An odd A700 problem (?)

[Greg Beetham]

Hi Walt, and welcome, yes I read through a couple of those threads on dpr with some strange logic from some, to the effect that, 'I don't need or want this or that feature in an SLR type camera so nobody else needs it either'. It seems that any sacrifice is ok in a DSLR as long as it has LV and Video...according to some over there...very strange indeed.
Greg

ps. Perhaps we could start a thread on that topic and list all the features that have been compromised/sacrificed by Sony so far on the Altar of EVIL...

[WaltKnapp]

But Walt you always get the same typical responses to your well known line of thought. They won't change their stance. So sometimes, I wonder if it is of any use getting involved with that "faction" or even keeping track of that faction.

Arun Gaur
http://tripolia-indianlandscapeimages.com

One of my other purposes in dPreview is to keep Sony reminded, since some of the Sony people claim Sony keeps track of the forum.

I don't think we want the only message to sony in anything they might be reading from customers to be that we like turning DSLRs into P&S or Camcorders.

Walt

[WaltKnapp]

Hi Walt, and welcome, yes I read through a couple of those threads on dpr with some strange logic from some, to the effect that, 'I don't need or want this or that feature in an SLR type camera so nobody else needs it either'. It seems that any sacrifice is ok in a DSLR as long as it has LV and Video...according to some over there...very strange indeed.
Greg

ps. Perhaps we could start a thread on that topic and list all the features that have been compromised/sacrificed by Sony so far on the Altar of EVIL...

I wish that logic worked, as in I don't need or want video in an DSLR type camera so nobody else needs it either

Note I'm not again video. I've done lots of movie and video in my life, even have it on my graduate school transcript that I know something about it. I just think it has a place, and that place is not DSLRs.

I think such a list as you suggest would be too depressing.

I told my wife when Sony first took over that I was hoping that Sony would manage a couple good DSLRs before they started simplifying and P&Sing them to death and hanging trinkets on them. We may have had our quota, though I hope not.

Walt

[WaltKnapp]

SSS only has movement side to side, from memory, your sensor appears too be displaced downwards, (the Pentax version has another movement incorporated as well), so something has come adrift in the SSS/sensor department, it'll have to go in for repairs I'm afraid.
Greg

On my a700 that the SSS went it both focused way closer than seen in the viewfinder or by AF, and it was offset top to bottom.

For SSS to work it's on a fairly delicate suspension so if something breaks in that all kinds of off alignment can occur.

I could see the offset that caused the focus to go off by looking at the sensor, which had clearly moved backwards in the camera. But my focus was such that something 4' away focused when the viewfinder showed something 6' away in focus. The sideways off was very tiny but visable looking at the sensor. I should have taken a photo of how it all looked.

The SSS unit which is called the Tebure unit in the repair manual is supplied complete as a repair part, so the repair manual does not call out the individual parts of that.

Yep, I did try turning on and off, different lenses and all the rest. Only replacing the unit worked to fix it.

Does kind of make one worry, my camera was only a year old and lightly used. It was my spare. If SSS is going to wear out after only a few years it's a problem.

Walt

[Javelin]

Sony wasn't the first to do either of those. in fact Sony's first cameras after KM were pretty conservative and pretty much what everyone else had been putting out. Canon and Nikon went off the script first adding junk in then the 4/3's came out and got everyones atrention. I think the DSLR market was pretty slow moving with only incremental improvements.. IE a parade of the same cameras over and over with more pixels and not much else new until Sony showed up and now all the makers are scrambling for market share by parading out these barely functioning features, Canon seems to be shipping a lot of mistakes recently too. the problem is new money in this segment isn't comming from the old users so expect everything to change.

