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.
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)
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.
star shooter: If anyone can bring out a ILC that can do the same job as a pro DSLR for sport and news, then I'm all for it. Otherwise an ILC is just another cheap, amateur camera for teenagers mum, dad kids variety. Long live the DSLR!
News flash: not everyone shoots "sports and news". Who's to say that, eventually, DSLRs are going to be cameras that mainly only exist in the pro sports and news segment? And who's to say that mirrorless cameras can't eventually go toe to toe with DSLRs in every respect, or better? Already, we have cameras like the NX1 with blazing 15fps and 4K! And that's from Samsung's *first generation* pro mirrorless camera. Not bad for a first-time pro body. Mirrorless is just getting started.
But like I said, not everyone shoots pro sports and news. Believe it or not, most cameras are *overwhelmingly* sold to people doing far less demanding photography. Pro level cameras used for pro level shooting only make up a small portion of the market. Keep in mind that the most widely sold cameras are lower level DSLRs like Rebels with far more modest capabilities.
That's like saying, "Why do camera manufacturers allow slow shutter speeds if slow shutter speeds yield blurry pictures when shooting handheld?"
There are always limits to what you get for any given set of variables. So you try to optimize your results by doing certain things, like using a tripod or whatever. With 600mm-equivalent focal, one thing you can do is stabilize the camera by putting a viewfinder to your face, rather than holding it out in front of you. Unfortunately with G3X, you have to add a $250 EVF to do that. The lack of an EVF doesn't kill the G3X's usability. You can still "take pictures at 600mm". The question is whether you'll get optimum results. You can still *try* to handhold the camera out in front of you. Or you can use it on a monopod/tripod for better stability. But for $1K, many people think Canon should have simply included an EVF, which I think is a fair criticism. An EVF would certainly help. EVF is much better for daylight outdoor shooting, too.
Canon sees impossible. "You want what in a camera in 2015?! Impossible!"
LOL, I wonder if Canon regrets coming up with that silly slogan. It seems to be regularly coming back to haunt them. Have they used it ever since they introduced it?
kodakrome: The whole point of this camera is the long zoom for stuff like sports or wildlife. So for that I want a viewfinder. With the vf the camera is $1249 and for all that money I'll be shooting moving things at 1 fps in Raw???Nice quality body and lens, but the usability isn't there. This camera is made for people that don't know anything about photography.
@kodakrome - "p&s type users" usually like cheaper cameras. They aren't looking to drop a thousand dollars on a P&S. People who are going to spend this kind of money on a camera generally want better specs than 1fps.
utomo99: I wish the lens is faster. F 5.6 is too slow now
@Joseph Black- "When you attack one variable at a time without considering the entire package".
I think people here are considering the entire package. f/5.6 from 164mm-600mm is pretty slow, and handholdability without an EVF isn't going to be great. I just wonder about naive consumers who are going to be suckered into buying this camera thinking, "24-600 zoom? It must be a great camera!"...without considering the whole package. They are probably just going to consider that massive 24-600 zoom range, and think "more zoom equals better, right?"