About to Buy -- What do you think ?

Started Apr 13, 2013 | Discussions thread
joejack951 Senior Member • Posts: 2,682
Re: Takes a licking and keeps on ticking

123Mike wrote:

joejack951 wrote:

123Mike wrote:

The Canikoners are refusing to acknowledge that the Sony provides more value for the same, and that it is a better choice for most newcomers looking to buy a consumer digital SLR camera.

I just pointed out the mistake in your listing of features and how it's absence might lead someone to falsely conclude that the camera could do something that it couldn't.

If you find *A* mistake, then correct that mistake without invalidating everything else in that list.

That's exactly what I did. Go read my posts again.

The list is real. The list is genuine. You can do many things with it that you can not with other cameras.

If you search my post history, you'll find that I have recommended Sony SLTs to people for tracking AF during movie recording. No other camera can do that.

However, you can expect me to call you out when you start claiming the A57 can compete with the Nikon D4 or Canon 1DX for sports shooting. Fast frame rate =/ good sports camera.

I have actually never claimed that the A57 is better than the 7D for sports photography. I have fended off false claims how the A57 is supposed to be no good or inferior for sports photography. The A57 is great for sports photography. Of course, the Canikoners want to see this differently, and they hinge on a silly incorrect evaluation on DPR. It said that 10 and 12 fps has some compromises and that therefore it's no good. I say those compromises are manageable. Where it's not manageable, there is still 8 fps where there are no compromises. The 7D does 8fps which is impressive. But it's got mirror slap, possibly causing a lower percentage of shots succeeding in difficult lighting conditions. So, is the 7D better for sports? Not for shooting speed it wouldn't be!

The DPR review states that the viewfinder lag is there at 8 fps too.

I have no problem tracking at 8 fps. Others have used it for sports very successfully as well.

Ok. But the lag is still there. Your claim of "no compromises" isn't exactly true.

I'm not sure at what frame rate it goes away. DSLRs have their viewfinder issues at high frame rates (blackout from the flipping mirror) but at least what you do see is a live feed.

I find that at 8 fps it's life enough. I also use the screen instead of the VF, because it allows me to stay better in touch with the environment. Plus I don't like any VF because of my glasses.

Personally, I find it difficult to focus on my subject when not using a viewfinder.

For fast moving subjects, that's a huge advantage. Of course, the ideal would be live feed with no blackout.

The live view doesn't black out, but does do the fast slide show effect. I just did a quick 8 fps pan around with cat meaninglessly roaming around. It's not a problem I tell you.

I understand that it's not a blackout. I was speaking about DSLR viewfinder blackout. All current SLT's give a delayed feed at high frame rates though. I'd rather a split second blackout than that.

DPR complained about the slide show effect. I agree that it must be disorienting to only be seeing what just happened versus what is happening.

As far as mirror slap is concerned, I've only seen effects using very high MP cameras or doing very close-up work and mostly when using tripods. Handheld, there are enough other things contributing to blur and shutter speeds are typically high enough to reduce the effects of most of them down to nothing that the mirror slap is a non-issue.

I don't know what percentage success rates you get when comparing, say, a 7D with an A57. I just threw mirror slap into the mix as a possible down side. Others are trying to claim that the A57's burst is entirely useless because of what DPR said. It's not at all a nice thread of messages here. People are just nasty.

You got VERY defensive at the first critique of your choice:

"But you know what? There is no amount of information that anyone could provide that is going to make you acknowledge that the Sony is a formidable camera choice. Just like religion, you will deny, avoid, and pretend it's not real. No amount of evidence will suffice. Beliefs trumps all. Am I right?"

You also demonstrated a lack of understanding about what more complete camera systems (like Nikon's and Canon's) have to offer. Tilt/Shift lenses aren't for everyone but your complete dismissal of them (without even understanding what they do) just made you look bad.

Probably the most glaring omission from Sony's lineup is an affordable, fast portrait prime like an 85/1.8 and high quality constant aperture f/4 zooms (like Nikon's 24-120/4 and Canon's 24-105/4).

 joejack951's gear list:joejack951's gear list
Nikon Coolpix AW100 Nikon Coolpix P7700 Nikon D300S Nikon D3S Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF +5 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow