they'd take up about the same amount of space.
People have to remember that there are several A7 II models. Even though they may look the same and start with the same name (A7), they are not the same camera. A7 II, A7S II, A7R II are all different cameras. So it makes sense that each would have its own articles or reviews.
justmeMN: I'm outraged! I paid $3,200 for this camera, and I can't take any photos, because it doesn't include any lens. :-)
Ironically, the Sony system has the potential to be the camera with the most lenses for it. Not only do you have the growing FE system (8 more FE lenses due by Spring 2016), but you can adapt a huge variety of lenses to it, from Leica M rangefinder lenses, to Canon EF lenses, and now Nikon F lenses with the new Commlite adapter being the first (probably the first of many) to offer full compatibility with Nikon F:
Glad to see that Leica switched from a brass to aluminum for their top plate. Brass is really heavy. I always thought that Leica M's could/should be a lot lighter than they were. So shedding 100g by switching from a brass top plate to an aluminum top plate is definitely a good thing, IMHO. Modern high-grade aluminum is plenty strong. Not that I'm going to buy one any time soon. But if I did have the money to buy one, I would definitely appreciate the lighter weight.
martuyn: It looks so cheap, and not very wel made.
A few months ago, I bought a $30 Fotasy 35mm f/1.7 cine lens for E-mount. In pictures on the web, it looked pretty cheap too. But in real life, it has a very solid, well-made metal body. Some of these Chinese cine lenses may not have the fanciest aesthetic styling, but it doesn't mean they are poorly made.
Zakzoezie: Its a consumer toy (with still lots of technical flaws) priced as a pro camera. For what you get, price for this toy is outrageous. Same counts for the Sony & Zeiss lenses. Both Sony & Zeiss introduced several incomplete lens lines in low capacity production, instead of one complete lens line in high capacity production. Furthermore, today there is simply no competition within e-mount lens business with other brands producing autofocus lenses and common focal lengths. This is all done to maintain premium prices and milk the consumers ... so no thanks for the offer. But hey maybe one positive note to end this, all this mirrorless tech attempts that are sold will maybe one day become mature thanks to the early adopters actually buying this. And then we can still jump the wagon when all technical flaws are resolved and prices are at an acceptable level thanks to some more healthy competition ...
I think people who feel the need to call these cameras "a consumer toy" are acting like children, haha.
As for you comment, "Both Sony & Zeiss introduced several incomplete lens lines"...how many companies introduced "complete lens lines" right from the start? The Sony FF mirrorless system is only barely two years old (it was introduced in October 2013).
KW Phua: Waiting for mirrorless lens. Mirror lens are too big to fit with mirrorless camera.
Not sure what the big deal is. We've used big lenses on DSLRs for decades. Ever put a 70-200/2.8 on a DSLR? Those are big lenses. Much larger than the DSLR bodies we put them on. Have you seen the size of Nikon's latest 24-70/2.8E ED VR? That's a massive lens, especially for a 24-70 range:
But with proper handholding technique (left hand supporting the lens), it really doesn't matter how much larger the lens is compared to the body. You just need to learn proper camera-holding technique.
Satyaa: This review proves once again that Sony is inherently a technology company. What they have done with the technology in this camera is amazing.
On the other hand, Sony is not a photography company. Hence the annonying implementation of some features that photographers keep complaining about.
For someone who doesn't care about those annoyances and is willing to pay the price, it appears to be a very good camera.
Given that the MKII series is only their second iteration of the A7 body design, I'm willing to cut them some slack. How many iterations have Canon and Nikon bodies gone through ever since the first Canon EOS or Nikon F body was introduced? Designing camera bodies is an iterative process entailing refinements and adjustments over the course of time. Just because a company doesn't reach perfection, or near perfection, from the start doesn't mean they aren't a "photography company".
Bene Placito: But the lens lineup is soooooooo limited.
Let's not forget that the Sony FF mirrorless system has only been in existence for barely 2 years (the first A7 camera was announced in October 2013). I remember people used to complain that the Canon EOS system was "soooooooo limited" two years into the existence of that system, too. But at least with the Sony FF mirrorless system, you can adapt other lenses to it quite easily and effectively.
Franck Bender: I'll be eagerly waiting for the reviews on that one. Apart from the virtual impossibility to focus it accurately wide open, it must have a very unique look.It does look very plasticky, though.
For only $349 for an f/1.1 and 13 aperture blades, I'll take a plastic exterior.
If the reviews are fairly favorable, I think it would be an interesting lens to have for my A6000.
bernardf12: The annoying flip out screen can be added to the list. Why would you want a feature that will help you 2% of the time (over a tilt screen), but annoys you every time you take a photo. It also makes it harder to compose because you have to turn your head away from the subject you are photographing. My flip out screen ended up not being used for tilting, and stored with the screen outside. In that configuration it functions as a fixed screen, so as a design it is a big failure to me.
I'm fine with just a tilt screen too. For any crazier angles (which are rare), I'd rather just use a remote connection to my smartphone. Heck, even give me a USB wired connection to my smartphone (I think sometimes that would be less hassle than trying to wirelessly connect to the camera).