Previous news story    Next news story

Sony gives more detail of its OLED viewfinder

By dpreview staff on Sep 8, 2011 at 01:11 GMT

Sony Japan has published more detail about the OLED viewfinder used in the NEX-7, SLT-A77, SLT-A65 and the optional EVF for the NEX-5N. The display is manufactured by Sony and is based on white OLEDs that sit behind colored filters, rather than the red, green and blue colored OLEDs used in many other displays. This could explain the apparent higher color accuracy of the Sony display (since it's easier to adjust the behavior of a color filter than change the emission color of an OLED).

Click here to read original release (in Japanese)

Press Release (Translated from Japanese by Google Translate):

Achieved a 2.4 million effective pixels
Type 0.5 (12.7mm diagonal) EL ultra-compact high-resolution color OLED Display

0.5-type organic EL display

For ultra-compact high-resolution color organic EL display

This product type 0.5 (12.7mm diagonal) 2.4 million effective pixels (XGA) is ultra-compact high-resolution color organic EL display. Driving the semiconductor silicon technology and organic EL display, Sony's unique technologies, high contrast, wide color gamut and fast response and performance. This product is mounted on the camera's electronic viewfinder interchangeable lens type digital SLR*1 Sony announced on August 24, 2011. As consumer electronic viewfinder will be the industry's highest resolution and*2, as the organic EL display has been achieved industry's smallest pixel size*3.

Development and background

Markets digital SLR cameras in recent years, and mirror-less type to enjoy pictures and movies of high quality easily with a small, performed at the same time imaging focus and product in the new method and mirror type semipermeable enjoy the movie and continuous shooting speed has been rapidly increasing.

These new methods, the optical viewfinder is mounted on a conventional SLR camera (OVF) electronic viewfinder instead of the reflectors and the (EVF) is adopted, reflecting directly the object image captured by the CMOS image sensor. The EVF so, it reflects a realistic image in nature comparable to OVF, bokeh natural characteristic Cameras addition, the seminiferous tubules, expressed in depth is required characteristics superior video you can also shoot video or moving subjects The. In addition, its small size is also required in the viewfinder of a camera can be mounted in a limited space.
Sony this time, for the camera viewfinder, has developed a new ultra-compact high-resolution organic EL displays these demands.

Features Ultra-compact high-resolution color organic EL display ● Newly developed

Ultra-compact high-resolution

The realization of 3.3um x 9.9um pixel size of the industry's smallest and *3 achieved a 2.4 million pixel high-definition 0.5 effective ultra-compact type. This time, we adopted the color separation overlay color filter on the white organic EL layer to achieve the ultra-compact high-definition.

Fast response and high contrast wide gamut

High contrast is a characteristic inherent organic EL displays, wide color gamut, fast response by the performance, video and attentive, more natural color reproduction, tone characteristics, and provides excellent video characteristics.

In general, the smaller the pixel size, harder to reproduce the correct color information between pixels become smaller. This challenge, overcome by driving the semiconductor silicon technology and proprietary organic EL display technology, has made it possible to tap the inherent properties of organic EL display, yet ultra-compact high-definition.

Built-in driver

D / A converters needed to drive, drive built into the silicon substrate such as a timing controller functions, and helping to reduce board space in digital camera with the product itself.

Sectional configuration of color organic EL display comparison

*1: "α77" "α65" "NEX-7"
*2: *3 points for consumer electronic viewfinder as August 24, 2011 Date: Date points as the organic EL display of August 24, 2011

Comments

Total comments: 79
dedal
By dedal (Feb 7, 2012)

I do not understand the reviews about this EVF.

I just received my nex-7, the EVF is awful compared to the OVF of my 5D2.
The image has a way too high contrast, literally burned compared to the main screen.

Tell me there is a process to adjust the contrast, or a firmware update, at least an explanation, something… or I send back the nex-7 and keep my nex-5. And I will be sorry to do that, but a nex-7 as a second camera, using only the main screen: better choice on the nex-5.

I do not understand.

0 upvotes
fmian
By fmian (Sep 20, 2011)

Got a hands on with the Nex7 and the A65 at a Sony trade show last night.
I was mainly interested in the performance of the OLED viewfinder.

Having used an SLR with OVF for a few years, I was extremely disappointed.

The view in the OLED finder does not represent what the eye sees, especially in low light. And again, the view does not accurately represent the photo that ends up being taken. Pity considering it's electronic.
There is a very minor delay between handling the lens (focus and zoom) and what is seen through the EVF.
It may not be noticeable unless you have used an OVF extensively, but it's there.
Manual focus is easy enough to work with, but again, it doesn't have that level of immersion that an OVF gives you.
Personally I think it does not hold a candle to an OVF.

0 upvotes
MaikeruN
By MaikeruN (Sep 21, 2011)

Agreed. I was at a trade show too. Maybe the same? haha

I was was aware of the challenges the EVF would have faced in low-light conditions, but I was particularly unhappy with the delay as it switching from LCD to EVF. Half a second delay is too long if you shoot alot and every shot counts.

0 upvotes
kombizz0
By kombizz0 (Sep 11, 2011)

It could be better than this.

0 upvotes
theswede
By theswede (Sep 12, 2011)

Sure, it could be like the superior OLED VF's from ... who?

0 upvotes
xilvar
By xilvar (Sep 8, 2011)

hm. some of the worst english translation I've ever seen "The EVF so, it reflects a realistic image in nature comparable to OVF, bokeh natural characteristic Cameras addition, the seminiferous tubules, expressed in depth is required characteristics superior video you can also shoot video or moving subjects The"

0 upvotes
Sordid
By Sordid (Sep 8, 2011)

You might want to have a look at those funny green letters at the very beginning of the text...

3 upvotes
Weistling
By Weistling (Sep 8, 2011)

What I really want to know is if this viewfinder will have the same blackout after the shutter is released as the viewfinder in the a55. No one ever seems to refer to this issue when discussing efv's. In real world decisive moment shooting, having your viewfinder blackout longer than a normal shutter "blink" is disturbing. When the a55 came along with translucent mirror and evf, one would have believed that no blackout was possible, like in rangefinders. Yet, it's worse. It makes no sense to have any blackout with this technology. Please, dpreview, consider this as part of your critique of this new technology as it arrives. If Sony knows that shooters would love this feature I am sure they would work on it. As of now, there seems to be no interest in this aspect. All I ever read about is pixel advancements. If every photographer out there would imagine , for a minute, shooting with clear view , at all times, how useful that would be, we might get it.

1 upvote
jpr2
By jpr2 (Sep 8, 2011)

this is clearly a critically important factor - and you're right that the silence that shrouds it seems ominous; but then hype always squeezes out all less favorable aspects :(

0 upvotes
bushi
By bushi (Sep 13, 2011)

...but surely, you guys are not linking that whatever "blackout" period after the shutter release, with an EVF display technology, are you?

It clearly is an implementations glitch - probably camera's processor get's busy processing data from the sensor, and it does not feed the EVF in parallel

0 upvotes
tbcass
By tbcass (Sep 21, 2011)

I own an A100 DSLR and an A55. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE in blackout time between the DSLR and the A55. I have used SLR's since the 60's and I assure you I know what I'm talking about. One must turn off auto review to eliminate the blackout delay you talk about but it's not really necessary with EVF's anyway. *Stop spreading lies!!!!!

0 upvotes
McNamaraReport
By McNamaraReport (Sep 8, 2011)

I've probably seen 90% of the LCD and OLED microdisplays made in the last 10 years, and the Sony OLED microdisplay is clearly "pun intended" the best I've come across, not only in resolution, color, and contrast, but also in response during burst mode. I only wish there was more control over the brightness of the display (there's only a +1 to -1 slider that is very limited) so that it could be dimmed to match very low ambient light, as typically found in a theater. Even at its dimmest setting it's so bright that you're shooting eye needs time to adjust to the low ambient light when you take the camera away--a problem not found on OVFs that more closely match ambient light levels at all times.

2 upvotes
Lan
By Lan (Sep 8, 2011)

I suspect the reason they're using one colour, rather than three, is that generally the different colours in an OLED display tend to fade at different rates. Over time that can become a significant and uneven colour shift.

Some common failure modes for OLED can be found here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oled#Disadvantages

The different colours of a standard LED generally require different chemical compositions too. It's much easier (and no doubt cheaper) to produce a single colour and then filter it later.

If you're interested, some info about the different compositions of normal LEDs can be found here:
http://donklipstein.com/ledc.html

0 upvotes
Color Blotch
By Color Blotch (Sep 8, 2011)

Different filter colors are also different chemical compositions. Still it's much simpler to control which wave length you filter than which one you emit. There's always a bit of hit-and-miss with semiconductors, not so much with filters.

1 upvote
Yo1K
By Yo1K (Sep 8, 2011)

The same family of new generation OLED chip is used in new 3D Head Mount Display system HMZ-T1, too.
http://3dvision-blog.com/sonys-3d-head-mounted-display-hmz-t1-will-be-available-soon/

0 upvotes
omr
By omr (Sep 8, 2011)

I don't see a reference link to the original (Japanese) press release.
Here it is:
http://www.sony.co.jp/SonyInfo/News/Press/201108/11-0824/

0 upvotes
kentut21
By kentut21 (Sep 8, 2011)

Why do they leave NEX3 and NEX5 user behind? Why is it not compatible? I sincerely hope it will be rectified... by firmware upgrade perhaps? or by releasing a lower end product? Oh... Sony....

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Sep 8, 2011)

Probably because they lack the needed data interface or bandwith.
Similar to how the newly announced Panasonic lenses (the ultra compact ones) will for example not work on a G1.

0 upvotes
whtchocla7e
By whtchocla7e (Sep 8, 2011)

Take one for the team.
NEX3/5 users are early adopters after all.

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Sep 8, 2011)

"Similar to how the newly announced Panasonic lenses (the ultra compact ones) will for example not work on a G1."

This is incorrect, the new collapsing lenses will work fine on all m4/3 cameras, only additional firmware features (distance display, zoom speed customisation etc.) aren't available.

0 upvotes
theswede
By theswede (Sep 9, 2011)

Because NEX3 and NEX5 do not have the connectors required to use this. There simply isn't enough datalines between body and EVF to make it work - when the old NEX models were built there was most certainly no decision made to build this EVF, and to make the NEX3 and NEX5 more expensive because of an accessory which may or may not be built is a Bad Idea(tm).

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Sep 8, 2011)

Will be interesting to compare to Panasonic's sequential colour EVF, anyone DPR have you had a chance to play with both? Care to comment on personal preference for either one?

0 upvotes
neatnclean
By neatnclean (Sep 8, 2011)

I don't see a real advantage in using white OLEDs with colour filters instead of RGB-colored OLEDs. White OLEDs will inevitably also show some variation in their light emission/spectrum, just the same as RGB-coloured OLEDs. The colour filters themselves are just an additional element in the light path, gobbling up some of the light emitted by the OLEDs = less brightness, less brilliance.
Even more importantly: why are the pixels *rectangular* with 9.9x3.3um? In a high-res OVF I definitely expect to get equal resolution vertically and horizontally! So why not 3.3x3.3um pixels?
And the resolution itself, while better than most current, utterly disappointing low-res EVFs is nothing to really brag either. 2.4M subpixels translats into a measly XGA resolution of 1024x768 real pixels = not even "Full HD" resolution. 10 years ago that would have been quite spectacular, but certainly not in 2011. All in all, this is still at least one product generation away from "good enough for me" EVFs.

0 upvotes
honza_pl
By honza_pl (Sep 8, 2011)

> why are the pixels *rectangular* with 9.9x3.3um?

because there are three (R-G-B) beside ?

0 upvotes
David_London
By David_London (Sep 8, 2011)

The so-called "retina display" in the iphone has only 960x640 resoultion on a 3.5" screen, versus Sony's "measly" 1024x768 on 0.5" screen. That is a crazy leap forward in pixel density.

0 upvotes
MaikeruN
By MaikeruN (Sep 8, 2011)

you're seen a 1024x768 display smaller than a coin before? i think not.

0 upvotes
itsastickup
By itsastickup (Sep 8, 2011)

That would explain why it's so dim in sunlight.

0 upvotes
danw82
By danw82 (Sep 8, 2011)

As people have mentioned, this is a particularly badly informed response.

The pixels are square, it's the three individual RGB elements that make up each pixel that are rectangular.
And 1024x768 across a 1cm display is an order of magnitude more pixel density than anything that's come before.

