I've said that I will try the A55 to see how much the EVF has improved.
I don't consider my dislike of EVFs to be due to a negative or conservative nature.
The same applies here, I'm not a negative person or particularly conservative. What I am is a scientist, I think about things and analize them. And don't stuff problems under the rug.
To date, I have not enjoyed using them (and I thought I would because I like the idea of lots of shooting info and gridlines in the VF).
Same here, I have a bridge camera, Sony HX1. One of a long line of EVF cameras I've used secondary to my main quality gear which is DSLR. I have worked around the compromises imposed by EVF in those cameras, but as long as I don't have to deal with those compromises in DSLR I'll choose not to.
I can't put into words what I don't like, except that I still have problems manually focusing with them, and I don't with my A700 (although the A700 OVF is not the best in the world, in fact it is the lowest quality OVF I would accept).
Yesterday I was shooting buzzards in flight, with MF on my a700 and hand-held just routine plinking around shooting. Need the speed of light OVF for that. And the clear unobstructed uninterpreted view of OVF.
A lot of people have stated that what they see in the EVF is what they get in the final image. I accept that my visual perception may be screwed up, but I find I can visualize the final result better through a good OVF, much better than through an EVF. It surprised and disappointed me, but that's how it is.
Consider that the EVF is a uncalibrated color display. With a time delay.
And yes, I too can visualize the final result better with a good OVF. I only have to learn what the lens does to the image, and that does not shift.
I will keep checking EVFs as they develop, someday I expect they will have one I like, or they will degrade the OVF enough that I will have to like it.
I think the latter is most likely. I think it will become all EVF without ever coming close to a quality OVF. That will be limiting in my photography but there will be no choice. That's the theme of this modern stuff, NO CHOICE.
Additionally, I'm not convinced that adding a pellicle mirror in the optical path so the camera can have PDAF is a great idea. I am an engineer, one of my responsibilities is to review new technologies and evaluate the pluses and minuses they bring, and then to rate them as to potential impact. Where there are potential negatives (and not the "but an asteroid might crash on it" type), I have to find out why it is not a significant issue.
With the pellicle, I have identified a number of potential longer term issues. I intend to wait (I don't have a need the special features the Axx brings) and see what user experience is and if any of my issues are significant. I'm not going to list them cause I don't want to start the next war, and they are my concerns.
The pellicle is really not what they have, a pellicle would have been better optically. Even among fans some issues have surfaced, and I expect more will.
Quite frankly, I might have had interest in video when my kids were growing up, but I have no interest in it now. The last time I saw a photographer shoot at 10 frames a second (EOS1V), I laughed my Axx off. I actually have more interest in the Fuji 3D camera, but based on the reviews of the last version, they have a lot to prove before I would buy it.
My position as well. It would take a far, far better video camera to be used about the only place I might, doing nature recording combining video with the audio. And I'm already having to phase out some of my nature recording due to my own hearing aging. So not investing much in my nature recording system anymore.
And I shoot each frame separately controlled and composed. No use for 10FPS, or even much lower machine gun rates.
I have bought new tech cameras in the past because they were going to bring great things. Most of them have been disappointments, and I ended up donating them or giving them as presents. Some were very enjoyable and I use them. But I don't just jump in just because its new tech, or the company, or a reviewer, or a person who hasn't used it says its the greatest thing. I didn't jump in with the KM7D or the Sony A700, but waited until the smoke cleared and issues were resolved, and I am a lot happier than those who were early adopters.
New is not automatically better, it's a new set of compromises. In this case adding video & LV (and EVF) have added new compromises while fixing almost nothing for still photography.
Walt
