Have we just seen the opening salvo in a new war - the How Many Cross-Type Focus Points Is Better Conflict?
Evidently there is a new manufacturing process for cross-point points (?) - because Canikon sure was parsimonious with them.
The Name is Bond: An 85mm is not for headshots or even head and shoulder shots.
It's for head and half torso at the most.
You need a 135mm equiv minimum for headshots.
If you don't believe me then try it with your consumer zoom. It makes a huge difference.
How do we cope looking at people with our Normal-equivalent optical system eyes, Mr Bond?
bigdaddave: Anyone worried about sharpness or dynamic range?
No, of course not because when the subject matter is so fantastic stuff like that really doesn't matter at all. Nor should it.
There is a time and place for technical concerns. This site serves that discussion. And there are lots of other sites where the artistic elements of photography are covered.
But not everyone who comes here is a philistine.
yslee1: "Meanwhile, DPReview's Andy Westlake expressed his disappointment that there's no option to directly select AF points, as is possible with cameras like the Nikon D7100 and Olympus OM-D E-M1."
Ah dammit! When I saw the unlabelled directional pad I was hoping that would be possible. I absolutely detest having to press a button before being able to shift focus points.
Yeah. You and George Jetson. ;D
So, how much of a drawback would it be to hold a Nikon D800 in portrait orientation and take two or three overlapping shots for a panorama, which would easily equal or exceed this $34,000 back at least as far as resolution?
A $30,000 premium for avoiding a second click in the field and three clicks of a mouse seems to me a more obscene bargain than a Hasselblad Luna.
Do you think anyone could tell the difference in the files in a blinded comparison?
Matt: Can you guys do AF tests with moving subjects? Honestly the differences in static image quality between todays top cameras seem so small that its alsmot not worth pages of review anyways.
Could be easy, too. A basketball suspended from a string in the ceiling, brought back to standardized positions (different heights to produce different velocities when released) using standardized lighting. Camera on continuous focus and drive at standardized distance, starts shooting when ball is released. Count the number of in-focus shots.
Ball could be released so that one could assess various angles relative to the camera - straight-on toward/away from camera; 45 degrees vector relative to camera.
dpr could glue small printing labels on the ball with different size fonts to standardize the focus accuracy rankings.
dpr would need a room with standardized lighting, 1 basketball or soccer ball, 1 string, 1 stepladder, 1 piece of wood mounted on a sturdy tripod to hold ball in position, 1 set of alignment marks on the floor to position the tripod.
wow, that is ugly. blown highlights and chromatic aberrations are really bad here. Bad exposure. This looks like it was taken with a compact camera with a poorly conceived lens. yikes.
Yes, very few of us will want a $5000 NEX-7. But what if this was $200.00 option?
There is quite an accessories aftermarket in the auto industry, and it appeals to more than a few psychological profiles. There are those who want to hot-rod their 'rides', others who like the idea of replacing some sterile interior plastic surfaces with the sensuality of rich wood. Mini owes a lot of their success to their decision to market individual customizations of interior and exterior options as a 'cool' exercise in expressing ones individuality.
And yet we have a 55 billion dollar camera industry with almost zero marketing of this aesthetic concept. Most customizations are utilitarian. About all we see marketed by manufacturers are a few cameras with a choice of exterior colors.
Given today's computer-assisted 3-D scanning and 3-D sculpting technology, I am curious how successful a business model built around these ideas would be. $55 billion is a gigantic market.
Superka: If DPreview is reviewing phones now, why not posting film scanners reviews? The also have sensor, lens, and they convert analog photography to digital.
so, how do you like working for Apple, Petrogel? Good benefits?
More than one - (but now 9!) cross-type sensors is a first for a Rebel. Well-done Canon!
18MP, low noise at ISO 12,000. We have come a long way. This was a what, a $7000+ camera just a few years ago, and that was without an articulated touchscreen or live-view.
Don Kiyoti: What is the point of these interstitial pages? I have long wondered why, when one clicks on the link on the home page, it doesn't go directly to the review/preview.
"This camera is a game changer , indeed. It is the first truly pocketeable camera with a sensor larger than the Canon s100 sensor."
a good point!
OTOH, this cam has a sensor only half as large a m4/3, yet is the same price as a NEX-5N with kit lens.
If a person can stand the noise and dynamic range limitations of this cam compared to those with larger sensors, it is a great choice.
I am not sure we are getting more flexibility here, indeed, I think we are losing some, although I think the behind-the-scenes processing looks to do a better job of reducing artifacts.
We have now lost the recovery slider, the brightness slider, and the fill light slider. But we did not really gain anything to replace them, since we already had four sliders (shadows, blacks, highlights, lights) in the manual section of the curves dialog as well.
Not particularly happy about this at all. :(
S.A.: Shouldn't have gotten that number considering the auto focus system/price. Autofocus is fundamental. It should be considered as one of the most important features, just behind image quality. The rest is icing. Especially when you are reviewing a 1300 dollar system. The camera doesn't deserve that number. 81 and gold my azz.
"According to DPR accuracy suffers as well. If you read page 13, "The problem here, aside from speed, is accuracy - the camera has a tendency to focus on the background, so you may well need several attempts to get correct focus.""
To be fair, that quote is for conditions of indoor lighting at low light levels, and using a particular autofocus focus algorithm. Not manual focusing and without flash focus assist.
Your post makes it sound like the camera has focusing problems under all conditions.
BMWX5: Well done Sony. PopPhoto "Camera of the Year" two years in a row and now DP awarding Nex 7 Gold award and declaring Nex 7 as the best "best APS-C camera yet", regardless of size. I can't wait what Sony will offer in 2012!
You need lenses?
The question is "Using an adapter, are there any lenses one can't use with a NEX-7?"
Peter K Burian: I have tested the a77 and it produced GORGEOUS high ISO JPEGs. All you need to do is use the Multi-Frame Noise Reduction feature (accessed via Auto ISO) OR the similar Handheld Twilight Scene mode. (The template form of reviews and comparison photos does not seem to lend itself to a testing of unusual features such as this.)
See one of my ISO 5000 JPEGs at https://picasaweb.google.com/110698711952841559844/SonyA77ISO500FABULOUS#
The camera snaps six photos very quickly. The Bionz processor micro-aligns them to minimize the effect of any camera shake, allowing for sharp shots at surprisingly long exposures. It then composites the six captures into one, discarding most of the noise data for clean photos even at very high ISO. (My ISO ISO 5000 photos resemble those made at ISO 800 without this feature).
The fully-automatic Handheld Twilight Scene mode is identical but overrides are not available when this mode is used; the camera controls all aspects of the image.
It looks very impressive for handheld shot! You folks, you have to click on the magnify glass symbol to see the detail. Then, use the zoom. Yes, there is some noise in the shadows.. But for a handheld ISO 5000 shot - very good indeed!