Re: Official: Sony A7 and A7r full frame mirrorless announced!
Steve Spencer wrote: Jman13 wrote: sebboh wrote: Jman13 wrote: safcraft wrote:
^^^^I think this image says it all.....almost the same size and a GIGANTIC difference in sensor size !
Also gigantic difference in native lens size, especially with regards to the zooms. That Sony 70-200 is 2.3x heavier than the Panny 35-100 as well. There is no free lunch.
That is the only lens so far that is similar in size. And I\'ll take f/1.8 + 4 stop IS over f/2.8 on full frame with no IS....but that\'s just me. I\'ll give the minor advantage in DOF to the Sony.
The Panny 25/1.4 is significantly smaller than the 55/1.8, and even the slow kit zoom is quite large. Leaked images of the upcoming 85/1.8 mean that lens is going to be pretty darn big too.
I\'m not saying the image quality won\'t be there...it most certainly will be, but this system seems really awesome for adapting rangefinder lenses, and even manual focus SLR lenses. The native lenses, though, are going to be very similar in size to their FF DSLR counterparts, and that makes it very much a non-starter for me as a full system, since I got away from my FF DSLR because I was tired of lugging a bag that weighed a ton. This isn\'t going to solve that with native lenses.
I still may get one down the line, making it a digital A-E1, but I\'m holding off for now.
But the Panny 25 f/1.4, brilliant as it is, only has the imagining properties of a 50 f/2.8 lens; of course it is smaller than a lens that is f/1.8. That is even more true with an 85 f/1.8, which has two stop shallower depth of field than something like the Oly 45 f/1.8. I think it is great that m4/3rds has small high performing lenses, but don\'t complain about slow FF lenses. These are the equivalents and often the m4/3rds lenses are so small because they have even less imagining capabilities than the currently slowest FF lenses available. Again this is not a knock on m4/3rds just a recognition of what it is.
I\'m not complaining about slow full frame lenses, I\'m saying the native lenses they are showing so far are LARGE. Period. In many cases they are larger than FF DSLR lenses of the same capabilities. A small camera body with huge lenses doesn\'t interest me in the least. It\'s the reason I dumped FF in the first place. And dear lord, can we please stop with the aperture equivalence talk. m4/3 is not trying to match FF depth of field capabilities. It\'s a fools errand to do so. It\'s one of the advantages of FF. Size is one of the advantages of the smaller sensor. That\'s all I\'m talking about now. I\'m not saying that these m4/3 lenses match all the exact image properties of the FF kit. They don\'t. That\'s not the point. My point is right now, the native FE lenses are quite large, and that limits the appeal to me as a full system.
What doesn\'t limit the appeal is how incredibly good this body should be for adapting the much smaller manual focus lenses that are out there.
Oct 16, 2013 at 10:13 AM
Previous versions of Jman13's message #11866704 « Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless »
I\'ll give the minor advantage in DOF to the Sony.