I wonder. Mine arrives tomorrow. Seeing it here:
however, I don't know but in my mind, next to my favourite camera of all time, the time has come for FF cameras to be the 'correct' size again.
If you look at your photo, what photographer wouldn't rather have the Canon? And do you see my point about the Imac look?
If they made it in all Silver and gold it would be a perfect match for an I phone 5s.
The Olympus is much more like your Canon A1.
Once again the Sony hit more points than just size. The focus is actually good, I'd say 5d2 good (which isn't perfect but ok).
The camera takes any lens without a crop factor. For 99% of the users that doesn't mean much, but for people the love old legacy glass, don't pixel peep or worry about the corners going soft, this does mean a lot.
A tilt shift on this camera will be much easier and more accurate to focus with an evf than an optical finder or even the lcd on the back with live view.
I think these sonys are less of a camera more of a roll of electronic film. In other words nobody would buy this camera because it strikes an emotional cord. It's not a leica, rolliflex, or even a contax, but the lenses you can put on it will change the way you work.
Once again a tilt shift where you intentionally throw focus is going to take some thought to shoot, a fast 70 to 200 will just bang away. The lens will make the difference and unlike traditional dslrs with the same detail it's not a lump of curved weight. Actually with the larger a mount lenses and adapter it does feel right.
If you drop on an E mount lens or any M mount lens your into leica small and discreet (except for that loud shutter)
If you fire the shutter the noise it makes is gruesome. Think slapping wet hand down hard on a glass table followed by a metallic click. Don't take this camera to Obama's press conference, or your sister's third wedding ceremony because everybody is going to get pissed.
The main thing is, it's cheap. Jesus it's cheap in the world of full frame. You can buy two an A7 and A7R for the price of a 1dx or D2x and though the lens case is still going to be large in total it's a smaller package.
It's selling like crazy. This means third party stuff is going to come out daily. Lens adapters, video supports, filter holders, they're already appearing.
The A mount lenses are Zeiss and I know from my fs100 putting Zeiss lenses on it almost made that camera useable. It sure made the file prettier.
Once again, it's cheap. Just a few years ago, for this quality file, you'd have to spend $12,000 for two bodies and when you went to the next sell them for a $6,000 loss.
I think you can probably use these Sonys for a year, sell them and even if you lose have the value, your only talking around $2,000.
The downside. It's a Sony and who knows what they'll do. If it sells well Sony is just strange enough to change it to an all E mount or drop some function if it starts to move into their video camera territory.
I'll be honest, I don't want to buy it, but it is perfect for the work we're doing now. It's a sexless omd em-1, with a lens format I can understand and honestly I was going to buy an em-1. When I went to the Sony store I expected it to focus hunt, have a silly menu, strange controls and it doesn't have any of those limitations, but if the em-1 was full frame and even cost more, I'd go there in a heartbeat.
Game changer, yea. . . . as long as it will tether, because Nikon didn't do it with the DF, Canon is just quiet and I'm very comfortable with electronic viewfinders.
I've thought long and hard about buying a Leica S2 to go with my Contax lenses and offer more hand held use to medium format, but how do you spend $15,000 on the first gen Leica S, when this thing is sitting there?
With the way we work, shooting motion and stills, limited time, lots of setups, the m43 system made sense especially for video. With stills at 16mpx with a small sensor means your on the edge, even with people based photography. Head an shoulders your golden, full length, your limited no matter how you work it in post.