[Sylvain]

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-hot-f...th-lenses/

 

Not very beautiful but still sexy.

 

Managing a 2000$ kit. Not too bad and not too far from "elite" MFT offerings.

 

 

[Sylvain]

funny how I can't help but think these late leaks are awlays photoshopped...

kinda look odd !

[WyldRage]

Product photos nowadays are nearly always done with computers instead of actually taking a picture. So if it looks photoshopped, then it's actually a good sign!

 

If the price is real (which it should, considering the D600 and 6D are slowly moving to the $1.5k mark) it could be the boost Sony needs for their camera division. Personally, however, I will wait for lens reviews before making my mind: as one of the early NEX adopter, I still feel burned by the poor lens quality they offered (easily the worse of all mounts).

[youpii]

Product photos nowadays are nearly always done with computers instead of actually taking a picture. So if it looks photoshopped, then it's actually a good sign!

 

If the price is real (which it should, considering the D600 and 6D are slowly moving to the $1.5k mark) it could be the boost Sony needs for their camera division. Personally, however, I will wait for lens reviews before making my mind: as one of the early NEX adopter, I still feel burned by the poor lens quality they offered (easily the worse of all mounts).

 

It will still be successfull without good native lenses because it will also be like a cheaper Leica M9 with M mount lenses or G mount lenses

[Brightcolours]

It will still be successfull without good native lenses because it will also be like a cheaper Leica M9 with M mount lenses or G mount lenses

Depends on the flange distance. I guess Sony kept it less than the Leica M needs, but are we sure about that yet?

[Guest]

Depends on the flange distance. I guess Sony kept it less than the Leica M needs, but are we sure about that yet?

It is an E mount, after all.

[Guest]

as one of the early NEX adopter, I still feel burned by the poor lens quality they offered (easily the worse of all mounts).

As late NEX adopter I feel somewhat burned by the poor AF performance compared to MFT.

[Brightcolours]

I still wonder why Sony never implements SSS in the Nex bodies. Perhaps the short flange distance brings trouble. But it does mean that the standard "plus point" from the Sony DSLRs (every lens is stabilised) is gone.

 

I must say that it does look quite nice, design wise. 

[WyldRage]

It will still be successfull without good native lenses because it will also be like a cheaper Leica M9 with M mount lenses or G mount lenses

 

It will then depend on how good theose cameras are with lenses made for film. Just look at how bad the NEX-7 was with wide-angle M-mount lenses. With a FF sensor, the technical challenge becomes much more important. We'll see if and how Sony will tackle it (are there microlenses like the Leicas? Will there be software correction of lenses like the Leicas? Or is everything to be done off-camera?), but don't assume that rangefinder lenses will be great straight out of the box.

[Brightcolours]

What is now most "interesting" is that basically Sony A-mount is dead, but they call these FF "NEX" cameras.. Alpha. What a nomenclature mess.

 

Nice compact FF cameras, with slow-ish (especially 7r) AF and slower FPS. Very loud shutter noise. The pricing of the bodies is nice, pricing of lenses less nice. The Zeiss 24-70mm f4 is normal, but the two primes are oddly expensive. The 70-200mm f4 OSSS lens price I have not seen yet.