I might test the sony, because the continuous light samples i've seen of it are not good, or better put, at 800 iso not as good as any camera I use, even an m-8 which is not meant for 800 iso.
Actually, I take that back, sony messes around too much. I don't know where they're going with anything and don't want to drop 2 grand waiting for lenses, or better video.
T
Not trying to talk you into anything, but you know, I know they're not going to make what you want.
Dumbass thing is they could make a camera that would do both ovf and evf. Think about it, ovf with a mirror that you take off, clip on an evf for video or when you want it and the mirror just goes up, but that's never going to happen which should because $2,700 for the Nikon ought to be better equipped than a stripped down d4 but this is the same for the $2,100 em-1. Both kind of cheaped out and Nikon should never have taken the F stop ring off of their lenses.
Then again I have one huge gripe about cameras and that's Canons backwards focus turn. I'll never ever, ever get use to that.
I can drop a zeiss 50mm on my RED's and track focus from a subject across the street to 3' in front of my lens and not miss, with the Canons my brain just can't get use to it and it takes me three tries.
But with electronics they all can do more. The gh3's will touch screen track focus like nothing I've ever used, but it's kind of hard to move a camera, touch a screen and focus all at the same time.
Panasonic could plug in a separate tough screen you could hand to any assistant, not a dedicated 500 a day focus guy and say when they get here touch on that face.
Red could make their out of camera files great. Actually the QT F and H version file that comes out of a RED one is killer compared to the raw, but trying to batch process that file out is an excersize in futility.
They all mess around with us.
IMO
BC
