Previous news story    Next news story

PPE 2013: Hands-on with Sony's new A7 / A7R and RX-series cameras

By dpreview staff on Oct 26, 2013 at 00:59 GMT
PPE 2013: Hands-on with Sony's A7 / A7R and RX-series cameras
1 2 3 4 5 10

PPE 2013: Hands-on with Sony's A7 / A7R and RX-series cameras

Of all the major camera manufacturers, Sony has the most new product on show at the Photo Plus Expo in New York, after the flurry of new Alpha and RX-series cameras released in the past couple of months. We had a fascinating (and fun) interview this morning with Kimio Maki, the brains behind the A7 and RX lines which we'll be writing up soon, but in the meantime, click through this slideshow for a quick tour of the new cameras. 

This is the 24MP Sony A7, one of two full-frame mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras that Sony launched recently, which are compatible with the E-mount (note that Sony has entirely dropped the 'NEX' designation). The A7 is a rather compelling mixture of design and ergonomic cues drawn from the RX1 and from Sony's longer-established NEX and SLT lineups. 

370
I own it
415
I want it
76
I had it
Discuss in the forums
368
I own it
569
I want it
106
I had it
Discuss in the forums
176
I own it
298
I want it
40
I had it
Discuss in the forums
515
I own it
339
I want it
91
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 113
Danielaru
By Danielaru (5 months ago)

These would be so much better if the viewfinder didn't stick out like it does....
It should be at the top left corner like the NEX6 and NEX7!

1 upvote
DekHog
By DekHog (6 months ago)

Pretty competetive pricing for the bodies but, jeez, $1000 for a 55mm F1.8? Hopefully Sigma will take this mount on soon...... lens range/price let Sony down every time.

0 upvotes
harold1968
By harold1968 (6 months ago)

Actually for good quality FF lenses the price is quite cheap
You might want to look at Leica, Zeiss or Canon L primes

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (6 months ago)

why should anyone use Sony lenses in the first place ?

0 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (6 months ago)

Because people want to enjoy the benefit of using a native lens with full AF speed, total control over aperture and sometimes optical stabilisation (not with the 55mm prime though, none of the FF NEX prime have stabilization)?

If you have a good selection of affordable, native glass, there's little incentive to fall back on legacy glass.

3 upvotes
whawha
By whawha (6 months ago)

These are really exciting cameras. Too bad the available lenses are so big and expensive, Sony really needs to get their act together with the lenses because they have a potential game changer here.
An affordable 35 or 40mm pancake would be perfect for those bodies.

0 upvotes
Adrian Van
By Adrian Van (6 months ago)

Lenses are big due to being FF sensor, they can only trim so much for the zoom range lenses shown on map. This FF cannot compare to m43 mirrorless lenses for good reason. However, primes could be small.

Let us compare prices of body $1699 is less for a A7 24Mp body, over a Nikon D610 at $2000 for body. However, Sony lenses certainly are expensive for the ones on the lens map. Some alternatives from third party would be nice at better prices. Sigma, Tamron? Will come eventually if not already here, as they have already have Sony A and E mount lenses in third party. However, top quality FF lenses always cost money due to production costs.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
harold1968
By harold1968 (6 months ago)

Actually the 35mm is pretty small. Especially for FF. The camera body is very small. It's a bit of an optical illusion with some of the lenses which are al smaller then the Nikon/Canon ones

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (6 months ago)

The 35mm is also unusually "slow". So slow than Canikon no longer produce those for their cameras. Their 35mm lens range start at f2.

1 upvote
rocklobster
By rocklobster (6 months ago)

Great job Sony but do we really want such a small body with large FF lenses?

Cheers

0 upvotes
gefrorenezeit
By gefrorenezeit (6 months ago)

.

Comment edited 14 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
viktoriskra
By viktoriskra (6 months ago)

It's hard to disagree with your point :-)

7 upvotes
gefrorenezeit
By gefrorenezeit (6 months ago)

Jo, was meant for another thread and i did not find delete the post. ;)

0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (6 months ago)

But fits here like the fist on the eye as well. So, now, come to the point, hahaha. If your freezing in time, come to my place, in the Philippines, here you never freeze.

1 upvote
olypan
By olypan (6 months ago)

By DavidKennard (11 hours ago)
They need to get Zeiss designing some Contax G style lenses (assuming the sensor design is compatible with that design of lens). Maybe with their investment in Oly they could get some updates on the nice compact OM primes as well. No need for full frame lenses to be big.

Film SLR lenses did not require light to hit the film square on in the way digital sensors do. The light hitting the film edges did not cause too many problems. 35mm sensors have terrible problems with corners. The mount would need to be twice the diaganol sensor size to overcome this. Olympus came up with the 4/3 format precisely because of this, the largest sensor size and lens mount without impacting the corners.

1 upvote
DavidKennard
By DavidKennard (6 months ago)

Couldn't the issue be avoided through using a special microlens design (like Leica's M)? While there may still be colour shading issues with particularly wide angle lenses, this could probably be dealt with using in camera processing.

0 upvotes
harold1968
By harold1968 (6 months ago)

Contax G was a rangefinder.
I am sure the Zeiss lens designs for the A7 series will be optimised as much as possible for size and quality.
The corner issue is only if the lenses are not designed for the sensor. For example, with the RX1(R) the rear element is designed to correct light for the micro lenses of the sensor.
In addition the A7r has angled micro lenses, so might be better for legacy M mount lens.

Comment edited 42 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
probert500
By probert500 (5 months ago)

Sure - with 4/3 - if you remove the corners you don't have a problem with corners. I'm not sure I call that engineering prowess. My guess is the sensor area is 40% smaller than APS so it's cheaper to make and you can sell it for the same price.

Regarding the 36mp sensor - it does have micro lenses to counteract corner issues.

0 upvotes
l_d_allan
By l_d_allan (6 months ago)

Roger Cicala at LensRentals wrote an interesting article about:
"There Is No Free Lunch, Episode 763: Lens Adapters"
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/09/there-is-no-free-lunch-episode-763-lens-adapters

Overall, he notes that any adapter will detract from image quality. He was writing about non-optical adapters that are hollow.

In the subsequent comments, the question came up about Sony adapters for the A7 series. My reading is that you could count of some image quality degradation.

How much? The article wasn't encouraging, but it depends on your expectations. It certainly put a damper on this Canon owner's interest with a significant investment in EF lenses.

I couldn't tell if the Sony adapters were optical (with one or more lenses) or hollow, and functioning as a "pass-thru" for electrical signals.

1 upvote
RichRMA
By RichRMA (6 months ago)

I don't see why the adapters would be a problem optically. They are maintaining the same lens to sensor spacing, the sensors are both flat and function in the same way. Where is the difference? The only possible thing that would effect image quality would be if the interior of the adapter allowed for glare or reflection off its surfaces, compared to the inside of the DSLR.

0 upvotes
gefrorenezeit
By gefrorenezeit (6 months ago)

You got one more connection (bajonett) which is prone to allowance and flex - cannot be as good as only one conection.

0 upvotes
ryansholl
By ryansholl (6 months ago)

Meh. All I read into that is that we as customers need to push to have higher quality adapters available. I'd gladly pay $40-50 for a simple dumb adapter + proper baffling.

0 upvotes
Adrian Van
By Adrian Van (6 months ago)

Get the Sony adapter which has autofocus ability. Or else get the Metabones adapter to any brand lens like Nikon G, F, or Canon lenses however, you would need to set focus manually however with Metabones, maybe this camera has focus peaking like some of the other Sony bodies, so manual focus any brand lens can be used well. Do not know if the Metabones Speed Booster adapter (extra stop advantage) would work as this body is already full frame lens, however, there is an aperature ring on that lens so any brand mount lens will work with manual aperature ring. Look up these adapters on Amazon or B&H Photo for info. Prices anywhere from $99 to $400 and up to $600 depending on adapter function spec.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
1 upvote
sparkling elk
By sparkling elk (6 months ago)

give me that kind of sony 7x with 3x mp, responsive AF (including servo), 7 fps and a 20mm f2.8, these existing 35 f2.8 plus 55 f1.8 and a 100mm f2 and i will sell everything I have to get that kit and make a world tour.

0 upvotes
jpr2
By jpr2 (6 months ago)

What I'd like to know very much is how much impact, and of what kind, will the last week release of the A7/A7r on the one hand, and a quite recent introduction of the a3000 on the other - both of which can be considered as exploration of some variants of a midget-DSLR theme - will have on the future of the NEX line of cameras? The NEX'en are going to be renamed to some other scheme - yes, we know that they will be called Alpha "something" now, but the exact naming scheme of that "something" is pretty much unknown, or at least pretty much unclear.

Specifically, would the future replacements/upgrades of NEX preserve the very small form factor of a tiny-brick design? And even more specifically - how about plans to expedite the release of upgrade for the two years old Nex-7? Will it have an much improved OSPDAF, capable to capture fast action/tracking at the pretty high rate of 10 FPS like the current one, but offering a reasonable keeper ratios for sports etc. very dynamic activities?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
harold1968
By harold1968 (6 months ago)

Sony will keep a body and lens line up for all budgets. Like other camera makers it will maintain an APS-C and FF line

0 upvotes
parallaxproblem
By parallaxproblem (6 months ago)

I am looking forward to reading the write-up of your interview

Did you ask Kimio Maki (or if you didn't, can you before publishing the write-up) what the implications are of Sony's announcement that they will not using the name 'NEX' on future E-mount cameras?

A lot of people in the NEX forum are concerned that the recent A3000 and A7 releases, together with the new product rebranding, might mean Sony are planning to radically change the format of APS-C E-mount bodies from the 'rangefinder' shape they have had until now to a larger DSLR shape in order to appeal to a different audience

Would it be possible for you to get from Sony some form of confirmation or rebuttal of these concerns?

3 upvotes
Shurato
By Shurato (6 months ago)

Now let's see how long it will take till Hasselblad will offer the A7 / A7R with their design interpretation à la Hasselblad Lunar. My wild guess what the name will be adhering to the two previous celestial body-related names:
"Hasselblad Planetar"?

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (6 months ago)

I think the concept is good and maybe it's just the appearance but when I look at these I think this is version #1. Before long, we'll look back and say, remember when people were lining up to buy those boxy, first generation, Sonys? Just a hunch but I think that v.2 of these Sonys will be a lot more refined.

1 upvote
thebustos
By thebustos (6 months ago)

I think the design was meant to give a nod to the design of some of the old Minolta rangefinders...

0 upvotes
backayonder
By backayonder (6 months ago)

Stick Zenith on the front and I might be tempted to buy one.

3 upvotes
onlooker
By onlooker (6 months ago)

To be honest, I am more interested in the RX 10 than the FF, but the price... ouch...

2 upvotes
schaki
By schaki (6 months ago)

Lol. Sony and their huge lenses..

6 upvotes
harold1968
By harold1968 (6 months ago)

the lenses are not big
the camera is very small and the lenses are smaller then the DSLR ones

10 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (6 months ago)

> huge lenses...

depends on what you need a lens for

0 upvotes
gordon lafleur
By gordon lafleur (6 months ago)

Nice little cameras, big clunky over-priced lenses. The lenses may be smaller than the DSLR ones, but those are monstrous. What's the point of making compact camera bodies if you don't make lenses to match. Maybe they could hire Pentax or Olympus to make lenses for them. Zeiss is a big part of the problem. Their lenses have always been bloated, over-rated clunkers.

5 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (6 months ago)

it looks that some people care more what a lens can do than how much it weighs, and some do the opposite.

for the price, Sony say its cost performance is not low enough, and that's why they need help from Zeiss.

2 upvotes
Timmbits
By Timmbits (6 months ago)

don't show your ignorance boys:
larger full frame sensor uses a much larger lens than APSC.

13 upvotes
DavidKennard
By DavidKennard (6 months ago)

They need to get Zeiss designing some Contax G style lenses (assuming the sensor design is compatible with that design of lens). Maybe with their investment in Oly they could get some updates on the nice compact OM primes as well. No need for full frame lenses to be big.

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
1 upvote
DDWD10
By DDWD10 (6 months ago)

They should be smaller than FF DSLR lenses due to a shorter flange distance.

0 upvotes
Adamaflex
By Adamaflex (6 months ago)

Timmbits are you sure about that because all the m mount lens ive seen are pretty small.

0 upvotes
gordon lafleur
By gordon lafleur (5 months ago)

Tmmbits Full frame lenses do not have to be bloated clunkers llike this. Lots of full frame lenses are very small, especially primes. Old film lenses like Pentax M series and Olympus OM lenses were very small. Leica M lenses are very compact. Old Zeiss lenses were bloated clunkers like their modern ones however. The lenses for the old Contarex 35mm cameras were huge.

0 upvotes
Shurato
By Shurato (6 months ago)

One thing I first noticed is the absence of design. But I mean this in a good way. Design the inner specifications, take a fitting flat box, cut a cylinder into half (sort of) call it "handgrip" and glue it onto this box, put some kind of prisma-shaped thing on top to give space for the viewfinder and done.
This straightforward design reminds me the good old times in the era of the Canon AE-1.
Yeah, I'm looking forward to this Sony one.

5 upvotes
Jonathan371
By Jonathan371 (6 months ago)

Metabones should produce a medium format speed adapter for this camera. Can you imagine an 80mm f/2.8 hassy lens operating at 50mm f/1.4. If they could get the leaf shutter to function it would be the ultimate combo.

0 upvotes
Timmbits
By Timmbits (6 months ago)

...or you can just use a 50mm f1.4 FF lens and forego the chromatic aberrations and lowering of contrast caused by the speed adapter.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
probert500
By probert500 (5 months ago)

You might be disappointed. Generally larger format lenses have less acuity for the simple reason that they don't have to.(Due to the relatively massive film/sensor surface area.)

What you'd end up with is a fairly massive mediocre portrait lens. Sad but true.

0 upvotes
viktoriskra
By viktoriskra (6 months ago)

One needs to applaud Sony for making its Alpha badge an admired commodity in today's photographic marketplace. It has come a long way since 'the era of indifference' (between A700 and Nex3/5), during which I had my doubts about its future.

Needless to say I am sincerely glad I was wrong.

12 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (6 months ago)

Is the Alpha badge an admired?

Personally, I'm not so sure a better plan would have been to keep the Minolta badge like Ricoh is doing with Pentax.

Sony is always going to have the stigma of a small electronics vendor, not a photographic company which is one reason they rely so heavily on Zeiss branding.

10 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (6 months ago)

What's an Alpha badge? But I do like the idea behind these and it should get others to do something similar, maybe better for Photokina.

0 upvotes
viktoriskra
By viktoriskra (6 months ago)

Reply to marike6:

1. As long as Sony pursues its current path of innovation and refrains from producing too many 'lemons' (although some might argue that these are inevitable by-products of such strategy), the popularity of its photographic brand will only increase as the perceptions towards it change for the better.

2. Retention of the Minolta branding would have been easier, but not necessarily a more successful option - history is full of 'brand marriages' that went wrong (BMW + Rover, et al). It is also worth remembering that in 2006 Interbrand ranked Sony as the world's 26th most valuable brand, higher than every other camera manufacturer except Samsung. KonicaMinolta did not even feature in the Top 100.

continued below..

9 upvotes
viktoriskra
By viktoriskra (6 months ago)

3. Two years ago I did a dissertation on the impact of branding on brand loyalty among Canon, Nikon, and Sony users, and found out that only a small fraction of my sample perceived Sony's 'stigma' negatively. Diversification is (increasingly) a necessity for camera/consumer electronic firms, and should be viewed advantageously as it pumps investment into their photographic operations. Would you marginalize Fujifilm just because it makes skin cream? I wouldn't.

14 upvotes
calking
By calking (6 months ago)

@ victor....
An excellent point. In fact, I believe most consumers reaction to the sony brand to be very positive. They make excellent televisions and audio equipment and that's how most people know the brand who aren't familiar with their photography products.

By comparison, many know canon as an office equipment company as well as photographic, whereas Nikon, Olympus, and Fuji are primarily perceived as photography-only equipment.

Once again, photo equipment "enthusiasts" (aka gear heads) need to remember that their perception of brand differential isn't the same as the consumer public. I seriously doubt that a large polling among thousands of consumers would indicate a consensus that "Sony is a small electronics manufacturer that needs to rely on co-branding with Zeiss".

MOST consumers aren't going to spend $2000 + on a FF MILC system either. This is much more niche to the enthusiast / prosumer / pro crowd anyway.

9 upvotes
Schweikert
By Schweikert (6 months ago)

marike6,

Sony global sales for their 2012 fiscal year ending in March 2013, $72 billion. Canon global sales for 2012 fiscal year ending in December 2012, $40 billion. Those sales include all products under those brands.

So how exactly is Sony a small electronics vendor?

8 upvotes
mrtaufik
By mrtaufik (6 months ago)

Marike is a perfect sample of fanboy and troll at the same time. Just ignore it.

