Sony Alpha 57 is no joke Canon and Nikon folks!!

[unpopular]

a700 or a900, a850 if you can find a good deal. Everything else is kinda "meh". Not bad, really, just not great.

 

[jason324]

I disagree, the older models were really nice, no question. The Sony came out with the A55 which although revolutionary in technology, the build quality was poor for sony's standards. SInce the A55, we are now on the Next gen and the A57 has very good build quality!! Not quite Canon 60 or 70D, but certainly equal or to the $200 dollar more expensive Canon t4i.

Best,
Jay

 

[unpopular]

Oh, IDK if 'revolutionary' is the right word for it. Not saying SLT doesn't have it's advantages, it does not realy change how we photograph or see photographs. It's not like digital, color reversal or dry plate. SLT is revolutionary from a manufacturing POV, I suppose. The technology is much less expensive to manufacture.

Still, the build quality just isn't up to par with the a700 and a900. At the same time these cameras were geared for a different user as well. I have no doubt that with the a99 and rumored a1S we'll start seeing build quality in line with teh a700, a900 and NEX7.

Sony can build great cameras, excluding the 7, they just haven't in a while.

 

[bhop]

If the A57 only has an EVF and no optical viewfinder, then it's useless IMO. No matter the specs..

 

[mjhoward]

The Sony came out with the A55 which although revolutionary in technology, the build quality was poor for sony's standards.

Sony didn't develop any revolutionary technology with the A55! The "Translucent" mirror, also known as a Pellicle Mirror, was first used by CANON in 1965! They went on to produce several bodies using this 'revolutionary' technology when in 1976 NIKON started using it. It was only 45 YEARS AFTER CANON developed it that Sony started 'borrowing' the idea.

 

[DiskoJoe]

If the A57 only has an EVF and no optical viewfinder, then it's useless IMO. No matter the specs..

I wish it could have both like the x-pro. I thought that was a good move by fuji.

 

[unpopular]

yes. but you can't with an SLT because the viewfinder would be too dim. I think the only thing you really gain with an SLT over a mirrorless is phase detect AF.

 

[unpopular]

The Sony came out with the A55 which although revolutionary in technology, the build quality was poor for sony's standards.

Sony didn't develop any revolutionary technology with the A55! The "Translucent" mirror, also known as a Pellicle Mirror, was first used by CANON in 1965! They went on to produce several bodies using this 'revolutionary' technology when in 1976 NIKON started using it. It was only 45 YEARS AFTER CANON developed it that Sony started 'borrowing' the idea.

Though I think the implimentation with an EVF is kind fo a different approach, and that Cannon's pellicle was eally nothing other than a bad idea with no advantages.

 

[ConradM]

yes. but you can't with an SLT because the viewfinder would be too dim. I think the only thing you really gain with an SLT over a mirrorless is phase detect AF.

That and how fast it is at least when talking entry level. The 7fps combined with the AF is probably my favorite thing about the A33.

 

[Kolia]

Revolutionary or not, once you get used to EVF you won't want to go back to OVF.

The ability to display all the information you want, better low light performance and finally the return of a view finder that is manual focus friendly makes it very useful.

 

[mjhoward]

Revolutionary or not, once you get used to EVF you won't want to go back to OVF.

Yes I will. In fact I did. I had a point and shoot with an EVF for a several years prior to getting my DSLR and hated it. It wasn't because it was a point and shoot either. I never find myself shooting photos by looking at the live view screen on my current body either. I would much rather look through an OVF.

 

[jason324]

Some good points all, but I still think Sony took the translucent mirror and made something of it. As said, the version from 30 years ago sucked and died off quickly.

As Kolia said, the distinct advantage to the EVF is seeing your photo's result before you shoot it. In other words, you see your white balance settings and exposure comp setting live as you look through the EVF in real time. This allows for incredible accurate WB, especially if you don't have a gray card. In addition to that, the zooming in ability with manual focus using the EVF is also extremely useful in sunny conditions.

With that being said, I did not like the EVF when I first used it either on the A55. That was my first experience with it, and it looked like a crappy TV for the lack of a better word. The New EVF's and OLED's are much better though, and I honestly prefer the new EVF/ oled over the optical vf on my 5D mark II.

Jay

 

[ConradM]

Some good points all, but I still think Sony took the translucent mirror and made something of it. As said, the version from 30 years ago sucked and died off quickly.

As Kolia said, the distinct advantage to the EVF is seeing your photo's result before you shoot it. In other words, you see your white balance settings and exposure comp setting live as you look through the EVF in real time. This allows for incredible accurate WB, especially if you don't have a gray card. In addition to that, the zooming in ability with manual focus using the EVF is also extremely useful in sunny conditions.

With that being said, I did not like the EVF when I first used it either on the A55. That was my first experience with it, and it looked like a crappy TV for the lack of a better word. The New EVF's and OLED's are much better though, and I honestly prefer the new EVF/ oled over the optical vf on my 5D mark II.

Jay

I always forget that that's not just a normal thing for all DSLR's. :lmao:

Serious question, with an OVF, do you basically have to guess WB and Exposure? I mean with enough experience you would know what works for a given situation... But does someone new to DSLR's have to guess that stuff?

 

[jason324]

Some good points all, but I still think Sony took the translucent mirror and made something of it. As said, the version from 30 years ago sucked and died off quickly.

As Kolia said, the distinct advantage to the EVF is seeing your photo's result before you shoot it. In other words, you see your white balance settings and exposure comp setting live as you look through the EVF in real time. This allows for incredible accurate WB, especially if you don't have a gray card. In addition to that, the zooming in ability with manual focus using the EVF is also extremely useful in sunny conditions.

With that being said, I did not like the EVF when I first used it either on the A55. That was my first experience with it, and it looked like a crappy TV for the lack of a better word. The New EVF's and OLED's are much better though, and I honestly prefer the new EVF/ oled over the optical vf on my 5D mark II.

Jay

I always forget that that's not just a normal thing for all DSLR's. :lmao:

Serious question, with an OVF, do you basically have to guess WB and Exposure? I mean with enough experience you would know what works for a given situation... But does someone new to DSLR's have to guess that stuff?

Another huge advantage to the translucent mirror is the phase detection AF works while recording HD video. So you get super accurate focus while recording video unlike any of the competition. Video may not matter to you, but if it does, this is a huge benefit in my opinion.

People that are new to photography struggle with white balance. Auto WB sucks a lot of the time, so yes guessing takes place and white balance is fixed in post processing for a lot of people. I'm not saying you or I would be guessing, but a newbie would be on AWB 90% of the time. That is until they realize how important wb is.

Also, speaking from experience chimping is often frowned upon, but you see wedding photogs doing it all the time. It's when they shoot then look at the screens histogram etc.. and then make adjustments and re-shoot. In theroy, that could be avoided with the EVF. Again, I'm not speaking to you all that understand this stuff inside and out, it's for the guys that don't get it as much. Sony's current line is mostly priced and geared towards that very market, so it makes sens to me. The Pro grade stuff is still in the works.

 

[DiskoJoe]

Just a side note. A custom white balance can be set using just about anything that is solid white. Not exactly the same as a gray card but its pretty close. And I love my live view. My landscape shots went to a whole new level after I got it. There is no substitute for being able to see the actual render of a photo before hitting the shutter. So say what you want but its silly to not take advantage of good technology.