Sony SLT - EVF , what's the point?.

[jonoslack]

Marc,
Are you really saying that if you put your best Sony lenses on either the A55 or NEX that the IQ negatively stands out from you A900?

Wow Terry - yes it does stand out negatively - it's in a different league. It's just startlingly good in lots of ways - but it's not as good as the A900 - unless you want to shoot at 1600 ISO, and even then I'm not very convinced.

I don't like the RAW files much in Lightroom (perhaps this is what Marc doesn't like?) - mostly I've been using fine JPGS in Aperture - which are surprisingly good - I'll be interested to see how the raw conversion is when Apple finally get their *** into gear.

Maybe I should clarify a little - I've been arguing against the 'what's the point' - I think there are lots of points, doesn't mean I think it's a substitute for an A900 though - I'm assuming (hoping) that if Sony can make something as good as this for £600 then they can make something fantastic for 3 times that price - we shall have to wait and see.

But Marc really does hit the nail on the head - it's fun, and it works, and the IQ is good too.

 

[jonoslack]

When the A55 (shod with say a 170gms 35mm f/1.8 or a 230gms Minolta 24mm f/2.8) is handed over to my wife, she loves it and knows exactly how to make it sing ! Hand it to a waiter at a restaurant and even the dimmest of them can use it intuitively, by composing on the "live-view" screen.

. . . or even a little plastic Zeiss 16-80 - I quite agree - it's easy and satisfying, and the results are good.

 

[jonoslack]

Your Leica M9 has really spoilt you Jono. :ROTFL:

It certainly has . . and I always go back to it with satisfaction. . . . actually, I always go back to the A900 with satisfaction as well. I think the A900 might be the longest I've ever been happy with a digital camera.

And here's me thinking the a900 was rather compact as far as FF dSLR's go. That is of course until you put a Zeiss lens on it and it becomes a monster. .

Oh - I can remember thinking the same when I sold the D3!

I've been playing around today with the a55 and I must correct myself with regards to my comments regarding shutter delay. You are correct it is almost instantaneous. :talk028:. I guess I was confused somewhat with the dark time in the EVF at exposure.

Yes - well, I'm really glad, you had me doing loads of tests dropping things and taking pictures of them :wtf::ROTFL:
But I agree about the dark time - too long (you'd have thought it'd be easily fixable in firmware?).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not toting it as the answer to life the universe and everything, it's just really nice to have something which is relatively small, where you ain't looking down a long dark tunnel, which takes pictures when you press the button and has decent image quality.

Not many of those about (I know, I've tried 'em all :deadhorse

 

[fotografz]

Marc,
Are you really saying that if you put your best Sony lenses on either the A55 or NEX that the IQ negatively stands out from you A900?

Yes.

But let's be fair and realistic in our expectations. It's a little crop frame camera for fun.

I have no intention of putting the better A lenses on this camera ... they are monsters. The Sony 50/1.4 and maybe a little zoom. The 24/2 isn't to awfully big for it either, so that may work.

I think the NEX will be an interesting experiment with little Leica M lenses. Remains to be seen for me as I haven't secured an adapter yet.

Nothing wrong with either if you keep the expectations realistic.

An A900 it isn't.

-Marc

 

[dhsimmonds]

I believe an A7x will definitely have a VF that will meet the needs of its market, based on the hints from the Sony beta tester....I expect some kind of a hybrid EVF/OVF that combines the best elements of both an EVF and OVF, but don't know how they will implement it, yet.

Maybe a '50' version for the cheaper SLT-EVF (a la A850 version of the A900?)
and the OVF for the full price jobbie? Both with the same sensors and engines.

 

[tom in mpls]

Don't forget the Sony 35 1.8.

 

[fotografz]

Marc,
Are you really saying that if you put your best Sony lenses on either the A55 or NEX that the IQ negatively stands out from you A900?

Actually, let me expand on this notion beyond just fun and giggles.

The A55 and NEX interested me from a street shooting perspective, some personal shooting and for some creative wedding work, especially with M lenses mounted on the NEX and set to hyper-focal distance focusing.

I've also been experimenting with the higher ISOs ... not for color with all of it's issues, but for B&W conversions. ISO 3200, 6400, and even ISO 12800 ... which using some of the simple B&W conversion effects in LR3 plus tweaking, starts looking a lot like high speed B&W film ... only with even faster ISOs.

This isn't necessarily for extremely low light where the shadows block up horribly with any camera, but for medium to low level light when I want that high speed film look. Personally, so far I like this sensor and noise pattern for this type of arty look as much or more than I did my D700.

It has it's intriguing creative possibilities.

-Marc

 

[douglasf13]

I hear you, Marc. If you can stomach the price of the Sony 16mm OVF, you can try what I did and attach a Leitz OVF. 35mm lens, f5.6, 3 meters and I'm ready to go, Having a 1:1 viewfinder is a nice compliment to the swivel LCD:

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showpost.php?p=255035&postcount=11

 

[curious80]

There is no reason to believe that the EVF on an A9xx will be the same as the one on A55/A33. Lets say hypothetically that the A9xx EVF is a scaled up version of the current EVFs and is 1.0x then would it still be inferior to the A900 OVF? I would say it will be better in many ways and worse in some ways but it is not clear if it will be worse overall, it might actually be better overall

I am using the G1 EVF these days and have also compared the A33, a550 and Canon 7D VF's side by side. I will definitely take the A33 over the A550. I will prefer the 7D VF over A33 but not by a huge margin. The only major issue with A33/G1 EVF's is dynamic range and sometime white balance, though in 90% of the cases these don't become a problem for me. If the EVF's in higher end bodies improve upon this aspect a bit and are also larger, then they might actually be superior to OVFs in many ways.

But I remember from a recent Sony executive interview that Sony has still not decided whether to put an EVF on the future FF camera or not. They think they have an EVF which is superior to the OVFs (not the A33 EVF), but have not decided whether to put that or the OVF in the FF camera.

 

[Andrea Buso]

We should not forget that the labor cost for assembling a900 OVF, excluding parts, cost about 300/400$ more than the one in the a850.
this cost difference on the assembly of 2 OVF that are nearly identical, is worth 40% of the cost of an a55 body.

I would not be surprised when the a7xx or a900 replacement, with an eventual EVF will come around, they will have an EVF of a different grade compared to the one on the a55.

 

[dhsimmonds]

I am sure that there are more than just a few of us that would be willing to pay a reasonable premium for an excellent "A900" type OVF for the updated replacements for the A700/A900.

 

[fotografz]

I'm confused by the term OVF ... it seems to be used 2 different ways in this thread.

Questions to those who seem to know a lot more than I do about all of this: (partially because I haven't read everything available yet, and haven't experimented with these cameras enough yet).

Do you think the black-out something that can be over-come in future? Also, is it necessary to have the review appear in the VF after the shot? Both these add up to way to much time before you can take the next shot. This isn't just a need for sports shooters BTW ...

Is the horribly grainy VF image in lower light necessarily always going to be so?

I can see holding these little cameras at arms length to use the LCD ... but most certainly do relish doing so with a camera the size of an A900 except just occasionally for an over-head shot or worm's eye perspective.

I personally saw the A900 as the successor to the Contax ND ... Zeiss AF optics and all that. The camera retained a certain level of simplicity ... and while not the most elegant of camera designs, it grows on you as being an expression of form follows function. My only gripe about the Sony A900 is the complex LCD menu interface that is organized oddly, forcing one to hunt for commonly used functions that are buried with-in less used ones. The Function window doesn't solve this IMO. Lack of live-view was a mistake on Sony's part IMO ... it is a great feature on conventional DSLRs from Nikon and Canon. So, I do like the EVF Zoom Focus function on the A-55 for critical manual focusing, which even works well while hand-held.

If they add a video/movie capability into an A900 type FF camera it will be an attractive alternative to existing ones such as the Canon 5D-II ... especially so if the EVF is a good one and the constant focus ability of the A-55 is retained. Imagine the color out of such a camera and the zing of the Zeiss optics. Wowzier!

-Marc

 

[Terry]

Also, is it necessary to have the review appear in the VF after the shot?
-Marc

No, you can turn image review off (menu item). I have it turned off and if I want to review I hit the play button.

 

[dhsimmonds]

Marc

As far as my use of the abbreviation OVF is concerned, I mean "Optical View Finder" as used in film and digital cameras such as the R9 and A900.

As far as I am concerned, an EVF is an electronic viewfinder to which the user puts his/her eye and the LCD viewfinder is the screen on the rear of the camera which for most digital compact cameras (ie NEX3/5) is the only means of viewing and framing an image before pressing the shutter!

I just cannot use the LCD screens and I have yet to like any EVF even though the latest EVF's are far superior to those of yesterday.

I hope that this helps to un-ravel some confusion!

 

[Andrea Buso]

I am sure that there are more than just a few of us that would be willing to pay a reasonable premium for an excellent "A900" type OVF for the updated replacements for the A700/A900.

In my previous post I did not make my point clear.
What I was implying was that for delivering an outstanding a900 VF, Sony uses an assembly procedure that increase the cost of 3/400$ (40/50% equivalent of the cost of an a55 body), if Sony will release a prosumer or pro model with an EVF, considering the price tag such cameras normally have, they will offer something of a much better quality they did for the A55.
I hope I explained myself.

What we are ready to pay for our tools is a different matter.
I was one of those that prior a900 release, was hoping for a price tag above 4k or 5k and getting a more advanced AF system and no shutter lag.

 

[jonoslack]

I'm confused by the term OVF ... it seems to be used 2 different ways in this thread.

I think it should be regarded to mean Optical viewfinder as opposed to Electronic viewfinder (which shouldn't be confused with the LCD on the back!

Questions to those who seem to know a lot more than I do about all of this: (partially because I haven't read everything available yet, and haven't experimented with these cameras enough yet).

Do you think the black-out something that can be over-come in future? Also, is it necessary to have the review appear in the VF after the shot? Both these add up to way to much time before you can take the next shot. This isn't just a need for sports shooters BTW ...

I'm sure the black out can be overcome - I would have thought a firmware update would do it . . . . but if you have auto-review switched on, then you should switch it off, it's unnecessary, and if you want to see what you got, then it's quicker just to press the review button.
I don't think you should make any judgement about shot to shot times until you've turned it off (although I think we all agree that it would be better with a shorter blackout time).

Is the horribly grainy VF image in lower light necessarily always going to be so?

I'm not sure - I guess it can be improved - but it's always going to be a trade-off between graininess and response time. My personal feeling is that the EVF works really well, but don't expect to make anything other than composition/exposure/focus judgements from it.

I can see holding these little cameras at arms length to use the LCD ... but most certainly do relish doing so with a camera the size of an A900 except just occasionally for an over-head shot or worm's eye perspective.

I've been using the A33/55 for a few weeks now (quite extensively) and I always use the viewfinder and (almost) never the LCD - it really does provide all the information you need to get the shot - it's a case of getting used to it.

I personally saw the A900 as the successor to the Contax ND ... Zeiss AF optics and all that. . .. . . snip

If they add a video/movie capability into an A900 type FF camera it will be an attractive alternative to existing ones such as the Canon 5D-II ... especially so if the EVF is a good one and the constant focus ability of the A-55 is retained. Imagine the color out of such a camera and the zing of the Zeiss optics. Wowzier!

-Marc

Well - I wonder if they aren't planning some kind of hybrid OVF/EVF, which would provide the best of both worlds. If Fuji can do it with their little 35mm then I don't see that it's beyond Sony's ability.

I can see that it would be possible to have a translucent fixed mirror behind a normal mirror - you could lock up the normal mirror, which would then give you an EVF and constant phase detection autofocus, together with the advantages of no mirror slap and constant live view . . . or you could unlock the mirror which would give you what is basically the same as an existing A900.

One thing I think we can be sure of is that it any A900 replacement will have both live view and a good movie mode, and almost certainly more than 30Mp

all the best

 

[biglouis]

I know I am just a visitor to this particular forum but I started reading the first thread and the rest of it was interesting.

Often thought about SONY dslrs but the lack of primes is what has held me back - and the fact that, like Jono, having a digital M kit (alas only the M8!) means that I'm not exactly at a disadvantage when it comes to the urban environment or landscape work that I do.

My two-pennoth on EVF is that I actually believe that in 25 years time (or less?) people will look back on optical viewfinders as part of the old analogue tradition. The reason is that the quality of EVFs must improve to be equal that of 'clear glass' (for want of a better term) and the advantages of EVFs are manifold. As Jono points out it is marvellous to be able to actually tweak your EV and see the results happening - I'm referring here to the use of the add-on EVF on a GF-1 which is my second camera tool. And the description of having a histogram superimposed in the viewfinder is really interesting (and cool).

LouisB

PS I still firmly believe that SONY will take over the camera world. They are the Microsoft of consumer electronics (if you appreciate the analogy). If only Zeiss would introduce Sony mount primes with CPUs...

 

[fotografz]

No, you can turn image review off (menu item). I have it turned off and if I want to review I hit the play button.

Thanks, I understand that, and it does speed up the shooting speed a bit.

The question is ... in future can the EVF and LCD reviews be separate functions?
A menu choice to set an instant return to live view through the RVF, while the LCD display shows the previous shot as an instant review if desired?

IMO, this is an obstacle for incorporating EVF into more "serious" FF cameras unless it can be functionally separated for user custom control.

Second thing ... doesn't the electronic black-out defeat the function of the shoot through mirror? I thought the idea was that the VF never went black. BTW, this is not a new concept ... Canon had it 10 years ago, and it is how they mechanically achieved 10 FPS when there was no other way at the time.

-Marc

 

[ptomsu]

Well, I was very interested in how the Sony A55 EVF would actually look like. Had the chance yesterday to try one out in a store in Seattle.

All I can say - I AM DISAPPOINTED!

So much hype, and then this comes with definitely much lower quality compared to my EP2 EVF.

The A55 with kit zoom is not really as small as I thought it would be. Yes, a DSLR with a real OVF is a bit bigger and not as fast, but looking through this EVF is all the time seems to be just unacceptable - at least for me.

 

[Terry]

So much hype, and then this comes with definitely much lower quality compared to my EP2 EVF.

All a matter of taste. I had problems with the EP2 viewfinder when there were horizontal lines in the frame. the viewfinder didn't do well in that scenario where it was almost looking at moire as you moved the camera.