Sony looks to change the world of DSLRs - Masashi 'Tiger' Im

[WaltKnapp]

The A55 would probably do macro and extreme macro very well in theory, but in practise it might fall short if the battery life is not very good and the flash compatibility is questionable, someone will have to do some tests with one to find out just how useful it is for night macro work out in the field.
Greg

From what I've found so far, I'm not interested. And I do a whole lot of night macro out in the field in the course of supporting scientific field work. I don't talk from theory but from a lifetime of extensive experience. Or maybe field is too nice, try swamps, awful thick brush and all the fun things. And remember this is Georgia, with it's share of snakes that can make you much worse than sick, and alligators that consider you a midnight snack, as well as other goodies. Like fire ant nests to stand in, been there, done that numerous times. And the reptiles and amphibians, they get photographed and documented, no matter how bad they are. And if they make a sound I record that too. I can do it all, combined at the rate of covering more than 100miles in a night documenting every species in every active location along that. Camera operation has to be fast and reliable. These new cameras are too slow in a number of aspects, some of which go right down to the basic physics involved.

Battery life is virtually a non issue to me with the camera. After all I used to use film, bulb flashes and all the rest. And got the job done. The issues are elsewhere, battery life is thrown in to distract from the real problems. And in the night field biology consider I was always carrying several flashlights, wearing a headlamp, using a portable GPS, carting a full pro stereo sound recording setup, as well as the camera gear. All of which uses batteries, most at a way faster rate than the camera. Even when my DSLR got only about 100 shots per charge. It's actually much easier now with LED lights that get far longer per battery set.

Speaking of flash compatibility, the ideal setup for an awful lot of that night field macro at the size of animals I was working is a DSLR, 100mm macro lens, AND the macro ringflash. See any macro ringflashes out of Sony? I sure don't. Here's the setup, though in actual field work it's not on a tripod but handheld:
http://madranis.home.mindspring.com/Min ... gflash.jpg

I've covered thousands of miles at night, thousands of sites with that rig or earlier versions that looked much the same over many, many years. That's how you find out how night macro is done and what's needed. You live in the field using the equipment.

Walt

[WaltKnapp]

As a lot of macro work might be tripod based I think live view works fairly well for that field even with slow ish AF you can either flip flap the mirror to AF or use the MF view to get very accurate focus. In the past I've not been sold on live view but I have warmed up to it a bit. Question is do you want live view VF and LCD personally I like a bit of variety myself.

Ummm..... almost all my macro nowdays is not tripod based. Even with still subjects macro is more and more a game of super fast made for the job macro flash. And with living moving subjects it's even more so. That comes from careful study by the folks that are pushing the macro envelope. Who have discovered just how much of that diffraction blur was really motion blur that's removable with really fast flash durations.

And night in brush, wetlands and swamps? Just try to follow me carrying a tripod. I'm not anti tripods and use them any time I can, but that's a minority of the time

And macro and AF. I do occasionaly use AF with my a700s doing macro in the dark, it will AF in pitch black darkness using it's AF light. But not necessarily on what you want. Ultimately it's MF, and especially so when the focus needs fine control. MF by headlamp or mini maglight is typical in my night macro. Of subjects that are moving.

Live view? yes occasionally, very occasionally, it might help, though I've never found it essential. But if it compromises the critical viewfinder at all I don't want it, the speed of the OVF is far more important. In fact there are several brands of clip on liveview available now so no need at all for even the slightest degrading of the OVF. And that same clip on can supply LCD up to and including driving a big screen TV.

Walt

[WaltKnapp]

Yes, if an EVF can be integrated into a compact body then that would be preferable to a klunky, awkward, catch-on-everything external EVF.

The you remove the claimed advantages for low and high shooting. And most of your EVF customers walk out on you if it does not flap around.

Walt

[WaltKnapp]

But with CMOS there is a possibility to use a modified backlit design and move those temporary storage capacitors to the dark side. They would need to solve the problem of making a large backlit sensor physically stronger since the current small backlit CMOS sensors are too thin and fragile.
And it's quite possible to make a thicker backlit sensor if they leave some minimum wiring on the lit backside and drive the wires through some fine holes in the thick silicon bulk to the other side. This can be done, it's no magic at all; but the fabs need a new process fully developed for that.

Now how to you handle that extra inertia dragging on the SSS unit? Those are already made delicate too just to keep inertia down to handle the rapidly changing movements they are compensating.

Cameras are a complex of interrelated systems all of which have to work optimally with each other. All kinds of things can work well in isolation but not with others.

Walt

[agorabasta]

Walt,

The mass of the active part of the sensor, be it regular or backlit, is totally negligible. The mass of the sensor housing and the dumb bulk part of the sensor silicon is orders of magnitude greater. And then there's a pcb where the sensor is mounted, and it is also moved together with sensor in case of SSS.

[agorabasta]

Yes, if an EVF can be integrated into a compact body then that would be preferable to a klunky, awkward, catch-on-everything external EVF.

The you remove the claimed advantages for low and high shooting. And most of your EVF customers walk out on you if it does not flap around.

Walt

Walt,

The EVF is that little window you peek into with the camera put close to your face. It's quite different from the camera rear display.

You really need to pay more attention to the points you're commenting...

