The concept of Translucent...and resistance to it.

[stevecim]

thanks again David, this is the sort of info you don't at most review sites
Hopefully these are the sort problems that Sony is working on. I think in a few years you may see the EVF has the main selling point between brands.
If Sony can keep ahead of the pack with EVF tech. we may have Alpha bodies around for a bit longer

[dewarp]

Yes - Similar to my first impressions.

At long last I decided to upgrade from my old KM D7D’s. My original one is virtually dead, and the one I bought from DK is also showing signs of succumbing to the FFB disease. I went into one of the few stores that had stock to handle the A77. With the latest in big bore fast focusing Sony lenses mounted, the camera fealt fantastic. A done deal! However, at home with my old steam-driven Minolta pin-drive lenses in a dingy study, things weren’t that great. In low light the viewfinder is full of quivering noise, and the speed of focus is not much different from the old KM D7D.

And so, into the field to grab some landscapes. A real disappointment followed:

Not only is the viewfinder shadow detail lost, the highlight detail is also missing. Basically one just cannot see the nuances in the luminance, meaning that you have to repeatedly lift your head and look at the scene, try to remember where to good bits of light are, and go back to composing. (Of course the camera records the details well enough once you get to convert the raw files.)

Previously after I had taken a shot I would either look at the histogram/flashing spots, or continue shooting. With the A77 I must choose one or the other in advance. There is no possibility to automatically display the last shot results on the LCD whilst still showing the live scene in the viewfinder. OK, one now gets the advantage of a live histogram, but that is a bit pathetic in size. So I find that I turn the LCD screen to face the camera and only open it out when I have some particular need to get into a menu or shoot using the screen for some reason. Although it is possible to look at the last shot manually each time, it’s a schlep to find the right buttons to press in the heat of the moment. However, the focus check is useful so I guess that I will just have to learn to use those buttons. At least I don’t have to work through menus!

By focus check, I mean the zoom button function, not the focus peaking facility. I thought that I would like the focus peaking trick, but in practice I found the “marching ants” distracting and not really helpful, and quickly switched them off. However, one thing that I now use more (as in the old film days!) is the aperture stop-down-preview button. On previous digital cameras this has been virtually useless for eyeballing DOF because the viewfinder gets too dark. On the A77 it starts to become useful again.

Oh how I miss the KM D7D’s exposure override dial! I’ve set up the A77 with the front “thumbwheel” to override exposure, but of course it doesn’t have the zero locking mechanism of the 7D.

I still use manual (powered) focus, just as I did with the 7D. With my old pin-drive lenses this is still the best way to go on landscapes. The only difference is that previously I used centre focus before composing the shot whereas I now find that I can focus during the composition phase, which is a slight advantage.

I love the “spirit level” in the viewfinder. This saves having to repeatedly look at the real spirit level on my tripod. However, it’s not perfect – many shots still need some rotation during raw conversion.

I have always said that the top LCD info panel is unnecessary if one has sufficient info in the viewfinder. The info in the A77’s viewfinder is great and I have not used the top LCD panel once. A complete waste of space in my opinion.

After a couple of days of shooting I decided that I had wasted my money and was sorely tempted to go back to my 7D. However, I will persevere. There are pro’ and con’s to the A77. I’m just not sure that, for my purposes, the pro’s come out on top.

regards - Peter

[mikeriach]

Wow, there is a lot of interesting stuff coming out now a few guys have had time to play with the A77.

I have one question, it was muted that the A77 was good for sport/action photography. So seeing the comment re the slight lag in the viewfinder, does that cause any issues when tracking action such as moving footballers, birds etc.

I would be using it to capture images of aircraft such as below. Just wondering what effect the admitedly short lag would have on the moving target.


Cheers,
Mike

[Magnar Fjortoft]

SLT - bfitzgerald wrote:

I wonder if the mirror is a sticking point to many people, it's not right to some, it might degrade IQ..and you lose some light. I'm not sure how this impacts potential sales but I suspect it will be a factor Sony might not have thought this one through.

You trade some light loss to a more responsive camera with continious autofocus (af not eclised by a flipping mirror), higher frame rate, no mirror vibration, etc. For many photographers, including me, the 0.5 stop light loss is a non-issue. With electronic first curtain the A77 captures finer detail at low/medium ISO settings and medium exposure than the A900, due to shutter vibration/lack of such vibration. Sony will lose some users, but gain a new group of users. Business as usual.

EVF: David K wrote:

I thought Barry photographed people and weddings a certain amount, and also landscapes where the lighting (being Ireland) is key. I would not advise the A77 for either, as the finder does not relay enough detail to judge exact expressions in groups, or to preview the real result of light and shade.

This depends a lot of your style of shooting, I think. When photographing people I am mostly using the viewfinder for quick framing, not for monitoring facial expressions, checking tonal range, etc. I prefer direct eye contact. Also, the lack of tonal range doesn't mean anything when I have learned the EVF and the quality of the files from my camera to know. For critical studio work I am metering each flash individually, so i don't have to rely on my eyes or an optical viewfinder. Also, the optical viewfinder doesn't show the exposure. Whar you see is just a much wider tonal range than the camera is able to register. This is my shooting style.

[bfitzgerald]

There is an element of pre visualisation with photography I have to say using an optical viewfinder has never been a barrier to most.
Being able to see the subject clearly is also pretty essential for many.
Personally I'm disappointed that some are not satisfied with being able to see the image straight way afterwards and now some insist we have to see the image before it's taken.

Part of photography is learning and making mistakes, learning the metering all cameras can vary here. Some call it old fashioned but some call it part of the fun

[Dusty]

Wow, there is a lot of interesting stuff coming out now a few guys have had time to play with the A77.

I have one question, it was muted that the A77 was good for sport/action photography. So seeing the comment re the slight lag in the viewfinder, does that cause any issues when tracking action such as moving footballers, birds etc.

I would be using it to capture images of aircraft such as below. Just wondering what effect the admitedly short lag would have on the moving target.

Cheers,
Mike

Not much, here's the same shot taken on an A77.

DSC00044_A77w.jpg

(84.02 KiB) Downloaded 3073 times

(Hope you don't mind!)
Dusty

[mikeriach]

Ha-ha very funny.
I'll get you back one day!

Believe me I can do that myself without any help.
I can chop off pitot tubes, tails, peoples heads with great ease I just don't show them.

Cheers,
Mike

[lonewolf16x9]

Hi Barry and all, I have a foot in both camps, as a returning flock member with my new a77, of course I'm loving it!
That said I am still resistant in some ways to the SLT, Having been spoiled in the past by the viewfinder on my a900
The Bad: Blocking highlights and Shadows, difficulty in seeing framed shot in side lighting, somtimes weird white balance choices? Lack of detail not so much.
The good: The loupe focusing, live histogram in viewfinder, the Marching Ants in Manual focus and the sheer weight of information available to the user without taking the eye from the Viewfinder, err display err SLT
Being able to reivew your shots whilst other users are trying to shade their rear screens He He
Improvements: Few more dots and not falling apart in harsh lighting conditions, oh and maybe they could make the Histogram in the Viewfinder flash or change colour when over or underexposing highlights and Shadows?
For me the SLT is no worse than the viewfinder on my D7000 but not a patch on that of the a900 which is to judge the SLT Harshly really cause nothings going to be that good now is it?
I view (Pun intended) the SLT interface as just that an interface, a means of getting information about the shot I've framed and I get more of it from the SLT than from plain old glass, it's not perfect and will need a couple more iterations to get to where "Full frame" (Hateful term) viewfinders are now but perhaps we better get used to the idea?
Or not as the case may be???
Hoping they don't bring out the improvements too quickly though...

[aramkostanyan]

I suppose, the next step of DSLR or DSLT will be when they can implement focusing into the main sensor. So in that case they'll abandon the mirror at all. So SLT is just the middle step to develop and prepare for that.
What's your idea about it?

[lonewolf16x9]

I suppose, the next step of DSLR or DSLT will be when they can implement focusing into the main sensor. So in that case they'll abandon the mirror at all. So SLT is just the middle step to develop and prepare for that.
What's your idea about it?

You mean similar to what Nikon have done with the V/J1?
Or am I way off there?

[aramkostanyan]

Something like that. But I do not know about the speed of the AF in that system.
Really we need the mirror in SLT only for focusing.
So if the problem of fast focusing would be solved without separate sensor, there would be no need in the mirror.

[Dr. Harout]

Something like that. But I do not know about the speed of the AF in that system.
Really we need the mirror in SLT only for focusing.
So if the problem of fast focusing would be solved without separate sensor, there would be no need in the mirror.

My thoughts exactly.

[stevecim]

Hi David.

Are you shooting raw with the A77?, the following was mentioned over at DPR,
" using the creative setting "portrait" and dialing in -3 contrast, and this opens up shadows quite a bit in the EVF. Another nice benefit of using low contrast settings is that it'll give you a more accurate representation of the actual raw file histogram." The theory is (I think ) that EVF screen output and histograms are based on sensor output + creative settings, but when you shoot RAW only, the creative settings has no effect on the final image but are still displayed in EVF + Histograms..

Cheers, Steve

[dewarp]

I got to thinking that my last (overly long) missive was perhaps posted in the wrong thread. For the record, I don’t think that pellicle mirrors will last too long – they will be replaced by no mirrors and no mechanical shutters – everything electronic.

My last message was obviously a bit premature. Another week and another couple of hundred images with the A77 and I’ve decided that the pro’s easily win out over the con’s. I am fast getting to love this camera. The noise might be a problem to some, but since I do a lot of PP in any case I can live with this, and actually take advantage of it in some situations. The detail from the raw files is incredible.

Apologies if my last message discouraged some folks!

regards - Peter