sony a77

Omofo · Jan 13, 2012

cosmonaut said:
Yes the a77 has focus peaking and also a level in the finder.

I love that feature on the A55

unpopular · Jan 13, 2012

I know this. But the NEX 7 has both minus the pellicle. This has been my point all along, Argie ... The SLT really has no propose. All it has going for it is fast AF, which isn't much use with a finder that can keep up. Perhaps the NEX 7 has the same problem, but there is nothing between the sensor and the lens chewing up valuable optical resources, plus it has a shorter film to flange distance.

I'm just not sure what the point of SLT is in its present implementation.

skieur · Jan 13, 2012

unpopular said:
I know this. But the NEX 7 has both minus the pellicle. This has been my point all along, Argie ... The SLT really has no propose. All it has going for it is fast AF, which isn't much use with a finder that can keep up. Perhaps the NEX 7 has the same problem, but there is nothing between the sensor and the lens chewing up valuable optical resources, plus it has a shorter film to flange distance.

I'm just not sure what the point of SLT is in its present implementation.

The point of the SLT should be obvious. The flipping mirror is dead as are reflex cameras. How can you miss the fact that the A700 was replaced by the SLT A77 and the A900 will be replaced by the A99 with an even more advanced SLT design? No wonder, you are impossible to get through to!

skieur

unpopular · Jan 13, 2012

The SLT is far from a proven technology and Sony is the only manufacturer to adopt it. I agree though that in the long run this is likely going to be true.

OTOH I think that there are going to be other ways which will make the mirror obsolete entirely. Improvements in contrast detection or active rangefinder could make the mirror itself obsolete. With multilayer primary sensors, it may be possible to even incorporate some kind of phase contrast detection. No matter what happens in the future, the Sonys fixed mirror cameras don't seem to be ready for prime time yet.

mjhoward · Jan 13, 2012

unpopular said:
Improvements in contrast detection or active rangefinder could make the mirror itself obsolete. With multilayer primary sensors, it may be possible to even incorporate some kind of phase contrast detection.

Unfortunately, I can't imagine any MAJOR improvements in contrast detection AF. I've implemented my own contrast detection AF for some computer controlled lenses before and it is just 'dumb' by nature. The reason why the focus has to 'hunt' around is to determine what focus distance provides maximum contrast. So it starts in one direction, calculating the contrast across some focus points. It checks to see if the contrast increased or decreased from the previous frame. If it increased, it keeps hunting in the same direction. If contrast decreased, it hunts in the opposite direction. It keeps hunting back and forth until it finds the point of maximum contrast. This is a very big problem for low contrast scenes and for constantly changing scenes.

unpopular · Jan 13, 2012

I agree that contrast detection is prob the least likely candidate. But already in some Fujifilm P&S there is Phase Detection incorporated into the imaging sensor. To prevent a drop in IQ, this could done on a separate layer (foveon style) or have the phase detection sensitive to IR light.

As I have pointed out elsewhere, avalanche photodiodes can be used for the EVF and eventually a voltage-controlled variable beamsplitter could be used to compensate less than ideal lighting situations.

cosmonaut · Jan 13, 2012

The SLT also is extremely quiet, if you are a nature shooter this is important and camera shake is minimal as well. Without a flopping mirror. I also had doubts about the EVF coming from 20 plus years from using an SLR. But I was made a believer and it's the future. Another advantage is what you see in the finder is what you get as an image. If it works why wouldnt a pro want to use it?

unpopular · Jan 13, 2012

Again, all these features exist on a mirrorless body.

cosmonaut · Jan 13, 2012

Well it's like this. The really good photographers of their time. Or most of them. Shot with the best they could get their hands on. They didn't fight technical achievement they embraced it. Cameras worked fine before they started using mirrors and they will work fine again without them. If you could have told Gary Winogrand what ever you see in your finder is going to be the final image on print I am sure he would have been thrilled not to have to spend hours in a darkroom.

unpopular · Jan 13, 2012

cosmonaut said:
If you could have told Gary Winogrand what ever you see in your finder is going to be the final image on print I am sure he would have been thrilled not to have to spend hours in a darkroom.

o.my.god.

You are kidding. right?

ok. seriously. i'm done.

Derrel · Jan 13, 2012

skieur said:
The point of the SLT should be obvious. The flipping mirror is dead as are reflex cameras. How can you miss the fact that the A700 was replaced by the SLT A77 and the A900 will be replaced by the A99 with an even more advanced SLT design? No wonder, you are impossible to get through to!

skieur

The "point" is that Sony's d-slr sales are still poor compared to both Canon and Nikon. Sony had 11.9% of d-slr's sold last year. Nikon had just under 30%. Canons made up around 44% of all d-slr's sold last year. World-wide.

Sony is banking on their new SLR technology to attract customers...because they have been getting their asses kicked in the d-slr marketplace. Reflex cameras, with moving mirrors, began in the 1890's. That's not a typo--eighteen-nineties!!!! By 1959, with the Nikon F, the "modern" d-slr with instant return mirror and fully automatic lens diaphragm was a reality...fast forward 38 years or so, and the Ninon D3 and D3x had become the standard.

One thing you do NOT seem to understand skieur, is that there is no real technical superiority driving this...camera manufacturers have ALWAYS, and I mean ALWAYS, sought to create what is called "the next big thing". When sales go flat, or profits grow thin and hard to make, the camera makers have ALWAYS resorted to creating "all-new" features, or entirely new "types" or "styles" of cameras, as a way to get people to BUY NEW GEAR!!!! YES, the A700 was replaced by the a77...Why? Sony is trying a new sales approach!!!

I have worked in the camera retail business, and have SEEN the way new technology actually affects consumers. First-hand. Real people. People with money in wallet, and credit cards in-wallet, and looking to BUY. The reason Sony has gone to the SLT system is that there is always a good percentage of people who love the technological side of camera gear. These people love high-tech and new-tech stuff, good or bad. They will buy just to say they have the "new thing". As most photo industry writers have noted, the A900,and A850,and A700 were poor sellers, and Sony went to the drawing board and came up with the SLT system, hoping to get better sales. Your statement that "the flipping mirror is dead" is patently ludicrous.

A much,much more accurate statement is this: "If you cannot win at the game, then find a new game where your skill set will let you win--or at least have a chance to win."

Sorry bud, but Sony could not compete in the traditional reflex market; that market is mature, with MOSTLY committed owners, and so trying to battle two companies that control roughly 75% of ALL d-slr sales was foolish for Sony to continue doing. Sony is trying to find a new poker game, as it were.The product line and the actions of a company with UNDER 12% of all d-slr sales is not indicative of what the market is doing. Sony sells a little over one out of each 10 d-slr's sold world-wide. It sounds a lot like you own an a77 and realllllly need to justify your purchasing decision. To a degree that I am really surprised by. I hope you enjoy your a77. It looks like a nice camera. But until Sony's d-slr sales threaten those of Nikon or Canon, I do not expect ANY movement toward SLT technology from Nikon,Canon,Pentax, or any other camera maker. Sony has very little to lose in this segment. Nikon and Canon have a lot to lose.

argieramos · Jan 13, 2012

unpopular said:
It's really not that big of a deal to me, but when you're using it as the big reason why the pellicle is a good thing it is a big deal because it's really the only significant advantage.

If the lag really is an issue, then there is a constant minimum delay between the subject and the EVF. That means that no matter what is going on in the outside world, what is going on in the EVF is going to be behind. Reason tells me that this delay will increase in darker situations. There will always be some kind of delay, but if that delay is shorter than what we can perceive it's not an issue. People are saying though that this delay is significant, and the bus video confirms that when you need the delay to be the shortest, during rapid continuous drive, it actually becomes longer - which makes sense as the camera must reallocate it's resources to writing the file.

With a traditional SLR the delay not present at all. So while you cannot see the subject for the duration of the shutter plus a few microseconds as the mirror retracts and returns to it's original position, once it is at it's original position the subject and the image in the viewfinder are synchronous. I can very easily predict where an object will be within a few hundred milliseconds, provided that I have a biofeedback reference periodically about the position of the subject. The image between frames acts as that reference.

So what I am hearing is that there are two significant advantages to the a77 which does not apply to the NEX or traditional SLRs. High speed focus and rapid continuous drive with the ability to always see the subject. However, if the EVF is not as responsive as those two features, then they serve no purpose - and in the end you are left only with the disadvantage of increased analog gain to compensate for the pellicle.

"So what I'm hearing"
That is the problem in your statement. What if you're hearing things from a person who love to hate things such as yourself? Or even worse, from clueless troll like Nikon_Josh?
You see, you are just looking at the fact that EVF is electronic. There are things need to be process, reading datas off the sensor, converting to digital signal, and so on. That takes time, right? But whatever the delay will be, it cannot be distinguished by a human senses. A77 EVF has no known issue with ideal lighting, even with extreme high speed movement tracking.
The real complain about the EVF delay that people are talking about is when you do the burst mode. it is showing the last image that you captured rather than the current view. You can say that as equivalent to not seeing anything with OVF for the duration of the shutter. It is greatly improved with 1.04 firmware which the issue is almost non existence
EVF in lowlight is also good. Whatever the changes in framerate, it will not be a problem. Here is what the EVF is like in low light condition;
www.youtube.com/watch?v=zf-8NYaQ9XQ
I dont see any frame drop. In extreme darkness, that's where OVF become useless. You will see noise in EVF because of the signal boost, but that is better than not seeing anything at all with the OVF.

As an ex-owner of SLT (a33), I have problems with EVF. Not the same as yours. Remember, it's all about adapting techniques with the technology.