JackM: Yet they still can't figure out how to put a proper shutter speed dial or ISO dial on top.
Always a gadget maker.
JackM, the Df is a one-off camera. I don't see Nikon adding shutter speed dials or ISO dials to any of their other cameras. And there has never been a single Canon EOS body that has ever had a shutter speed dial or an ISO dial. So are you saying that all these Canon and Nikon DSLRs don't have "real controls"? Absurd.
I have a Fuji X-E1 with a shutter speed dial. It's almost always on "A" because I am almost always shoot in aperture priority mode. That shutter speed dial is simply a waste of space for me. For my usage, it's not a "real control". It's mainly there for decoration!
"Yet they still can't figure out how to put a proper shutter speed dial or ISO dial on top.
Always a gadget maker."
Yeah, just like every Canon or Nikon DSLR with the exception of the Nikon Df.
JoeWall: Speaking of the voice of customer - I would love the older dials of the Sony A7/A7R. The new ones on Sony A7II feel plasticky.
Also the battery capacity is ridiculous ! How can a pro photographer (wedding, sports etc.) expect to use the Sony all day?
A second SD Card slot would also make it perfect (back-ups for pro photographers)
@RichRMA - one easy way to increase battery life is for Sony to eventually migrate to a larger capacity battery. Sure, it would increase the size of the grip, but I think there are plenty of users who would welcome both a larger grip and a bigger battery. And the body would still remain compact, because it wouldn't have the thick, cavernous mirror-box midsections that made DSLR bodies so fat. As long as the grip does not extend past the shortest lens, you still have a compact body.
biza43: I have moved from Canon EOS (shot with it for 20 years) to Sony A7 system. From my experience, all these items mentioned in the article are very valid, but they will have a small impact in the "pro" world. For a pro photog, Canikon systems are still much more reliable than all these MILC advancements.
If you need to get the shot, poor AF in low light does not cut it... fidgety controls and menu driven interface controls do not cut it... some of these "lowlights" can be overcome by familiarity; but the point is, it takes time to get acquainted with a system, and who can really tell that Sony will not drop the A7 system, as they have dropped the Sony-Minolta DSLR line? Or the NEX line?
Pros require support and reliability, and Sony are not there yet... for us amateurs and hobbyists it is fine, but if you need to put bread on the table? Not really...
@biza43 - I think people are a little optimistic in thinking that there will be some kind of spike in Canon lens sales as a result of the Sony's adaptability. More likely, it'll be existing Canon users using their existing Canon lenses, rather than a bunch of people buying all new glass all for their Sony bodies. The adaptability will be a way for Canon users to slowly transition over to Sony. A user can transition immediately, or they can do it over the course of several seasons of shooting, and as Sony bodies continue to get more advanced. I think a lot of Canon DSLR users will use both Canon and Sony bodies for a while, especially pros. After all, pros aren't known for having just one camera, LOL. Pros typically use multiple bodies.
RealEyesRealizeRealLies: Should pros be wary of committing to Sony?
Canon releases their big sensor in a pro-centric body first.
Nikon releases their big sensor in a pro-centric body first.
Sony gives their best sensor to Nikon first, three versions, then releases their own plastic mount a7R with best sensor.
But pro Amount users are left out. Forced to change system just to keep up.
Not judging here... no opinion expressed. Just stating the facts.
Should pros be wary of committing to Sony?
Sounds like FUD. Especially when you consider that the Sony A7 bodies have only existed since October 2013. In less than 2 yrs they've introduced A7, A7R, A7S, A7 II, A7RII. They progress their bodies far more rapidly than Canon or Nikon. Canon/Nikon can go a few years between camera body updates. Canon, for example, took 5 years to update their 7D body. In less than two years, Sony put out five A7 bodies. So I think it's silly to tout that Canon or Nikon "releasees their big sensor in a pro-centric body first", when Sony evolves their bodies at such a short time clip that it really doesn't matter. It matters more with Canon and Nikon because they update bodies at a much slower pace and move much more slowly.
As for giving "their best sensor to Nikon first, three versions", that was then. Sony's FF mirrorless system was in its infant or fetal stage. Sony had the sensors, but were still developing the bodies. So they sold sensors to Nikon. Now they have the bodies and the system.
Meanwhile, Canon introduces a camera that can't shoot RAW (the XC10) and a camera that can't shoot faster than 1fps in RAW continuous AF (G3X). Such a contrast in companies.
dmanthree: I guess I missed the point. What's so impossible? That they brought a body to market with tons is nice tech only to handicap it with a bonehead compressed raw file?
I read it as a subtle dig at Canon's ill-fated "See Impossible" marketing campaign. Maybe it was an unintentional, sub-conscious dig, but that was the first thing I thought of.
yoyokal: I wonder why many people think that at 600mm it is imposible to take picture without evf/ovf? Are they have tried it?
As long as I know when the product is released, it has been tested by many people. If all of tester said cannot take picture at 600mm, I believed the enginer will improved it and finally is released when the problem is solved. If it isn't solved it, G3X is released without 600mm.
I believe that 600mm is the game changer for Canon according to the competitor's product. Canon will do everything to make it posible to take picture. Now, let's see what DPR says about it.
Note: I'm sorry if my english is bad, is not my primary language.
I see lots of people using poor camera holding technique, and sometimes they still get decent results. That still doesn't mean that it should be institutionalized into camera design for the sake of cost cutting, or to reap/rape their customers for more cash by forcing them to buy an add-on EVF.
Well, given that the Sony A7 series has only been in existence since October 2013, less than 2 years ago, I think it's safe to say that we're still in the very early days of these cameras. Give them 2 more years to develop, and I'm sure we'll see plenty of additional advancements, in areas such as battery capacity.
Dave C 150: I still don't understand what the advantage of a mirrorless camera is supposed to be. If you need a big telephoto and I do, then it eliminates any size difference straight away. So what are the advantages ?
Well, one advantage is that without a flapping mirror to move up and down, cameras can shoot a lot faster. That's why the Samsung NX1 is capable of 15fps, and cameras as inexpensive as a $550 Sony A6000 can do 11fps.
Scales USA: Somehow, I do not think its bad news for Canon that their lenses work on the Sony Camera. They'd probably laugh all the way to the bank at that one. They cost less, and are better. Obviously having a lens that will work on two different manufacturers systems is a advantage for the owner, and for the sales of the lenses.
Yeah, but in the long run, it can siphon off existing Canon users. Furthermore, the adaptability factor will appeal most to people who have *existing* Canon lenses. I don't think it will necessarily result in a leap in new Canon lens sales. It's primarily going to be an additional use for existing, or already-sold, Canon lenses.
kaganm001: Mr. Maki, please honor the $199.99 to whom has ordered the Sony A7R as advertised on Sony Store website and we will believe you. Sony send me an order confirmation and 4 days later send me 2 separate order cancellation with 2 different reasons. 1st reason is short of supply, 2nd reason is pricing error. Which one should I believe? None! A gentleman is always keep his promise and do not made excuses. Sony is a real Japanese company and Japanese is always keep their promise. Make effort not excuses.
Seriously? Errors happen. You've never made an error? I don't mind companies eating errors, within a certain level of decency. But you seriously expect to get a $1999 camera for $199? That's simply despicable and dishonorable. And yet, you attempt to invoke "honor" in an attempt to get a camera at a 90% discount? Sickening.
Souciantmag: Again, I think enthusiasm for the new A7 should be tampered by the criticism of the RAW issue. It's a good camera, but...The compression problem remains huge and unwarranted for a camera this costly, and it's a deal-breaker for commercial photographers. I'm glad that this article addresses the issue, but the tabloid headline, and buildup with the mirrorless revolution op-ed on Friday, feels designed towards supporting Monday's Sony announcement. Where is my old DP Review?
Where is the innovation of the old-guard camera companies such as Nikon or Canon?
