I look at it more from the evolution standpoint. I don't think we will ever see the A300/A350 LV setup again. It will go the way of the E330. I think we will see Sony take an evolutionary path.
They go to A500, A710, A900 and such as Penta Prism Cameras and they carry similar design aspects. Below that, things brew.
I think the next evolution is to do something similar to the 3 series LV, but remove the OVF entirely. Right on top of the mirror box where they put the pentaprism or pentamirror they put the second LV sensor there. Directly. So they maintain the Phase detection system for AF, but the worthless OVF is gone. Everything goes to the rear screen and or a EVF on top. That second sensor might even get it's own SSS system to stabilize the view finder. So this would be the next evolution of what they did with the 3 series. This might go a generation or 2. For an even cheaper body, they might forego this and do a straight evil and get rid of the phase detection system and extra sensor and thus do it right off the main sensor, so the camera gets smaller and cheaper, yet slower AF which balances the price structure. They can still share the same chassis like they did on A200 verses A300/350 but the "A210" has had the second sensor, mirror, and phase AF bits removed. And shutter replaced with a normally open version instead of the typical normally closed you see on SLRs. Sony goes this route for maybe 2 generations before going EVIL only on the sub A500 bodies. A500 sits at the $1000 price point, the "A400" which is the high end LV/EVIL body shares the same price, it's a choice of design. 7 series bodies keep the 1500-1800 price.
The next big thing for Sony is the EVIL transition. SSS becomes a bit of a liability here. Nikon and Canon will have "solid state bodies". They have ditched AF motors (nikon that is), They both now support electronic apertures, so all those moving stuff is gone. They can make an EVIL with no moving parts in it, just a board stack and it's done. very cheap to make. Sony has SSS system in there. I think we will see the next evolution in the next entry level round. With the 7D, AS was basically a huge machine with a camera built around it. On the 5D it was made more of a package, and since then Sony keeps refining it down more. But it's still a big sub assembly that gets mounted, and then cables off to a separate board. The next step is they need to get that system bonded to the board. Basically a hold in the PCB, with the bits directly attached like a Socket almost, so the sensor mechanics move and their is the ribbon, but it's all built into the board for support and everything else, no more sub chassis. This lets them get smaller and cheaper. Cameras after-all need to get down to 1 circuit board as they move forward. Sony will have to do this to keep on track for size and price with Nikon and Canon. I think we will see this design with the next gen of entry level stuff, all new chassis, and it basically puts the high end stuff and the low end stuff on pretty different design paths.
Down the road, I can see a possible way to do second sensor LV in the pentaprism bodies. They basically need the second sensor to be on a sliding tray that sits between the pentaprism and the eye piece. When activated, it slides up, replaced one of those lens elements with a properly corrected on on the surface of the sensor to make it all work. This same slide also blocks out the view finder. So it's just a little thing that pokes up in there. Now you have a pentaprism, and second sensor LV, and you still have your metering in the prism. They still maintain Phase detection AF. They keep doing that for a long time till they decided to remove OVFs all together. Which they might do once they get Contrast AF system working as fast as Phase Detection. No point getting rid of one and not the other. I think that's what Sony means by "the right way". If you are going to have stuff for an OVF, you better keep using the phase detection AF. And if you get rid of one, you get rid of both. But since Contrast AF isn't so hot, for now, it's better to ditch the OVF and keep the phase detection for a while, than to do the opposite and have LV with no Phase Detection AF.
I don't see how the A200 lives. To me it's just something they made because they could with the parts they had and made folks happy who didn't want LV. Gave them a good fall back if their LV was a flop. But their LV is a clunky parts heavy system. So just ditch OVFs at that level. Have the low end model be just an EVIL, the Higher end entry model gets phase detection support. An A200 replacement that is just a basic evil could be dirt cheap.