[Greg Beetham]

When you look at the argument objectively, about who is more right with regards to whether we should have a feature compromised DSLR to satisfy those who want LV and Video inserted into it, you only have to look at the history of the SLR and what it's purpose in life was/is.
The short answer is a DSLR is first and foremost a STILL camera, always was, it's not a video camera, it was never invisioned in design conception that it would ever become one, so WE the STILL shooters have the legitimate right to say to those who want to have their LV and Video built into a DSLR...fine you can have it, but we demand that there will be NO compromises to all the features and functions we expect to be there for taking STILL images.
Greg

[WaltKnapp]

When you look at the argument objectively, about who is more right with regards to whether we should have a feature compromised DSLR to satisfy those who want LV and Video inserted into it, you only have to look at the history of the SLR and what it's purpose in life was/is.
The short answer is a DSLR is first and foremost a STILL camera, always was, it's not a video camera, it was never invisioned in design conception that it would ever become one, so WE the STILL shooters have the legitimate right to say to those who want to have their LV and Video built into a DSLR...fine you can have it, but we demand that there will be NO compromises to all the features and functions we expect to be there for taking STILL images.
Greg

This is my approach too. Video and still require different in the very core of the camera, ultimately any approach to combined sensors and such will lead to compromise. Even camera bodies need to be different because the techniques of taking stills are so different from the techniques of taking video.

We should also demand that by far the majority of R&D money for DSLRs go to still photography. There is more to do, we have barely scratched the surface as to what can be done in camera with digital. Look, for instance at DRO+ in the a700. That's a excellent and useful improvement. But I'm sure a more advanced version is possible. Or look at intelligent preview from the a900, that can certainly be improved, at least so your adjustments don't have to be re-shot. The idea there is nothing more that can be done in DSLRs for still photography.

Walt

[Winedarksea]

I don't think anyone has the idea that there is nothing more that can be done to improve taking still pictures, and I certainly don't think that Sony has that idea.

No more than anyone else do I want my ability to take still pictures compromised by the addition of video. (LV is just another way of taking still pictures, and, once the issues have been worked out, will improve our ability to take still pictures dramatically--already has, to a high degree.) But, in the first place, video or no video is a moot point--video will be in pretty much all dslrs, of all brands, in the future--unless Sony keeps a few cameras free of video, in the way it has kept a few cameras free of LV.

The issue is how to implement good video in a dslr without compromising still-picture quality. Sony has taken big risks in the marketplace by delaying the implementation of video in its dslrs until it can find a solution to this issue. Maybe Sony won't be able to find a way that will satisfy those of us who demand no compromise. But our demands will not prevail. The market will decide, and will sweep us all on to the next advance / compromise / issue. And, right now, it looks to me like the market is saying that video in dslrs is necessary, if you want to sell cameras. So let's try to work with Sony to find the best solutions to the issues involved.

Dulaney

[Greg Beetham]

Correct me if I'm wrong but LV caused the extinction of the DOF preview button from what I can see, it also caused the OVF serious performance issues, LV is of not much use in daylight, the light shining on the screen renders it difficult to see, and what is the point of LV if using a large lens, how do you hold a DSLR out in front of you when the camera has a large heavy lens fitted?
If LV worked to show the DOF at say f8, f11, f16 I'd say it was an advance, but again as far as I know it can't even do that, and probably never will. Wouldn't Sony be better employed finding a way to make AF work in stopped down mode, THAT would be an advance, currently AF stops working as soon as you stop down at, or past f8. (if you could that is, on a camera not equipped with a DOF preview button).
Greg

[stevecim]

Correct me if I'm wrong but LV caused the extinction of the DOF preview button from what I can see, it also caused the OVF serious performance issues, LV is of not much use in daylight, the light shining on the screen renders it difficult to see, and what is the point of LV if using a large lens, how do you hold a DSLR out in front of you when the camera has a large heavy lens fitted?
If LV worked to show the DOF at say f8, f11, f16 I'd say it was an advance, but again as far as I know it can't even do that, and probably never will. Wouldn't Sony be better employed finding a way to make AF work in stopped down mode, THAT would be an advance, currently AF stops working as soon as you stop down at, or past f8. (if you could that is, on a camera not equipped with a DOF preview button).
Greg

With the A550, I find LV quite usable in any thing but direct bright sun light. When I had my Sigma 170-500, I found it easier to hold it steady for longer periods using LV instead of OVF, Even more so if you could hold it at waist level using the LCD at 90 degrees, but Sony QLV could be better, 100% view would be handy, so would zoom mode and better OVF

[WaltKnapp]

The issue is how to implement good video in a dslr without compromising still-picture quality. Sony has taken big risks in the marketplace by delaying the implementation of video in its dslrs until it can find a solution to this issue. Maybe Sony won't be able to find a way that will satisfy those of us who demand no compromise. But our demands will not prevail. The market will decide, and will sweep us all on to the next advance / compromise / issue. And, right now, it looks to me like the market is saying that video in dslrs is necessary, if you want to sell cameras. So let's try to work with Sony to find the best solutions to the issues involved.

