David: SLTs have back focus "by design" ?

[Greg Beetham]

I'll have to take your word for the size relationships Barry, I don't have a service manual for quite a few models the A200 included, I do have one for the A100 but I have no idea about the changes in focus sensor modules, I was thinking along the lines of whatever size the sensor actually is (maybe related to more light gathering/sensitivity) it would have to have a front/back dof AF lock tolerance equal to the width/height it covers in the image...possibly.
Greg

[bfitzgerald]

Greg A200 def had a bigger AF point size than the 5d or film bodies. I got some shots where you'd AF on say a group and you would have a background in focus! Really that bad at times, it can happen the odd time with any camera..but it was a bit of an annoyance with the A200. Also to pin point AF was not so easy esp a problem with the 50mm f1.7 which I use a lot on A mount. That was down to the big AF points too it could lock on unintended subjects

For some reason Sony downgraded the AF system to EV 0 instead of EV-1 on the A200 too so it wasn't as good low light as the Km either. Not knocking it too much because for the very meagre outlay at the time you got a nice enough budget body really. One of the reasons I sold the A200 if I am honest was I found the Km better in low light for IQ and focus, though the Sony was quicker AF wise and better in good light.

Kinda miss that A200 really it's a shame they didn't soup it up over the years they could have had a really good budget DSLR with a bit of work.

[Greg Beetham]

I suppose an f1.7 shallow dof would present a challenge for a few focus systems as well, but one would expect it would be slightly better on APS-C perhaps than on a FF, and how meh the light is also, I should get one one day and see how many focus challenges I miss. I don’t have anything faster than f2.8 in my collection but those seem reasonable most of the time from what I remember, a couple hardly ever seem to miss actually, it just depends on the light situation for the most part with them I think, (with my old bods), I guess I don’t usually get overly adventurous with bad light either, and being a casual photographer means there is always another day so no stress, working photography for a living is a different deal for sure.
I wonder if there is much difference between various focus modes, I usually don’t bother too much and just stay with AF-A in focus area select, (Wide area-AF when I tried it was much too random for my liking), maybe AF-S or AF-C might be different too each other in performance, I’ve never specifically compared them myself.
Greg

[bfitzgerald]

The 50mm f1.7 suffers from some focus shift stopping down, I'm fortunate to have a good copy (way better than the photozone review suggests) and it's very good wide open. The 5d did a better job of nailing the focus wide open than the Sony and much more so in low light. Maybe newer Alpha models are better I just think the speed increase at the time came at the expense of accuracy. The 5d isn't exactly fast for AF, but accuracy is more important to me. And it's proved mostly accurate with the 50mm prime where the Sony was not particularly impressive.

Now that the D90 is calibrated properly that's doing a good job in low light and the 35mm f1.8 is really very good even wide open..seems to nail it consistently now.

[Greg Beetham]

How is the other D90, has that been fixed yet?
Greg

[bfitzgerald]

Greg other D90 has been returned to the seller, they picked it up via Fed Ex and I've to sort out what to do next week with that (repair, replacement, refund etc)
Tamron 17-50mm also returned to seller via Fed ex, something up with that esp at the tele end, focus was off even in live view so I'm thinking the lens is faulty. I did some work with it last weekend and I managed to work around it a bit without ruining things, but it's not as good as it should be. 35mm f1.8 and 90mm Tamron no problems to report spot on most of the time.

I know the 17-50mm has a bit of a hit and miss reputation, I had a great copy on K mount..this one was not so good. If that gets replaced/repaired will see what happens, if not I'll hunt for another fast zoom solution. I'll put some shots up soon have to work though a few of them.

[OneGuyKs]

Kinda miss that A200 really it's a shame they didn't soup it up over the years they could have had a really good budget DSLR with a bit of work.

Sony got A37, now. Same price as A200 but a much better camera.

[Dusty]

Kinda miss that A200 really it's a shame they didn't soup it up over the years they could have had a really good budget DSLR with a bit of work.

Sony got A37, now. Same price as A200 but a much better camera.

No, it doesn't have an OVF!

