[monochrome]

Where's jogiba when you need him?

Yikes!

[LensBeginner]

poor quackers

I believe it's "clackers", no need to start calling names.

[abmj]

This whole argument - er, thread - has gotten very tedious and boring.

[eddie1960]

The whole thread has degenerated
Osv go troll the Sony forum for a while because you are getting too offensive here and slagging the brand which is specifically against forum rules if I was modding you would have earned infractions today
A7 I think we can all agree is a nice camera but not for everyone ( me for instance I didn't like the interface having just bought my entire signature in 30 days any brand was obviously an option)
Ff is no longer the be all end all its main advantage right now is even less dof on a 1.2 lens
Not sure anyone needs that but hey whatever
We can probably all agree Sony has currently a poor selection of lenses if they want to be the pro alternative
So does Pentax
Both seem to be out to change that
It's also obvious to anyone who pays attention to the world outside photo enthusiasts that t camera market is shrinking in general not just dslr
The revolution is not mirrorless but phones
The vast majority of images recorded are now on phones
As the tech improves that will continue to be where the general non geek public record their images
They are good enough (just like 126 was at one point or 110)
Pros will continue to use whatever tool suits their needs and if they need to change systems they will because they can its a tool and is treated as such
Fan boys and enthusiasts will continue to argue about arcane stuff rather than go take a picture
Personally I think I'll go take some pictures where's that tripod

[clackers]

you lose 1/3-1/2ev, not "30% of your ff light" certainly the most ignorant claim that you've made yet!

Let me get this right.

You don't understand autofocus, mount lengths, len design, financial documents ... and with Sony trolling you lecture us about Pentax being doomed ....

And now you don't understand what's fundamental to photography - light.

You just get better and better.

Because of logarithms, 1/2eV *is* 30%.

Will you believe that only if it applies to Sony?

Okay then: Sony SLT Alpha A55 In-depth Review: Digital Photography Review

What did you say, Osv ... "Ignorant claim"?

If we buy an A7R like you did, tell us we won't also lose brain cells ... you've got me worried!

[kadajawi]

I was actually missing something then!
Well, there are already cameras that allow you to get 8MP stills from 4k footage, I remember reading that about a new piece of hardware recently...
If price is not an issue, why not...

Edit: seen now that the GH4 can do that... wonder what's the quality like... the one I read about however was something along the lines of a blackmagic or red... can't remember now...

Yup. And the Samsung NX1. Samsung NX1 - which is 4K video and which is the 28MP raw still? Can you tell? - EOSHD


The NX1 was reviewed by The Camera Store recently, and it sounds quite promising. The EVF is as good as it gets (no lag, though I wonder what happens when it gets darker), the sensor is the best APS-C sensor yet. About 1 stop better than the K-3, despite having 28 MP. AF performance is... a bit all over the place. AF-C seems to work better than AF-S, and with one lens it didn't work well at all. When it gets darker AF seems to be problematic too. Might be fixed in firmware, we'll have to see (one area where Pentax won't have to worry, I suppose?). Some minor UI things that can be fixed. They compared the build quality to the Leica S2. What the ...?

[jeff knight]

Are SLRs dying?

All electronics are trending towards smaller. Miniaturization of components is an inevitable wave of the future. EVF's will only get better and better and we won't have to wait long as the technological acceleration is increasing more rapidly than ever before, Cameras will see better in the dark than your eyes can now. SLR's are like SUV's big, clunky, and pretty much unnecessary. (Probably a bad analogy as you are definitely safer in a SUV in a collision.) SLR's will be a tiny niche market in the future, mainly because they will be too expensive to make.

Years ago I got into a big argument with a guy who insisted to me that 8 track tapes would be around forever. He really believed they were here to stay! There will always be people like that.

[Digitalis]

All electronics are trending towards smaller. Miniaturization of components is an inevitable wave of the future. EVF's will only get better and better and we won't have to wait long as the technological acceleration is increasing more rapidly than ever before, Cameras will see better in the dark than your eyes can now.

The problem is that fast high quality lenses will always be big - there is absolutely no way with current technology to get around this. So you can make cameras smaller but if you want make the most of your sensor and obtain excellent image quality at you will still have to haul around a Zeiss Otus. Unless you are content to walk around using an f/8 super compact 12-200mm wunderplastic zoom lens and having to squint at the grainy EVF and shoot at ISO 12800 as soon as the light levels start to get challenging, to hell with that idea.

[osv]

Because of logarithms, 1/2eV *is* 30%.

you think that i haven't seen that already? it's been argued ad nauseam on the sony forums for years now... that "30%" is a drama queen number from a dpr article about a *first-gen slt camera that's over 4 years old*

fact is, the lea4 photo comparisons that people have made don't typically show any more than 1/3ev loss, which is insignificant.

judge the lea4 p.q. for yourself here: Sony LA-EA4 Review | PhillipReeve.net

"Advantages of a pellicle mirror:
The user has an uninterrupted view through the viewfinder while making an exposure.
There is no vibration from mirror movement, reducing shake and audible noise.
Shutter lag may be diminished, and pictures taken at a faster rate, compared to systems employing a reflex mirror.
Continuous phase-detection autofocus during video, live view or continuous shooting mode.

Disadvantages of a pellicle mirror:
The pellicle mirror causes a 1/3-stop loss of light. (Some light is redirected to the viewfinder.)
The mirror has to be kept perfectly clean, or the light sensor and other electronics (as well as the image quality) will suffer.
Owing to its thinness, the pellicle mirror is rather fragile. This makes it difficult to clean."
Pellicle mirror - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

some of that might not apply to an lea4 situation, but you get the idea.

[Digitalis]

wow people are still arguing over light loss from pellicle mirrors - ah that takes me back...

[IchabodCrane]

wow people are still arguing over light loss from pellicle mirrors - ah that takes me back...

No kidding. This subject is incredibly old and I'm sure everyone here knows what the SLT technology is all about. If it's so great, why does it appear Sony is throwing it away?

[Nicolas06]

prove it.

Help yourself and learn to use google, thanks.

[Nicolas06]

you think that i haven't seen that already? it's been argued ad nauseam on the sony forums for years now... that "30%" is a drama queen number from a dpr article about a *first-gen slt camera that's over 4 years old*

fact is, the lea4 photo comparisons that people have made don't typically show any more than 1/3ev loss, which is insignificant.

The good thing with you osv is that you are so willing to say Sony is the best and insist on that you make lot of statement that push other to respond... And in the end even you finish by admiting all the drawbacks of the system. You are likely one of the best guys out there to convince everybody in the end that thoses A7 bodies are quite uninterresting.

One thing is sure to me, if somebody was hesitating on switching to A7 but then following this thread, he is very likely to think of it a lot more before doing it !

[LensBeginner]

you think that i haven't seen that already? it's been argued ad nauseam on the sony forums for years now... that "30%" is a drama queen number from a dpr article about a *first-gen slt camera that's over 4 years old*

fact is, the lea4 photo comparisons that people have made don't typically show any more than 1/3ev loss, which is insignificant.

judge the lea4 p.q. for yourself here: Sony LA-EA4 Review | PhillipReeve.net

"Advantages of a pellicle mirror:
The user has an uninterrupted view through the viewfinder while making an exposure.
There is no vibration from mirror movement, reducing shake and audible noise.
Shutter lag may be diminished, and pictures taken at a faster rate, compared to systems employing a reflex mirror.
Continuous phase-detection autofocus during video, live view or continuous shooting mode.

Disadvantages of a pellicle mirror:
The pellicle mirror causes a 1/3-stop loss of light. (Some light is redirected to the viewfinder.)
The mirror has to be kept perfectly clean, or the light sensor and other electronics (as well as the image quality) will suffer.
Owing to its thinness, the pellicle mirror is rather fragile. This makes it difficult to clean."
Pellicle mirror - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

some of that might not apply to an lea4 situation, but you get the idea.

Those are all, bar the first maybe, advantages of a mirrorless camera as well... new ones have on-sensor PDAF (they can also do hybrid AF) I believe...

[kadajawi]

No kidding. This subject is incredibly old and I'm sure everyone here knows what the SLT technology is all about. If it's so great, why does it appear Sony is throwing it away?

I think it was a only there because Sony wanted to get mirrorless with decent AF, and the only way to do that back then was using the mirror. Now that sensors are getting the PDAF sensors on the sensor, SLTs become obsolete. There is no advantage anymore.