Instead of canons or nikons,can i go for a sony?

[Kolia]

Huh? 100% accurate? Does that mean it displays the full dynamic range of the scene, and does so in 3D?

Does the OLED display the full range of colors humans can see?

100% coverage.

So, EVF doesn't cover the whole range of color your eye can see.

Neither does the digital RAW file.
Neither does your computer screen.
Neither does the printer used to print the picture.

Why bother taking any picture if the only time you do see it all is when you shoot it ?

Anybody who actually uses the LCD screen on their camera, either for review or anything, should be able to understand the benefits of have all that information available in the viewfinder at the time they actually take the shoot.

Personal preference will dictate what we each go with in the end. Both technologies have their pros and cons.

 

[sapper6fd]

The viewfinder on the A99 was enough to turn me off Sony DSLR's. Thee OLED screen inside it made me feel like I was looking through the viewfinder of an early 90's handy cam.

 

[Kolia]

The viewfinder on the A99 was enough to turn me off Sony DSLR's. Thee OLED screen inside it made me feel like I was looking through the viewfinder of an early 90's handy cam.

Where did you get to handle an A99 ?

 

[pixmedic]

instead of having people play "my camera is better than yours", just go to the store, pick up and play with a few different cameras, pick the one YOU like and can afford, and BUY IT! I am pretty certain that the differences in how much "better" the nikons and the canons are won't really translate to very much when it actually comes down to taking a picture with the Sony. If you really like the sony camera, they get it. you will be able to take great pictures with it, you can get good glass for it, and im sure you will be very happy with the results.

 

[skieur]

3. OLED viewfinder is bright, 100% accurate......

skieur

Huh? 100% accurate? Does that mean it displays the full dynamic range of the scene, and does so in 3D?

Does the OLED display the full range of colors humans can see?

You don't read specs much, eh? 100% accurate means in photographic terms 100% of what you see in the viewfinder is what you get in your final image as opposed to less than that in crop body cameras.

skieur

 

[sapper6fd]

The viewfinder on the A99 was enough to turn me off Sony DSLR's. Thee OLED screen inside it made me feel like I was looking through the viewfinder of an early 90's handy cam.

Where did you get to handle an A99 ?

A local camera store in Calgary had their 10th anaversary last month and invited the Nikon, Canon, Sigma, Pentax, Tamron, Sony and a few other reps to set up display booths. They had one on display and were allowing people to give it a look over.

 

[skieur]

And from Nick Devlin: "My view is that there is nothing inherently good about EVFs. They are at best a necessary evil, chosen for the form-factor advantages they bring and the cameras they make possible. Sony clearly does not share this view, since they built this camera around an EVF simply for the sake of doing so. It offers no notable advantage of any sort, most notably not in price. I can see no reason to chose an EVF in any context where it does not significantly reduce the size, weight or price of the camera, or substantially enhance its usability. The case is simply not made out beyond, "It's cool new technology".

To me, the experience of viewing the natural world through an EVF is like crashing at a cheap motel, closing the blinds, and turning on the small, fuzzy old cathode-ray tube TV on the dresser. It's a shame, because this is otherwise a cracker of a camera, really nice to hold and behold. – Nick"

This comment from Nick Devlin displays a lot of negative bias toward Sony irrespective of the camera and the viewfinder which severely limits his credibility.

Sure there is something inherently good about SLT viewfinders:

1. real time feedback of camera adjustments and creative choices in the viewfinder including dynamic range adjustments KmH
2. the ability to fully adjust your camera without taking your eye from the viewfinder
3. a quieter shutter release (no mirror flip) which makes street photography much less obtrusive.
4. with no mirror flip there is less vibration, so super slow shutterspeeds are possible handheld.

Oh and by the way, if you don't like the SLT brightness, then for heaven's sakes adjust it to your taste. It is adjustable and customizable like everything else on the camera, including the buttons.

skieur

 

[mjhoward]

3. OLED viewfinder is bright, 100% accurate......

skieur

Huh? 100% accurate? Does that mean it displays the full dynamic range of the scene, and does so in 3D?

Does the OLED display the full range of colors humans can see?

You don't read specs much, eh? 100% accurate means in photographic terms 100% of what you see in the viewfinder is what you get in your final image as opposed to less than that in crop body cameras.

skieur

My crop body camera has 100% viewfinder coverage. BTW, isn't the A77 that you mentioned in your original post about 100% "accurate" (coverage) ALSO a crop body camera?

 

[Majeed Badizadegan]

Instead of canons or nikons,can i go for a sony?

No you may not, young man!

 

[unpopular]

Huh? 100% accurate? Does that mean it displays the full dynamic range of the scene, and does so in 3D?

Does the OLED display the full range of colors humans can see?

You don't read specs much, eh? 100% accurate means in photographic terms 100% of what you see in the viewfinder is what you get in your final image as opposed to less than that in crop body cameras.

skieur

My crop body camera has 100% viewfinder coverage. BTW, isn't the A77 that you mentioned in your original post about 100% "accurate" (coverage) ALSO a crop body camera?

And really, is 95% accuracy THAT much of a problem?

 

[bunny99123]

Never had a Nikon or Canon DSLR, but I do use a Sony A55. I looked at specs of the 3 DSLRs in my price range. Then went to a Photography Store and tried them out as best as I could. Boy, was it a hard decision to make, but I am happy with my camera. It takes pictures I am satisfied with at this point in my photography. Who knows what the future will bring, since techno is advancing so rapidly; years later I may switch to another company.

I have used Maxxium Minolta lens, and they produce very good images.

My friend has a Nikon D70 (I think?), and my pictures are as impressive as her's when printed. She is even suprised at the camera's proformance.

Almost everyone loves the camera that they use. In my opinion, it is more than a piece of equipment, but an expression of their creativity, so check them all out and choose the on that fits you

 

[skieur]

Huh? 100% accurate? Does that mean it displays the full dynamic range of the scene, and does so in 3D?

Does the OLED display the full range of colors humans can see?

You don't read specs much, eh? 100% accurate means in photographic terms 100% of what you see in the viewfinder is what you get in your final image as opposed to less than that in crop body cameras.

skieur

My crop body camera has 100% viewfinder coverage. BTW, isn't the A77 that you mentioned in your original post about 100% "accurate" (coverage) ALSO a crop body camera?

Your crop body camera has 95% magnification/coverage which does not cut it against 100%.

skieur

 

[skieur]

A less anti-Sony bias in this review related to the viewfinder.

skieur"BLOODY HELL" - Sony a77 - Does it Suck? - YouTube

 

[skieur]

You don't read specs much, eh? 100% accurate means in photographic terms 100% of what you see in the viewfinder is what you get in your final image as opposed to less than that in crop body cameras.

skieur

My crop body camera has 100% viewfinder coverage. BTW, isn't the A77 that you mentioned in your original post about 100% "accurate" (coverage) ALSO a crop body camera?

And really, is 95% accuracy THAT much of a problem?

If you are shooting macro, then it certainly is THAT much of a problem.

skieur

 

[DiskoJoe]

this one the one down side to an otherwise glowing review.