19104 Loc: Philadelphia

The perfect camera for me would be a simple, full frame digital, range finder camera. cost around $1000 with approximately 20 Megapixel resolution. Where I could use my M Leica lenses. I miss the three dimensionality of the Leica lenses. Aperture priority would be nice but not necessary. a view screen wouldn't be necessary. A nice Electronic View finder would be a good accessory so that one could use non rangefinder coupled glass as well. Something like a Minolta Cle body. And yes it would need to be full frame so that one could take advantage of all the incredible wide angle lenses made in Leica M mount. I hope this helps you understand what i was saying.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

The Sony A7 family can do all that. There are simple Leica lens adapters that allow manual focus of the Leica lenses. They can do this because the Sony E-body is much thinner that the larger DSLR cameras and it is possible to have a Leica lens adapter without the extra lens that has to be installed for it to work on other DSLR cameras.

Mickey Mantle Loc: New York City

Do not understand some of the ranking criteria in the score such as popularity of 50 for the Nikon and 0 for the Sony and clarity of images. Those two criteria's give the Nikon a huge edge

JPL

No, this is by far the worst website to compare cameras, they are not fair, they are not honest, they do not base their comparisons on facts or specs, they are lazy and their comparisons are worthless. The trend that you will see if you investigate their comparisons carefully is that older cameras are always better than new cameras. Do you really think that is true?

If we look at the comparison you are doing, Sony A7II vs Nikon D7200, the Nikon gets 50 points for popularity and Sony gets 5. This popularity has only to do with the age of the camera. The older a camera gets, the more accumulated lookup's does it have on the internet, and that is how they decide that the Nikon is so much better than the Sony because this number alone accounts for about 90% of the difference of the cameras. And what does this popularity have to do with the quality of the camera in any way? It is not like this is even reflecting how many cameras have been sold. This number should not be in such comparison at all. This is to explain how they always rate older cameras higher than newer.

Another thing in the score is that the Nikon gets 40,9 points for image quality, the Sony gets 0. That basically means that when Snapsort was testing the Sony it did not deliver any images at all as I understand it. But we know that is not possible unless they were too lazy to put a battery in it so I guess they were lazy and did not bother to take any pics to check the image quality or look it up at any other real website that has this info, they did not even bother to use the numbers from the last model temporarily if no numbers were available for the new model. So they just say that the Sony does not make any images at all. This is neither fair or honest and lazy too because they are not looking for the most important information they are basing their score on. So they are not fair and honest, but they are lazy. And in their evaluation this is the second most important score for a camera.

And there is a lot more about the cameras they are not comparing at all, info that is useful for the possible buyer of a camera, some would be in favor of Nikon, other of Sony. But it really does not matter because Snapsort is a Snapcrap when it comes to camera comparison.

JPL

An easy way to show how the older cameras are always better at Snapcrap is to compare more of them, here I have the Canon 5Dmiii vs the new 5DsR and of course the older is better, and that is only because of the popularity due to age. http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-vs-Canon-EOS-5DS And the new Canon 5Ds is of course also well behind the Canon 6D at Snapcrap due to the 6D being older.. http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-5DS-vs-Canon-EOS-6D/score

If we look at the detailed score, which in this comparison is at least more fair then in the Nikon vs Sony we see that the advantage of the old model is in the age alone. http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-vs-Canon-EOS-5DS/score

JPL

And to continue with this Snapcrap review of mine I can take the old Sony A7 vs version II of that camera and like usual the old one is better. See here http://snapsort.com/compare/Sony-A7-vs-Sony-Alpha-7-II/score

But if we compare the old model of Sony A7 and Nikon D7200 then it is a tie?? See here http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D7200-vs-Sony-A7/score

But everyone knows already from reviews that the new version of Sony A7II is much better in many ways and in no ways worse than the old model, so why is it so far behind the Nikon D7200 in comparison on Snapsort?? It is because Snapsort is a total crap as I have stated before, Snapcrap, Snapcrap, Snapcrap :thumbup:

We can add comparison for the new A7rii vs the old A7r and of course the old model is twice as good as the new one at Snapcrap, see here http://snapsort.com/compare/Sony-A7R-vs-Sony-Alpha-7R-II/score

Blasthoff Loc: Life halved NY and IN

Hey, you had to remind me? I was nine years old and my dream was shattered. My one redemption was a couple of years later, the Mets came along. After years of some of the worst Baseball ever played, there was the "Miracle of '69". I've had to hang on to that, since I've been a Cub fan for the last 35 years.
:mrgreen:

JPL

And here at last I take one more comparison from Snapcrap. The Canon 1DX vx the Canon Powershot SX60. http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-1D-X-vs-Canon-PowerShot-SX60-HS/score

As you all can see it is a tie!! The only big difference is that if you buy the 1DX you waste a whole lot of money according to Snapcrap. Would this be the judgement of experienced Canon users??

I think now I have finally made my point about Snapsort.com being Snapcrap. :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Mickey Mantle Loc: New York City

Snapcrap is crap. Agree

RichardSM Loc: Back in Texas

Sorry your feelings are hurt, the bulk of the folks here on the UHH are what they are bias towards NIKON and don't like CANON people much either, but so what just take it with a grain of salt! You're adult don't let this petty crap get to you. If your happy with SONY do what you do best take your photo's.?

Mickey Mantle Loc: New York City

It's all about the eye. Be creative and enjoy

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

No, no, nooooooooo... you are whistling past the graveyard mark. :lol:

While you qualify your remarks with "professional" and "skilled amateur", it is important for you to realize that professionals and skilled amateurs alike are switching over to Sony and their E/FE mount cameras.

So as I said before, you might be selling....... but no one is buying. :lol: :lol: :lol:

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

Nope... the new electronic viewfinders are actually BETTER than optical viewfinders in almost every respect.

But to each his or her own. As Sony sales increase and cut deeper and deeper into the DSLR market a battle cry will go up from all the canikon users of the world; "Adapt or die!!!"

Remember the dinosaurs......... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

HIS point was that the website is neither unbiased OR accurate. It is unscientific and unfair and shouldn't be taken seriously by anyone interested in a REAL and meaningful comparison.

RichardSM Loc: Back in Texas

His was clear and to the point? He decried clearly.