arbuz

Mike FL: These are what I wanted, but for said to be released a7000 with IBIS + weather sealed body; Weather sealed Zeiss 24-70 and 16-35mm equivalent which should be priced lower and much smaller than these two full-frame A-mount lenses, I think.

SONY is getting better day by day.

naththo: Sony sensor is now nailed in the coffin! Can't believed it! Samsung trump over Sony by miles!

nandbytes: dxo does a review on NX1, its IQ doesn't seem much better than any other APS-C like A6000, D7200 etc - http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Samsung-NX1-lens-review-Hail-the-new-king-of-APS-C-hybrids/Samsung-NX1-vs-Sony-a6000-vs-Sony-A7R

The only APS-C that impressed me was the D7200 with its impressive dynamic range - http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D7200-versus-Samsung-NX1-versus-Sony-A6000___1020_976_942
The SNR is roughly the same between A6000, D7200 and NX1 but D7200 is way ahead in dynamic range (seems to be only second to the D810).

thx1138: "Our lab tests confirm that the Sony a7 II does between 1 and 2-stops poorer than the Nikon D750"

Totally ridiculous Nikon can blow Sony away for noise from basically an identical sensor, and has always been the case. Given the much increased weight of the A7 II, the p!ss poor controls, average AF, the D750 is hands down a much better camera other than lacking IBIS, but Nikon has so many VR lenses who cares unless you have a lot of legacy glass. Only thing about the Sony that's much better, the amazingly versatile mount allowing almost any glass to mounted. Nikons mount is way past it's useless use by date.

johnbatten: I use a D810 professionally but find that - apart from the dreadful shutter noise - the a7ii + 24-70/4 is the perfect carry-around.

It is roughly half the weight of my equivalent Nikon combo and hangs round my neck all day without discomfort. The RAW files are not good enough, for sure, but in terms of getting the shot (i.e. camera always at the ready) it delivers excellent results. The JPEGs are excellent.

At lot of the criticisms in these reviews focus on things of marginal importance, just as motoring reviews salivate over a car that will do 140mph despite a 70mph speed limit. It's the same with cameras. Complaining about noise at ISO 25,600 as compared with what some other manufacturer's camera can do is strictly for the birds - and about as irrelevant as could be. Who needs 140mph?

As ever it's horses for courses. For most of us the a7ii will be as good as an always-with-you camera gets - and as good as it needs to be. So come on Sony, fix that shutter please!

naththo: Still struggle to catch up with Nikon again. Nikon still ahead of it!

koolbreez: With this increased body size, why not a single mention of the "No Flash" issue, especially in the conclussions, as it is a big negative factor? Smaller,lighter models have flashes, why not this one, and why no talk at all about this issue?

Lucas_: The A7Ii is such a wonderful and groundbreaking camera, that DPR had to dig out something like "high ISO noise" to not give it another gold to Sony...! Since I bought it my excellent A99 startedto see a lot of som shelf time. I believe DPR is also mistaken when saying that the sensor is the same as in the A7. This review seems to have been done in a hurry and under a lot of pressure from canikon, etc... Nevertheless, most everybody knows now that Sony sensors are by far the best out there. I feel positive now that the "new" 50MP Canons will get the gold...!

Toccata47: Hmm, same imaging pipeline as the A7 yet a lower score for image quality? Oddly again, a lower score for video. I suppose the categorization makes scoring complex but I think an a72 with ibis would be head and shoulders above an a7 without a rig.

It's hard not to feel an bias toward nikon here, particularly as canon cameras are left out of the drop down menu now (6d?), though it's probably a knee jerk reaction to seeing the disparity between sony and nikon cameras using the same or similar sensors. Is there definitive proof the 750 uses a different sensor?

Mike FL: Samsung seems getting cheaper...

http://www.amazon.com/gp/review/R22NR3OWP5OSRI/ref=cm_cr_pr_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B00NFDZRRA

Renzokuken: I'm from Asia and i live in Asia.

The DP team said they "garnered some surprisingly open admissions"

but if you really take time and read what he said, it's basically all sarcasm and arrogance.

"If another company made a sensor that we believed to be truly the best quality, we would not hesitate to use it."

He's implying that Canon sensors are superior in every way and no one can compete with them. Did the DP team really failed to pick up his sarcasm while interviewing him?

Larry de March: I had an entry in that challenge and in going through the images to vote I figured last was the correct placement for your picture

Frank_BR: Nikon words: "While not recommended for general photography, the D810A is ..."

At a time when DSLR sales are falling rapidly, perhaps Nikon should focus on cameras for general photography, and not on special solutions for a small niche market.

mpgxsvcd: I have been saying it for years that Olympus’s live time and Panasonic’s constant preview functions make them ideal for Astro Photography. Now that Nikon slapped the “Astrophotography” label on a camera everyone is also singing the praises of those functions.

I have no doubt this new Nikon Astro camera will be great. However, let me propose some reasons why something like a modified Olympus E-PL5 is a better choice.

1. The E-PL5 has the excellent Sony sensor for outstanding long exposure high ISO photos.
2. The crop sensor is actually better than full frame because full frame requires a much bigger and more expensive scope to cover the full frame.
3. It has the articulated LCD.
4. Cost – A modified E-PL5(Less than $400 fully modified) is about 1/10 the cost of the 810a and a modified camera is even more sensitive to Ha than this astronomy geared Nikon.

I am not saying this camera is not a good choice. However, there are much less expensive options that can achieve the same results.

Ignat Solovey: Someone decided to beat Sigma by four degrees of diagonal field of view eleven years after original 12-24 came out. Several times more expensive and probably better... Until there is 12-24 Art out there... Somewhere... Sometime...
I guess there is no other UWA lens to perform as expected on 5DsR, and 126 degree FOV on 51 Mp is yummy-yummy for interiors (less so for landscapes, we need to be careful about viewers brains), but for everyone else, who need JUST wide angle... Nope. Or Sigma.

Mike FL: The M3 is "gun shy" to see incoming SONY a7000, even the current SONY $600 a6000 will kill the M3.

If EVF is not a concern, $450 Fuji A1 or SONY a5100 will beat this M3

No?