5 upvotes
CFynn
By CFynn (6 months ago)

When people want their cameras to shoot video as well as stills, and camera bodies have become electronic devices, Sony is probably a pretty strong brand.

Sony have been making professional video cameras and advanced electronic devices for much longer than other camera companies - except maybe Panasonic.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 12 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (6 months ago)

@mrtaufik 7 people who upvoted my comment didn't consider it fanboyism or trolling.

I don't see you generating any discussion, just jumping slamming others like a cranky old man.

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (6 months ago)

@Schweikert Total global sales don't really tell us anything about Alpha branding and its perception among photographers.

3 upvotes
Edgar Matias
By Edgar Matias (6 months ago)

Brands take years to gain any sort of meaning or association. Minolta had that and was thrown away unceremoniously -- a clear waste of brand value.

To me and others, "Alpha" is little more than a label. The NEX brand is a lot stronger, and they're throwing that one away too. They seem to view brands as disposable.

It's clear that Sony has a lot to learn about branding.

4 upvotes
Adrian Van
By Adrian Van (6 months ago)

The Sony A99 is a fine FF camera with A mount and 24mp sensor (just ask Kirk Tuck who has 2 of them), just like the A7 which has same sensor and mount. The Alpha brand should be perceived as high quality and new tech.
I like this designation better than Nex, personally for new generation cameras from Sony.

6 upvotes
viktoriskra
By viktoriskra (6 months ago)

Reply to Edgar Matias:

1. Some might argue that in 2006 Sony did not have a choice as there was very little 'residual' brand value Minolta could offer. Even a merger with another brand with strong photographic pedigree (Konica) could not prevent its unfortunate takeover. Nevertheless, I partially agree with your point and would suggest to go for SonyMinolta :-)

2. Let's take away the (lack of ) successes with NEX and Alpha products, and focus on the branding alone. Alpha - meaningful word association; very similar pronunciation in most languages; memorable logo; vibrant, optimistic colour; can be shortened if needed. NEX - meaningless, colourless, no logo, bland in comparison. While it may seem a bit bizarre that arguably superior products will be rebranded, this unification of the two camera systems will strengthen and simplify Sony's ILC branding.

3. Utter bollocks - Walkman, PlayStation, Blu-Ray, Handycam.. Sony is responsible for creating some of the world's most iconic brands.

6 upvotes
Edgar Matias
By Edgar Matias (6 months ago)

The Sony of today is not the Sony that created those iconic brands...

They cling to brands that lost their meaning long ago (did you know they still make Walkmans? not many people do), and discard brands that have meaning and value.

Look at all the FREE buzz Olympus got from reviving the OM-D brand. That's brand value in action!

Sony could benefit similarly, but I have $5 that says they'll choose not to. In fact, they've already chosen not to. Their shift to FF mirrorless was a prime opportunity to revive the Minolta brand and tap all that accumulated nostalgia. Instead, they go with "Alpha".

Not impressed.

5 upvotes
viktoriskra
By viktoriskra (6 months ago)

Reply to Edgar Matias:

Re: Today's Sony isn't the same

100% agree. Sony, like the majority of Japanese consumer electronics firms, has lost the edge. Numerous reasons, not necessarily branding issues - emergence and technological advancement of lower cost economies, industrial standardization, product/industry life cycle, patent expiry, obsolescence of key products, lower barriers to competitors' entry, consumer literacy, etc.

Re: Sony Walkman (I miss making and playing personal 'best of' tapes, don't you?)

While there might be few obscure retailers with surplus stock, the production of the actual cassette player had ceased. The brands lives on though, further proof that Sony's branding can go beyond its physical creations.

Re: OM-D

Its success is fundamentally down to its performance and lens offering. If it was 'fur coat and no knickers', only a fraction of consumers (ostentatious tossers, hipsters) would have fallen for it.

continued below..

6 upvotes
viktoriskra
By viktoriskra (6 months ago)

I used to be a camera salesman (2008 - Jan 2013; over £1 mil. photo gear revenue), and encountered maybe two dozens of customers who exhibited blind brand loyalty, or bought into a system purely as a result of brand nostalgia whilst knowing there were superior options out there. Then again, I live in Yorkshire, a county (in)famous for its cool-headedness and pragmatism when it comes to splashing a bob or two. Metropolitan yuppies tend to have more careless purchasing habits.

