Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 12   Go Down

Author Topic: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?  (Read 49156 times)

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11305
    • Echophoto
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #80 on: October 30, 2015, 01:26:45 pm »

Hi,

The lenses can be about 2cm shorter, otherwise I share the size argument. An EVF sort of makes little sense on a DSLR, or let's say, the mirror makes little sense once you have an EVF.

I feel there os a lot of hype about the Sonys and I actually feel that they are good cameras, but I don't think they are going to steal Nikon's and Canon's lunch. But they are nice enough to keep Sony having it's own lunch.

Best regards
Erik


What's interesting is that by the time Sony releases an A9 with a correctly sized battery,... in a package similar to that of the Leica SL, the size disadvantage of what a D820/5Dx fitted with a EVF instead of an OVF would be would be mostly gone... ;)

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Basing criticisms on extreme edge cases usually does not help
« Reply #81 on: October 30, 2015, 02:26:50 pm »

For those of us who were never bothered much by having to change film after every 24 to 36 shots, the frequent internet agonizing over battery life seems like a case of "let's find a small disadvantage in some edge case of a product alternative that I do not prefer, and blow it up into an allegedly major problem for serious photographers".

What's interesting is that by the time Sony releases an A9 with a correctly sized battery . . .
What is your criterion for a "correctly sized battery"?  For my needs, I get plenty of shots per change on the modestly size battery of the EM5, with the worst case scenario covered by carrying one extra battery for a single mid-day change. In almost any multi-day trip away from electricity, the food and such that one would have to transport would vastly outweigh any additional batteries needed. There are those (like some wedding photographers?) who wish to avoid even pausing for a single change amidst taking many hundreds of photographs, but for such usage, there are of course add-on battery packs (vertical grips and such).  Those certainly add bulk, but that need only affects a small minority of ILC using photographers, and even for many of them only in some usages, so the "battery pack" can be left at home or in the car on other occasions.  The idea that an EVF camera body needs to have the bulk and weight for a worst-case-scenario extreme of battery capacity is implausible.
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
could some SLRs benefit from an optional EVF for video work?
« Reply #82 on: October 30, 2015, 02:32:26 pm »

An EVF sort of makes little sense on a DSLR . . .
Actually I wonder why no maker of a video-and-stills oriented SLR has not offered an add-on EVF for video usage (where the OVF is useless), given that these cameras already have live view?
- Is it because there are adequate third party EVF options?
- Is it because most videography is done with the more comfortable two-eyed view of the rear screen, or on a large add-on viewfinder screen?
Logged

uaiomex

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1209
    • http://www.eduardocervantes.com
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #83 on: October 30, 2015, 02:42:26 pm »

True but don't matter much now as (we learned) hr lenses are good equalizers.


What's interesting is that by the time Sony releases an A9 with a correctly sized battery,... in a package similar to that of the Leica SL, the size disadvantage of what a D820/5Dx fitted with a EVF instead of an OVF would be would be mostly gone... ;)

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: could some SLRs benefit from an optional EVF for video work?
« Reply #84 on: October 30, 2015, 02:43:28 pm »

Actually I wonder why no maker of a video-and-stills oriented SLR has not offered an add-on EVF for video usage (where the OVF is useless), given that these cameras already have live view?
- Is it because there are adequate third party EVF options?
- Is it because most videography is done with the more comfortable two-eyed view of the rear screen, or on a large add-on viewfinder screen?

market segmentation. Make them buy the same thing several times.
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3686
Re: Basing criticisms on extreme edge cases usually does not help
« Reply #85 on: October 30, 2015, 02:53:57 pm »

For those of us who were never bothered much by having to change film after every 24 to 36 shots, the frequent internet agonizing over battery life seems like a case of "let's find a small disadvantage in some edge case of a product alternative that I do not prefer, and blow it up into an allegedly major problem for serious photographers".

It's just part of a larger phenomenon, where the gear itself has become the primary reason for being involved with photography. To put it bluntly: the more capable the equipment the more frenzied the measurbating and the more intense the fanboyism.

Maybe better is really better only to a point…after which it becomes an increasingly efficient conduit for neurosis.

-Dave-
Logged

DeanChriss

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 592
    • http://www.dmcphoto.com
Re: Basing criticisms on extreme edge cases usually does not help
« Reply #86 on: October 30, 2015, 04:03:37 pm »

For those of us who were never bothered much by having to change film after every 24 to 36 shots, the frequent internet agonizing over battery life seems like a case of "let's find a small disadvantage in some edge case of a product alternative that I do not prefer, and blow it up into an allegedly major problem for serious photographers".

...


At the end of my film days I was shooting wildlife with a 10 FPS Canon EOS 1V. A 36 exposure roll can go pretty fast, and on numerous occasions changing film at inopportune times bothered the heck out of me, and lost some photos too. Oddly, I don't recall any issues with battery life.

For a long time I've had cameras that provide over 1100 shots on a single battery pack and come with a charger that recharges one in 1.25 hours and handles two battery packs. I recently got another camera that provides half as many shots per charge and comes with a charger that handles just one battery and takes twice as long (2.5 hours) to charge it. That means either getting up in the middle of the night to swap batteries (no way that's happening) or carrying two chargers. It's not the end of the world, but I'd be happier if the manufacturer had considered the issue.
Logged
- Dean

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Basing criticisms on extreme edge cases usually does not help
« Reply #87 on: October 30, 2015, 04:39:18 pm »

It's just part of a larger phenomenon, where the gear itself has become the primary reason for being involved with photography. To put it bluntly: the more capable the equipment the more frenzied the measurbating and the more intense the fanboyism.

Maybe better is really better only to a point…after which it becomes an increasingly efficient conduit for neurosis.

-Dave-


Be careful, Dave: you are in danger of stealing my curmudgeon crown! Thing is, you are absolutely right in yur diagnosis. Even a brief journey into one's own images reveals the fact - if we can face it - that we could have made almost any of them with low-cost equipment. That's not to deny the real challenges that some photograhers face, but for the amateur... really?

Rob C

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: Basing criticisms on extreme edge cases usually does not help
« Reply #88 on: October 30, 2015, 05:14:35 pm »

At the end of my film days I was shooting wildlife with a 10 FPS Canon EOS 1V. . . .

For a long time I've had cameras that provide over 1100 shots on a single battery pack and come with a charger that recharges one in 1.25 hours and handles two battery packs. I recently got another camera that provides half as many shots per charge and comes with a charger that handles just one battery and takes twice as long (2.5 hours) to charge it. That means either getting up in the middle of the night to swap batteries (no way that's happening) or carrying two chargers. It's not the end of the world, but I'd be happier if the manufacturer had considered the issue.

This sounds like a case where you and some small fraction of photographers need to have an extra charger, some extra batteries, a battery/vertical grip, or to choose a model with a battery+charger design better suited to your particular needs – none of which is much of a bulk problem when one is already carrying the fast telephoto lenses used for wildlife photography.  More to my original point, none of that forces EVF cameras to become as heavy and big as SLRs in order to have adequate battery capacity.
Logged

NancyP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2513
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #89 on: October 30, 2015, 05:46:32 pm »

What is the power consumption of "live view" on the Sonys? Comparable to other mirrorless and DSLR cameras? Individuals who compose via live view on tripod might want more batteries.
Logged

Chuck Fan

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 31
Re: Basing criticisms on extreme edge cases usually does not help
« Reply #90 on: October 30, 2015, 06:17:25 pm »


.... that we could have made almost any of them with low-cost equipment...
Rob C

That may be true, but many people would not have made them were it not for the fancy equipment, or would not have started making them. 
« Last Edit: October 30, 2015, 06:21:47 pm by Chuck Fan »
Logged

shadowblade

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2768
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #91 on: October 30, 2015, 08:06:14 pm »

Hi,

Camcorders have small sensors, so they have very large DoF. Professional video cameras don't have AF. Have you seen any PL-mount lens with AF. They use a "focus puller" an extra guy doing just the focusing…

Two different issues here. I'm using pro video cameras as an example of lag-free viewfinders, not AF. The AF on mirrorless cameras is much better than is often given credit for, but is held back in its utility by horrendous viewfinder lag which makes them underperform on moving targets.

Also, pro-level camcorders, such as those I've seen on wildlife shoots, certainly do have AF, and are capable of narrow DOF.

Quote
In video, fast AF is not wanted because they don't want jumpy AF. Sony actually has a slow AF mode just for video. Video is different, so leave it out.

Modern lenses use internal focusing, just moving a single group of elements, that reduces the mass to focus. Modern AF lenses to be used with CDAF need to have fast movements, that is the reason Sony uses linear motors on the new lenses.

Quote
Very clearly, Sony cameras may not be able to match fast focusing Canons and Nikons, and I think this may to have a bit to do with limitations in on sensor PDAF.

The technology behind on-sensor and off-sensor PDAF is exactly the same - just that one uses pixels on a separate sensor and the other uses pixels on the main sensor. And PDAF on Sony with native E-mount lenses is still faster than basic and many mid-range Canons and Nikons. The high-end models have dedicated AF processors and the like, and Canon 1-series batteries operate at a higher voltage and can also drive lenses more quickly. These are the aspects that the miniature Sonys lack - add them on and there's no reason AF can't be just as fast, and more accurate, as Canon/Nikon action cameras.

Of course, even the fastest AF may be unusable for action shooting due to viewfinder lag, which gives the perception of AF being much slower than it really is, 200ms is just unacceptable. Pro video cameras have reduced viewfinder lag to an imperceptible level. But this requires power - processor power and battery power - that can be fitted into a large video camera, or even an SLR-sized body (whether D4s size or D810 size) but not a minaturised design.
Logged

Chuck Fan

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 31
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #92 on: October 30, 2015, 08:35:13 pm »

Exactly how does on-sensor PDAF work?  Normal PDAF requires a separate lens in front of the AF sensor to refocus out of focus images into two separate sub-images.  The AF sensor the measure the distance between, or the phase difference, of the two sub-images.

 For on-sensor PDAF?, how does that work?  Does the camera have to extend an lens array in front of the imaging sensor?
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #93 on: October 30, 2015, 09:32:03 pm »

Exactly how does on-sensor PDAF work?  Normal PDAF requires a separate lens in front of the AF sensor to refocus out of focus images into two separate sub-images.  The AF sensor the measure the distance between, or the phase difference, of the two sub-images.

 For on-sensor PDAF?, how does that work?  Does the camera have to extend an lens array in front of the imaging sensor?

I think some pixels have directional acceptance angles
« Last Edit: October 31, 2015, 10:07:34 am by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

shadowblade

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2768
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #94 on: October 31, 2015, 01:14:52 am »

Exactly how does on-sensor PDAF work?  Normal PDAF requires a separate lens in front of the AF sensor to refocus out of focus images into two separate sub-images.  The AF sensor the measure the distance between, or the phase difference, of the two sub-images.

 For on-sensor PDAF?, how does that work?  Does the camera have to extend an lens array in front of the imaging sensor?

Several ways to do it. You can put a lens in front of it. You can use dual-photosite pixel technology (like Canon). You can use microlenses to do it. You can use two adjacent rows of pixels.
Logged

hjulenissen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2051
Re: Basing criticisms on extreme edge cases usually does not help
« Reply #95 on: October 31, 2015, 11:24:46 am »

For those of us who were never bothered much by having to change film after every 24 to 36 shots, the frequent internet agonizing over battery life seems like a case of "let's find a small disadvantage in some edge case of a product alternative that I do not prefer, and blow it up into an allegedly major problem for serious photographers".
What is your criterion for a "correctly sized battery"?...
I can try giving a real-world example:
With my Canon 7D I can go on a 2 week trip with my single battery and one CF card happily snapping pictures. I don't need a charger, provided that I avoid LV/video. I don't need to buy extra batteries. I don't need to buy a car charger or disrupt my trip by (unnecessarily) stopping somewhere to charge batteries. For me that is great ergonomy.

Could I work around having 1/2 or 1/10 of my current battery life? Sure. But that would be cost and/or inconvenience that would be have to be weighted in the pros and cons of camera upgrading.

-h
Logged

shadowblade

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2768
Re: Basing criticisms on extreme edge cases usually does not help
« Reply #96 on: October 31, 2015, 11:29:57 am »

I can try giving a real-world example:
With my Canon 7D I can go on a 2 week trip with my single battery and one CF card happily snapping pictures. I don't need a charger, provided that I avoid LV/video. For me that is great ergonomy.

I understand that others have other usage patterns than myself, but I cannot understand this lack of understanding for my needs (and others like me).

-h

Ever considered that you can carry an A7rII (or any other mirrorless camera), a memory card and a stack of spare batteries, and still end up carrying far less weight and volume than a 7D with one battery?

Or that the lack of battery capacity in mirrorless cameras isn't due to them being mirrorless, but rather them being designed to be small, thus necessitating weak, small, batteries? Make an SLR that size and you'd also run into battery life issues.
Logged

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3256
Re: Basing criticisms on extreme edge cases usually does not help
« Reply #97 on: October 31, 2015, 12:45:31 pm »

Ever considered that you can carry an A7rII (or any other mirrorless camera), a memory card and a stack of spare batteries, and still end up carrying far less weight and volume than a 7D with one battery?

Or that the lack of battery capacity in mirrorless cameras isn't due to them being mirrorless, but rather them being designed to be small, thus necessitating weak, small, batteries? Make an SLR that size and you'd also run into battery life issues.

That's why my 7D rarely makes its way out of the roller case these days.  When I'm going shooting now I grab my Fuji X-T1 and a few lenses and I'm good to go.  For the record I have 4 batteries for the Fuji and I'm happy.  The 7D hasn't been sold (yet) because there are rare cases in sports where it makes sense.
Logged
Regards,
Ron

hjulenissen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2051
Re: Basing criticisms on extreme edge cases usually does not help
« Reply #98 on: October 31, 2015, 01:03:41 pm »

Ever considered that you can carry an A7rII (or any other mirrorless camera), a memory card and a stack of spare batteries, and still end up carrying far less weight and volume than a 7D with one battery?
Sure.

Battery life of A7Rii (according to cipa): 290
Cost of a Sony A7rII: 32.995,00 KR ($3888)
Cost of NP-FW50 battery: 795,00 KR ($94)
Cost of AC-PW20 charger: 1.395,00 KR ($164)

Battery life of 7D (according to cipa): 800 (I believe every 1/2 images using flash?)
Cost for keeping my 7D: 0

I don't know how many batteries are needed to get my personal "lasts for 2 weeks without charging", and how many chargers would be needed in order to make that setup viable, but it would add significant cost to an allready expensive upgrade.

I'd say that my original statement still holds well:
Could I work around having 1/2 or 1/10 of my current battery life? Sure. But that would be cost and/or inconvenience that would be have to be weighted in the pros and cons of camera upgrading.
Or that the lack of battery capacity in mirrorless cameras isn't due to them being mirrorless, but rather them being designed to be small, thus necessitating weak, small, batteries? Make an SLR that size and you'd also run into battery life issues.
I'd suggest that it is mainly the "mirrorlessness" that makes these cameras have low battery capacity.

My 7D have a "mirrorless" mode (Liveview). It has horrible battery life (using the same battery).
Canon offers smaller DSLRs (the 6D and the 100D) with what I believe to be decent battery life (small DSLRs can have decent battery life).

I believe that running a sensor continously "on" (feeding the low-latency AF and viewfinder), doing continous image processing (feeding the viewfinder) and powering an EVF/LCD, in sum, makes for significant power draw. Perhaps in time, this draw will be small enough so as to be insignificant. Certainly the current development in cellphone cameras and mirrorless system cameras got to help.

-h
« Last Edit: October 31, 2015, 01:07:00 pm by hjulenissen »
Logged

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3256
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #99 on: October 31, 2015, 02:25:02 pm »

It takes a good deal of processor power to provide an image to the EVF or LCD from the sensor at a refresh rate that is acceptable.  Another factor is how fast you can read data from the sensor.
Logged
Regards,
Ron
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 12   Go Up