Video: What's in the future for Sony's Alpha system?

Canon and Nikon already have rolled out their own mirrorless entries. It's just that Canon and Nikon's mirrorless have been so underwhelming that you didn't even realize they'd rolled out their own mirrorless.

Hi Ivan

Believe me - I wish the camera would work for everything. I don't relish continuing with 2 systems.

Try to use this camera for sports and wildlife, you will soon see why it isn't suited for these activities. Some of the problems were mentioned in the interview.

1. Tracking moving subjects with continuous high speed shooting is near to impossible with the EVF - I've tried and tried - they need to greatly increase the speed of refresh and image recovery after each shot. I may resort to a sports finder in the meanwhile

2. There are still issues with tracking and rapid focusing with long lenses - granted the lack of native long lenses is the first problem - but even with adapted lenses the phase and contrast detection focus acquisition seems to crawl at longer focal lengths compared to a Canon 7DII and a 100-400 mkII. THis may be one reason why there are no native FE 70-400's yet.

I think the Sony A77ii (apsc SLT) which uses the A mount has been selling fairly well against the Nikon and Canon apsc competitors D7100/7200 and 70D, taking at least some of the market, as this is a good featured camera. A99 in FF also uses A mount. Is there going to be a A99ii? Could be good reasons to continue with A mount.

As a-mount photographer, only thing I heard was A7r2 bla-bla-bala, A7s bla-bla-bla for 30+ minutes. Then for less than a minute: "We'll continue with A-mount". Without telling about "dedicated A-mount camera production". What a waste of my time!

Ok, Tjardi, we'll do that for you, we just didn't know what you needed.

Nikon

Exactly. You don't expect a manufacturer to bring up limitations, so by introducing and framing some of them myself (e.g. EVF limitations, AF mode limitations with adapted lenses, etc.), I tried to take the position of the interested photographer - is this or that limitation, or is this or that enhancement, going to be addressed in the future? Is it something you're aware of? Are you aware that photographers are interested in this?

The good thing is, most of the time Kenta responded indicating awareness - which itself is valuable information out of an interview. In fact, the fact that he's forthcoming about a lot of these things is laudable and, we thought, of value to our audience.

Sorry if you disagree. Also, perhaps have the decency to spell my name correctly?

Indeed.
Actually I was amazed by his frankness. I sort of expected a kind of corporate "the camera is the best at everything"; especially as it is the best (for many of us) at a good many things.
But to both admit that it might not be for fast action sports, and to identify the biggest issue with this (which is not the AF system as such in my experience, but the slight lag in the EVF when moving it fast) AND to admit that long fast native glass is needed ideally (I expected adapted A glass is all you want!! to be what we were told) was, I thought, impressive and thoughtful as well as making me think these things are likely to be addressed in the future.

People are seriously bring up a ten year old story? Jeez, talking about desperately grasping at straws.

Fooled us once shame on Sony. Fool us twice, shame on us! :)

@justmeMN: It wasn't Sony, It was First4Internet who created the rootkit under contract from Sony, so there.

vscd:
or in the immortal words of GWBush:
fool me twice....you can't get fooled again.

@Wubslin: It doesn't matter that Sony hired someone to create the rootkit.Hire someone to murder for you and you are just as guilty in the eyes of the law.

@Wubslin: I have not read all comments, but who brought this topic up? You seem to be the only one, I have not seen any posts about this here in the comments of this video.

@Oli4D, I was going to make the same comment.

@Alfa1: Except Sony never hired anyone to do this, nor did they approve of it. First4Internet created the rootkit (which didn't exist) on their own initiative.

A large corporation like Sony should not have to micromanage its contractors.

@Wubslin: I was simply asking why you brought this topic up in the first place.
Nobody was talking about it... or did I miss it?

You don't need a LOT of lens per camera.

My Valet.

1. They have no direct competition, therefore they can charge whatever price they want and people will still buy.
2. More beneficial for them to not include PDAF so they can include it in the next version next year and therefore maximize the longevity of the sensor and the profit (if they included it in now, people wouldn't have anything to buy and upgrade to next year).

The 12 MP is only a year old. The 36 MP is 3 years old and was the oldest Sensor of all the A7 cameras. So it made sense for Sony to update the 36 MP sensor.
Well. and it's all about money. The cost of R&D has to be covered, and I guess. designing Sensors aren't cheap. And the more they can sell the sensor, the faster it's amortized. And of course... there are no other sensor with the same specs, so no need to rush out a new sensor. Although it would have been nice to have PADF... Guess you have to wait for another iteration.

New body design, expanded ISO, image stabilization, 169 focus points vs 25, 4K video, new viewfinder, new LCD, all combine to increase the price. These are all new manufactured features. They did not just clean out the closet of left over parts.

I think the sensor is A7/A7ii is borrowed from the A99 which might be older than the 36mp sensor in A7r.

Only thing confirmed as far as I know is there will be a large aperture prime (as shown on the roadmap). No mention of any focal lengths.

8 new Sony lenses:
- Sony 24-70mm f/2.8 G Macro
- Sony Zeiss FE 25mm f/2.8 (compact prime)
- Sony Zeiss FE 85mm f/2.8 (compact prime)
- Sony Zeiss FE 50mm f/1.2 (with aperture ring)
- Sony Zeiss FE 85mm f/1.4 (with aperture ring)
- Sony FE 100-400mm f/4-5.6 G
- Sony FE 70-300mm f/4-5.6
one more thing...
- Sony Zeiss FE 135mm f/2 (with aperture ring)

Zeiss Batis FE roadmap:
- Zeiss Batis Distagon 1.8/35
- Zeiss Batis Distagon 1.4/50
- Zeiss Batis Planar 2/100

Zeiss Loxia FE roadmap:
- Zeiss Loxia Sonnar 2/85
- Zeiss Loxia Distagon 1.4/35

And 4k wasn't really an innovation from Panasonic. The Canon 1Dc had 4k video in a larger sensor format almost 2 years earlier than Panasonic. And the Sony A7s was announced a few months later than the GH4.

Longer lines, Heat, slower read time and until recently FSI (small sensors have been BSI for years).

I live outside the U.S. Where I live it's very hard to sell Sony equipment for good prices.

Then sell it for a bad price. Your 6 year old camera is never going to be worth more than it is right now. Fifteen A-mount cameras have been released in that time frame, and you did not buy a single one of them. So why the rush now? They say more are on the way. Relax and wait a while.

if Sony (or any other brand for that matter) is hard to sell or buy used equipment for in your location, I'd advice against buying any more from that manufacturer.

"I live outside the U.S. Where I live it's very hard to sell Sony equipment for good price"

Then buy used - that way you get a bargain and lose little on the resale.

Really - you did perpetuate the technical confusion and could have just as simply said Lossless Raw when talking about what they implemented. As a result of this confusion we now have half the buffer we had before.

And by the way - why didn't you bring that up ON Camera?

Just so I understand you: you actually think we're the reason Sony went fully uncompressed?

Our reporting on the issue clearly spelled out the fundamental problem that needed fixing, raised awareness of the issue, and linked off to Iliah Borg's far more in-depth work? You'd like to now hold us responsible for not spelling out exactly the implementation that you demand?

Why didn't I bring that up on camera? Because I'd already spoken to Kenta about it, and it wasn't on my list of 'top things' I wanted to get to in the interview. I'm sure there are a lot of things people wanted raised in the interview - realistically, someone will always be disappointed. For that, my apologies.

For the record, my opinion on why fully uncompressed? To make sure no one could raise a complaint about 'my files are still compressed!' (hey, some people still believe that 14-bit ADCs leads to more 'tonal gradation' than 12-bit ADCs for a camera with 11 stops of dynamic range...). Not a great reason, since certain forms of visually lossless compression have absolutely no visual impact whatsoever, but I can understand first implementing uncompressed, then implementing better compression schemes in the future. As I said, after the announcement of uncompressed Raw, we explicitly talked to Sony about implementing lossless compression, so they are aware of the desire (after all, their engineers aren't stupid).

It's certainly not b/c of our use of terminology (but thanks for thinking we have so much influence manufacturers follow our requests to the T), & suggesting so is disingenuous at best.

Also, you can turn uncompressed Raw off. So, no, you don't have half the buffer you had before.

I have found that with my shooting I have found compression artifacts in other than just high contrast edges. It also tends to appear in moire. There is hardly any time I would shoot raw and not care about unexpected compression artifacts.

@Rishi Sanyal - maybe this was addressed off camera or maybe I missed it in the interview. When will Sony bring uncompressed raw to all the people who made the A7-series viable (i.e. all A7 mark 1 buyers) as well as the A7II? If you did not ask him on/off camera why not? The continued support to existing customers is far more important than the very latest tech advance. Thanks for replying. EDIT: Typo

Speaking of using tone curves to throw away useless data what if someone were taking a photo of a negative and were going to invert it later. As light tones become dark would that not be throwing the wrong data away in that situation? Also if you were stacking/averaging many Raw files you would increase the SN and DR and may end up with more that 11 bits provided no tone curve was applied. Always a need for true lossless. Oh and I still have a nex 6 and would also like uncompressed raw any chance they're going to go back on that?

@Glenn - That's fine, but your accusation remains baseless, wrong, and flat out rude.

@xpanded - Unfortunately, Sony didn't discuss any such plans, but pretty certain they're aware of the desire, so I'd imagine they're considering it.

@Zdman - No, because shot noise is a property of light, it wouldn't affect your negative scan at all. Now, how well you can capture all the negative information from one shot is another matter entirely - slides, with their high output dynamic range, can still challenge certain cameras, but that's a camera dynamic range matter. Nikon NEF compression curve will pretty much never cause a loss of visual data, as far as I am aware anyway, because it carefully considers what data you can throw away due to it being entirely shot noise.

As for stacking Raw files - won't matter unless you're stacking in-camera. There, you raise the SNR of all tones, so the calculation of what you can throw away as 'noise' goes out the window. But few cameras stack Raw...

It's rude because it's flat out wrong, and utterly ridiculous. We showed the problem, we didn't write a treatise on the exact algorithm Sony should use instead. We instead pointed out the problems with the compression. We didn't ask for 'explicitly uncompressed Raw'. We pointed out that the portion of the compression that only encodes deltas across certain regions is destructive.

Your accusation that that somehow meant we were asking for completely uncompressed Raw is baseless, wrong, and disingenuous, so your assertion that we are the reason for the confusion, when we're the entire reason the subject was brought enough attention for Sony to do something about it, is rude, insulting, and offensive.

Exaggerating your claim? Allow me to re-quote you:

"Really - you did perpetuate the technical confusion and could have just as simply said Lossless Raw... As a result of this confusion we now have half the buffer we had before."

So you're claiming that "as a result" of the "confusion" we have caused by apparently asking for fully uncompressed Raw, or by using the term 'uncompressed' in an interview on October 6, you now have half the buffer you originally had due to a Sony announcement of uncompressed Raw made on Sept. 15. Even though you don't, b/c you can just turn this 'feature' off. And even though we didn't perpetuate the confusion, b/c we never explicitly asked for "fully uncompressed Raw". Nevermind the impossibility of my confusion-causing wording to have traveled back in time > 3 weeks to have affected Sony's algorithm.

I'm not taking this any more personally than you intended it to be. Perhaps you're just not used to being held accountable for the things you say?

This with both LAEA-3 and 4 with adapted AMount lenses.

Native lenses work better depending on which camera. With LAEA-3/4, AF locks on first frame and never attempts readjustment on any camera until after buffer filled forcing camera to stop shooting. Then it will readjust AF for another series of the same.

I tested this with both LAEA adapters with many Sony/Mino screw drive and SSM lenses along with Metabones IV fitted to Canon 70-200/2.8II.

With EMount native, it depends on camera model.

a7R, don't even try. Camera stuck in AF priority and cannot accomplish even 2fps when set for 5fps in AF-C.

a7II, Camera stuck in Release Priority and shoots a dozen 5fps OOF shots before attempting readjusting.

a7RII better with native lenses but far from DSLR. User can choose priorities between Release, AF, or Balanced Emphasis. Seems to hold up pretty well with brighter lenses shot wide open. But f4 lenses lag between shots compared to f1.8. A problem with no bright tele. So LAEA.

Also remember that EMount AF's at selected aperture. So even f1.8 lens shot at f5.6 will suffer AF-C performance. You can actually hear the motor drive slow down to accommodate the harder time the AF is having.

I'm sure the system would AF-C very nicely with a 300mm f1.4 lens. But until EMount answers with some good tele's, we're stuck with LAEA adapter... hence the main complaint. Even then, I'm unsure the methodology for native EMount is capable of keeping up with SLT or DSLR that always AF's wide open aperture regardless of selected exposure aperture. EMount was never designed for this type of shooting from the very beginning. They'd need new lenses that allowed wide open aperture, or change camera protocols to accommodate the same. Not sure the lenses are up for it considering how slow they are to close down aperture.

Also, just to mention, the power zooms don't allow zooming while shooting in continuous motor drive mode. The zoom is locked for as long as the burst. Forget recomposing for oncoming action, like one enjoys with non powered zooms.

Firstly tl;dr
Secondly, don't need a lesson in adapters and/or e-mount.

Thirdly since you didn't take the hint, which other competing product offers full AF-C with adapted lenses? Basically none of them. Competing products don't offer things like eye-AF or face recognition like Sony e-mounts do. They all have a place in the world. But e-mount while lacking some lenses, do work nicely with native lenses just like competing products do with their native lenses. Its a nice plus that you can adapt a whole world of other lenses unlike competing products.

Clyde, you're aware that you can setup E-mount cameras to AF wide-open with one menu setting option? At least you can do that on A6000, I doubt that option missing from higher end cameras.

nandbytes... You asked. Your sentence "Isn't that with adapted lenses?" ended with a question mark. Why question just to claim "Secondly, don't need a lesson in adapters and/or e-mount."...?

Seems like you're setting me up just to scold me later. Not cool.

Speak clearly please, if you want me to "take the hint". It's hard enough to communicate on forums without playing hide and seek. I've provided very thorough answers. Please stop badgering me here and elsewhere.
__

Please don't tell me that my comments are too long "tl;dr" and then go off topic about what EMount can do. The topic we're on is about what EMount cannot do. Stay on topic please.

May I ask you a direct question please..? No hinting or setup. Just a simple question. If you don't need a lesson in EMount, that's great. But did you know about the differences I detailed between cameras? Others might not. If you did, then why not share before telling me off after asking?

Gimme' a break dude. Not against U.

@nandbytes Canon and Nikon don't need to adapt lenses, they have very impressive native selections (+tons of Zeiss, Sigma, Tamron, etc... in the native mount). Also pretty much all modern DSLRs do offer face recognition in the live view.

Meh.....I believe so called 'photographers' would do better by knowing how to use their cameras better before blaming the tech innovations that are refreshingly put out by Sony!
Shakespeare wrote with but a mere quill.....

Lensmate... are you suggesting that LAEA-3/4 adapters would be able to AF-C AMount glass with Cont High motor if photographers knew how to use their cameras better?

I'm suggesting that people know how to use what they buy [with or without limitations] that work within the framework of their shooting purposes. Its like buying a house on the freeway and then complaining about the traffic afterwards!

I see your point. But I also see it differently.

There's a difference between complaining and making people aware of facts. Sony's marketing material consistently leads users to believe that AMount lenses are fully functional with LAEA adapters. One must actually purchase the system first to discover the reality of compromise it comes with. They don't advertise that. Most people don't download manuals before they purchase a camera. That would be another way to have all the facts, as Sony does make short mention of the disfunction somewhere I forget.

There is no fault for the homeowner warning others of noise. We might even hope she does so.

I see your point if the facts are hidden. [which I don't believe they are] 'Emptor Cavete' ....plus the fact that variations in equipment, such as this, are bound to have cause and effect results one way or the other. That's why there is so much variation in terms of usage and compromise with lenses and cameras.
If she was deaf, dumb and blind, than warning people about the 'freeway' would have been a waste of time....

If the facts aren't hidden, then where are they advertised? Just checked Sony page for LAEA-4.

•"Continuous AF with Translucent Mirror technology"

•"Continuous phase detection keeps shooting smooth and focused."

Doesn't say a thing about no teleconverters. But at least B&H page warns of teleconverter incompatibility "Teleconverters and Minolta XI lenses are not compatible." But then they go on to say "...enabling AF to work seamlessly even during video recording and continuous shooting." and "...Translucent Mirror Technology to enable full-time, continuous, TTL phase-detection autofocus. AF is supported with all A-mount lenses except STF models...".

Here's a quote from Sony Australia explaining why EMount is same as AMount "You can take full advantage of your A-mount lenses with an E-mount body by using a LAEA4 lens adaptor,". A letter sent to DPR member ozgoldman.

Can you point me to a source where the facts aren't hidden?

I'm assuming you reside in St Louis , Mo. which I believe has 'brick and Mortar' stores to check out said features. Establishing your requirements with sales clerks and testing camera in person would be a 'very' reasonable action would it not? Reading between the lines here, I would suggest that buying gumboots [and yes, I can hear the online assault ring through] is not the wisest thing for Olympic track hurdling...

rafalczak: It's actually more complicated. In bright light, even using 'Settings Effect OFF', the camera will stop down the aperture to some aperture it thinks is appropriate. It'll then focus at that aperture, then stop down to your selected aperture.

In AF-C, the camera always focuses stopped down, which cripples AF in many scenarios. No matter what your Live View Settings is set to.

Also, behavior varies from camera to camera. Oddly, the a7R II is the only recent camera in memory that actually opens up the aperture for AF acquisition. But again, not in AF-C.

Frankly, I don't understand this behavior, and it's not even internally consistent -- why does the camera focus at different apertures based on your 'Live View Settings' setting? Regardless of your preview setting, the camera should AF the same way - the 'best' way :) Which, IMHO, is wide open with a potential fine tune for lenses having large degrees of spherical aberration.

We've raised this point with Sony, FYI.

Lensmate... what store in St. Louis would you recommend that I test out AMount lens performance with LAEA adapters...? Or any lens with any adapter?

I have forty year relationship with my local dealers friend. There isn't a sales clerk in town that knows, or cares anything about Sony details... Even when Sony rep brings donuts for morning meet and train. They just don't know. That's why discussing these topics on forums is good for everyone, and should be encouraged. Very little resources to check manufacturers claims otherwise.

Clyde, I do apologise. Perhaps my communication or hint as it were wasn't obvious. I am not badgering you, afaik I have only replied to you twice. I haven't gone through this whole thread because I honestly don't have the time right now for such extended replies. So I will drop it here.

APSC is dead so are we according to the Mayan calendar.

You don't hear Toyota reassuring everyone every five minutes that they are still making Corollas either.

Markol: "Wow, that's a hard thing to swallow coming from a journalist."

What's this a journalist interviewing a political leader? This is a gadget review site, and he is interviewing someone who works for a manufacturer. Manufacturers do not talk about future products that are not announced. That guy probably himself doesn't know the date, and if he did and announced it, he will be fired for disclosing such information to public.

You are wise, Rishi. Even worse would be if you asked about an unannounced product and they told you something that you could not print. Pointless. Some sites like to pretend they are big shots with non-disclosure pacts, etc, but unless the announcement is less than a few weeks away, nobody is going into detail about products that are far off.

That's not what Sony UK have specifically told users about A-Mount development.

↑ What ET2 said.

First of all, I don't consider myself primarily a journalist. This is not simply investigative journalism. If you watch the interview you'll note that we talk about a number of camera technologies that help, or could help, photographers. A lot of the interview was geared towards that, not simply probing for answers I know I won't get. Rather, a dialogue about what's great about some of the new technologies we're seeing, but also: what could be better.

Second, I do ask the questions you're suggesting I ask, but I do so 'behind the scenes' - I'm curious, after all. But there is no point wasting camera time (it's already 37 minutes long) asking a question that is just going to get a canned 'we can't speak about future plans' response.

No point whatsoever. Sorry if you disagree.

Transcription is incredibly time-consuming and consequently, very expensive. If there's a lot of demand for it, we'll do our best but for now, it's not something we can justify.

...yes and sign language please and a the certificate that this video is CO2 neutral ;)

That's a marketing material in a form of an interview, so I guess Sony just didn't want to pay extra $ for the transcription ;)

At least a bullet list of main points covered maybe?

"That's a marketing material in a form of an interview"

No it isn't. And we have plenty more interviews from other manufacturers, photographers and PIX speakers on the way soon which aren't either. This is just the first one we've had time to package up and put on the homepage.

I see this so often but can't imagine a heavier camera providing better ergonomics. It's harder to handle and carry a larger, heavier camera. It makes no sense to me. The argument seems baseless. Cameras grew in size with DSLR in order to pack all the technology in them. The A7 series is around same size as film SLR and no one had a problem with ergonomics then. Take even a tilt screen that some believe detracts from a pro experience. Is it ergonomically better to crouch down on the ground to get a shot vs. tilting the LCD?

Hi Pat

To be honest I find the ergonomics on my A77II vastly superior to those on my NEX-5R, but the size and weight makes it much less attractive in terms of portability whenever I have to take it anywhere. For taking static, outdoor subjects the ergonomics are not such an issue, but the instant that 'the pressure is on' then the ability to change parameters quickly and easily becomes very important

With film SLRs things were much simpler... you focused the lens using the microprism spot in your pentaprism and then moved aperture and/or shutter dial until the needle in the VF was in the appropriate position between + and - (or later LEDs instead of needle and maybe let the camera do some of it for you). Now we have to adjust ISO, change shooting mode and AF-mode, select focus spot and umpteen other parameters which just didn't exist in the days of 35mm or which were 'set once' when you loaded the film!

Regression through progress? :-)

I'm sure you can listen to it while doing your important things.

Yes Cartagena Photo, I'm interested, but no I don't have 37 minutes, nor do I want to spend 37 minutes stuck to a sequential, one-dimensional, clumsily fast-forwadable, LAZY information broadcasting medium. Not asking for a transcript. Just a summary. I HATE video tutorials or news. Is it that it gets more hits, more money?
Or is it just that the interview was so void of content that there's nothing t be indexed about it on the web?

"Sony’s inferior colour science"?? Are you referring to decisions made by the programmers of the JPG engine --which are subjective?

Shoot RAW people. If you think there's a problem with color it's you not the camera. I'm use to Sony colors so Canon's "color science" is crap.

So the account with one other post (ever) says Sony colors suck and Rishi Sanyal is a Sony shill 'singing their praises'.

Well, that tears it. My Sony camera is going straight into the bin.

There is absolutely no need to discuss color “science” here. The question is really trivial.

(0) If spectral sensitivity of sensels does not match human vision (is not a linear combination of cones’ sensitivity), one gets unfixable color errors (metamerism).

(1) Film had absolutely horrible metamerism (in tens, 1 being what is distinguishable by eye).

(1') A lot of people get very used to film’s horrible colors.

(2) So when digital came (with MUCH MORE freedom in choosing spectral curves than was available for film), manufacturers were at a fork: should they follow (horrible) legacy left by film, or should they go for good color reproduction — so annoy people used to film.

(3) CaNik went with film (high metamerism, low annoyance from legacy users).

(3') Minolta (so Sony) went with honest color reproduction (low metamerism, high annoyance from legacy users).

So people who hate Sony’s color hate seeing “natural” colors (since they get used to distorted colors of film/CaNik).

For the record, I actually sing Canon's praises when it comes to color, especially for people shots. Greens in landscapes, though, Nikon absolutely excels. And, yes, I'm talking about Raw, via ACR.

Cartagena Photo: do you find Capture One to do a better job at Raw conversions from Sony cameras than ACR, with respect to color? ACR does a good job honoring the manufacturer's intent which, admittedly, needs some work in my humble opinion when it comes to some Sony cameras. They're not poor by any means, just not my absolute favorite.

Rishi, thank you for stating the point on colour. I agree, and would have loved it if you had discussed it with the Sony representative.

As for the "singing," my comment referred to general hat doffing rather than color praise per se. I thought that the interview could benefit from more emphasis on issues needing improvement.

I must say I´m slightly surprised people prefer the quite often somewhat disneyfied ("pretty"..) colours of Canon rather than the more imo correct neutral ones of Sony.

Well, it´s all subjective, maybe just a question of habit?

" ACR does a good job honoring the manufacturer's intent"
The beauty of digital is to move away from the manufacturer's intent, imho. We saw this with film, as well, but it was more limited, and far more difficult.

Tested on two a7RII cams and on a7II with FE55/1.8 and FE35/1.4. Also with LAEA-3 adapter + AMount lenses.

Does not occur with LAEA-4 + AMount lenses.

Auto shooters will not notice the flashing for reasons listed below.

Manual exposure mode, the EVF/LCD flashing occurs in varying degrees. Basically, it goes like this...

If my manual exposure value is set to exactly what the camera would choose in auto mode, there is no flashing. But if my manual exposure mode is darker, or brighter than what auto camera would choose, the scene will quickly flash to the camera auto mode exposure value while focusing, and then after AF lock, viewfinder will revert back to my manual exposure settings.

So, if I overexpose from camera meter, the EVF/LCD will flash to darker screen for focusing. If I underexpose, the view will flash brighter for focusing. The flash lasts exactly as long as it takes for the camera to lock AF in single shot mode.

This is with Settings Effect "ON".

I think many want a more pro spec A6000. Better EVF, more robust build, waterproof etc. Some assurance that more APS-C lenses are forthcoming would not go amiss either.
I appreciate they are chasing the money and having little competition in the FF mirrorless market means it only makes sense for them to milk that cow while they can. Sony seem unable to nurture brand loyalty the way Olympus and Fuji do and I think that's one area they could improve upon.

They sell the more bodies than m43 or fuji. In fact they sell a lot more than fuji. So if sales figures are anything to go by they are doing pretty well.

As for APS-C lenses, Sony e-mount has more APS-C lenses than canon do for their DSLRs. Manufacturers supporting both FF and APS-C formats expect their customers to use FF lenses on APS-C bodies for things like macro, fast telephoto lenses etc.
But it'd be nice to see some good APS-C pancakes lenses on Sony.

I'm actually not disappointed that I don't engage more in worthless pursuits...

You know the usual suspects. The names may change....

DPR interviewing Sony is like a tween fangirl interviewing One Direction. :-)

I thought I loved Nikon? Or was it Lytro? Oh and Canon and Sigma. But then there was that crusade out to prove that I, in fact, hate - not love - Sony back when we published the a7 II review.

Thanks for helping me stay on track by reminding me who I love today. It's really tough being a player. Tougher yet, it seems, to be a reader and read anything negative about your favorite brand, or something positive about your not-so-favorite brand, and attribute it to anything other than brand love/bias.

Nothing against someone having their own personal preference - and nothing against that personal favouritism coming through in either written pieces, or video reviews or interviews. Nothing is impartial any more, and frankly, it's good to see a bit of an authors own personality injected into what they produce.

My comments remain true though, and this really did feel like a casual afternoon "chin-wag" - and as one person noted, a info-mercial of sorts.

This isn't about placing a representative on-spot, nor is it about holding them to account and forcing them to look "bad" - it's purely about researching your questions, and preparing follow up rebuttals for those pedestrian answers you KNOW you'll get. Push the agenda, respectfully of course, but really differentiate yourself by getting the in-depth answers that the photography community deserves - that was honestly 30 minutes of bloated garbage.

"Push the agenda, respectfully of course, but really differentiate yourself by getting the in-depth answers that the photography community deserves"

This is exactly what we try to do by raising awareness about areas where cameras excel, and where they suffer. In juxtaposing Ming Thein's 'critical analysis of a particular camera', are you suggesting we don't dig deep? Did you perchance miss our in-depth coverage of subject tracking, low-light AF, Raw compression, ISO-invariance, etc. on the a7R II? We then used information from those tests to raise, even in this interview, with Sony their weak points with respect to lock-on AF, continuous AF with adapted lenses, subject tracking w/ adapted lenses, etc.

Just b/c you you had some specific questions that either weren't asked or probed on, you conflate your perceived lack of rigor in this 30 minute interview with a general inability of DPReview to be analytical and critical?

That's an interesting standpoint.