[Scooterman]

I quite agree with you Walt, I do very similar to you, I have a fascination for things small and moving, I even have a microscope with camera attachment.
Out in the field as it were I also like an optical viewfinder, I use the A-580 for nearly all of my shots now, and birdlife in flight is now excellent with the new AF system on the 580.
Being disabled (spinal injury) I can use the display flipped out for some low shots, not perfect but better than nothing.
So I can see your problem, my only difficulty with the A-700 was the focus confirm beep far too high for my damaged ears also the focus points in the viewfinder are not as clear as I would have liked but as a camera the 700 is very underrated, and why I would love to see a super optical viewfinder on a new 700 replacement, I am just hoping they do both an A-77 and an A-770 then every one would be happy.
Regards
Richard

[alphaomega]

Walt, I am impressed by what you do and I am amazed that you are still OK and not injured or worse by the wildlife you frequent. I guess you should insure your equipment

Speaking of flash compatibility, the ideal setup for an awful lot of that night field macro at the size of animals I was working is a DSLR, 100mm macro lens, AND the macro ringflash. See any macro ringflashes out of Sony? I sure don't. Here's the setup, though in actual field work it's not on a tripod but handheld:
http://madranis.home.mindspring.com/Min ... gflash.jpg

for a hundred thousand bucks so that you can buy a set of competive equipment should your Sony/Minolta come to grief through accident.
I wonder if you have a Website where I can see some of your interesting work.
Always been impressed by the people who are prepared to risk themselves and go through the hassle of getting these wonderful wildlife shots.

[Greg Beetham]

Walt I'm not sure what your point is, you've posted a link to show us equipment that's no longer available, available new that is, I'm sure you already know I've been agitating for the Macro flash system to be fixed for years, because unlike you I didn't manage to get the KM one before it went extinct. I already know what you do, where you do it and how you do it from discussions we've had in the past and from reading your posts. What I want to know is, how does what Sony offer now perform out in the field, err out in the swamp at night, David seems to think the A55 would do Macro well, I have reservations about how well the flash system performs. Even if I had a macro flash system there is that reported 'delay' now with a flash mounted on the hotshoe. So if Sony are going SLT all the way, what does that mean in real terms for us; you who does serious work, and I, who is basically a weekend warrior but still wants gear that can do the job, and I don't see any reason why a current or new model high end SLT shouldn't be expected to do what good SLR's have done before in all facets of photography, not just macro.
Greg

[David Kilpatrick]

Walt, I think you should try the A55. If I was Sony USA I'd lend you one! The EVF is like an enlarged, critical focusing OVF which works in near-darkness and has an instant 7.5X or 15X magnifier. It can be diverted at any time to the rear screen which can do exactly the same, and be positioned at almost any angle. It can also feed any size of external monitor from Sony's dedicated 5" design to a 50 inch TV.

It is capable of metering and focusing down to EV minus 2, and the SLT mirror honestly does not do the damage to image quality often suggested - you might not want to aim it into the sun, or shoot s star field with it, but for macro subjects it should show no visible degradation. The higher resolution of the sensor, and irs ability to capture almost noiseless results at ISO 1600, complete a specification which should actually be a brilliant tool for field macro work. It could also allow the use of very low-power modelling or focus guide light.

David

[bakubo]

Walt, I think you should try the A55. If I was Sony USA I'd lend you one!

I keep thinking I may get my wife one for the next time she travels with me. It is smaller and lighter and in most ways better than the A100 she has now. Personally, I really dislike the A100, but if she had an A55 then I would use it sometimes. The A55 would probably work better as a p&s too, which is how she uses it. She likes LV too so that is another point in its favor. I often travel alone, but she does go with me sometimes if it is a place she has some interest in. I don't know the next time that might be so it may be the A55 replacement rather than the A55 by that time. I wouldn't object if Sony wanted to send me one though to use for awhile -- sort of an extended evaluation of a year or two.

[Greg Beetham]

David that still doesn't address the critical flash issue, when you are using the compose by forward and back movement for critical focus you need the flash to go off on the instant, otherwise it's useless. So it wouldn't matter how wonderful the A55 is otherwise, if it can't flash on the instant it's of no use in night macro.
Greg

[Lonnie Utah]

David that still doesn't address the critical flash issue, when you are using the compose by forward and back movement for critical focus you need the flash to go off on the instant, otherwise it's useless. So it wouldn't matter how wonderful the A55 is otherwise, if it can't flash on the instant it's of no use in night macro.

What you are saying might be true, but isn't that a very, very limited application? Additionally, we have no idea how the A700 replacement might handle flash work at this point?

[Greg Beetham]

Yes Lonnie I agree it's a limited application for some who don't do that, but even my old X700 can do that very well, so I don't agree that a camera produced 30 years later should have evolved backwards.
Greg

[agorabasta]

Henry,

Just today I did some testing of exactly the P&S functionality of a55 + Sigma 17-50 HSM. I did 80+ snaps under tungsten lighting, doing instant full press. Of those only one was wrongly exposed, another single one showed motion blur, and another two had focusing errors - with those two the cam missed the focus on a bright saturated yellow object. The lens was set at 50mm, the cam was in P mode, shutter speeds ranged 1/20 to 1/50.
Earlier I checked the Sigma OS vs a55 SSS and found exactly equal near-100% efficiency of both for shutter speeds 1/20-1/50 at 50mm; it means I needed to shake the cam on purpose for either of them to fail. The a55 SSS is really much better than a700's...

Then tried the same with 35f18 SAM. The instant full press shots don't come out good. That lens needs some time after focus confirm to really settle the focus; but then it's very accurate.