Dusty

[bfitzgerald]

Exactly no OVF = No buy, cast in stone and I really hate the EVF models I have played with. The A77 is pretty lumpy too size wise, A65 is better in this regard if only they had one with a pentaprism VF it might be worth a look
I was running across some the name "sonylistens" but I've yet to see an example of this!

[artington]

Exactly no OVF = No buy, cast in stone and I really hate the EVF models I have played with. The A77 is pretty lumpy too size wise, A65 is better in this regard if only they had one with a pentaprism VF it might be worth a look
I was running across some the name "sonylistens" but I've yet to see an example of this!

I shant be surprised if OVF's are history before 5 years are out, probably less. Of course, ther's always film

[Mark K]

I have had D800 for eight weeks now with 4k shutter counts. I have mixed feelings. Every time when I used A850 back, I felt at home again, partly due to brighter viewfinder and partly due to my better prime lens collection. With AF, my D800 tends to focus very fast with higher inaccuracy. I was wondering about Dynax 7's AF system last night and my answer is here.
KM 7D always hunts. My A77's tends to hunt a lot when the subject does not fall into any of the focal points and this is extremely irritating when shooting small moving objects like BIY or even slowly crawling ants. Is there a fix for it?

[bfitzgerald]

Lots of talk about D800's and AF issues out of the box, of course not all but it's been an issue no question. Can't really comment on AF with that body not used it.
With the film 7 and 7d they are different animals for AF, film 7 I found very good for accuracy and subject movement nailing it. No complaints with 5's/60's either (that means mostly decent not 100% perfect)
Pentax were quite good but had issues in specific light, and a bit slower in low light levels..they rarely give up trying to get a lock. Nikon and Canon tend to not slow down as much.
Not used a recent Sony model..5d was not that quick even in good light, but accuracy was not bad really in most situations

If I ever get a D90 that is calibrated properly I'll update my AF findings! Nikon do seem to lock on subjects that my old 5d would just not even attempt I have noticed that. It's a double edged sword if the AF rarely says "nope can't do this" you could get shots out of focus, if it gives up too quick you might get frustrated a bit trying to get a lock on subjects (esp poor lighting)

Regarding the future of DSLR's and viewfinders, all I know is right now I want to use OVF ones..and if a maker does not offer that (at any price point) then I can't stay with that system I'm afraid...feel that strongly about it. I'm not against users having a choice but IMO it was a huge mistake of Sony to not offer OVF's to users, I just can't trust the brand ever again.

[Greg Beetham]

There is a continuation of the EVF/OVF debate at dpr…ongoing again.
I don’t think Sony takes much notice myself, the Sonylistens stuff is window dressing, a kind of public relations exercise to make people think Sony actually listens, yep they sure listened and responded after the huge number of threads over the years about the macro flash system they screwed up…I don’t think.
The only thing that might make Sony take any notice is sales figures, and even then they probably draw the wrong conclusions about the reasons anyway.
Greg

[peterottaway]

It's a disease on DPR, so no more here please.

I can live with EFV and others hate the very idea of it. So until the next generation comes out and there is something concrete to comment on there is simply no real point.

[bfitzgerald]

Ah the ongoing macro flash debate! But it was a valid point.
I don't think this is DPR style debate it's more reasoned one. And very valid regarding the needs of OVF users I'm certainly not alone in that.
Unfortunately this is what happens when a company decides to do something, there is a chance Sony might bag some EVF fans or those who do video and want good AF, but it comes at the expense of other users. But in short I simply don't have any interest in the Alpha offerings..even in a mild way.
I've seen one person (American tourist) with an SLT, I've seen more people with the older Sony A200's/350's and more A700's around.

I don't think the strategy is working or having any significant impact on the top 2 makers.
I could say it might not be much different if they were only making OVF cameras. But disagree with the DPR reviewer notion that "Sony had no choice to try to be different"

The other point to make bar the mirror in the way is that SLT like DSLR's has to be calibrated properly, it does not offer the potential advantage of contrast AF accuracy. (I say potential because well calibrated phase detect can be just fine)
I do think the SLT mirror is a turn off for buyers, of that there is no doubt in my mind v a genuine mirror less camera