The issue of coloured OLEDs vs. filtered white ones is a little more ambiguous. True, filtering white light must lose some intensity in the process, but that can easily be compensated by having a more intense white light to begin with, and on a 1cm display, I would think the extra power requirement would be negligible.

At the end of the day, Sony obviously saw a design advantage to using filters, and while you may not see an advantage, I'm guessing they did their homework.

2 upvotes
G Davidson
By G Davidson (Sep 8, 2011)

The resolution is a great technical achievement, don't get me wrong, but in terms of usability we'll need something much better before it can fully replace an OVF.

I can see how it would be a lot better than a 'bad' OVF and it brings a host of benefits; seeing the final picture simulated, camera information being visible and gain in dim light. I just think we need to see beyond the marketing hyperbole and put things in perspective. The resolution is still a challenge for EVF and it may take another doubling of it before it's as satisfying as a good OVF, which, in this price segment, is what Sony will be competing with (D7000, for example).

0 upvotes
SchorschB
By SchorschB (Sep 8, 2011)

Why did they use filters instead of colored OLEDs? (1) Filters have the ability to compensate for the variations in the emissions spectrum, (2) durability: One of the big problems of OLED displays is that the different color dots age at a different speed: Blue ages fastest, red lasts the longest. This would lead to color aberrations that photographers would probably not accept. Sony, as the innovation leader in OLED (they were the first-to-market with a mass produced OLED TV in 2008) are well aware of this.

0 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (Sep 8, 2011)

so, this looks like a high density LCD with a OLED backlight? does each 3 sub-pixel unit have its own white OLED backlight?

0 upvotes
Henrik Herranen
By Henrik Herranen (Sep 8, 2011)

I don't see the connection. To answer your question, each sub-pixel, be it red, green or blue, has its own white OLED whose brightness can be adjusted. There are no liquid-crystal-like elements that would change their light transmittivity as in LCD's, just a passive RGB filter. The brightness and colours are solely defined by the amount of light emitted from the OLED pixels.

Look at the right hand side of the comparison image in the article for details.

0 upvotes
theswede
By theswede (Sep 8, 2011)

No LCD. The OLED is colored by a filter, not an LCD. Intensity is varied through control of the OLED, not the filter. Each subpixel unit (I have no idea what you mean by "3 subpixel unit") is an OLED light and a filter.

0 upvotes
Alexramos
By Alexramos (Sep 8, 2011)

What you are talking is an AMOLED, it is clearly not an AMOLED display.
Your post is partially right, it technology look like a LCD with a white organic background (no active).
This is made with the similar tech than LCD for high resolution pixels because the AMOLED tech doesn´t reach that pixel density right now.

0 upvotes
mpetersson
By mpetersson (Sep 8, 2011)

This looks very promising. I am very ambivalent towards EVF:s, but this looks like the technology that can finally make them good enough. I think a lot of people's skepticism come from the fact that they have used low-res EVF:s in superzoom-cameras or camcorders. The new EVF technology is something very different. Panasonic has had decent EVF:s for a while now, and this should be superior.

0 upvotes
Debankur Mukherjee
By Debankur Mukherjee (Sep 8, 2011)

Sorry I am only interested in Optical Viewfinder!! No EVF for me, I just hate it.

0 upvotes
Frenske
By Frenske (Sep 8, 2011)

Look a dinosaur.

3 upvotes
benny_wong
By benny_wong (Sep 8, 2011)

You hate all camcorders?

0 upvotes
theswede
By theswede (Sep 8, 2011)

Then by all means feel free not to read articles on EVF's.

7 upvotes
tbcass
By tbcass (Sep 8, 2011)

Then why bother reading this and posting? If you don't like EVFs nobody cares and your stating so adds nothing to the conversation. You're just a negative thinker who likes to bring other people down.

0 upvotes
Steve Ives
By Steve Ives (Sep 8, 2011)

An informed reply from someone who has never used this EVF....

0 upvotes
MonkRX
By MonkRX (Sep 8, 2011)

That is INSANE resolution for that size. Next step: RGB. Maybe RGBW.

And someone, please, scale this up to monitors and cell phones.

1 upvote
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Sep 8, 2011)

But it is RGB...?

0 upvotes
nixda
By nixda (Sep 8, 2011)

No need to use a display like this on a cell phone or monitors. The Retina Display on the iPhone already has the maximum resolution for the given viewing distance. Of course, if you are looking at your monitor from a distance of 1 cm, then you may in fact benefit from higher resolution :)

0 upvotes
jmmgarza
By jmmgarza (Sep 8, 2011)

Now all I need is one receptor for each eye... in fact why not implant a processor that captures and interprets the data traveling via my optic nerve. Just transmit that data to my cloud based service provider. Don't forget to relay that (corrupt) data to the local authorities, IRS, FBI, CIA and of course my wife.

0 upvotes
tesilab
By tesilab (Sep 8, 2011)

Wikipedia explains: "Seminiferous tubules are located in the testes, and are the specific location of meiosis, and the subsequent creation of gametes, namely spermatozoa."

How did this end up in my viewfinder?

4 upvotes
Archiver
By Archiver (Sep 8, 2011)

+1. I did a double take when reading these 'seminiferous tubules'. Perhaps it relates to the potential reaction at the clarity of the viewfinder? ;)

0 upvotes
goetz48
By goetz48 (Sep 8, 2011)

Seminiferous tubules are highly requested, because therefore the OVFs will die out.

0 upvotes
bcalkins
By bcalkins (Sep 8, 2011)

I'm not sure this added any information for me - seeing it in action will be the interesting part...

0 upvotes
nofumble
By nofumble (Sep 8, 2011)

In short, it works like a regular LED display like what's on your iphone except in higher density and extremely high contrast ratio.

Nothing here could prevent Samsung from copy it, and make it better and cheaper.

2 upvotes
NorthwestF
By NorthwestF (Sep 8, 2011)

Samsung fans are sure Samsung never copies anything, ever, ever! Even the potruding mount on NX200 that makes body look thinner, the grip, mag body, were not copied from Nex-5. Samsung never copies a single thing, ever! Ask Samsung fans.

2 upvotes
Patman888
By Patman888 (Sep 8, 2011)

Unless Sony patents it as a viewfinder technology. Then they can use some Apple tactics to prevent Samsung from copying it.

Samsung does make some sweets OLED screens for their phones though. Galaxy S2. Drool.

Anyways, back on topic. What does it matter whether or not one electronic giant can copy the same technology from another electronic giant? What does this weak attempted downplaying of excellent new technology accomplish exactly?

We all know big electronic companies with huge pockets can do a lot of things. It is the first and how much better this EVF is compared to the Panasonic and A55 ones that is impressive. Not whether or not Microsoft and Apple can throw money and copy it if they really wanted to.

I suggest a little more subtlety to your Sony bashing or you risk coming off as defensive.

0 upvotes
theswede
By theswede (Sep 8, 2011)

Except that it doesn't work at all like a regular LED display and is probably patented.

0 upvotes
Alexramos
By Alexramos (Sep 8, 2011)

This technology is not from Sony, I think it is from Sharp or Toshiba.
Samsung has 98% of the OLED market and more than 50% of the actual OLED patents. Even the AMOLED tech used in Samsung display are more useful, because those are real Active Matrix RGB display with individual control of the pixel and true black background, but the AMOLED tech is not available to so high resolution.

0 upvotes
David_London
By David_London (Sep 8, 2011)

There were rumours that the panel came from Samsung - but the press release flatly contradicts that and states that Sony are making it.

And "useful" despends upon the context. This new panel will be extremely useful where high-resolution displays in extremely small spaces are required - such as an EVF.

0 upvotes
sensibill
By sensibill (Sep 9, 2011)

Sony fanboys have got to be the most ridiculous of every camera brand. Any other camera using a sensor, grip or any kind of metal has GOT to have copied that from SONY. My advice to Sony fanatics: Go take some pictures and turn down the hot air valve. You're steaming up the joint.

0 upvotes
bacteria
By bacteria (Sep 8, 2011)

"since it's easier to adjust the behavior of a color filter than change the emission color of an OLED"

- that can totally be done in software. what they gain in "color filters", they lose in the saturation of dedicated r/g/b OLEDs. my mp3 player is an rgb OLED and it's an absolute *treat* to look at photos on it!

my guess is that because the resolution is so high, the manufacturing process can't easily produce three color channels at that density, so rather than admit that fallback, they turn it around into a claimed advantage.

0 upvotes
Patman888
By Patman888 (Sep 8, 2011)

You have to look at it from a size perspective. Plasma TV technology cannot get smaller than 42 inches. If someone comes up with a way to do it by changing the technology a bit, that would hardly be considered a fallback. That is absolutely an advancement.
You can put all the RGB lights you want on the big LCD.

Geez you guys are a tough and unreasonable crowd. Cramming anything besides normal LCD technology into a viewfinder size is impressive enough by itself. This is good for cameras in general.

0 upvotes
theswede
By theswede (Sep 8, 2011)

And my guess is that you have never spectrographed your mp3 player screen.

1 upvote
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Sep 8, 2011)

You can't change the spectral output of an OLED element in software, it's fixed. Software can only mix the given red, green and blue output to make additional colours.

0 upvotes
MaikeruN
By MaikeruN (Sep 8, 2011)

lol theswede, your comment made my day

0 upvotes
Gordon Brown
By Gordon Brown (Sep 8, 2011)

Good on Sony for their development of this technology.
I have held the opinion for some time now that ALL camera manufacturers should have been doing extensive R & D of EVFs.
After all, shouldn't it be the ultimate goal to be able to see exactly what the sensor is seeing? Surely.
The OVF with the mirror box arrangement was developed for a specific need in film cameras and does not have the same relevance with today's technology.
I sincerely hope that this sparks a trend towards developing the ultimate viewfinder. Well done SONY!

3 upvotes
jpr2
By jpr2 (Sep 8, 2011)

all very good points, esp. about the "ultimate VF"

the very BIG question is: how durable these minuscule OLED pixels would turn out to be? 5 yrs? less? or... maybe more??

0 upvotes
Najinsky
By Najinsky (Sep 8, 2011)

While the OVF addressed a specific need, the solution also had benefits that we didn't really appreciate until we tried replacing it with EVFs. These benefits can be summarised as the complete lack of any sampling artefacts. No latency, no smearing no tearing, no refresh artefacts, and so on. Also, DR and ISO sensitivity limitations in the sensor are transferred to the view finding process with EVF.

Ultimately there would be benefits in the EVF seeing what the sensor sees, but for those benefits to materialise in full, the sensor needs to see what the eye sees, and then better.

So the technology is welcome and clever, but ultimately it still only an incremental step in one part of the process, not something revolutionary that replaces OVF overnight.

0 upvotes
hjulenissen
By hjulenissen (Sep 8, 2011)

Najinsky:
What would the benefit of looking "through the sensor" be if the sensor exceeded the human vision anyways?

Just like looking through the lense lets you assess the "distortions" made by the lense, looking through the sensor lets you assess its distortions. The important point is that the EVF should be "better" than the image sensor, and that in-camera raw-development should be close to your typical raw development. Both difficult goals I guess.

0 upvotes
Najinsky
By Najinsky (Sep 9, 2011)

Part 1 (due to 1000 character restriction).

It's a matter of first making EVFs equivalent, and then looking to provide new benefits enabled by using EVF.

Current EVFs have unexpectedly served to highlight unappreciated benefits of OVFs. So new EVFs not only have to match OVFs, they need to surpass them.

An Example: OVFs mostly work at a lens's brightest aperture. To see a preview of DOF, you have to stop down the lens using the DOF button, but the image gets a lot darker.

If the sensor technology advances so that Resolution, DR, Refresh, etc... gives a close enough equivalent of the OVF (at f/2.8) then you could say it's matches human vision (in context of an OVF).

So one way you might want the sensor to exceed this, is to provide an f/2.8 style bright image but at f/8 DOF, so as to give a better DOF preview. Which needs the Sensor/EVF combination to exceed human vision by providing f/2.8 brightness at f/8 light gathering.

-Najinsky

0 upvotes
Najinsky
By Najinsky (Sep 9, 2011)

Part 2.
The above example is obvious, but I'm quite certain other technically feasible benefits will come from EVF. But only when the sensor can oversample (exceed) the desired result.

For example, extreme lighting compensation, ultra high speed capture, slow motion assistance, slow shutter speed simulation, focus confirmation, and more.

But the unavoidable conclusion of this path is that stills cameras will effectively become high resolution video cameras. It may get called 'continuous capture' for a while, but continuos capture is also known as video.

When the capture technology becomes perfect, the USP becomes how to capture the moment, and how better than capturing all moments.

Imagine being able to 'start continuous capture' and then slow-mo through each frame to find the precise impact image, the moment the bullet hits the water filled balloon, or the moment a child squeals with eyes open as wide as saucers.

It may start as a quest for EVF, but it ends with video.

-Najinsky

0 upvotes
JoePhoto
By JoePhoto (Sep 9, 2011)

Your description of "continuous capture" is essentially what the Casio EX-F1 did, (albeit for only 1 sec @ 60fps).

Since that was a Sony sensor, I don't understand why they don't expand and continue that technology for use in the NEX line of cameras.

The Casio F1 was paradigm changing in the sense that it not only eliminated the need to "anticipate" the action, but better since it is very often impossible to know if the "peak" of action is really the best photo.

I mean think of a football player about to catch a ball, is the best shot the moment the ball touches his hands, for a split second before when the ball is still in the air, (and the players eyes may be frozen on the incoming ball). OR, could the best photo be slightly after the ball is caught and the player is intent on clutching the ball and running forward. ALL of them may be "best" photots.

Having 60 shots to select from is paradigm changing.

I would like to see a PROFESSIONAL level equivalent of the F1.

0 upvotes
Dennis Linden
By Dennis Linden (Sep 8, 2011)

In Fairness to Sony, the translation is Google's not theirs... I am looking forward to it. Something New.

0 upvotes
calxn
By calxn (Sep 8, 2011)

I can translate better for you.

translation begin:
"It's good. Very good. Good technology. Enjoy."

3 upvotes
darkref
By darkref (Sep 8, 2011)

Sony spent all their money on the viewfinder, they couldn't afford a translator.

1 upvote
Klipsen
By Klipsen (Sep 14, 2011)

Don't blame Sony just because someone used Google Translate.

Other than that, every penny spent on the viewfinder instead of the translation is a penny well spent.

0 upvotes
CarVac
By CarVac (Sep 8, 2011)

The translation is terribad, but otherwise it's pretty interesting that they opted for color filters. That probably hurts battery life a fair amount.

0 upvotes
Patman888
By Patman888 (Sep 8, 2011)

I am not 100% positive because of the horrible translation but I believe that article says that they needed to go with filters in order to make the technology feasible in such a small space.

0 upvotes
Doug Marsh
By Doug Marsh (Sep 8, 2011)

Read again....They are using white OLED units behind red,greeen, blue color filters to create the color that is seen.....

0 upvotes
Patman888
By Patman888 (Sep 8, 2011)

You should read again actually. Read this part again.

"The realization of 3.3um x 9.9um pixel size of the industry's smallest and *3 achieved a 2.4 million pixel high-definition 0.5 effective ultra-compact type. This time, we adopted the color separation overlay color filter on the white organic EL layer to achieve the ultra-compact high-definition.
Fast response and high contrast wide gamut

High contrast is a characteristic inherent organic EL displays, wide color gamut, fast response by the performance, video and attentive, more natural color reproduction, tone characteristics, and provides excellent video characteristics."

Now look at the charts that show how much smaller the pixel sizes are using filters in place of the RGB technology. They even have a size label.

I think it is pretty clear that they are saying these filters allow them to go that small and it wouldn't be possible using the current OLED technology. Yes, even that broken English translation shows this.

0 upvotes
Patman888
By Patman888 (Sep 8, 2011)

You see the colour chart that says regular OLED technology has a 200um pixel density while with the filters they can go as small as 9.9um. It is pretty clear looking at the chart and text combined.

0 upvotes
McNamaraReport
By McNamaraReport (Sep 8, 2011)

Sony's claim that regular OLED tech is limited to 200um pixel density is misleading, based on the current 15um density found in an OLED microdisplay made by it's closest competitor in this area, Emagin http://www.emagin.com/oled-microdisplays/ ). Some great charts and tech info on OLED microdisplays can be found on their site. They also use white OLED elements with colored filters, so Sony has no way to patent that aspect of its design. However, kudos for Sony for leapfrogging over emagin, which has been struggling for over a decade to perfect its microdisplay resolution.

0 upvotes
Jeff E Anderson
By Jeff E Anderson (Sep 8, 2011)

I'm looking forward to seeing this in practice.

1 upvote
Total comments: 79