Upload & Sell: Off
It suits me very well that it is a 35mm, and that it is permanent - it is a very useful focal length for so many things, and so you avoid dust on the sensor.
It is also OK, that one should buy various things, because it makes it more pocket friendly, that these things have to be retrofitted, so I was with, although it is disappointing that
A) AF is not on a par with the Olympus E-M5, and it is
B) …disappointing that there is no in-camera stabilization (and those 2 things should be there for the price) and when I found that they have saved a lot, too much is missing for the high price when
1) You can not even get 1/8000 sec - it's not quite so rare that you will be missing it with f 2.0, and maybe you would not want to stop off in bright light for the kind of picture you want.
2) The built-in flash has low strength – this is for a cheaper camera
3) There is to my knowledge no multiple exposure (not talking about HDR – see the link) as nearly all Nikons DSLR.s and now also some Canon cameras has.
So overall, there is spared too many things in my opinion, and the price does not match the features, so I find it hard to justify to myself to pay the high price you demand, even I have the money ready, but I think I would feel a bit cheated with this high price in Europe.
If you ask about the same price as the Nikon D600 (Europe-prices for both) I am with again, and would feel I better could live with all those missing features, named above A+B + 1-3and I think Sony would benefit and still get their fine investment and fine development back, even it perhaps would take longer time.
So: Well done in the development zone, Sony, but …..hey…. find a decent price.
I will wait and look for a better featured camera for a bit lower price, and it is interesting if this will be Sony – or others will take the challenge too.
But the trend is fine.