Dulaney

Come back and see how it goes in the many years down the road. Once every DSLR has video then video imparts no competitive advantage. Everyone has that checkmark in the reviews. Your feature has to be different to be competitive. And video won't be different. It will be another lesson in compromise.

If the majority don't want it and it's forced on them it's hardly going to be a stable advantage. I'd not be surprised in the next 10 years or so to see the competitive advantage go to the first company that deliberately and purposely removes video from DSLRs and promotes the camera's advantages and lack of compromise for still photography. That put real effort into the still photography designs. Sony had a chance to do this at the point they brought out the a700 and it appears to have lost it for now. All those people resentful for having video forced on them against their wishes are certainly going to support the company that builds quality cameras for the rest of us ie still photographers.

I've seen movies and video come and go several times in popularity in my lifetime. Still photography has always stayed. I see no reason why this round won't go the same way.

Walt

[David Kilpatrick]

So far, the inclusion of video in DSLRs has always resulted in a quantum leap in still performance. The high readout speeds from the sensor, larger processing pipeline and very fast card interfaces make a good start; the added heat resistance, lower noise design, faster still frame rates...

You hardly need to go on. Not one video DSLR yet made has sacrificed any aspect of its still performance; nearly all have accompanied the video with a major upgrade to the quality, and sequence speed, of stills.

So exactly why anyone thinks that adding video is a compromise beats me, Sure, the video is compromised; it's a rather special type of video and limited in everyday practicality. But it is always the video function which is compromised by being in a still camera, never the still camera which has its main functions somehow reduced or degraded by the added video.

Since there has also been no clear rise in prices, why complain? If you don't want or need the video function it can be completely ignored. In fact, on many Canon models you can't even use it at all (or live view) unless you do a special menu set up process first.

David

[KevinBarrett]

So far, the inclusion of video in DSLRs has always resulted in a quantum leap in still performance. The high readout speeds from the sensor, larger processing pipeline and very fast card interfaces make a good start; the added heat resistance, lower noise design, faster still frame rates...

You hardly need to go on. Not one video DSLR yet made has sacrificed any aspect of its still performance; nearly all have accompanied the video with a major upgrade to the quality, and sequence speed, of stills.

So exactly why anyone thinks that adding video is a compromise beats me, Sure, the video is compromised; it's a rather special type of video and limited in everyday practicality. But it is always the video function which is compromised by being in a still camera, never the still camera which has its main functions somehow reduced or degraded by the added video.

Since there has also been no clear rise in prices, why complain? If you don't want or need the video function it can be completely ignored. In fact, on many Canon models you can't even use it at all (or live view) unless you do a special menu set up process first.

David

THANK YOU

[bfitzgerald]

I think DK is right on this one. I'm not particularly interested in video, I'd play about..but really it's not a must have for me. Saying that, I've no objections to it being there.

One cautious point was that camera design might be influenced by video, that has not happened to far, and I would hope it does not. They must always be primarily geared to stills shooting. Being Sony specific though..it cuts both ways, if indeed Sony do have the best video on DSLR's when it turns up, that's not going to be a substitute for having a decent stills body and feature set. This is my biggest concern with Sony, they need to improve their stills bodies, not just bash on a great video mode.

[Greg Beetham]

Well too me, LV is an essential part of the process of adding video, you have to get the LV working first before you think of video. Already the A380 and the A550 don't have very good OVF's, MLU doesn't work in the A550, no DOF button because it's incompatible with LV and video, (and maybe spot AEL & DMF as well), that doesn't look like a no impact situation from adding LV, and potentially video at some point.
And what's the use of having video in the next model if AF doesn't work while you're using it? if you are going to extract quality stills out of the video stream taken at large sensor shallow DOF, at least you'd want the subject of interest to be in focus, where do you check for focus confirmation? the OVF/EVF with the mirror up? or will the rear screen have manual focus confirmation while using main sensor LV/video? or will the next model have no mirror? if there is no mirror then there will be no AUTO exposure and WB control, so video will be limited to short bursts with controlled lighting.
Yup, no impact forseeable there either.
Greg