a6000 faster than OMD E-M1, faster than most DSLR's (if not all). Good job SONY.

Started Feb 12, 2014 | Discussions thread
GaryW Veteran Member • Posts: 8,675
Re: Faster for 3 seconds?

stevo23 wrote:

GaryW wrote:

stevo23 wrote:

Donny out of Element here wrote:

Well, 11fps with live tracking AF is something. It's faster than OMD E-M1 and mind you it's an APS-C sensor with 24.3 Mp! Fastest AF (in the world?) 0.06s CIPA.

For 3 seconds? How long of a burst do you maintain 11fps? And how many times can you do that in a minute? How many RAW images can you rip out per second?

I honestly see no point in any further mirror usage in cameras from now on.

I guess you should have added the caveat of, for the vast, vast majority of people, including most photographers.

Very few folks need autofocus in the first place. Now that we have it, most don't even know how to get the best out of it. Most of us will never need more than 5fps.

One time I tried using the 7fps mode in my Nex-5 for a specific project I had in mind and had to drop half the frames as they just were too close together!  10fps is neat, but I'm still looking for a need for it, much less needing that rate for several seconds.  Maybe if I were more actively shooting "serious" sports rather than these casual events it would make sense, but it still starts to sound like "spray and pray" at some point.

Because the mirrored D4s can shoot 10fps for 20 full seconds and crank out 200 full resolution RAW files with full tracking autofocus/metering/auto ISO etc. for each shot. And right away, it can turn around and do it all over again. All day long. Processor/buffer is just as important.

How often does one need to do this? Is this for "spray and pray" photography? I doubt most pro photographers' cameras do this today. Of course, if you need this, or some other feature, you should buy the camera that does it, but let's keep it in perspective.

That's my point exactly. For people who need the speed - really NEED it - they don't NEED the A6000. It's autofocus speed isn't the headline that matters. It's just there for the folks who will be impressed with it and buy one based on that.

Let's separate "autofocus speed" from "burst rate and buffer size".  I certainly don't mind a faster AF speed, but 10fps for 20 seconds is a pretty obscure need.  But I guess need is all relative and can mean anything to anyone if you want to belabor that point.

I can understand a 1 second buffer (in my Nex-6) is a bit short, but after 2 or even 5 seconds, I can't imagine what I'm still shooting. The action is over with. Anything longer, and maybe I should have used video. At least then I have 60fps for as long as I want.

Again - all the claims are for "victory over the mirrored DSLR". Not so fast, be real. For folks who need that kind of speed, the need it for longer periods of time. And they need every shot metered, white balanced, iso'd and they need Raw+jpg - all ready to go to the service bureau.

For the very few folks that need this level of performance, they can feel free to pay extra for it.  Why should I care if DSLRs eventually are relegated to a niche position?

I'm sure back in the day, large press cameras were seen as necessary for press jobs, and average people looked for smaller alternatives, perhaps even turning out higher quality results but missing this or that high-performance feature.

The bottom line is that shooting 10fps for 20 seconds is not a very common need, and not something I want to pay for if it is going to cost so much extra.

Not to dampen the enthusiasm, but you get what you pay for.

And you do pay for it! In money not just for the camera but for lenses, because you wouldn't just plop a kit lens on a $5000 camera. And not just in money, but for the bulk. It's not exactly a good travel setup.

I'm just sayin', keep it all in perspective.

I think most of us are?

Hopefully. But when I see statements like "we don't need the mirror anymore" and "death of the DSLR is here", I have to laugh.

But most of us don't need the mirror any more.  I've got my larger sensor in a smaller package and I don't need the DSLR design.  What a relief!  

I wouldn't expect the DSLR to "die", necessarily, but it does seem like Sony might end up with mirrorless A-mount cameras down the road.  Would you still call it a DSLR?  Effectively, it'll be the same technology and design as the Nex or other MILC cameras.

The writing is on the wall. It's interesting how DSLR fans get nervous about such discussions.  If there's no danger to DSLRs then they should not worry.  

-- hide signature --

Gary W.

 GaryW's gear list:GaryW's gear list
Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS Sony Cyber-shot DSC-V3 Sony Alpha DSLR-A100 Sony Alpha NEX-5 +8 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow