A900 and the future - some questions...

[David Kilpatrick]

Today I had to shoot some tests with the Canon 1DmkIV and their brand new 300mm IS f/2.8, and also the A77 with 70-400mm SSM G. Horse racing, good light.

Canon - 100% complete success rate, every frame in sequences, except one sequence where I didn't frame the subject on the first exposure and therefore did not track it.

Sony - 100% failure rate. Not a single useful frame. I have now calibrated the lens for micro adjustment, but I don't think that is the whole story. At 8fps I could barely manage to use the EVF at all for this subject except on static compositions.

I didn't have time to go back, recover my A900, and try that instead. But I know for sure that whatever interesting motordrive experiments and successes people may have with the EVF, no professional will ever try to rely on it for mainstream sports/action.

David

[artington]

Pretty disappointing observations on the a77, David. Needless to say, none of these came across in the so-called pro reviews excepting yours in BJP, which doesnt say much for the others. I suspect Sony has nailed its flag to the am, pro-am mast rather than for pros and will do very well notwithstanding. Personaly, I can count the number of times I've used continuous framing on the fingers of one hand which is testament to my subject matter. For the same reason i have found my renewed enthusiasm for MF, courtesy of the NEX after mixed experiences with Leica M, has also opened my mind to the potential of EVF, with its MF assistance potential. I still love the OVF on the 900, and it woud appear its going to be better for AF for a while, but I am certain that EVF is the future. After all,the Terminator had one hard wired into his eyeball!

[Heidfirst]

I have now calibrated the lens for micro adjustment, but I don't think that is the whole story.

tbh I doubt that the AF on the 70-400 is up to that in the 300/2.8.
It's quiet & precise but it isn't the fastest & having the limiter work from 3m doesn't help - it really needed to be something like 6 or 10m.
I had a long chat with Paul Genge about this when the 70-400 had been out a couple of months & if the 500/4 arrives with more limiter options (incl. poss. something approximating the old Minolta user settable option) i would like to think that I had a hand in it.

[Dr. Harout]

David that is not fair.
Now remove the section concerning Canon, and you still have the problem with the lens or a77.
It's not something to compare, but a problem that needs fixing.
I am really really interested in this.
Please, could you perform a similar test with the same lens but on different alpha bodies?

[Greg Beetham]

I suppose too be fair you would use the Sony 300 2.8 on the A77 but I doubt there would be any different result. And anyway Doc why should you need to fix ANYTHING on a new fan dangled camera with all the bells an whistles that they've been working on for...how many years?
Greg

[David Kilpatrick]

Because the Canon was fixed at 300mm and this was a bit tight on the framing, I set the A77 to a wider focal length in real terms - 140mm for at least one sequence. I thought that at 140mm it would be OK.

It was really the EVF which caused the problem. Racehorses at full speed crossing your view fifty feet away are very difficult to frame even with an OVF. The intermittent view and time lag of the EVF made it pretty much impossible.

Can't really say much about the 70-400mm as I have not had a useful result from it yet. I'm trying to think of some situation where it might be the best choice of lens, and most of the answers involve not living in Scotland in winter...

David

[mikeriach]

I once tried to photograph cyclists on a 10k time trial from the road side using a Dynax 7 with a Minolta 100-300 and had huge problems tracking them as they were too close and too fast.
Landing aircraft at 200-300mm are much easier (much slower relative movement across the frame) and I get good focus (usually) with all my digital gear including the A100.
I would imagine that galloping horses are a very tricky subject.

Mike

[jcoffin]

My experience with pictures of cycling has been that it's generally best to pre-focus and pre-set your focal length, then just pan with the cyclist until they reach your focus point, then click off a shot or two. This works particularly well for time trials, where you don't have to deal with an entire peloton at once.







Based in the (admittedly minimal) testing I did with the A77, I couldn't imagine trying to use if for this kind shooting. About the only thing I can think of that might work would be to use a somewhat shorter lens and fast frame rate. Point the camera in about the right general direction (ignoring the viewfinder) and hope that at least one out of the burst was reasonably focused and could be cropped to produce reasonable framing. Definitely not my style, but I suspect with some practice it could work.