Re: Minolta

Brand 'resurrection' can be costly, and its fortunes are rarely guaranteed (Rover/MG, HMV, Kodak, Polaroid..). While I (not quite fully) understand the popularity of brand revival and the consequent changes in fashion, starting from scratch can often provide brands with a wider marketing platform. Plus there's an issue of leaving a legacy and 'putting your own stamp' - a proud firm like Sony would see its sub-brand as the next chapter (1. Mavica 2. CyberShot 3. Alpha) on their photographic journey.

6 upvotes
subodh
By subodh (6 months ago)

Repy to Edgar Matias-
"The Sony of today is not the Sony that created those iconic brands"
- But still they r far better than any Chinese & south Korean company. well built, unique design & Value for money.

"They cling to brands that lost their meaning long ago (did you know they still make Walkmans? not many people do), and discard brands that have meaning and value"
- I think u have ipod but you should use walkman.. awesome sound quality than ipod. recently they announced android based high end walkman players. google it.

and still they are pretty innovative than canikon. their xperia brand is also going well. in my point of you they going on right path
and A mount will stay in high end camera (in high end APS-C & high end FF cameras with translucent technology)

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Edgar Matias
By Edgar Matias (6 months ago)

I should clarify... I'm not anti-Sony.

In fact, I think they will ultimately "win". They control the sensor tech. Almost everybody buys from them. They've put out some incredible cameras recently.

It's just disappointing seeing such cheesy branding from them.

1 upvote
viktoriskra
By viktoriskra (6 months ago)

Reply to Edgar Matias:

Re: Anti-Sony

I never thought you were. Your points were constructive and articulate, unlike the ubiquitous brand-bashing waffle some pursue on this forum.

Re: Future of Sony's tech and branding

In theory, the unified Alpha brand should be a solid foundation for Sony to (re)establish itself as a photographic force to be reckoned with. While it has the essential know-how, resources, and an inherent degree of anti-luddism, there are some issues one can immediately think of:

1. Product strategy often lacks continuity - there was a 7-year gap in its premium fixed-lens CyberShot range (2005: R1 ~ 2012: RX series). Why the long pause, knowing that there was a gap in the market and that these products could have improved its brand perception significantly?

continued below..

1 upvote
viktoriskra
By viktoriskra (6 months ago)

2. (Consumer) uncertainty about technological direction - too many short-lived advancements can create mistrust and lead to rejection by the customer. How do we know that the current system won't be just an 'interim solution' like the translucent mirror thingy?

3. There's a difference between "premium" and "unaffordable" - the ratio of Sony to Zeiss lenses should be at least 2:1. Yet they're starting a new system with 1 sub-mediocre Sony kit zoom and 3 Zeiss, more Zeiss to follow in 2014. Silly. Shoot, I forgot the G-branded lenses..are they supposed to be Sony-price Zeiss-quality or Sony-quality Zeiss-price? They're a misfit and should be re-branded.

1 upvote
probert500
By probert500 (5 months ago)

Nikon is very small and specialized relative to the others - it is a photography only company. Olympus made it's bones in scientific optics. This explains their exquisite and tiny om zuikos. Fuji makes everything mankind needs - huge.

0 upvotes
Edgar Matias
By Edgar Matias (6 months ago)

Not sure what the point is of these "PPE 2013: Hands-on" posts. It's just a bunch of photos with no new information.

Am I missing something here?

8 upvotes
monkeybrain
By monkeybrain (6 months ago)

I have to agree, but they generate lots of comments so are getting lots of hits.

I was especially confused with the Fuji, talking about the X20 and X100s as if they were new cameras they'd never seen before.

2 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (6 months ago)

They're not going to add much for those of you who are regular and loyal site visitors - it's more of a quick roundup of recent (ish) releases from some of the busier camera manufacturers. It's also a convenient hub for some of our more in-depth review and preview content for people who might be new to it.

3 upvotes
Edgar Matias
By Edgar Matias (6 months ago)

You know your traffic logs, so perhaps that makes sense.

As for regular readers, next time you might want to consider adding interesting sound bites from your up-coming interviews. That's not much more work, and would make these posts a lot more interesting, plus build anticipation for said interviews ( = more traffic).