PMA 2009
Forum rules
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
Re: PMA 2009
Sony could go the other way, improve the a300/350 live view, style the camera like the a900, give it a bigger OVF and use one of their 8 or 12MP phone sensors for the live view, this would allow digital zooming with live view and also use the LV sensor for video capture, since HD video only needs 2-4Mbits with this I would add the ability to record to external usb disks
This way you could take hours of video with there never being a chance on over heating the main sensor .
Cheers, Stephen
This way you could take hours of video with there never being a chance on over heating the main sensor .
Cheers, Stephen
-
PhotoTraveler
- Grand Caliph
- Posts: 243
- Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2008 8:07 am
Re: PMA 2009
I don't think sensor heating is an issue for anything. The only time cooling sensors comes up is astro-cameras, and there it's because they are trying to get the sensor to ambient temperature, and it happens they tend to do their stuff on cold mountain tops.
While nothing about the mechanics rules out doing the bodies with a bigger OVF, that would begin to become a very big package/lump on top of the camera. Pretty sure one would find it scales up very bad, as the bigger you make the OVF, the bigger the second sensor needs to be, otherwise you don't get full coverage or you need to do some optical reduction pre-sensor. A big second sensor isn't too big of a deal for them, as an APS sensor is cheap. But even with a direct approach they would probably have some form of condenser lens to shrink it down to a smaller sensor, that just comes down to a cost trade of sensor size to cost of a glass element. Still, scaling the whole works up would get really big, really fast. And you are still working with a pentamirror which isn't going to be very big or bright no matter what.
One other issue to the Sony system is trying to get 100% coverage LV. That's not easy to do, as to do it, they would need a mirror step designed for 100% viewfinder, and then matching parts above. That's expensive to do on a cheap body. Now if they make the A700 replacement have 100% view finder which I'm certain they will do. They could re-use the mirror setup and share the cost on that.
Of course now you are getting on a slippery slope of design. If you now have gone for 100% coverage, yet scrapped any big OVF plans because it's just to big, you go with my design mentioned above, well one cheap way to share parts would be put 2 identical/complete SSS+APS sensor rigs in it. Now that's not cheap to do, and now you have 2 of something in there, sound very overkill. And the next logical question would be "what can we do with 2 identical sensors", shortly followed with "why don't we just capture with the second sensor and get rid of the primary sensor". Basically now you have a fixed mirror setup acting as a splitter to the AF and second sensor. Which could be a way to do things, as you could reduce parts, make camera thinner. But now you have just completely gone off the deep end. So you need to get constrained someplace.
If they keep the design they have for another run, yeah, the will probably make it a bit bigger on the OVF, but they just can't go far because it will get huge and overhang to front of the camera something awful. Just makes much more sense to toss the poor tunnel OVF anyways. It's not like the A200 has a good view finder and it's way bigger than the A300/350 view finder. So if you aren't going to make a good OVF, just toss them. I do think using the second sensor as a video sensor has merit, it would able to be small (if some sort of condensing lens was used), and allow for super fast AF in video mode. Then just pump stuff out to an EVF. I don't like EVF's but it's better than a really poor OVF. Sony could just put a stake in the ground and say "Penta Prism or EVFs and that's it, no PentaMirrors".
While nothing about the mechanics rules out doing the bodies with a bigger OVF, that would begin to become a very big package/lump on top of the camera. Pretty sure one would find it scales up very bad, as the bigger you make the OVF, the bigger the second sensor needs to be, otherwise you don't get full coverage or you need to do some optical reduction pre-sensor. A big second sensor isn't too big of a deal for them, as an APS sensor is cheap. But even with a direct approach they would probably have some form of condenser lens to shrink it down to a smaller sensor, that just comes down to a cost trade of sensor size to cost of a glass element. Still, scaling the whole works up would get really big, really fast. And you are still working with a pentamirror which isn't going to be very big or bright no matter what.
One other issue to the Sony system is trying to get 100% coverage LV. That's not easy to do, as to do it, they would need a mirror step designed for 100% viewfinder, and then matching parts above. That's expensive to do on a cheap body. Now if they make the A700 replacement have 100% view finder which I'm certain they will do. They could re-use the mirror setup and share the cost on that.
Of course now you are getting on a slippery slope of design. If you now have gone for 100% coverage, yet scrapped any big OVF plans because it's just to big, you go with my design mentioned above, well one cheap way to share parts would be put 2 identical/complete SSS+APS sensor rigs in it. Now that's not cheap to do, and now you have 2 of something in there, sound very overkill. And the next logical question would be "what can we do with 2 identical sensors", shortly followed with "why don't we just capture with the second sensor and get rid of the primary sensor". Basically now you have a fixed mirror setup acting as a splitter to the AF and second sensor. Which could be a way to do things, as you could reduce parts, make camera thinner. But now you have just completely gone off the deep end. So you need to get constrained someplace.
If they keep the design they have for another run, yeah, the will probably make it a bit bigger on the OVF, but they just can't go far because it will get huge and overhang to front of the camera something awful. Just makes much more sense to toss the poor tunnel OVF anyways. It's not like the A200 has a good view finder and it's way bigger than the A300/350 view finder. So if you aren't going to make a good OVF, just toss them. I do think using the second sensor as a video sensor has merit, it would able to be small (if some sort of condensing lens was used), and allow for super fast AF in video mode. Then just pump stuff out to an EVF. I don't like EVF's but it's better than a really poor OVF. Sony could just put a stake in the ground and say "Penta Prism or EVFs and that's it, no PentaMirrors".
-
bfitzgerald
- Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
- Posts: 3996
- Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm
Re: PMA 2009
PhotoTraveler, the A200 has an "acceptable" Viewfinder for a lower end model. Nothing more, nothing less. Same as the 5d, it's ok by me. Clearly if you go comparing it to "good" finders such as a film 7, it's not looking so great. Even peer into a dynax 5 film, and you see how much larger that is, than the A200 finder.
But, for the price paid it's ok, and usable. I am ok with it. No objections to sony making it bigger..def not. But this is firmly pentamirror land, and you won't ever get uber great finders on these cameras. As it happens, many other makers have worse finders (bar pentax), The D60 one is smaller, so is the canon, and the Olympus E420/520 ones are notably worse. Having looking into an A350 VF, it's noticeably smaller than the A200. As the A200 VF is as small as I can tolerate, it's a no sale for me. Ok you can add the VF magnifier, but that makes things dimmer..not a perfect solution.
Some users coming from superzooms etc, won't be fussed, but I am. That's just me though. Saying there is no difference VF wise A200-A350, is stretching things a tad.
And suggesting sony just dump the OVF lower end model, is not a logical choice. It would def cost more to put a LV EVF in there (a half decent one), than to use the pentamirror OVF. I don't really know how much cash sony make on the A200, maybe not that much. But for every 100 A200 owners, "some" will get additional bodies, some will buy lenses and or flashguns..and other stuff. It's about getting more users onboard. I called for a super budget sony some time ago, and sony did that. That was a good move IMO. Also the rather stellar battery life on the A200 will be pretty bad if you have a constant 100% LV system, a def downer for many people. Why not just add the mirror up LV mode other makers do? And improve the AF???
I have 0 interest in a fully EVF based system, there are too many disadvantages, and it's not a replacement for an OVF. Go play with a G1, and yes you will see. Hey while we are at it, how much does the G1 cost? It's a fair bit more than the A200. Your calls for an EVF are not going to work for buyers such as myself. I don't want it, I won't buy it. I would rather sony do a separate EVF model for those who want it..and leave it at that. Until you have used the G1, you won't know how almost useless it is for action shots..how it flickers in indoor lighting, how it does get grainy and slower refrest in low light, and how the AF system isn't as good as even the A200. Thanks, but no thanks...