I'm pretty sure horses are more difficult though. Cyclists move quickly, but quite predictably. Horses move in more dimensions at once, and I doubt they're quite as predictable either.

[Magnar Fjortoft]

The A77 EVF is early technology. I would be surprised if not the A9x EVF is much better. Larger, brighter and higher refresh rate. Then this camera would be as good for action photography as any OVF camera.

I read David K’s report when he compared the A77 with a top end Canon camera with great interest. My first thoughts were: Was there something wrong with the G 70-400 mm lens? What about the A77 autofocus settings? And also: What about shooting technique?

When I first started to use my now sold A55, the lugging viewfinder felt hopeless for action photography. Then I spent two days of intensive shooting to adopt my panning technique to the nature of the EVF. After this the camera did pretty well. Heck, I have earned money on sports/action photography with this camera. Not the best camera for such work, but not hopeless either.

When I got my A77 the larger and much more responsive EVF was a relief. But then I had to adjust my action shooting style once again to match this viewfinder. I am now using my A77 for all kinds of work, also sports and action. I don’t think the A77 is less useable for this kind of photography than an OVF camera (you should compare with aps-c cameras like the A700). But you for sure need another mental approach to the EVF thant the OVF, and you also have to adjust your shooting style to the nature of the EVF.

I am not sure if I could use an OVF and EVF camera side by side, alternating, like David K did, since the nature of these viewfiders are so different.

So how do I adopt to the A77 EVF? First of all I need to be sure my panning technique is good: keep the camera and lens very steady, then moving the whole body from the legs and up to get a smooth horizontal motion. Then, when shooting, I need to concentrate on the subject and overlook the lugging of the EVF, and also ignore the blackouts when exposing to keep the panning silky smooth. If the panning rhythm is broken, then everything is lost, no matter EVF or OVF. This is especially true when using medium shutter speeds, like 1/125 or 1/60 sec with 200--400 mm focal lengths. With ultra-short exposures you can to some extent adjust for a poor panning. When shooting frame filling fast moving subjects this way with long focal lengths, I have no problem adjusting the framing of the subject on the fly. But then, if I have to adjust the framing, the main problem is lack of panning technique, not the viewfinder. So I do not hesitate using my A77 for sports and action, also for commersial work.

After comparing the A700 OVF with the A77 EVF, that was very good OVF for a camera in this league, I really understand why Sony has left the OVF for their aps-c series cameras.

Since this tread is about FF cameras, I have to say: Better EVF technology might make the OVF feel small and dark. Also, when teaching young media students, most of them prefer using EVF cameras over OVF cameras. This is the future professional marked for Sony. Not us fifty years or so old dinosaurs that grew up with manual exposure only, muddy OVFs and no autofocus.

[David Kilpatrick]

Not all my shots were panned, and the Canon was abused in the extreme - after setting up, just grab and fire. It was really the Canon which was extraordinarily good, and I can see why any pro Olympic shooter would need this. That's what my report is for - a pre-Olympics issue.

The A77 with 70-400mm was very disappointing on subjects identical to those which had worked perfectly with the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 on the same camera from the same position, and also with the 70-300mm G. The images are just so soft, even where there appears to be a hint of correct focused detail. As I said, static scenes I tried with the lens also failed to work due to incorrect focus - I have since micro adjusted the A77 based on 400mm at about 10 metres, and maybe this will solve the problem.

But it will be two months before there is anything worth shooting here.

David

[Simmondsphotography]

David
I use the 70-400G extensively, for a large heavy lens it is remarkably quick to focus. However for panning moving subjects, I do usually turn off the "steady shot", ensuring that I switch it back on again for static shots. I also agree with an earlier post that the A77's EVF needs it's own technigue when panning, totally different from the A900 for instance. In this respect it is more like an up-market bridge camera!

[Magnar Fjortoft]

The A77 with 70-400mm was very disappointing on subjects identical to those which had worked perfectly with the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 on the same camera from the same position, and also with the 70-300mm G. The images are just so soft, even where there appears to be a hint of correct focused detail. As I said, static scenes I tried with the lens also failed to work due to incorrect focus - I have since micro adjusted the A77 based on 400mm at about 10 metres, and maybe this will solve the problem.

But it will be two months before there is anything worth shooting here.

I find it strange that the G 70-300 mm works perfect, but not the G 70-400 mm. My wife has the G 70-300 mm and I have both the G 70-200 mm f:2.8 and G 70-400 mm. The 70-400 mm is very quick and precise, even in low and flat light, and I can shoot wide open at the long end without worrying about IQ or focus. Actually, I often leave the G 70-200 at home since I really enjoy the reach of the longer zoom lens. So it might be something bad with your G 70-400 lens. It should be sharper than the G 70-300 mm at 300 mm!

If your lens is faulty, I am very eager to know how the A77 contiinious autofocus performs with a good lens compared to the Canon beast!

[pakodominguez]

Sonce this tread is about FF cameras, I have to say: Better EVF technology might make the OVF feel small and dark. Also, when teaching young media students, most of them prefer using EVF cameras over OVF cameras. This is the future professional marked for Sony. Not us fifty years or so old dinosaurs that grew up with manual exposure only, muddy OVFs and no autofocus.

It is hard for me to imagine such EVF that will make the A900 viewfinder feel "small and dark"
I think that, in photography as well as any other aspect of life, we need to be ready to adapt to the new "morals" if we want to "survive".

[bfitzgerald]

Students might prefer EVF's but do we care? Not a bit of it sorry it has to be said many will be moving up from superzooms and compacts, so they will be ok with EVF's as a reminder of exposure problems and WB issues. Many photographers here are quite experienced, some very and it's an entirely different ball game for this type of user.

I can't comment on action shooting I don't do much of it and I've only had a grab of the A77. But I would not be comfortable using the EVF for wedding, landscape or portrait photography let alone action shots and panning. Because I "could" if I had to use it for those tasks is entirely different to making an informed choice to do so. In this respect I think EVF's are too early, not mature enough and it's mistake for Sony to pursue this path at the expense of optical viewfinders, they're going to put off a significant number of users straight away with their tunnel vision strategy. Whatever folks feel about OVF's and dated/old hat etc etc. As the old saying goes if it works, don't mess with it. Sony won't stand a chance with a FF EVF SLT model not for pro users anyway. They should know this though very clearly so as well

[bakubo]

Certainly many people are quite happy with the state of EVF tech in the A77 right now. Many were quite happy with the A55 EVF tech. Actually, many were quite happy with the DSC-F707 (and that era) EVF tech too. Each improvement satisfies a few more people, I guess. Although I could probably live with the A77 EVF tech it is not good enough for me yet, I think. By the way, I have had the chance to look at an A77 a couple of times here in Japan in recent weeks. I imagine EVFs will keep getting better though and at some point I could certainly see myself getting one. Actually, I could probably get by with the A77 EVF tech, but IMO for my shooting I would give up too much to make up for what I would gain. I prefer to do more than get by as long as I have a choice. As a second camera though an EVF of current tech would be fine for me, I think. I do really prefer IBIS for the types of things I usually shoot and I also have a lot of A-mount lenses that I would like to continue to use.

I have no opinion about whether Sony is making a mistake on this since I don't care that much about the business side of cameras. If it is a mistake then Sony will just bleed even more money than they already are. If it is not then maybe they won't. Here in Japan I can probably count on one hand the number of Sony interchangeable lens cameras I have seen outside of a store over the last 5 years. And this is a country where I see people with interchangeable lens cameras all the time. Lots and lots of DSLRs (mostly Canon and Nikon, but also Pentax and Olympus) and lots of m4/3 (Panasonic and Olympus). Speaking of that, here is the Japan sales for 2011:

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/four-son ... -in-japan/

Nikon, Canon, and Sony were all hurt by the flooding in Thailand and the earthquake/tsunami/nuclear problems in Japan this year. 2012 will probably be interesting as all the companies recover from the natural disasters.

I have made it clear where I think Sony's biggest problems are and that they need to desperately fix, but no need to go into that.