About to Buy -- What do you think ?

Started Apr 13, 2013 | Discussions thread
123Mike
Senior MemberPosts: 4,141Gear list
Like?
Re: Really?
In reply to Guidenet, Apr 15, 2013

Mike, let me ask you a question. With all your backpeddling

I'm not the one making straw man arguments.

, misinformation

I have not intentionally lied. I have pointed out lists of features that makes the Sony unique.

, crazy ideas

I'm not the one that created the features.

, lack of understanding

That's your arrogant assumption.

, bad attitude

I'm not the one attacking, ridiculing, laughing, ganging up, making fun of.

, ranting and whatnot

I'm defending the list of features that makes the Sony a better option for new buyers.

, do you really think a new prospective buyer is more or less likely to consider a Sony a57 after following these threads?

They're buying a camera, they're not looking to suck up to you. Or perhaps they are, I don't know.

Seriously, you're doing and have done your brand way more harm than good.

That's your story and you're stuck with it.

Even the average Sony owner see this.

Sony owners are familiar with the advantages they have.

You obviously do not, but think about it.

Think about all those features that you don't have.

Add this to the fact your battery tests seem to point out you have had and might still be having focus issues with your Sony camera. There probably isn't any, but you obviously thought there was or half your gallery wouldn't have been the typical battery test.

The battery test was after observing back focusing, which was later tracked to a problem in two lenses, where axial chromatic aberration was causing the camera to focus wrong with the lens wide open. One lens in particular was supposed to be a really good lens, and it exhibited this problem also causing massive veiling and hazing wide open that goes away when stopping down. The unexpected part is that normally you only expect to see this kind of focus shifting on very fast lenses, but this lens was a 28-135 f4-4.5 lens. I've had lengthy discussions and noone had suggested focus shifting because noone had expected that to happen THIS badly on this kind of lens.

You don't seem to understand HDR photography.

Another arrogant assumption, and accusation. High Dynamic Range. One shot captures one range from dark to light. To increase the range, one can combine multiple shots each with different exposure. I can code up the computer algorithms that can make all that work in a separate app if I wanted to. ps. I'm so tired of people trying to come out ahead by trying to put me down.

You think frame-rates are the only thing sports photographers are looking for and believe frame-rates are the most important aspect to others.

That's not what I said. But I know that for a consumer camera, someone wanting to capture high action sports, such a person could do very well with an A57!

You're shocked the a99 doesn't bother with this much in the way of frame-rates. You don't consider buffer size and read speed nor files size. You probably don't understand tracking.

Again, you're making assumption that there is something I might not know. Do you think it is ok if there was something I might not know? Would that automatically make me completely inferior and rookie? I'm sure there are thing that you know that I don't, and vice versa. I'm sure for instance, if we go sit down at a computer, I'd code circles around you. Would I go smear your nose into that if we'd be talking about coding? No! But if someone is using a better programming language with better features, when someone looking to program, is better off with one language over the other.

You believe sweep panorama is a good legit substitute for real panorama photography.

I did not say that. You might have missed a message. My opinion on panoramas is that a Fish-eye provides better results. I did point out that one can take the panorama side ways so that it isn't so darn wide and skinny vertically. I also pointed out that because of the sweep it creates a horizontal blur, and lastly I admitted that that feature is a bit of a gimmick. However - I *HAVE* created a few interesting landscape captures where I didn't have the right lens. A kludge but it worked, kind of. It's not what you buy a camera for, I admit that.

You see no advantages in full frame 35mm sensors though Sony's top shelf model embraces it.

Of course I see an advantage in ff. Shallower DOF. The AF having a better opportunity to better measure distance and as a result focus better. A larger sensor area capturing more collective light. I've seen plenty of really amazing FF shots that are very difficult to equate, if at all, using a crop camera. But it is also possible that the guy having a crop shows up with results that the FF guy didn't outdo. If I had a choice, I'd go full frame for sure. A99 all the way! For sports, if I were a pro, which I'm not, I'd keep an A57 on the scene as well! Purely for the 10 and 12 fps action, plus it'd be ready with the right lens.

You don't understand the difference between professional grade gear and consumer grade entry level.

Again with the arrogance. Drop it already. I'm not an idiot.

You seem to have zero clue s to what is important to advanced seasoned photographers or professionals. You seem to think all the features you state are unique to your camera.

The list of features are not found on the competition anywhere near that price. That is something.

You don't understand which of those are really important.

Someone want to take some video around the house of the kids, pets, local sports, and whatnot. Some fast action snapping at 12 fps. Using 10 fps to burst many shots in crappy lighting condition when only like 5% of the shots turn out good. A better flip out screen. A cost effective array of lenses to tap into. All important reasons to someone getting into this.

You don't even know how to use many of them and have little experience with them.

Arrogant.

Add this to your name calling

I don't recall calling anyone actually names. Where? Did I slip somewhere? I don't want to actually call names. I think others called me names though.

ranting and attitude,

Is it nice for people to shoot down, ridicule, insult me, downplay, after I merely point out why Sony is a great choice camera for a new buyer? Am I not allowed to defend the points I'm making, which are very valid.

and I wonder if you think you're making a good impression to the average reader for you or your camera choice.

I'm not courting anyone. I don't have anyone here to suck up to. I could understand why people would hate me for starting to list things that can't equate in a specific Nikon or Canon forum. But this is an open brand-less forum. Some guy wanting to buy a camera. I'm simply pointing out what I know.

 123Mike's gear list:123Mike's gear list
Sony a6000 Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS A3000 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Tamron AF 28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) Macro +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow