I miss the globe.

And still a prism is better than lcd and liveview. Addin that Sony lenses are about 30% worse on lpi than the Nikons you end up with garrish overcorrected sensor output, less lightsensitivity and and an image of your viewfield rather than the field of view with a prism. Output of Canon and Sony sucks.

Double dislike.

So no sell, Sony, this is a dumb product with featuritis rather than decent engineering solutions.

Sounds like Wakaba missed soup time today at the old folks home.

There are no sides. And it isn't a battle. Like it, buy it. Don't, don't.

"So funny listening to people's viewfinder battle. Are any of you really trying to convince the other side of something? It's like yelling at clouds."

It's called a discussion. One person has one opinion, and someone else has another one. Quite incredible that you haven't come across different viewpoints before really.

You missed his point. Try it again.

You give an opinion on lenses and compare them, while on any A7 or NEX, you can use all of them. I had many brands, and I still have, Nikon, Fuji, Pentax, Zenza Bronica, Voigtlaender. But all in all, Sony A -E mount sytem rocks, and in compatibility only other mirrorless hold the road with it due to adpater possibilities, but not in FF. In FF Sony is not to beat, and wait the new dslr to come. Now EVF is a shared opinion, I would like all cameras to have it, it is fast, you see what you get, including noise. Saying that an OVF is better is just stupid, it's different. You have to follow trends, stop living in caves.

@Hugo
"The only way they can make cameras smaller is by putting a hideous EVF in place of the lovely OVF." The EVF lovers use similar language. You call that a "discussion"? Cane nailed it with his observation.
So, now go back on your part of the clouds that are yelled at and yelled from.

EVF obsolete the OVF by long distance. OVF does not have peak focus aid etc. You complained about EVF nonsense refresh rate. It is absolutely rubbish and irrelevant. EVF is useful for the peak focus, got absolutely nothing to do with refresh rate. If you want better refresh rate, use viewfinder instead of looking through EVF and quit whinging/whining like a dog. OVF has very long been irrelevant ever since. EVF came in years ago. It still in use today. And remember, mirrorless camera does not qualify for OVF because of missing the prism whatever that is. So it must have EVF to go with it.

We do not use adjustable lighting until the very highest ISO (at which point it is reduced by a whole stop). Any differences in shutter speed are down to inaccuracies in ISO, aperture and shutter speed control and the inevitable inability to perfectly exposure match.

The plan was to note any files shot at with the reduced lighting level - I'll try to identify why this hasn't happened.

I suspect by that time we'll have flat silicon glassless nanotech lenses with 4x5 sensors behind them. Your whole camera will literally be the size of a pack of 4x5 Polaroid film. Gold nano-antennas will simply bend the light right into the pixels. We'll all laugh "haha remember lenses?" "Remember 'full frame'?" lol lol

Detail looks very good as well as high ISO, but I am not seeing more than 1 stop difference between it an the EM1 for RAW. And since DxO says their reported ISO is very similar (going by the A7r), I'll take the EM1 and the faster lenses. I also agree with Polytropia. The A7 will be a great pleasure for some, but it lacks too much for me to even be considered.

how exactly are you assessing dynamic range from this series of photos to that level of precision?

DXO "ISO's" do not directly reflect metering, which the results in the comparison widget above do.

Ultimately photography is, and always will be, about imagination, and having "the eye". It will always be about great lighting, noticing things, paying attention, being ready, seeing the moment. The iPhone proved you can have a 1/3.2" sensor and take amazing shots.

At the end of the day, it's a tool. I think the A7 makes a wonderfully light, quick, versatile tool for photography. If you prefer shooting in 35mm format, it gives you the only flip-out screen available with that sensor size. Using the built-in WiFi and a smart-phone as a remote controller you can take photos from any angle, even behind you.

How well will this camera be able to become an extension of your mind's eye? How will its design enhance your ability to make the image you want? This has largely to do with the interface, responsiveness, intuitiveness, control placement, options, etc. It's highly subjective too. I'm interested to see how people like it, after owning it for a few months. I'd love to try it too.

The only problem with more pixels is the room they take up on the hard drive! If this stupidity goees on we'll need a different laptop to store each photo on.

It isn't like it makes the pics any better, just bigger. How big do you need them to be for heavens sake? I've never printed larger than A3 and my 12mp D90 does that with quality to spare. It's marketing not photography.

It can in large part be corrected in the Adobe converter, similar to the corrections done in camera to the OOC jpegs which suffer noticeable less from the purple/blue shadows. See Camera Calibration box with Shadows Tint slider.

The only way they can make cameras smaller is by putting a hideous EVF in place of the lovely OVF. Not everyone thinks that progress is always a good thing. The pentaprism has stood the test of time as it's the best way of seeing what you are taking a picture of.

Every EVF I've looked through is like sticking my eye up to a cheap TV, doesn't it give you headache after a days shooting? Not to mention the reduced shooting experience in the first place....

Hugi808. I don't recognise that description of the EVF on my Sony A77. It's great. Not sure why it would give anyone a headache either. It doesn't use some poor low frequency pulse width modulation technology like you find on cheap LCD monitors.

So for me the EVF isn't the problem with the A7's. It is what they have had to sacrifice in the pursuit of very small FF bodies. The lens mount is narrow so that makes fast lenses hard to make. There is no in-body stabilisation. The battery is small which means not only fewer shots but GPS which I find very useful has gone.

Canikon as spiderhunter said may be complacent in producing toaster sized dslrs but Sony has had to leave out too much modern innovation such as IBIS and GPS to achieve what they did. I am sure some people won't miss these things but I find them very useful so in that sense these cameras are a retrograde step. And of course they use a different lens mount than my A77 so its a completely system anyway.

I don't want a tiny camera with a big lenses, evf or have to mess with adapters. Thankfully Nikon is making what I want!

@Hugo808 - Yet another one mouthing off without actually having tried it.

Its the same excellent one in the A99 (1 yr ago) & A77 (~2 yrs ago). Only goes to show how outdated ppl can be. Still clutching to yr sacred cow periscope-technology OVF invented more than a century ago for submarines & film eh?

The thing that only allows framing & guessing what the picture will look like?

Those using it know they'll NEVER go back to pentaprism/OVFs. U forget it's not an OVF because it's so real. I won't bother listing the whole laundry list of advantages but suffice to sum up the conceptual breakthrough.

Its about seeing EXACTLY what the sensor is seeing BEFORE the shot. Which in turn is EXACTLY what the image looks like in Photoshop. Sony OLED EVFs can do that. Not LCD EVFs in other crap.

Understand the implications? Nope, cos u're still chimping at the LCD display like a chimp. *Hint - Its truly real time image preview, not delayed-near-real-time-trial-&-error-shoot-1st-think-later-BS.

Thankully, Nikon, Fuji, Epson, or Leica are (were for Epson) making what I want

It seems there will always be companies who insist on making money from traditional designs this while innovators like Sony don't make money from cameras. Wake up, Nikon & Canon! There's money to be lost and you're missing out on it.