Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?

[shadowblade]

I think people are enamored with Sony simply because of the sensors. I hate to say it, but a camera system is far more than sensors -- even giving Sony Zeiss for their lenses. Personally, I hate the A7 et al cameras. They are worthless for my style of shooting. The blackout of the viewfinder when shooting is totally unacceptable. And this is why I will never use an EVF. Some people love them. I hate them. I used a friend's A7r for all of 5 minutes while doing a studio shoot recently. God did I hate the camera and it's handling. Ergonomics are awful. The friend just tried the out the latest Sony A7r2 at B&H over the weekend. He said he is so disappointed with the camera's handling, and the fact that the viewfinder blackout hasn't been addressed, that he's seriously thinking of going back to Canon, or perhaps Nikon. (He's been shooting professionally for almost 20-years doing corporate work. For that matter, I've shot professionally, 100% of my income, for almost 40, so I've used a few cameras.)

I'll take the handling of my 1Dx or 5Ds over the Sonys any day. I think they were onto something with the Alpha series (like the A99). I considered buying into that a while back, but now I'm VERY glad I stuck with a mature, comprehensive system like Canon. (The same could be said for Nikon.) Sony reminds me of an ADD kid -- onto a new lens mount before you can say "boo".

Yet, for anyone who primarily shoots using live view and values the real-time exposure simulation and ease of precise (usually manual) focusing only a direct sensor readout can bring, the A7r is probably the best thing that ever happened. Obviously it's not optimal for action shooting - it wasn't designed for that. It's like taking an old SLR without live view and wondering why it's not particularly good for precise focusing using tilt-shift lenses.

And, for some fields of photography (mostly of things that don't move), sensor (and lens selection) pretty much is everything.

[BJL]

I think people are enamored with Sony simply because of the sensors.

I have no disagreement with your preference for OVF cameras, but the sensors can't be the only reason why some people like EVF cameras, since Nikon (and Pentax) offer Sony sensors in OVF bodies, and often, Nikon has got the new sensors first, probably in part due to buying far more of them than Sony's own camera division does.

I would hope that we can agree that the OVF and EVF options for ILCs each have legitimate appeal, with the choice at least partly depending on differences in intended usage. Along with other factors like the effects of decades of Canon/Nikon dominance of the ILC market, back to the film era, which gives them advantages from AF and metering technology, to the big array of lenses thay can offer, to the many millions of such lenses that owners want to keep using, and want to use wih the AF system they were designed for.

The most that I predict for EVF cameras is a rise to dominance in the mainstream sub-35mm formats, where Camon and Nikon have already established small beachheads. The future mix in 35mm format is very unclear to me.

[Telecaster]

I think people are enamored with Sony simply because of the sensors.

Not in my case. I just wanted a nice platform for all my favorite older 35mm format lenses. Multiple brands, mostly pre-1990. Being able to accurately focus said lenses was the key factor. Enter the EVF with its superior focusing assistance…and a sale was made.

While you may never buy an EVF camera I will most certainly never buy another SLR. I think there's room in the world for both, though.

-Dave-

[Manoli]

... Nikon has got the new sensors first, probably in part due to buying far more of them than Sony's own camera division does.

Although this doesn't seem to have been the case with the new BSI sensor in the A7rII - unless of course they (Nikon) decided to pass.

I would hope that we can agree that the OVF and EVF options for ILCs each have legitimate appeal, with the choice at least partly depending on differences in intended usage. Along with other factors like the effects of decades of Canon/Nikon dominance of the ILC market [...]

I'd agree with that too, but in adopting the FE mount cams, most users will want to use legacy lenses. The FE mount has one major disadvantage in that it can't be 'adapted' - so even if the option was there (which it isn't, yet), no-one in their right mind would invest in a full set of Sony/ZEiSS lenses from the 'go', dumping a dozen or so CanNikon lenses in the process. The kick-off for the FE mount came mainly from sensor-deprived Canon users who were suddenly presented with the option of using their existing lenses via an adapter on higher spec sensors. Nikon users followed, but for differing reasons.

If you were of the same frame of mind as Nemo, then little damage was done - just switch bodies. Hence, the uptick in interest of the FE v A mount.  Without the interchangeability of lenses, the cam would have been dead in the water before it had even got off the ground. The pickup was certainly greater than Sony (and Zeiss) ever expected.

Andrew Reid has just published a review of the A7sII on EOSHD [link]. Motion centric but interesting reading, though for the full picture you'll need to read through to the comments in his forum.


 

[NancyP]

I am pretty happy with the live view implementation of the Canon DSLRs (6D, in my case). The only time exposure simulation fails is for long-exposure night photography (typically 10 sec or longer), where there simply isn't enough light at the desired ISO of 1600 or 3200 to see your image on LV. Typically I crank to 12800 or 25600 and find a particularly bright star to use for focusing those lenses that don't have true infinity hard stop (that's most of them). Precise framing of the shot is usually done by iteration from photos, not directly from live view (assuming moonless dark rural night).

But I have to say that for daytime, unless you attach reporting chips to all of your old lenses/adapters, or use live view with Magic Lantern, focusing fast old manual lenses on a modern DSLR can be a bit of a crap shoot, even with a superfine screen. Nevertheless, I have had some fun with the old AIS Nikkor 50 f/1.2 focused through optical viewfinder - just not huge accuracy   

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I have little doubt EVF will take over from OVF question is just how long it will take.

• Both SLR and EVF try to solve the same issue, what you see is what you get.
• SLR technology has been around for 70 years (or so) EVF just a few years. SLR technology is mature while EVF is still adolescent.
• EVF doesn't need two mirrors doing complex motion in as few milliseconds as possible.
• EVF focusing using the sensor itself, while SLR focuses on a proxy image projected by the moving mirrors mentioned above.
• EVF cameras can have shorter response times than SLRs if electronic first curtain is used
• With SLR the mirrors needs to be flipped out of the optical path before exposure this takes time and will cause vibrations.[/li|
  
  • With EVF the manufacturers can get rid of a lot of mechanical complexity.
  
  SLR technology has at least two basic advantages:
  
  • There is no viewfinder delay. The image is visible in nanosecond accurate real time. EVF will always have some lag, even if it can be very short. Milliseconds vs. pico seconds.
  • Not dependent on electric power
  
  I am pretty sure that evolution of technology will reduce the disadvantages of EVFs.
  
  Best regards
  Erik
  
  
  

  I have no disagreement with your preference for OVF cameras, but the sensors can't be the only reason why some people like EVF cameras, since Nikon (and Pentax) offer Sony sensors in OVF bodies, and often, Nikon has got the new sensors first, probably in part due to buying far more of them than Sony's own camera division does.
  
  I would hope that we can agree that the OVF and EVF options for ILCs each have legitimate appeal, with the choice at least partly depending on differences in intended usage. Along with other factors like the effects of decades of Canon/Nikon dominance of the ILC market, back to the film era, which gives them advantages from AF and metering technology, to the big array of lenses thay can offer, to the many millions of such lenses that owners want to keep using, and want to use wih the AF system they were designed for.
  
  The most that I predict for EVF cameras is a rise to dominance in the mainstream sub-35mm formats, where Camon and Nikon have already established small beachheads. The future mix in 35mm format is very unclear to me.
  

[Paulo Bizarro]

I think people are enamored with Sony simply because of the sensors. I hate to say it, but a camera system is far more than sensors -- even giving Sony Zeiss for their lenses. Personally, I hate the A7 et al cameras. They are worthless for my style of shooting. The blackout of the viewfinder when shooting is totally unacceptable. And this is why I will never use an EVF. Some people love them. I hate them. I used a friend's A7r for all of 5 minutes while doing a studio shoot recently. God did I hate the camera and it's handling. Ergonomics are awful. The friend just tried the out the latest Sony A7r2 at B&H over the weekend. He said he is so disappointed with the camera's handling, and the fact that the viewfinder blackout hasn't been addressed, that he's seriously thinking of going back to Canon, or perhaps Nikon. (He's been shooting professionally for almost 20-years doing corporate work. For that matter, I've shot professionally, 100% of my income, for almost 40, so I've used a few cameras.)