It's amazing the speed of progress at which Sony is moving. At this rate, just imagine where there cameras will be in 5 years or so. Sony is very ambitious, and more importantly, they are delivering on their ambition. Meanwhile, other companies (Canonikon) seem content with just getting by with offering as little as they can. If they think they can get away with offering a camera without RAW support, they'll do it. If they think they can get away with offering camera with only 1fps shooting speed, they do it. It's time we stopped rewarding that kind of behavior, otherwise they continue to think they can get away with it.
Steve Sanacore: In my opinion, Sony is what pro's were waiting for with the A7II and A7RII. They are the perfect step into mirrorless for those of us shooting Nikon and Canon. Better sensors and the ability to use our current lenses to test the waters. It will probably benefit all the other mirrorless brands as more people adopt and realize the advantages of digital viewfinders and small size while giving up nothing as far as image quality.
@rrccad- I think most pros are well aware that Sony makes cameras. And I think most pros are more pragmatic than dogmatic. If it works, and it helps, they'll use it. That's why I think it's so smart that Sony is developing their cameras to work so well with adapted lenses like Canon's. It'll make it that much easier for some Canon pros to simply add a Sony mirrorless body to their gear collection. It doesn't force Canon users to make an all-out switch.
Mister Joseph: The problem with having a full-frame camera is, the images it produce are simply superior over smaller sensors, you just commit to it and end up having a huge, bulky camera+lens combo that's a hassle to carry around!
It really depends on which "camera+lens combo" you choose. Not all FF lenses are big and bulky.
dcolak: XXI century and no EVF?! WTF Canon?!
@BeaniePic - this may come as a shock to you, but all EVF cameras *also* have a rear LCD. So when you have an EVF, you are not "restricted to having to put [your] camera to [your] face." You have the option of using the EVF *or* the rear LCD. EVF's even automatically switch from the EVF to the LCD when you move your eye from the EVF. I don't know anyone with an EVF who feels "restricted" to putting the camera to their face in any lighting condition. EVF camera users are also free to use their rear LCD. However, when you have a camera that doesn't have an EVF, that's when you are "restricted" to only using a rear LCD.
A rear LCD certainly has its benefits. But lets not ignore the benefits of EVF. Many feel it's more comfortable for normal shooting, it adds stability, it shuts out ambient light, it's easier to see in a wider variety of lighting conditions, etc. And like I said, having an EVF does not "restrict" you to only using an EVF. You can also use the rear LCD any time.
Shmuel Goldberg: When the mirror is up, in DSLR there is nothing between the lens and the sensor. It is mirrorless. The mirror is there only before and after taking picture. It contributes nothing to photography. It was OK to use a mirror in the fifties of the last century. Now the world is digital, and it is much better.
"none of those makes a difference to pressing a shutter button. I've taken pictures without it and managed just fine.
perhaps you need the crutch."
LOL, yeah, people used to say the *exact* same thing about auto exposure metering, auto focus, image stabilization, etc, too! And in the age of digital cameras, they said the same thing about image review and high ISO sensors. "I don't need to review my images on no stinking rear LCD out in the field! I don't need no high ISO capabilities because I don't shoot black cats in coal mines! Blah, blah, blah!" But the luddite arguments always seem to lose out in the end as technology moves forward! At some point or another, the luddites and curmudgeons dismissed all these things as a "crutch".
@rrccad- EVF contributes "nothing to photography"? LOL. How about real-time exposure preview, focus peaking, focus magnification, live histogram, image review so you don't have to remove your eye from the viewfinder, better AF focus indicators such as dynamic-sized focus boxes so you have better visual feedback on what is being focus tracked, etc. Not to mention that EVFs allow for larger viewfinders whose size is not limited by the size of the sensor format. I also like to switch my EVF to black-and-white mode, which helps with visualizing my composition more effectively. I can't do that with an OVF. EVFs also allow for side-mounted viewfinders, which caters to certain people's style of camera handling. I like side-mounted EVFs because it allows me to look around me with my left non-viewfinder eye. It gives me more "situational awareness" of a scene or environment, which also helps my photography. All these things certainly contribute to photography, and are lacking from OVFs.