Art and Photography

How much would you pay for a full frame mirrorless camera?

  • Last Updated:
  • Aug 27th, 2012 12:10 am
Tags:
None
[OP]
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Feb 15, 2005
5381 posts
981 upvotes

How much would you pay for a full frame mirrorless camera?

So, how much would you pay for a full frame mirrorless camera? There's a lot of buzz over at EOSHD and sonyalpharumors that Sony will release a full frame mirrorless NEX camera in the next couple of month. Combine that with a new 16-50 F3.5-5.6 pancake will make this camera perfect for the very few very well off individuals who want a small but powerful camera. I can't see anyone buying this over the Leica M9.
http://www.eoshd.com/content/8763/sony- ... he-horizon

The only full frame sensor that Sony currently makes is the 36MP sensor found in the Nikon D800, which DXOmark says is the best sensor ever. Seeing how the same sensor in the Sony A65, A77 and NEX7 are slightly different, it's quite possible the new FF NEX will be even better than the D800 in terms of image quality.

My guess is a list price of $2500 for the body only.
No external links in signatures - Mods
10 replies
Deal Addict
Jan 19, 2008
1730 posts
259 upvotes
rf134a wrote:
Aug 20th, 2012 11:48 am
So, how much would you pay for a full frame mirrorless camera? There's a lot of buzz over at EOSHD and sonyalpharumors that Sony will release a full frame mirrorless NEX camera in the next couple of month. Combine that with a new 16-50 F3.5-5.6 pancake will make this camera perfect for the very few very well off individuals who want a small but powerful camera. I can't see anyone buying this over the Leica M9.
http://www.eoshd.com/content/8763/sony- ... he-horizon

The only full frame sensor that Sony currently makes is the 36MP sensor found in the Nikon D800, which DXOmark says is the best sensor ever. Seeing how the same sensor in the Sony A65, A77 and NEX7 are slightly different, it's quite possible the new FF NEX will be even better than the D800 in terms of image quality.

My guess is a list price of $2500 for the body only.
it will really depend how nice it performs when m mount lens are mounted on it.
Wedding & Child Photographer ~ happily photographing
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jun 11, 2007
1502 posts
59 upvotes
Brampton
i currently shoot a old 5D, and Sony NEX 5n, with the lens line up (i know there are a few rumored) its hard to pay $2000+ for a FF NEX knowing you have to wait years for the lens to come.

but its definitely a good first step. maybe Sigma and Tamron will see the needs and fill in with their own specialty lens.
FS: Continental-Barum Bravuris 2 - 1x 255/35/18
I don't worship lenses, nor do I see the 3 primes as a "trinity"
there is only one Holy Trinity and they certainly aren't lenses
Deal Addict
User avatar
Oct 5, 2004
1385 posts
326 upvotes
Toronto
I can't see them being too popular with many photographers just yet. I mean, many photographers buy 1D series cameras because of the weight and others buy 7D/5D style cameras and put a heavy grips on them.
And you can't even put a big flash on it.
I can see these cameras to be popular among amateur photographers, and those of age,since 1D plus say 70-200L is very heavy even for a young person,if you carry it all day.

I'd love to have a mirrorless camera in a typical 7D/5D style bodies though.
Some weight reduction would be very welcomed,and the metal body would be strong enough to handle the external flash and daily wear and tear as well as long lenses such as 70-200L
Dmitri Markine Wedding Photography: My 500pix||My Flickr||My Pinterest||My Instagram
Deal Addict
Nov 15, 2009
1985 posts
158 upvotes
$0. I don't want a mirrorless camera.
Member
Jan 6, 2008
434 posts
46 upvotes
me too. $0. a FF without an OVF is ridiculous. i know the low end of the market is going EVF, but FF sort of implies high-end expectations. a full set of buttons and two control wheels takes space. hot shoe and nice grip and long battery life do too. the only reason to go mirrorless is size. otherwise, practically any DSLR is more capable.
Deal Addict
May 31, 2005
1612 posts
344 upvotes
Mississauga
EVF will surpass OVF in a few years, it's not there yet. currently the main drawback of mirrorless is the AF speed. IMO, mirrorless will kill the DSLR eventually.
Deal Addict
Nov 15, 2009
1985 posts
158 upvotes
I had two EVF cameras (P&S, not DSLR) and I can't see going back to them.
Deal Fanatic
Feb 2, 2007
5855 posts
352 upvotes
Toronto
demi2004 wrote:
Aug 20th, 2012 3:55 pm
I mean, many photographers buy 1D series cameras because of the weight and others buy 7D/5D style cameras and put a heavy grips on them.
And you can't even put a big flash on it.
I can see these cameras to be popular among amateur photographers, and those of age,since 1D plus say 70-200L is very heavy even for a young person,if you carry it all day.
Hi there. :)

It was either 1 5D2, or 3 1D2 bodies... I think you know which direction I went with...
M-e-X-x wrote:
Nov 27th, 2011 7:22 am
Booty call AND you get gas money? Sweet!
My HEATWARE
100% Positive
Member
Jan 6, 2008
434 posts
46 upvotes
aximrocks wrote:
Aug 22nd, 2012 1:08 am
EVF will surpass OVF in a few years, it's not there yet. currently the main drawback of mirrorless is the AF speed. IMO, mirrorless will kill the DSLR eventually.
it's good to be confident. presently, there are plenty of people who see many drawbacks with the whole EVF concept. to them, it cannot surpass OVF. you may, however, be right that the dslr will become the realm of niche high end photography only. it's ikely that the masses will want smaller and lighter. but that's another discussion. one that leaves out all the aspects of photography except size. anyway, as of this year, there is nothing that comes close to dslr. i don't see anything on the horizon either.

Top