About to Buy -- What do you think ?

Started Apr 13, 2013 | Discussions thread
123Mike
Senior MemberPosts: 4,220Gear list
Like?
Re: features or fluff?
In reply to mike703, Apr 16, 2013

Mike, you need to take a deep breath and lie down.

Join the insulters. Line up over here!

Leave the forum for a day and get a sense of perspective... Apart from your repeated and hysterical rudeness

Correction. I'm not the one being rude. I'm not the one trying to put others down to make myself look better. I'm not the one making personal insults.

, you keep harping on about this list of features like it's a holy grail.

It's a serious list of features offering many possibilities for a good price, compared to what you have to spend with the competition, and even then, you don't get it all. Sorry that you do not like that.

Most of what you list below I would regard as an irrelevance (to me), a pointless gimmick, or easily available on other cameras.

Of course, the usual downplaying. Pretending it's real. Pretending it's not important.

For example:  I use a humble Pentax K-01... which cost about half of a Sony A57

That's great! Half though? The A57 was on for $399 couple of weeks ago!

  • 10 fps burst rate, no compromises
  • 12 fps burst rate, cropped
  • Faster AF
  • 1080/60p/30p/24p video
  • Fast continuous AF during video
  • Stereo Mic
  • HDR
  • In camera panoramas stitching
  • Access to AF lenses from 80s (Minolta mostly)
  • Live view always available with no compromises
  • Excellent low light abilities
  • Camera body based stabilization
  • Focus peaking
  • Kelvin WB Adjustment
  • Lens Correction for CAs, Distortion, Vignetting
  • 15 Point AF
  • Wireles Flash Commander
  • High Speed Flash Snyc
  • 100%/1.04x EVF

Burst rate?  Totally irrelevant to me.  I don't 'spray and pray' and don't shoot sports.

That's fine. Whatever works for you. But a new comer might be interested in this. Also, have you considered that when you want to take a picture where it's hard to hold still because of too long an exposure, like indoor flashless or stopped down telephoto, then when, say only 5% of the shots turn out sharp, that when you burst many photos, you then have a higher chance of ending up with the photos you want. I had an interesting bird land on a tree the other day. My telelens is kind of so so unless stopped down. Lighting was not ideal. So, I burst a bunch of shots, and ended up with about 20 worthwhile shots. Without the bursting, I might have only had a few, and less choice. Of course, you may not want do that, so a camera without that feature would be better for you. Do you tell others that they should not want that too, so that they can then too avoid a camera that offers this?

Faster AF? - no doubt - but for landscapes / portraits / architecture they usually sit still.  Give me accurate over fast any day.

I can appreciate accurate. I haven't heard the A57 failing in that aspect though.

Video - completely not interested.

But others are.

HDR - a gimmick.  if you want to do it properly put the camera on a tripod and shoot a series of RAW files at different exposures and do the HDR properly afterwards.

The camera can do this for you. This saves time, requires less equipment, is more readily available, you can review it on the spot, and it is accessible to non-experts. Great for new comers.

Panorama stitching - another gimmick to impress the credulous.  iPhones do that.

I know that is a bit of a gimmick, but you *CAN* take interesting shots with it if you don't have the right lens with you. To compare it with an iPhone is just stupid.

You can take a panorama sideways, so that the shot is closer the aspect ratio of a normal picture. You end up with a very wide high resolution image. It handles the stitching process pretty decently. Of course this has its issues, but it is nice to have.

if you want to do it properly, again you need a tripod, take several overlapping stills, and splice later.

Way too complicated for most users.

I have access to Pentax lenses going back who knows how far.  They are MF but with focus peaking that's fine and they are cheap and optically excellent in many cases.

I have access to Pentax lenses going way back when too. I have a Vivitar 135 f2.8 M42 Pentax screw mount lens from way back when, that I picked up for very cheap. Manual focus of course, but it's surprisingly good. The focus peaking is enormously helpful with this. I see you have that too - that's great!

Live view always available - check!

I'm pretty sure that you lose phase based auto focusing when you use live view, making it very slow and sloppy.

Excellent low light capabilities - check!

Agreed.

In-body stabilisation, focus peaking - check!

Great!

Custom WB... does any half decent camera NOT have that?!

Usually you get the ability to fixate it on something white (or a grey card of course), but it's nice to be able to just manually adjust the temperature up and down to give it a nudge after auto adjusting it. I don't know what other cameras offer to that respect.

Wireless flash etc... I prefer available light so I don't care.

I'm not much of a flash guy myself. I have an external flash, but I don't like it. I prefer a fast lens, and I overcome blurriness by bursting many shots.

100% EVF - I find that I prefer to use the screen (I wear rather bulky spectacles which interfere with an OVF / EVF) so wouldn't use an EVF if I had one.

Me too. I wear glasses, and I never ever use the VF. I use the screen 100% of the time, even outside in bright light. The VF could break for all I care. Not going back for warranty and lose the camera for 6 weeks.

The point is... you keep reciting this cut-and-paste list of features like a talisman to prove desperately that your choice of camera is better than everyone else's needs.  It's like saying (over and over again) 'hey, my car is better than yours cos it's a got a 10-CD autochanger, a spoiler, and a leather-trimmed steering wheel, so there!'  If you are happy with your choice, whoopee, well done.  But your choice is not for me, thanks.

You need to reconsider what it is that I'm responding to. I'm simply pointing out the positives, and others are trying to put it down. That's how it is here!

I wanted a new comer to consider the A57 as a viable option that offer amazing value and that is just as formidable as a player as any of the other cameras, which have the false reputation that they're the king of the hill.

 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 Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM +4 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