FYI, I've been reading DPR since it was photo.askey.net. It's been interesting watching the site evolve. Thanks for your efforts.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (6 months ago)

"We want to change the world"

That's the interview teaser ;)

0 upvotes
Edgar Matias
By Edgar Matias (6 months ago)

No one will accuse you of being long winded. :-)

0 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (6 months ago)

Front panel construction A7=Magnesium alloy A7r =Composite
Really ? Well it looks like other websites have that backwards.
"Body on A7 is magnesium alloy but front panel is polycarbonate"
"Body and front panel on A7R is magnesium alloy"
http://briansmith.com/sony-a7r-field-test/

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (6 months ago)

Good price for the body but the lenses are extremely pricey. It could be interesting for adapting lenses, but with native Sony lenses the cost of ownership is substantial.

2 upvotes
Chris43
By Chris43 (6 months ago)

This news item suggests that apart from the interview, DPR staff had more information as a result of attending the event, than the already published hands on review of these cameras. Disappointed, DPR.

6 upvotes
Miwok
By Miwok (6 months ago)

Sweet cameras for people who don't like to show off..

2 upvotes
Eleson
By Eleson (6 months ago)

"We had a fascinating (and fun) interview this morning with Kimio Maki,"
and where is it?

2 upvotes
inFocus
By inFocus (6 months ago)

Read on just a few words, "which we'll be writing up soon"

3 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (6 months ago)

We were speaking for an hour, and 1min of audio takes around 5 mins (at least) to transcribe, longer if the interviewee's first language isn't English, plus editing it into something readable, sorting out the on / off-record comments... It needs several hours, which I'm hoping to find this week.

4 upvotes
sebastian huvenaars
By sebastian huvenaars (6 months ago)

Liking the design. Sharp, functional, efficient.

9 upvotes
digitall
By digitall (6 months ago)

'If you have A-mount lenses laying around, those too will ...'?

Lay golden eggs?

Or do you mean:

'If you have A-mount lenses lying around, those too will ...'?

3 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (6 months ago)

a golden egg is an egg with no life.
A-mount lenses should be the first to go, to the toilet.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
technotic
By technotic (6 months ago)

An A-mount lens is a lens with life.

0 upvotes
calking
By calking (6 months ago)

@ yabo....

Every now and then you post something really amusing that I enjoy greatly, like the above.

0 upvotes
Optimal Prime
By Optimal Prime (6 months ago)

Where is the grip on the rx100 from?

0 upvotes
calking
By calking (6 months ago)

Looks to me like its part of the camera design, not a third party item like the. Richard frencic grip I bought for my rx100. Maybe sony listened to the criticism and made a more useful grip on this latest incarnation.

0 upvotes
Rob Sims
By Rob Sims (6 months ago)

That's the official stick-on grip Sony sell as an accessory (s$20 here in Singapore). A few other companies make them for cheaper.

0 upvotes
silentstorm
By silentstorm (6 months ago)

These new A7s need more lenses with OSS. I don't understand why the omission of OSS in the newer Zeiss prime lenses.

Or is Sony differentiating the products by having IBIS in Alpha mount & non-IBIS in the Nex series?

So now we have Alpha APS-C & FF (IBIS) & Nex APS-C & FF (non-IBIS lower end stuff)

1 upvote
hippo84
By hippo84 (6 months ago)

It's impossible to make stabilized sensor in such tiny body. If there'll be something like A7 but in DSLR shaped body, it will sure have SSS.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (6 months ago)

agree that it's more difficult to shift a larger sensor but cost cutting may have been the real consideration.

2 upvotes
silentstorm
By silentstorm (6 months ago)

I understand the body is small so it is challenging to include the stabiliser, but the lenses??

The Sony & Zeiss zoom has OSS, so what's the excuse for not integrating OSS in the primes?

1 upvote
JDThomas
By JDThomas (6 months ago)

"so what's the excuse for not integrating OSS in the primes?"

Size maybe? The camera looks completely off-kilter an terribly unergonomic as it is. Put an even bigger lens on there? Fumbly.

2 upvotes
silentstorm
By silentstorm (6 months ago)

Not likely a size consideration. Just look at the 2 zooms, not that big & fumbly you reckon? At least I don't feel it is so.

If those 2 zooms are fumbly, then the Nex 70-200 F4 is going to be gigantic :)

2 upvotes
Spectro
By Spectro (6 months ago)

I only use vr on lenses over 120-140mm. vr, is, ibis, oc on a 50mm, you might have handshaking problem.

there are sony rumors of a ff mirrorless A mount for 2014.

