A6000 vs. A77ii Continuous AF - Very confused

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
VirtualMirage
Senior MemberPosts: 2,398Gear list
Like?
Re: A6000 vs. A77ii Continuous AF - Very confused
In reply to 123Mike, 4 months ago

123Mike wrote:

We're both expressing opinions and facts.

Now we are, but my initial post wasn't.  Opinions didn't start to slip in until you started to downplay the facts.  Hence, reread the original post.

The fact that people find the EVF good enough, is a fact.

No, it isn't.  It is still an opinion.  That is what you are missing.  I could really care less about your opinion.  I have an issue with you trying to pass opinion as fact.

The SLTs have the same issue. What is shown in the EVF (or LCD) is interrupted while the exposure is taking place.

Wrong again.  Just because you can't see anything on your display during the exposure doesn't mean the AF still isn't working.  Since the AF sensor is a separate module that is constantly receiving light even during the exposure, the AF is not interrupted.  On a camera wtih on sensor AF points, the AF is interrupted during the exposure process since no light is reaching the AF points.  At this point either focus waits until the AF points receive light again or predictive AF algorithms take place and try to guess where the target will be.

I'm not contradicting anything. You're just trying distort things whenever you think that helps your argument.

It's kind of hard to distort it when in one comment above you said that it is tracking in real time at 11fps, which I followed up with that it is using predictive AF algorithms to do that while an exposure is taking place.  You then claim that the predictive AF algorithm is my opinion and that the AF can see between shots.  So you saying at first that focusing is real time and now that it is between shots is contradicting.

Why are you so threatened by opinions? I think you're trying to get others to have an opinion, controlled with how your are presenting facts. The fact that the opinions aren't working out the way you want, is upsetting you.

No, but clearly you are threatened by facts.  Especially facts that may not agree with your personal opinions of said camera.

It's you that is obsessed that 12 fps is more than 11 fps.

I beg to differ since it is you that keeps bringing it up and assuming I am trying to label one as better than the other.  I never even mentioned that the higher frame rate makes it a superior camera.  I only mentioned that it puts more of a demand on the hardware.

You are most certainly implying that one is better than the other. You even come up with stories about continuous uninterrupted focus input making anything less automatically inferior.

Ummm....no, I am not.  I listed facts and let them speak for themselves.  If you feel threatened that another camera specs higher than yours, then that is of your own deduction.  But I never said one camera was better than the other.

It is just a direct comparison to explain the reasons why the camera costs more.

Given what you can get for half the price these dasys, it seems to me the A77ii is overpriced. However, it is possible that the E-mount cameras are somewhat subsidized in the hopes of expensive E-mount lens sales.

Again, but that is an opinion.  But it is finally an opinion that at least responds to why you think there is a cost difference between the two.  Here, you are heading back on track.

Common assembly line stuff. Won't cost that much.

But it still costs money, does it not?  More parts, more money, more to put together during manufacturing, more components that have individual mark ups.

It can be pennies to the dollar, but it still adds up and contributes to the overall cost.

That's what I think about you. You're trying to milk any little thing you can to nullify views that are different from your own.

You really have a skewed perception here.  You really think I am trying to belittle one camera over the other or even belittle your opinions.  You couldn't be further from the truth.

It really comes down to semantics.  What I am posting you see as something different.  I am posting non-biased facts (spec sheet level facts), you see me as trying to promote one camera over the other.  What I see as corrections, you see as me trying to silence your opinions.

You're expressing opinions about the cost. You're also expressing opinions about your assumption that one's focus system is better than the other.

So more buttons should cost less than fewer buttons?

A higher resolution EVF is cheaper than a lower resolution EVF?

A bigger body that requires more materials (magnesium at that) is cheaper than a smaller body that is mostly composite?

Tell me, are those really opinions?

As for the assumption that one focus system is better than the other, you are seeing things.  I didn't say one was better than the other.  I did, however, mention factual limitations of one focusing system over another.  But I never mentioned how one performs compared to the other.

Trust me, you're being negative right from the start.

I'd really like to know how I was being negative from the start.  Give me some examples.  This ought to be good.

If any negativity has been mentioned it has been towards your lack of actually listening and comprehending what is being said and what the post was actually about.  But that didn't occur until some posts in.  But as for your opinions or towards the cameras, there hasn't been any negativity.

Plus you're trying to downplay what I have to say. And you're adding opinions. Claiming you're only about facts, which is false.

Seriously, what am I downplaying?  I really want to know since you haven't come up with a single good example that shows that I have downplayed you.  Meanwhile, I have come up with several where you did such a thing to me.

In your eyes, people should not be saying things like camera X is a competent camera? You'd be having very boring conversations then, because it must only be about what can not be denied by anyone. Oh but wait, you *are* allowed to insert and imply opinions, but you have a problem when others do that. Right. And that's reasonable?

Wrong again, very wrong.

People can claim all they want how competent a camera is but it doesn't make it fact, it only makes it an opinion.  And people are entitled to their opinions, but it still doesn't make it a fact.

What I offered was material where people can take it in and come up with their own opinions.  I didn't insert my opinion in my original post to sway someone one way or another.

You, on the other hand, voiced your opinion against fact trying to counter it in favor of just one camera.  You then take offense at anything outside of your opinion.  And to go further, you expanded the opinion from being just your opinion to being the "people's" opinion, aka the majority or everyone.  That doesn't sound reasonable to me.

So from now on, you won't express any more opinions then? Only state facts. That also means you can not comment on if someone's picture is a nice picture, because after all, those can not be facts.

No, and that is also where you fail to understand and use a terrible example at that.

It's one thing to give your opinion when asked for, it is also one thing to give a opinion and label it as such.  But when you try to dispute facts with opinions (especially ones that hold no ground) or give opinions and label them as facts is when you are in the wrong.  That is what I am getting at here.

You tried to dispute facts with your opinions, and that is why I decided to step in.  You then claim my facts are not facts but instead are opinions, followed up with claiming I am trying to silence your opinions because I don't like what you have to say because you are in Camp A.  You claim I am in Camp B, but really you don't know that since I never promoted one camera over the other.

You're not being reasonable is what. This is not how normal conversation work. You're being absolutely anal about things here. Trying police what one can and can not say. Ridiculous.

Do you really think you are being reasonable?

You keep digging yourself into a deeper hole, failing to understand why I am even having this conversation with you.  Do you even know why I keep responding to you?  Do you even know what initiated it?

If you think it is because I don't like your opinion or that I am trying to silence you or trying to sway someone to a different camera, you are dead wrong.  It has nothing to do with any of those.

I am not saying you are wrong to think how awesome the A6000 is nor am I saying how much much better the A77II is.

When I do, you're pointing out how it is not a fact. So, every time there is an opinion, you're going to try to get others to conform to only expressing facts then.

Again, you responded to a factoid post with opinions that try to downplay and/or refute the specs and are upset that I responded back to you correcting you of such.

As said before, if you responded in your own post listing your opinions as a stand alone, to someone elses opinions, or directly to the OP it wouldn't be a problem.  And not because they are opinions and they don't belong in my post, but because their wording and implication has more meaning standing on their own.

But instead you responded to facts and based your opinions against them to refute the viability.  On top of that, they were opinions that had nothing to do with the topic. To go even further, instead of giving a summarization of your opinion at the bottom, you felt that you needed to itemize each piece with its own opinion.  When you did this, your opinions changed from an OP ED piece that sings your praises to counterpoint post with weak arguments and not much backing to lean against.

Same words, different posts, different interpretations.

You're pretending that you're talking about facts. But you're implying opinions, by making it seem that the cost of buttons is substantial. I think it's not. We simply have a difference of opinion in that regard.

But I was talking about facts, clear as day.

I never said the buttons were substantial in cost.  They are just one of many other features and components that add to the cost.  Nothing more, nothing less.

Yes, let's let others decide who is being reasonable. I'm not worried.

Well, judging by the likes on the posts, it appears more people are in agreement with me than you.  But that isn't about camera opinions, which for some reason is what you think this is about.

Those are your assumptions and opinions, not facts.

No, I'm pretty sure they are facts.  Fact:  the A6000's AF points can't focus on anything when the shutter is in the way.  Fact:  The A77II's dedicated AF sensor can focus while the shutter is in the way of the sensor.  Pretty simple, actually.

We disagree.

Clearly we do since you think I don't value opinions.  On that same note I can say that you are coming across as not valuing facts.

You're making your share of assumptions. This comes off as truthful claims. Claims how one is better because of something that you see working different from the other.

Go on, list my share of assumptions that hasn't already been stated as such.  List what I am trying to pass off as truthful claims.

Again, I never said one camera is better than the other.  They are different horses for different courses, which has been mentioned ad nauseam.

And I am correcting you. You're claiming you're only stating facts. You're stating opinions and you're making assumptions as well.

Again, list where I am wrong.

You've been negative to moment that you started this argument.

Proof?

I have. You seemed to have a problem with that.

Nope, I don't.  You don't see me responding to your other posts, do you?

What facts have I denied?

How the AF works, the EVF, the flash, the buttons.  Care for me to go on?

There it is again. "but but but, op this and op that, and dare you veer off course". It's about A77ii vs A6000 stuff. Cost difference. What justifies it. Does it imply that one is automatically so much better because of the higher cost? Pointing out that the lower cost one is by no means inferior, is just fine, and you can not forbid that. You simply do not have that kind of control.

You clearly have an issue with actually answering the OP's original question.  Why do you feel that you cannot answer what the thread was originally about and must feel to post whatever you feel like that barely has any relation to the topic?

You don't jump into a car thread talking about engines and make a post talking about computers.  It's off topic.  Which is now what this has digressed to.

And my point of view is very straightforward. I openly share my views, my opinions, and my findings. It is what we do here. You don't like that. Well that's too bad.

Again, they are welcome.  But don't get offended when you are wrong and someone decides to respond pointing it out.

We'll let others decide who's the one needing growing up. People probably think we're both nuts at this point.

At this point probably so.  So far it seems from other responses, people are in agreement with me.  But here I am continuing to "feed the troll", so to speak.

Your stories about continuous auto focus were quite telling.

Again, that is what you took away from the facts.  Don't feel threatened by it. It is what it is and is a limitation in the design.  Luckily, it seems to have a good enough predictive AF algorithm that it may handle most situations just fine.

And that's what happens. Things come up. Not something for you to forbid.

I didn't forbid it.

Op this and op that. I guess everything should be a questionair on forums like this. Rule A number one: though shall not discuss any other matters than precisely what the op talks about. Well, the op didn't set any rules. The op expressed what justified the cost difference. And that leads to analyzing all the things that people can think of. I contributed my bit. You had a problem with that.

Again with this fear to actually respond to the OP's original question.  So why are you in this thread again?

That's how I see you.

You see me as superior, how kind.

Joking aside, it is you that took the post as thinking it was superiority match.  I have mentioned numerous times this isn't a competition and I am not mentioning what camera is better than the other.

What facts have I denied?

How the AF works, the EVF, the flash, the buttons.  Care for me to go on?

You're trying to make my opinions seems incorrect and unimportant by trying to change the subject to other facts.

No.  I am clarifying that your opinions are opinions and that they do not change the facts.

You're distorting things again. I was sharing my excitement how I prefer to maximize on utilizing natural lighting, by using a bright lens on top of a focal reducer. I've gotten nice results with that, and perhaps others might find that useful. So, I can live with a smaller flash, because in my case I'm not using it much, if at all. When others get frustrated that the flash is too weak, then they could also consider using the tricks I have. Or not. That's ok.

Regardless, it still doesn't change the fact that it has a weaker flash.  That was the plain and simple comparison I was getting at.

I say higher resolution EVF, you say you are happy with yours.

No. I said that I have not seen people having used or evaluated the EVF, complain about it being not good enough. So you're distorting, misquoting things, again.

So you are not happy with your EVF?

You also said the EVF on the A6000 is just fine, I assumed that meant you are happy with it and that a higher resolution EVF gives no advantage.

I didn't quite say they're not needed. I said that there are plenty of buttons on the A6000, plus that it has a customizable menu on top of the customizable buttons.

To say the A6000 has plenty of buttons, would that not imply that you feel the extra buttons on the A77II are not needed then?

Again, my post was in regards to what adds to the cost, not what makes the camera better.

"So my opinions need correcting? Opinions about button quantities and using bright lenses and avoiding flash? Because you have different opinions."

Your opinions didn't contribute to why one camera costs more to the other, instead you took my bullet points of items that may contribute to increased costs and questioned the need for such items and that many of them you felt you didn't need.

I though my solution was constructive. You didn't like it. The flash is weak, fine. So?

It would have been constructive if someone was asking for reasons to not use a flash.  But it offered nothing to explain the cost difference between the two flashes.

Sure it had place in the conversation! Flash is used to make photography in darker situation possible, among other reasons. There are other ways to do that, which are also appealing. Sure, it doesn't solve every need, but it *IS* a solution in some cases. I'm free to offer these options, and there isn't a darn thing you can do about that.

Know what that is called?  It is called going off on a tangent.  You claim relevance because of one very loose link that can tie everything together.  In this case, flash.  Yet, your response holds no place nor contributes to the original question or to my response, which was about cost.

I've talked about that a number of times now, right in this very message. Scroll up.

Actually, you didn't.  You mentioned once or twice about the AF which wasn't an opinion but fact.  You don't mention much else.

That particular issue, it doesn't affect me, and probably not most others either. And I've explained why.

Again, that is your opinion but still doesn't explain why it may or may not cost more.  And while it doesn't affect you, it can affect others and may be a factor in their purchase.  But that wasn't the point of this conversation.

The auto focus mechanism comes to mind.

I stated the differences, I didn't claim it was superior.  Again, that was your take away.

Stories about auto focusing for one. How having more buttons is much better. How it's important to have a faster shutter speed. It's all over.

No, most of those were in response to your comments and not ones I laid out in the original post.  And some of those you were even asking a question to their relevance, which I then gave you an answer.  So really, you asked for it so I gave it to you.


Scroll up, rinse and repeat.

And again, you failed to provide any significant proof.  As I mentioned before my original post were based on facts with one publicly labeled assumption.  Any opinions mentioned afterwards were in response to some of your questions as well as your opinions.  But none of those opinions were directly favoring one camera over another.

What you consider proper, might be seen as un-creative by others (it is by me).

Read above as to what I mean by this.

You're trying to prevent someone arguing why a given fact is not important enough to make a enough of a difference to make it a deciding factor. So, you're trying to control the conversation, again, through restrictions and made up rules, your standards.

No, I am trying to correct someone who is using a cost comparison post as a sounding board to reflect their personal opinions in favor of only one camera all the while having none of those opinions relate to the original topic of explaining the cost difference between the two.

You're not tolerating opinions that you do not like, that much is clear.

You are not tolerating facts nor know how to stay on topic, that is my issue.  As mentioned before over and over, I have no issue with opinions.

That's your opinion and your view. You have your interests. You think your view is more valid?

Actually, yeah...I do.  My original post stayed on topic.

I don't think I'm off topic at all. This argument I'm having with your is off topic, but that's an argument that you started, not me.

I think what you need to learn is that other people have other ways of looking at things. Instead of trying to control things by forcing things, let people be what they are. If someone offers a creative solution, don't downplay that, just because you insist that the other must simply acknowledge a fact.

Actually, you started it with your off topic opinions.  You then continued this conversation to run further off topic by arguing against it and failing to see what the original problem was about, which then you someone misconstrued into thinking we are trying to see which camera is better (which it has nothing to do with it).

I am all for letting people be who they are.  There is a place for creative solutions, but my post wasn't that place.  It wasn't a post about the limitations of a camera, only a cost comparison between the two.  You, somehow, decided that was a perfect post to offer "solutions", "good enoughs", and "not needed" ideas.

The whole point of how this went off the rails is you went way off the tangent.  This conversation would have been real short if you responded with something like:

"Yeah, sorry about that.  You are right those can add to the cost of the camera.  My opinions are not refuting that.  I was just offering my opinion of the camera based on my personal experience.  It doesn't have much relevance to the topic at hand, but I felt the maybe the OP would like to know from a user's perspective on how well the camera works."

But instead, you dug your heels in and decided to run with it regardless of how far off base your were.

That is pretty much it in a nutshell, practically my only issue with this whole conversation.  It had nothing to do with your views on the camera or opinions in general.  You just listed off your opinions in the wrong topic.

 VirtualMirage's gear list:VirtualMirage's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony SLT-A77 Sony a77 II Sony 50mm F1.4 Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX +24 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
f/8New
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow