TOP Camera of the Year 2015

Despite a slowing pace of camera introductions (frankly a bit of a relief) and a declining market, 2015 was a very good year for cameras. Maybe even great. The market still has plenty of turboboost to fuel R&D, yet the technology is becoming more mature, with refinements taking over from basic leaps-and-bounds progress. That's what you want to see: leaps-and-bounds progress is great, and certainly exciting, but it basically means you're not yet near where you're going.

There can be little doubt that of all the introductions in 2015, none generated more interest, and few more admiration, than the second iteration of Sony's A7R, the Alpha 7R Mark II (A7RII).

Many years ago, following the introduction of the Canon EOS 650, the late Burt Keppler of Popular Photography magazine (or was it Jason Schneider? Burt was VP and Publishing Director, Jason Editor-in-Chief and a camera collector) noted that particularly successful camera designs tend to quickly sprout variants. The 650 certainly did.

Sony's original full-frame interchangeable-lens mirrorless camera, the A7, quickly spawned three very sensible and easy-to-parse tiers. In the middle there's the basic A7, now the 24-MP A7II ($1,700), the lowest-cost all-rounder with everything most photographers need; a lower-resolution "speed king" 12-MP A7S, optimized for low light performance and video, now also in its second iteration ($3,000); and the high-res variant for landscapes and product shots and anybody who wants the best image quality on offer. That's the A7RII ($3,200), at 42 MP the "resolution king" of this popular, well-regarded lineup.

With sales taking off, the Mark II variants of all three cameras got major improvements in the form of a redesigned right-hand side of the camera body including the grip and shutter release, and the addition of 5-axis in-body image stabilization (IBIS), plus various model-specific refinements.

Camera of the Year 2015

The A7RII, announced in June, got the biggest buzz of 2015. It was the most anticipated camera of the year, yet got remarkably little in the way of complaints and sour grapes after it arrived. The verdict when the smoke cleared was that Sony had successfully fixed pretty much everything anyone had disliked about the original A7R, including greatly improving autofocus with on-sensor phase-detection AF and adding a world-beating sensor that dpreview.com called "by far the largest backside illuminated CMOS chip to be released." Experts all around the web had glowing things to say.

Of all the interesting cameras that came out in 2015, and this wasn't the only one, there's no other sensible choice for Camera of the Year. That's the view from here.

Mike

Original contents copyright 2015 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

James Moule: "I started 65 years ago with a Graflex. Then I shot with Leicas for 25+ years. Then a Canon SLR. Then a succession of top-of-the-line Nikon DSLRs. The Sony Alpha 7R II is the best and most fun camera I have ever known by far. The reason: image quality."

fws: "A2 [~16x20" —Ed.] prints are as large as I will ever want to go within the limits of available wall space. And given the incredible detail I can perceive at close inspection, I don't see that I will ever want (or at least need) a camera with more IQ than my A7 Mk II."

Mike replies: Right, that's why I called the A7II "the lowest-cost all-rounder with everything most photographers need"—and why I would probably buy an A7II myself if I bought any A7[x] camera.

Jake: "OK, so maybe a Camera of the Year for the less well-heeled plebeians among us?"

Mike replies: Well, first of all, TOP is a utopian classless society. Nobody in here but us shutterbugs.

Second, a CotY for the less well heeled is kind of...crossing purposes. The CotY is not necessarily meant as a buying recommendation, or certainly not for everybody. It's more like it's for the camera that made the biggest splash, or that embodied where things seem to be going, or that engendered the most enthusiasm or garnered the most gossip. The "talk of the town" as the New Yorker feature puts it.

For a down-at-heel buying recommendation, here's what you do. 1. Pick the lens line you want to be in (making sure all the lenses you really want are available). 2. Find a camera in that lens mount that's just about to be replaced. 3. Buy that and one lens for now (usually normal-ish primes are good and also not too expensive). 4. Add lenses as you can till you have three or four, and 5. Start saving up toward a future body replacement in a few years.

(One caveat: I'd say to only buy the lenses you really want. That's your longer-term investment, so don't get into a bad habit buying stop-gaps and then wasting money when you replace lenses you don't like with ones you do.)

For example, let's say you want to start building a kit of Fuji lenses. So right now you might buy a Fuji X-Pro1 because it's about to be replaced and it only costs $499. (I think it was $1,699 when it was new in 2012.) It won't focus as fast as the new model and the sensor is not the absolute latest thing, but then it ain't shabby either, and you're saving a lot of shoe money.

Does that help?

John Lehet: "The body is compelling enough that I've gone through a few lust-cycles this year. My Olympus Micro 4/3 gear has me spoiled with stabilization, focus peaking, and dynamic range indicators ('blinkies'). When I pull out the D800E, in terms of these aspects of usability, it feels eating like last month's leftover mac and cheese (though of course there are compelling enough reasons that I carry the heavy bag with the DSLR along with the Micro 4/3 bag).

"The problem with this Sony comes down to your advice above: 'Pick the lens line you want to be in (making sure all the lenses you really want are available).'

"Every couple of months since it came out I go through a cycle where I think, 'Maybe I'll sell one of the Porsches and buy that Sony now. Yes. I'll do it! And for lenses I'll get....'

"Then I spend two hours (again) looking at all the lens options. The normal zoom is not that great. The other zoom is not that great. The Sony primes are good but expensive, and limited. The Batis lenses look excellent.

"Mind you, I've only decided to sell one Porsche. I decide the D800E and a couple of nice primes will do me just fine for now."

Mike adds: We kid a lot around here, and sometimes it's not clear to everyone just what's serious and what's not. Just to be clear for those who don't know him, friend John has no Porsches. Except for the 1953 550 Spyder under the tarp in his barn in Vermont, which he keeps only because it was hardly ever used. But most of the rubber bits on that one are rotted and it's been ages since it even started up.

Paulo Bizarro (partial comment): "Now, how about recommending the SOTY (system of the year)?"

Mike replies: For my money—literally, as it's what I've spent my own money on most recently—that would have to be Fuji X. But perhaps Micro 4/3 actually ties or even pulls a little ahead, because of the large number of options.

Comments

[Gato]

Good choice on the Sony, but can I get it with a 135mm lens? :-)

[Manuel]

Now that's a surprise...

[Chris Y.]

Good morning and happy new year. One could say that the biggest thing Sony fixed was the name, which used to be "Minolta." :)

[cecelia]

I held off on getting an A series camera for a long time mostly because of all the issues with the A7r and cooked raw files. I finally gave in this fall. With the caveat that I rarely shoot anything that moves, the A7rii with the Zony 55 is the best camera I have owned outside my iPhone (EM-5, D810, Rx-1r are my other digital cameras and I've used the Zeiss ZF and best Nikon primes). The hand-held shooting with incredible file quality is pretty hard to beat. Olympus can support the hand held shooting, but not with the file quality.

There is a serious unmet need for small and high-quality native lenses.

[Stephen Scharf]

I agree with fws and Mike's sensibilities, except if I were to ever go with a Sony ( I won't be because the lenses will still be too large), it would be with the 12 megapixel A7S Mk II...yes, less megapixels!

[Michael Perini]

Impressive camera to be sure.
And Sony also provided the sensor forThis: https://www.phaseone.com/en/Products/Camera-Systems/XF100MP.aspx
They are on a bigtime roll.
They could easily scale up the A7 body to either of the MF sized sensors they make.

The PhaseOne now offers frame capture During live view , which I take to mean continuous feed, grab frames at will.
Which I am sure is enabled by the Sony Sensor.
They don't say how often you can do it, but it's very interesting.
(24 times and it's RAW Video)
Most impressive to me is how quickly they fixed issues between iterations, including the 11bit compressed RAW.