0 upvotes
calking
By calking (6 months ago)

Just how many prime lenses in shorter focal lengths with OSS / IS / VR are there anyway? I can't think of any under the nikon 105mm macro though there may be more....

0 upvotes
Eric Hensel
By Eric Hensel (6 months ago)

The 35 1.8 for APS C has OSS, so does the 50 1.8

0 upvotes
chillgreg
By chillgreg (6 months ago)

2nd comment. Drats!

1 upvote
Daniel Bliss
By Daniel Bliss (6 months ago)

A small camera wants a small lens. This one is begging for a really good 35/2.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (6 months ago)

They launched with a good 35mm f2.8, is that close enough?

1 upvote
samhain
By samhain (6 months ago)

Not close enough for me. I agree, should've been a nice 35/2, with a cheaper, smaller 35/2.8 down the road.

( And that 35/2.8 doesn't look much smaller than the Minolta 35/2, if at all. Just a lot less glass on the front. I just don't understand Sony's adversion to making fast e-mount lenses).

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (6 months ago)

the front element only occupies a small fraction of the front of the lens.

1 upvote
Ocolon
By Ocolon (6 months ago)

The RX1(R) is their small 35/2 full frame camera. A 35/2 lens for the A7 would have made the RX1(R) almost obsolete.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (6 months ago)

> They launched with a good 35mm f2.8.

An extremely expensive $800 35 f/2.8 lens. Want a normal lens? There's the $1000 55 f/1.8. See a pattern?

1 upvote
PenGun
By PenGun (6 months ago)

You can't hang your average junk lens on the a7R. It will reveal all it's faults.

The 35 2.8 is a steal, as is the 55 1.8. Any used Leica or Zeiss lenses in those ranges are more.

1 upvote
gordon lafleur
By gordon lafleur (6 months ago)

The only stealing going on is by Zeiss and Sony. Your average "junk" lens, like a Nikkor or Canon do just fine thanks. I remmember a few years ago seeing tests in one of the mags of a round-up of 50mm normal lenses. The Zeiss was twice as expensive as all the other "junk" lenses, but it tested in the middle of the pack.

2 upvotes
gordon lafleur
By gordon lafleur (6 months ago)

$800 for a 35mm f2.8? $1000 for a 50mm f 1.8? give me a break. I'll spend my money elsewhere thanks.

2 upvotes
calking
By calking (6 months ago)

Those of you complaining about the price of the glass must have missed the spec about using the two sony adapters with glass you already own...read that Brian Smith review.

And PenGun is right....consumer glass on ANY 36mp FF camera isn't going to look anywhere near as good as it would on a much lower resolving sensor. Photography 101 there.

2 upvotes
samhain
By samhain (6 months ago)

Who's talking about consumer glass? No one suggested Sony make an inferior 35/2 for it.
(The Minolta 35/2 certainly isnt)

1 upvote
PenGun
By PenGun (6 months ago)

Look at the Fuji XF lens prices. I paid $900 for my 14mm. An amazing and universally acclaimed piece of glass and it only has to cover APS-C.

Your consumer lens will be terrible on the a7R. Maybe get a 7R if you want to cheap out on the glass.

It goes like this. Leica makes the best lenses available. Zeiss comes in next with some very fine lenses. Then there is everyone else and sometimes some of theirs are as good as the Zeiss, the Fuji XF 14mm and the XF 35mm are good examples. But this rarely happens.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
OfcrMike
By OfcrMike (6 months ago)

If the new 35/2.8 had been a 35/2, someone would have commented that it should have been a 35/1.8, but if it had been, someone would have said it should have been a 35/1.2, but that would cost as much as the a7 itself, which would have prompted someone to comment that they should have launched the a7 with a more-affordable 35/2.8 for around $800... somehow, Sony foresaw all that and launched the a7 with a sensibly-priced 35/2.8. Brilliant, Sony! Simply brilliant!

0 upvotes
probert500
By probert500 (5 months ago)

Let's see - they release a f2 and you'll all complain it's too large. They release a small super sharp 2.8 and it's too slow. Me - I like small. 2.0 - 2.8 who cares? Really - who the f*ck cares?

0 upvotes
Total comments: 113