But, for the price paid it's ok, and usable. I am ok with it. No objections to sony making it bigger..def not. But this is firmly pentamirror land, and you won't ever get uber great finders on these cameras. As it happens, many other makers have worse finders (bar pentax), The D60 one is smaller, so is the canon, and the Olympus E420/520 ones are notably worse. Having looking into an A350 VF, it's noticeably smaller than the A200. As the A200 VF is as small as I can tolerate, it's a no sale for me. Ok you can add the VF magnifier, but that makes things dimmer..not a perfect solution.
Some users coming from superzooms etc, won't be fussed, but I am. That's just me though. Saying there is no difference VF wise A200-A350, is stretching things a tad.
And suggesting sony just dump the OVF lower end model, is not a logical choice. It would def cost more to put a LV EVF in there (a half decent one), than to use the pentamirror OVF. I don't really know how much cash sony make on the A200, maybe not that much. But for every 100 A200 owners, "some" will get additional bodies, some will buy lenses and or flashguns..and other stuff. It's about getting more users onboard. I called for a super budget sony some time ago, and sony did that. That was a good move IMO. Also the rather stellar battery life on the A200 will be pretty bad if you have a constant 100% LV system, a def downer for many people. Why not just add the mirror up LV mode other makers do? And improve the AF???
I have 0 interest in a fully EVF based system, there are too many disadvantages, and it's not a replacement for an OVF. Go play with a G1, and yes you will see. Hey while we are at it, how much does the G1 cost? It's a fair bit more than the A200. Your calls for an EVF are not going to work for buyers such as myself. I don't want it, I won't buy it. I would rather sony do a separate EVF model for those who want it..and leave it at that. Until you have used the G1, you won't know how almost useless it is for action shots..how it flickers in indoor lighting, how it does get grainy and slower refrest in low light, and how the AF system isn't as good as even the A200. Thanks, but no thanks...
Re: PMA 2009
David,
You should give the local shop a plug!!
I'm eagerly awaiting the 70-400 as a solution to a long standing requirement for a high quality long tele zoom. So as you might imagine I am keen to see sample images and reviews of this lens. I currently use a Tamron 70-300, Minolta 100-300 APO and Sigma 170-500. The Sigma 120-400 is out of favour as the short end is not short enough if you know what I mean.
The A700 has indeed dropped to a very affordable cost with the current best offer around £550 which is a lot of camera for the money. I can't see it getting much lower even with a replacement just around the corner. I agree that the replacement will probably have live view and more MP etc but I'd hope not at the expense of the good viewfinder or noise. My wife would like live view but I'd like a large, bright viewfinder. I am currently debating with myself about buying one now before the replacement comes out and I end up paying extra for lots of gimickery I don't need/want (do want 5fps and good AF for aviation/wildlife) and the need to upgrade my P/Shop for easy RAW handling.
I'm not surprised to hear about "grandads" A350 as one of my friends (who is a manager at a Wilkinsons branch) usually recommends Sony as they are easy to use and give good results at a very reasonable price. So A200s and A350s are flying out of the shops. Even small Jessop stores have a good range of Sony stuff now so shelf visibility is good.
Seasons greetings to everyone,
Mike
PS I'm chuffed with my new Sony 18-250, so versatile for daily use. It goes everywhere.
You should give the local shop a plug!!
I'm eagerly awaiting the 70-400 as a solution to a long standing requirement for a high quality long tele zoom. So as you might imagine I am keen to see sample images and reviews of this lens. I currently use a Tamron 70-300, Minolta 100-300 APO and Sigma 170-500. The Sigma 120-400 is out of favour as the short end is not short enough if you know what I mean.
The A700 has indeed dropped to a very affordable cost with the current best offer around £550 which is a lot of camera for the money. I can't see it getting much lower even with a replacement just around the corner. I agree that the replacement will probably have live view and more MP etc but I'd hope not at the expense of the good viewfinder or noise. My wife would like live view but I'd like a large, bright viewfinder. I am currently debating with myself about buying one now before the replacement comes out and I end up paying extra for lots of gimickery I don't need/want (do want 5fps and good AF for aviation/wildlife) and the need to upgrade my P/Shop for easy RAW handling.
I'm not surprised to hear about "grandads" A350 as one of my friends (who is a manager at a Wilkinsons branch) usually recommends Sony as they are easy to use and give good results at a very reasonable price. So A200s and A350s are flying out of the shops. Even small Jessop stores have a good range of Sony stuff now so shelf visibility is good.
Seasons greetings to everyone,
Mike
PS I'm chuffed with my new Sony 18-250, so versatile for daily use. It goes everywhere.
All my Sony SLT gear gone. Still got my RX100 though.
-
Greg Beetham
- Tower of Babel
- Posts: 6118
- Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
- Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
- Contact:
Re: PMA 2009
Just pondering a bit on the question of the evolution of DSLR's, I wonder how many of those with LV type DSLR's use them in LV mode while NOT on a tripod?? and if so, with what lens?? I'd like to watch while someone uses an LV DSLR with a 300mm f2.8 attached, or a 70-400 G, and NO tripod...THAT would be interesting.
Instead of hacking at the function and design of a traditional DSLR, why not design a completely new battery wasting system from the ground up, and a new set of interchangable lenses to go with it (as Panasonic has done), then those who want that type of system can go buy it and leave us in peace.......then we could all get some sleep.
Actually, from an evolutionary point of view that's pretty much what takes place anyway, a new competing design makes an appearence, and sinks or swims on it's merits, so that is what Sony should do, build the completely new LV + EVIL Digital-whatever plus a range of lenses etc, and then let it compete with the traditional D-SLR, winner takes all....eventually the sales figures will decide the argument one way or another....that battle would be interesting to watch as well, I wonder which one would win?? or would they just co-exist and live happily ever after??
Greg
ps. Can't I have three images AND three external links as well?? ...sheesh, now I'm starting to feel deprived.
Instead of hacking at the function and design of a traditional DSLR, why not design a completely new battery wasting system from the ground up, and a new set of interchangable lenses to go with it (as Panasonic has done), then those who want that type of system can go buy it and leave us in peace.......then we could all get some sleep.
Actually, from an evolutionary point of view that's pretty much what takes place anyway, a new competing design makes an appearence, and sinks or swims on it's merits, so that is what Sony should do, build the completely new LV + EVIL Digital-whatever plus a range of lenses etc, and then let it compete with the traditional D-SLR, winner takes all....eventually the sales figures will decide the argument one way or another....that battle would be interesting to watch as well, I wonder which one would win?? or would they just co-exist and live happily ever after??
Greg
ps. Can't I have three images AND three external links as well?? ...sheesh, now I'm starting to feel deprived.
-
David Kilpatrick
- Site Admin
- Posts: 5985
- Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 1:14 pm
- Location: Kelso, Scotland
- Contact:
Re: PMA 2009
I have the D3X here with some moderately heavy lenses, the best one to try for hand-held live view is the 14-24mm because it can be held over walls, etc. Short answer is, it's painfully un-ergonomic and clunky. I liked the Panasonic G1 and a tiny lightweight camera with an articulated rear screen and no mirror-flap focusing mode makes live view practical. It is also completely practical with the A350/300, even with long lenses - you hold the lens and camera in two hands and the result can be very stable. But the Nikon and Canon LV is only a clear winner in tripod mode with MF or AF off sensor. The kludged hand-held modes are barely usable when compared to a decent p&s. This is also the big, big problem with the Canon/Nikon HD video filming. You just want, almost in desperation, to be able to hold that camera to your eye. Companies are now making rifle stocks with magnifying eyepiece sights to view the rear screen and turn it into a viewfinder. Waving a full size DSLR around in front of your face trying to compose professional video is not going to work, it's fine on a tripod (yet again) but not all filming is tripod-mounted.
David
David
-
bfitzgerald
- Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
- Posts: 3996
- Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm
Re: PMA 2009
Greg, the battle for low end DSLR sales is based on price/brand pull mostly.
Not if the camera is EVF of OVF based. I don't detect a huge surge in demand for EVF based cameras, as said previously the EVF is a design element to reduce size. In the hand the G1 is simply too small for me to take it too seriously, no doubt there is a market for small cameras like this, but until panasonic can price it at more appealing levels, it's not likely to be a massive sales hit.
A collection of Olympus and Panasonic fans on the dp forums, does not reflect overall market demand.
Not if the camera is EVF of OVF based. I don't detect a huge surge in demand for EVF based cameras, as said previously the EVF is a design element to reduce size. In the hand the G1 is simply too small for me to take it too seriously, no doubt there is a market for small cameras like this, but until panasonic can price it at more appealing levels, it's not likely to be a massive sales hit.
A collection of Olympus and Panasonic fans on the dp forums, does not reflect overall market demand.
Re: PMA 2009
That's exactly what was clear to me when the Canon 5DII and Nikon D90 were announced with video mode. I posted about it a few times, here is one:David Kilpatrick wrote:This is also the big, big problem with the Canon/Nikon HD video filming. You just want, almost in desperation, to be able to hold that camera to your eye. Companies are now making rifle stocks with magnifying eyepiece sights to view the rear screen and turn it into a viewfinder. Waving a full size DSLR around in front of your face trying to compose professional video is not going to work, it's fine on a tripod (yet again) but not all filming is tripod-mounted.
http://www.photoclubalpha.com/forum/vie ... t=15#p5330
Bakubo http://www.bakubo.com
-
Greg Beetham
- Tower of Babel
- Posts: 6118
- Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
- Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
- Contact:
Re: PMA 2009
Another thing just occurred to me, what about here, where the sunlight in summer varies between EV *BRIGHT* and *REALLY BRIGHT*, what is one going to see on the rear screen when outside...will the screen still work? will you be able to see what's on it good enough too compose the shot/video etc......?
Greg
ps. Ha! Henry I was typing the above when you posted, I just went and read yours.
Greg
ps. Ha! Henry I was typing the above when you posted, I just went and read yours.
Re: PMA 2009
Yes, exactly. See my link above about that issue too.Greg Beetham wrote:Another thing just occurred to me, what about here, where the sunlight in summer varies between EV *BRIGHT* and *REALLY BRIGHT*, what is one going to see on the rear screen when outside...will the screen still work? will you be able to see what's on it good enough too compose the shot/video etc......?
Bakubo http://www.bakubo.com
-
Greg Beetham
- Tower of Babel
- Posts: 6118
- Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
- Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
- Contact:
Re: PMA 2009
That's what I'm sort of getting at Barry, what category do you put an interchangable lens battery consuming EVIL/LV/VIDEO-thingy into? it's not going to be an el-cheapo entry level camera, an entirely new system is not going to be cheap, that's for sure. Anyway as long as they don't bug me with it I'll be just fine.
Greg
Greg
-
bfitzgerald
- Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
- Posts: 3996
- Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm
Re: PMA 2009
Some have suggested this new type of non DSLR video/live view/evil thing, as you say..
I have no idea how this will pan out, none.
My primary interest remains still photography, and that takes priority over everything else. I don't mind if they slap video in all DSLR's, or live view, you can use it, or you can ignore it. I suspect most of us would use it..at least sometimes. But I won't be going out of my way to hunt these new hybrid machines down, when they turn up. My only objection to lv and video would be if the handling of the camera is compromised for stills.
I still think that makers will not be willing to kill their camcorders off, and that still cameras will always be more suited to that, with the video whacked on, and video cameras will be the ist choice of folks interested in that, with the stills element there..but not as good as a dedicated camera.
I could be horribly wrong, but that is what I am thinking.
If I were honestly that much into video, I would have gone out and bought something meaty enough to satisfy my needs in that area.
The EVF area is something very different in itself...
I have no idea how this will pan out, none.