I'll take the handling of my 1Dx or 5Ds over the Sonys any day. I think they were onto something with the Alpha series (like the A99). I considered buying into that a while back, but now I'm VERY glad I stuck with a mature, comprehensive system like Canon. (The same could be said for Nikon.) Sony reminds me of an ADD kid -- onto a new lens mount before you can say "boo".

So the A7 system does not work for you, good. I am glad it works for me, I shoot landscapes and travel. Because it allows me to save weight and space, while surpassing me previous Canon 6D system. It is liberating to go out into the woods, or beaches, or travelling, with an A7II, and 3 lenses, all carried in a small backpack.

[shadowblade]

So the A7 system does not work for you, good. I am glad it works for me, I shoot landscapes and travel. Because it allows me to save weight and space, while surpassing me previous Canon 6D system. It is liberating to go out into the woods, or beaches, or travelling, with an A7II, and 3 lenses, all carried in a small backpack.

Or two A7r bodies, a heavy tripod and C1 cube head, 15kg of lenses and a 5Ds, 200-400 and monopod for those two days of wildlife shooting in the middle of a three week landscape trip, as the case may be...

Mirrorless doesn't necessarily mean light weight.

[Tony Jay]

Or two A7r bodies, a heavy tripod and C1 cube head, 15kg of lenses and a 5Ds, 200-400 and monopod for those two days of wildlife shooting in the middle of a three week landscape trip, as the case may be...

Mirrorless doesn't necessarily mean light weight.

I can commiserate.
Just about to leave for Southern Africa - combination of wildlife and landscape shooting ahead.
Packing a combination of Sony kit and Canon kit.
Canon mostly for the super telephoto end and Sony for the rest.
The kit is lighter than the last trip (just with Canon kit) but not by much...

Tony Jay

[eronald]

I can commiserate.
Just about to leave for Southern Africa - combination of wildlife and landscape shooting ahead.
Packing a combination of Sony kit and Canon kit.
Canon mostly for the super telephoto end and Sony for the rest.
The kit is lighter than the last trip (just with Canon kit) but not by much...

Tony Jay

The next generation of camera will be a clip-on sensor for the glass, with a feed to the VR glasses which everybody is now going to wear.

Edmund

[Tony Jay]

The next generation of camera will be a clip-on sensor for the glass, with a feed to the VR glasses which everybody is now going to wear.

Edmund

Maybe the next generation of air travel will be a form of teleportation to save on time!

Tony Jay

[Rob C]

Maybe the next generation of air travel will be a form of teleportation to save on time!

Tony Jay

Heaven forbid: remember The Fly?

Rob C

[Tony Jay]

Heaven forbid: remember The Fly?

Rob C

Actually no!
Not sure whether to laugh or cry now!

Tony Jay

[BJL]

Or two A7r bodies, a heavy tripod and C1 cube head, 15kg of lenses and a 5Ds, 200-400 and monopod for those two days of wildlife shooting in the middle of a three week landscape trip, as the case may be...

Mirrorless doesn't necessarily mean light weight.

Agreed: clearly, when one needs big, fast lenses, body bulk is rather irrelevant.  On the other hand, one thing that is pushing many photographers towards using EVF cameras at least part of the time is the great increases in sensitivity (reduction in noise at a given ISO speed; higher usable ISO speeds, getting the same usable ISO speed in a smaller format) compared to sensors from some years ago, and even more so compared to film.  Because one way or another, this leads many of us to sometimes take photographs in ways that deliver far less light to the sensor, and hence less light to the OVF.  An EVF camera can keep the VF image as big and bright as ever by increasing the amplification (allowed by the lower noise in the newer sensors) but with an OVF, the image must get dimmer, or smaller, or some mix of both.

The situations I am thinking of include:
1) Shooting in lower light with a given lens.
2) Shooting in the same light at the same shutter speed with a higher ISO speed and higher f-stop, allowing the use of a lighter lens through the lens having a higher minimum f-stop.
3) Pushing telephoto reach further by using the same-sized lenses with a smaller format (or using them with heavier cropping, which I count as using a smaller effective format).
4) Pushing telephoto reach further by using a tele-convertor or a longer but slower lens, offsetting the f-stp with the higher usable ISO speed.

I am often in case (3): I ver owned a lens longer than 300mm for my film cameras, but the relatively lightweight MFT 75-300/4.8-6.7 gives telephoto reach as good as (actually better than) a mythical 150-600mm on those film cameras.  It would not work well on a Four Thirds SLR, because at f/6.7, the VF image would be uncomfortably dim or small, depending on the OVF magnification.


Of course, one can also use rear-screen Live View on a DSLR in this situation, but the disadvantages of doing that, especially with hand-held long lenses, have been much discussed around here!

[NancyP]

Help me, help me!!!  bzzzzzzz   

[Paulo Bizarro]

Or two A7r bodies, a heavy tripod and C1 cube head, 15kg of lenses and a 5Ds, 200-400 and monopod for those two days of wildlife shooting in the middle of a three week landscape trip, as the case may be...

Mirrorless doesn't necessarily mean light weight.

Yes of course, we all know that, that is not the point... In my case, I never shot with the big white teles. I am sure that for most users, they never did also. My point is that until recently, if one wanted FF and Zeiss glass for landscapes, on a DSLR, that meant say two 6D, with a Distagon 21. Add a couple of L lenses to cover standard and telephoto, and all of a sudden I am schlepping around 6+ kgs of gear.

Today, I carry two A7, both Batis, and the 55 1.8, for less than half the weight. A significant change for me, and I believe for many.

[Rob C]

Help me, help me!!!  bzzzzzzz   

Sweet drrrreams!

;-)

Rob C

[eronald]

Yes of course, we all know that, that is not the point... In my case, I never shot with the big white teles. I am sure that for most users, they never did also. My point is that until recently, if one wanted FF and Zeiss glass for landscapes, on a DSLR, that meant say two 6D, with a Distagon 21. Add a couple of L lenses to cover standard and telephoto, and all of a sudden I am schlepping around 6+ kgs of gear.

Today, I carry two A7, both Batis, and the 55 1.8, for less than half the weight. A significant change for me, and I believe for many.

I tried the Leica S, the Sony A7RII and the SL today, and found I just like optical viewfinders.

Edmund

[Manoli]

I tried the Leica S, the Sony A7RII and the SL today, and found I just like optical viewfinders.

Edmund,

Perfect timing, but before you lay out for the 'S', you'll be pleased to know that Sony have announced a firmware upgrade for the 'vanilla' A7II - uncompressed RAW and Phase/CD AF much as the A7R, albeit with reduced focus points. Release date: Nov-18.

M

[eronald]

Edmund,

Perfect timing, but before you lay out for the 'S', you'll be pleased to know that Sony have announced a firmware upgrade for the 'vanilla' A7II - uncompressed RAW and Phase/CD AF much as the A7R, albeit with reduced focus points. Release date: Nov-18.

M

Manoli,

 I am too poor anyway; the problem seems to be that my 1Ds3 has the best viewfinder outside MF, and I have been spoilt.

 The A72 is selling for about 1800 E at FNAC, and I suspect the price will fall quickly. The A7RII is not on sale in France in high-volume stores AFAIK.

 I suspect that a surplus sub $1K H3D Hassy is in my future, about 2 years away.  When I got the 1Ds3 it was already 5 years old. Of course at that point, the A7R2 will probably be something I'll fish out of a dustbin in front of one of the posh apartments near Trocadéro

Edmund