Also the new sensor is CMOS as expected but also 16b color depth. I wonder if we'll see that on FF and lower.
Amazing stuff

[BH]

Blarg. Am I the only one who finds the Sony cameras completely uninspiring? Weird handling, wacky sounding shutters and the overall feeling that you're completely plugged into a computer/disconnected from reality. I played around with the first iteration of these cameras and took a pass, then came back again to see if they could change my mind (because in theory they're perfect), and once again walked away cold. I really WANT these cameras to work for me, but it's not meant to be.

[m3photo]

I'd say the Sony RX1RM2.
'Cos I got one and it warms me cockles, so it does.

[Malcolm Leader]

I'm getting used to my Canon 5DsR and I can tell you it requires re-thinking a lot of shots. Since I am a landscape hound, I never go without a tripod now. Slow shutter speeds are a trap. Good to great glass is a must or you'll never get what you think you should from a 50MP sensor. When done correctly, big enlargements (20 X 30) are a delight. In a hurry? expect to be disappointed. I would love to have an 7RII and some compact glass, but the budget has killed that idea for now. I know I can put my Canon glass on one with adaptors but what is the point of a 2 pound camera and a 7 pound lens?

[Robert Roaldi]

A decade ago, Sony barely existed in the camera world.

[In 2006? Not so. Sony was a mainstream player in digicams in that era. The F-505 for example dates from 1999. --Mike]

[Parnell]

I swore never to buy another Sony product after they abandoned one of my first expensive digital cameras. I wonder how long they'll support the A7 line once the upper management realizes that most of the customers aren't buying Sony lens to use with it? I also find it humorous how people spend thousands for the "high-resolution" but then shoot it with fifty-year old hazy lenses..... grouchy grumbles!

[john wintheiser]

My camera of the year, as it has been for the last 40 years in a row, is the Canon F1.

[Joe B]

Yes indeed it is the wonder of 2015.

How can it get any better?

Well, Sony being a large consumer electronics company, can turn on a dime because a bean counter somewhere in Japan decides the camera division is not pulling its own weight. They have pulled the rug out of other products and cameras are just more product to them.

[Right, much better to buy from real camera companies with histories in the business, such as Contax, Bronica, Kodak, Rollei, Konica, and Minolta. Er.... --Mike]

[Eric Rose]

Looks to be an impressive camera. However for me the camera of the year is more like the camera of the day. Whichever camera I am using is just fine by me. I pick the one from my arsenal that will do the job best. Each have their own "look". Yes even digi cameras.

Some days my camera of the day is just an Olympus XA. Imparts a very cool look in B&W

[John Camp]

Panasonic GX8 is my COTY.

I could be tempted by the Sony if it wasn't so damn ugly. The Minolta heritage coming through, I guess. I'm not curious about it, though. I don't need a FF camera, though I've got one. The camera I'm really curious about is the rumored new Fuji X-Pro2. That's gonna be one good-looking camera, which is important, when the technical differences are now as small as they are.

[And the new 35mm f/2 is perfect for it because it won't block the OVF. --Mike]

[Gaspar]

For what I see online, they have the best IQ you could ever get.
But, also, they have the worst user interface I have ever seen.

I've never shoot seriously with one of those, just played with the A7II around half an hour in a store, but I get the feeling that If I ever bought one I'd end up feeling uncomfortable and missing my older cameras.

[Moose]

My Cameras of the Year are Olympus E-M5 Mark IIs. Fixed pretty much everything wrong with the Mark I and added improved new functions.

Within 10 weeks, I was so convinced that I added a second body. Never regretted it for a moment. In 10 months since I got the first, they have run up over 7,000 shots.

What no one seems to say in reviews, perhaps because they aren't long tele and/or macro hounds, is the improved IBIS. Shoot a few thousand images a year at 600 mm eq. and it immediately becomes clear that the IBIS is a BIG improvement over the Mark I.

More subtly, it seems to me that EFC and revised shutter design, in place of the 1/8 sec. delay necessary on the Mark I to combat shutter shock, also improve practical detail resolution, although perhaps only noticeable at the extremes of subject magnification. The shutter delay was a useful workaround, and so much better than Panny's head in the sand attitude. But the Mark II goes past workaround to full correction - and doesn't slow shutter response or sound funny.

The High Res Mode is limited to things that don't move for straight shooting, but spectacular for those subjects.* It also adds truer color, by capturing each pixel location with sensels of each color. So, no Bayer demosaicing, and no moiré.

Then, before the year is out, we got a freebie, a big one, automated, in-camera focus stacking (Oly calls it Bracketing). Anyone who has spent far too much time manually focus stacking with focusing rail should be blown away by this! And fast enough to avoid changing light problems. (There's also some video improvement.)

The A7II is obviously a great camera, although not part of a great system. But in another way, it's an ordinary camera. Even the IBIS is either licensed or copycat from Oly.

It's really Olympus that has been leading in actual innovations that allow photographs that couldn't be done before. Anyone actually looked at the Composite Mode introduced with the E-M5 for long exposures? I've not tried the in-camera Focus Stacking Mode added to the E-M1, but have a TG-4 with simpler version. It is simply a game changer. Aim at something, push the button once, wait a few seconds, and get an image with F128+ DoF. On the TG-4, only small close things, on the E-M1, anything.

Oly wins Best Camera for the E-M5 II AND for Best Design/Engineering from me. \;~)>

* Oly claims actual shooting of the 8 exposures will take 1/60 sec. (with fast shutter speeds) in the next iteration - at a guess an E-M1 II.

[Glenn Allenspach]

Mike, next time you get the urge, have a go with an A7II and a Zeiss Loxia f2/35mm. I bet you'll like it.

[David Boyce]

I have an A7ii. As far as digital goes, I'm now hardly using my D3, or any of the others I have. I use it with Leica, Nikon, and Zeiss lenses. Sure, the interface could be better, but I have worked out what I need and where it is and keep it simple. This is a camera that makes me want to make photographs.

[Dean Johnston]

Hiya!

> 1. Pick the lens line you want...2. Find a camera...a Fuji X-Pro1
> because it's about to be replaced and it only costs $499.

'Twas my plan in fact. But here in Japan the X-Pro1 is still around US$650, so I'm still scheming.

Dean Johnston

[That was just an example, not the only recommendation. There are lots of good ways to equip yourself on a severe budget. For instance, consider a two-generations-old Canon entry-level DSLR. You can get those for less than $650. Good luck! --Mike]

[Roger Bradbury]

@ Mike: "One caveat: I'd say to only buy the lenses you really want."

Better surely to only buy the lenses you need? If you are buying on a budget, I think it's best to buy lenses, or any other accessory, only when the lack of it is stopping you from doing something that you must, something that you ache to do.

Buying kit because you daydream of using it, or because some authority has told you you should have that particular item, costs money that could have been spent on what you really need.

I must agree with the rest of your reply to Jake, though.

[Darlene Almeda]

I have enough tools except one, a low-light performer. I am seriously looking at the A7S II. Oh, the places I could go with this lightsaber light saver!

[Paulo Bizarro]

This will probably be my COTY in 2017 or 2018, when I can afford it in the used market:) It will then replace my (bought used) A7, for landscape tripod work.

For general shooting, the A7II is a much more sensible option, at about half-price of what the A7RII costs today.

Now, how about recommending the SOTY (system of the year)?

[Minnow]

I could be tempted by the Sony if it wasn't so damn ugly.

I have the sqme feeling. Can't help it, looks matter to me a lot. I have decided to go for a super-bridge camera and the brain insists on the FZ1000, especially after Kirk Tuck's many encomuiums to it, but it looks so horrible that I know I will end up with the technically inferior RX10.

[Peter Croft]

If I'd bought an A7 mark 1, I'd be pretty upset. From what I've read, that camera had obvious faults. You have to pay a shedload more money to get a camera that's fixed. This is what makes me hesitant about Sony.

[John]

I have the A7RII and while I love the images it produces with some of the better lenses, I always miss my other cameras when I'm using it. The other ones being the Olympus E-M1 and the Canon 1D X.

[The E-M1 was our Camera of the Year in 2013.

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2013/12/the-winner-top-camea-of-the-year-2013.html

--Mike]

[Christer Almqvist]

I have an A7r2. Yes, the menus are a bit confusing, but that is a one time thing.

Everything I need is now under a button, or, in case of infrequent use, on the 'fn' menu. I still have a few spots unused there. Yes, it took some effort to set up the menu, but now everything is easy.

[KeithB]

It is a good thing for Jake that you did not make the COTY a Leica.

[Kenneth Tanaka]

Good choice, indeed. (C'mon, what else came close?). Sony cameras have been my principal tools for longer than I realized, nearly 3 years. The A7 cameras have been my main bodies for nearly 1.5 years. Just 5 years ago I would have open-mouth laughed at such a prediction, as I was a true Canon man.

This past summer I spent several days with the Canon 5DSR before buying the A7R2. It's my 5DIII on steroids. Same body, same controls, same image...just a bigger file. I came to realize how accustomed I had become to the A7 features such as articulating screen, high-res high-scan evf, manual focus assist, easy adaptability to other lenses, smallness, and, yes, IBIS. There's no going back for me now.

For those grumpy about the Sony control design I highly recommend investing a significant amount of time configuring your custom buttons and custom function menu. The Sony offers a great deal more customization than, say, a Canon. And with such flexibility ironically comes more complexity. But once you have it set to your style it will become second nature.

My 2nd place nomination for a COY award would be the Sony RX1R II. Wow, talk about taking nearly 100% of the criticisms of prior models and delivering a 110% better product! Same 42 mp sensor as the A7R2, same gestalt as the original RX1, same Zeiss Sonnar lens. But with an articulating led, a fabulous pop-up evf (RX100-style, but better), same general control scheme as the A7's.

[Doug Thacker]

I always think I want one of these Sony cameras, mostly because of the image quality and high ISO capability, but also because of the bold steps Sony takes compared to stodgy Nikon and too-canny-by-half Canon. But then I pick one up with a big prime attached, and ask myself, what are you thinking?

I've got this thing about the small format being small - that's supposed to be the whole point, after all; and while I've known for years about the requirement that light strike digital sensors along a perpendicular path, for some reason, via some magical thinking, I kept expecting someone to produce a full frame digital camera in an analog form factor: a Nikon F3 with a 50mm f/2 AIS lens, let's say. (Yeah, I know Nikon never made such a lens.) Maybe I thought this could be done by use of micro lenses around the sensor or something.

It wasn't until I read this recent interview with Takashi Ueno, a product manager with Fujifilm, that the wisdom behind the APS-C sensor size was really driven home for me.

Size does matter, as we all must finally admit, but given a certain minimum image quality the size and shape of the form factor trumps the size of the sensor in the overall shooting experience - at least in my case.

All of which is just a long winded way of saying that I agree with you, Mike, that the A7RII is Camera of the Year for its IQ and daring do, but Fuji X is System of the Year for real use in the real world.

[Stephen Scharf]

"For my money—literally, as it's what I've spent my own money on most recently—that would have to be Fuji X. But perhaps Micro 4/3 actually ties or even pulls a little ahead, because of the large number of options."

Might have agreed with you re: micro 4/3 about 1 1/2 years ago. And, while there may still be a greater total number of lenses (due to two major manufacturers) with 20 lenses already available for Fuji X, including a 1.4 X teleconverter, it's looking very much like a complete and most importantly, integrated system. A rather remarkable accomplishment in less than four years. And the lenses are getting better and better.

Try finding a Zeiss Batis in stock...

[Gordon Cahill]

Based on my very personal criteria, i think my camera of the year is the only camera currently without a system. The Leica SL. I love the files my A7R2 produces. In almost every respect it's the sensible choice. There's so little to complain about. Maybe a good 2.8 standard zoom. But that's really it. It has so much packed into it's tiny little shape that it's just the obvious winner.

But I still reach for the SL.

Yep. A camera with exactly one lens and a year before a single AF prime lens is available. A camera that's in desperate need of a second, and possibly a third firmware update to fix some niggling issues. Leica screwed the launch so badly that not only is there a single lens, the brochure shows compatibility with lenses where there's no adaptor even available yet. It's bordering on false advertising. It's a camera that just doesn't make sense right now.

But I still reach for the SL.

It's so addictive as a camera. Beautifully built. Solid as a rock. Sensational in use. I am a registered Leica fanboy. But even I was skeptical. I wasn't ever going to buy a large stupid camera with one lens. Hell, my 4 year old Sony a99 has an almost identical spec sheet, except it has IBIS AND a lens range. But I made the mistake of going to the Leica launch. And now I'm hooked.

And I think I know why. Apart from all the usability stuff that Leica always does so well, this camera has potential. I can actually see what Leica is thinking now I've used one for a month or so. When a few more lenses turn up this really could be a viable alternative for so many working photographers and enthusiasts. Sure, no sports photographer will use one, no matter what Leica says but in reality the photographers who actually need the super predictive AF of a D4S are no that big a group. Any photographer in the domestic market will love this camera, if they can justify the cost. On paper this camera makes no sense. What ever you do, don't pick one up.

I think the SL will have an influence on the big three. (Sony, Fuji and Olympus :) ) I think you'll see a larger, better built "pro" camera from the other mirrorless players who've seen that mirrorless doesn't have to mean so small that it handles like crap with a flash in the hotshoe. I think you'll see more emphasis on the weather sealing and ruggedness, dual card slots etc. Maybe even Canon and Nikon will see there's a market for a real mirrorless camera for the serious photographer.

So with respect, I think the A7R2 is a nice camera but not the one that'll have an effect on the industry or the one that'll be even remembered in a couple of years. That'll be the SL.

Gordon

[David Comdico]

I eagerly awaited the arrival of the A7Rii for months. When it was finally released to great fanfare, what did I do? I bought a Nikon D810.

Why? I wanted a studio camera for portraiture with strobes and it just seemed like the right choice. Also, I purchased an EM5mkii in the summer but never gelled with it and felt like I had enough of the great electronic viewfinder swindle.

I was very close to buying the Sony and felt that I would have buyer's remorse. Who buys year-old (plus) tech anyway? This post almost brought it on... but still, no.

The Sony is an amazing piece of technology for sure and the photos I've seen from it are impressive. But for all of the talk about DSLRs being film technology mindlessly applied to digital and limiting its potential, one thing overlooked is that it is a mature approach that works.

Anyway, camera technology marches on. Soon, digital may even look better than film. :-)

[Steve Jacob]

Well Mike, I know you like car analogies...

The A7RII reminds me of the Nissan GT-R and the XT1 is more like Mazda's new MX5.

A technical tour-de-force with every driver aid imaginable and capable of incredible performance, vs. a simple, tactile lightweight that relies on the fundamentals and is fun to drive to work.

There is a good reason to by either, but they don't appeal to the same type of petrol-head.

[Bob Rosinsky]

COTY: Oly EM-5 II. Sure, I wish it had better high ISO performance. But the image quality at ISO 200 is fine, if not outstanding. The Pro lenses are super. The livetime feature for long-exposures is invaluable by eliminating tedious guesswork. The multi-shot feature is great. As a workaround, I often take a single shot at base ISO along with an 8-shot exposure. That way, I've got a decent enough file to mask out 8-shot artifacts.