My primary interest remains still photography, and that takes priority over everything else. I don't mind if they slap video in all DSLR's, or live view, you can use it, or you can ignore it. I suspect most of us would use it..at least sometimes. But I won't be going out of my way to hunt these new hybrid machines down, when they turn up. My only objection to lv and video would be if the handling of the camera is compromised for stills.
I still think that makers will not be willing to kill their camcorders off, and that still cameras will always be more suited to that, with the video whacked on, and video cameras will be the ist choice of folks interested in that, with the stills element there..but not as good as a dedicated camera.
I could be horribly wrong, but that is what I am thinking.
If I were honestly that much into video, I would have gone out and bought something meaty enough to satisfy my needs in that area.
The EVF area is something very different in itself...
-
Greg Beetham
- Tower of Babel
- Posts: 6118
- Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
- Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
- Contact:
Re: PMA 2009
What I'm hoping is that they (Sony, Canon and Nikon) at least leave one decent A500-A700ish class, model in traditional form without any LV/VID/EVF stuff so that people that don't want it or need it don't have too get it/pay for it if they don't want it, that includes me for a start, and I assume still shooters like yourselves as well. After all what was the original purpose of an SLR? to shoot STILLS wasn't it....not Video, last time I looked Sony was making some of the best video cameras on the market, they are small, light and take high quality video, (designed expressly for the purpose) so what's wrong with carrying one of those around as well, for those who like video?
Greg
Greg
-
alphaomega
- Viceroy
- Posts: 1196
- Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:20 pm
Re: PMA 2009
Interesting discussion about what individual photographers want in their ideal DSLR. It is horses for courses as usual. We are all different and do different types of picture taking. I have both the A700 and A350. I used the R1 before. That camera did not endear me to EVF and LV with too small a screen.
I now find that I use the A700 if I need speed and the more sophisticated settings available on this excellent DSLR as well as lower noise at higher ISO settings (with v.4). I use the A350 when I know I may get involved in shooting positions where the LV comes in handy such as stretching up the hands to view over obstacles or holding down to avoid lying on the ground etc. The A350 is immensely versatile but noisy at higher ISOs and have less of a feature set and no DOF and a lousy OVF. In fact when I travel I bring both if I can. I would rather have one DSLR only plus my P&S LX2 & 3.
So I am looking for an upgraded A700 with the much rumoured 16Mp sensor (as good ISO performance pixel for pixel as A700 v.4) and a 3" LV with enlargement for focusing and the A350 type articulation. No reduction in the A700 OVF with LV and as a minimum the A700 feature set including DOF, 5 frames/second etc. No video - thanks but no thanks. Adds to price for no purpose. The 16 Mp sensor will allow for more extensive cropping than the current 12Mp. That will suit me fine when shooting architecture and straightening in PS distortion/lens correction filter.
I will buy such a camera without hesitation if the price is reasonable. That is my ideal camera for my purposes only. Other participants have other uses and do not want my specification.
I now find that I use the A700 if I need speed and the more sophisticated settings available on this excellent DSLR as well as lower noise at higher ISO settings (with v.4). I use the A350 when I know I may get involved in shooting positions where the LV comes in handy such as stretching up the hands to view over obstacles or holding down to avoid lying on the ground etc. The A350 is immensely versatile but noisy at higher ISOs and have less of a feature set and no DOF and a lousy OVF. In fact when I travel I bring both if I can. I would rather have one DSLR only plus my P&S LX2 & 3.
So I am looking for an upgraded A700 with the much rumoured 16Mp sensor (as good ISO performance pixel for pixel as A700 v.4) and a 3" LV with enlargement for focusing and the A350 type articulation. No reduction in the A700 OVF with LV and as a minimum the A700 feature set including DOF, 5 frames/second etc. No video - thanks but no thanks. Adds to price for no purpose. The 16 Mp sensor will allow for more extensive cropping than the current 12Mp. That will suit me fine when shooting architecture and straightening in PS distortion/lens correction filter.
I will buy such a camera without hesitation if the price is reasonable. That is my ideal camera for my purposes only. Other participants have other uses and do not want my specification.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests