24MP Nikon DX : D7001

[rondhamalam]

A55 shared it's sensor with D7000 then it's normal if A77 share it's 24MP sensor too.... say D7001



24MP D7001, would you buy it?

 

[LarryPhoto]

I'd but it if it has a EVF

 

[Dave George]

Do most people have the skill/technique required to get decent sharp shots out of a 24mp dx camera?

 

[Patco]

Do most people have the skill/technique required to get decent sharp shots out of a 24mp dx camera?

Sure, as long as they don't have the obsession of so many here of viewing at 100% or more ;-)

--
Patco
A photograph is more than a bunch of pixels

 

[jonikon]

No way! That Sony 24 MP sensor is mushy mess! I doubt even Nikon can fix this turkey!

And besides, I would not want to be the laughing stock of the Sigma forum either!

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=39186522

Best regards,
Jon

 

[hea]

What is the practical advantage of an electronic viewfinder over optical, other than drain more battery ?

thanks

--

 

[Reilly Diefenbach]

A55 shared it's sensor with D7000 then it's normal if A77 share it's 24MP sensor too.... say D7001

24MP D7001, would you buy it?

If the noise is under control, sure. The A77 pics look noisy in the shadows even at ISO 200. It will be interesting to see if the raws are a lot better. I predict they will be. Sony has some little idea of what they're doing. I was kinda hoping for better results, because the video looks really good. As far as a D400 at $2,000 is concerned, my temptation will be to go the extra few hundred bucks and get the D800 if and when. That one should be a monster.

 

[marike6]

The A77 pics look noisy in the shadows even at ISO 200. It will be interesting to see if the raws are a lot better. I predict they will be.

The A77 DPReview samples, from the first image of the Space Needle in Seattle, taken at ISO 200, I see noise in the sky. Other samples at higher ISO, the NR give the images that painting effect. Definitely not for me.

The EVF ruins the whole body for me. The only Sony camera I was ever interested in was the A850 FF and they discontinued it. For the price of the A77 with kit, I'm approaching D700 territory which would be a no-brainer.

 

[BJN]

Fix the lame exposure mode dial's weak detents and add LCD articulation and we'll talk...

--
BJ Nicholls
SLC, UT

 

[rhlpetrus]

Let's wait and see how it performs in RAW. The samples flying around are jpegs and don't look that good, but I trust the basic sensor is good. Another point: as before, Sony stays at 12 bits, hope Nikon, if they use it, will go for a 14 bit ADC engine.

Only thing is, it'll likely show up in the D400 pretty soon.

IMO, I have plenty of pixels already in the D7k, only if sensor is really better in DR and other aspects. More likely I'll go for a FF, the D800 .
--
Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/

Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)

 

[BJN]

Faster frame rates are possible with the semi-silvered mirror, and there should be less vibration and quieter operation. An EVF is bright in low light. However, the finder quality gets really poor when the light gets low. Also, the refresh rate slows down so following subjects becomes difficult. I have a couple of Panasonic G cameras. The EVF is good enough except in low light. The Sony's use of a semisilvered mirror will keep the finder view working during action shooting, but the EVF's sensor is getting very little light in that mode.

--
BJ Nicholls
SLC, UT

 

[happypoppeye]

Why see the world with your own eyes when you can watch it through a TV...

...and I did read BJN's response above but it seems, with the preview, that Sony's new EVF isn't too great in really bright light either. Not good.

What is the practical advantage of an electronic viewfinder over optical, other than drain more battery ?

thanks

--

--
http://www.wanderinground.wordpress.com
http://www.pbase.com/happypoppeye

It's almost all opinion folks, gonna have to deal with it...

 

[jonrobertp]

--I own the D7k, and if the noise is low, I'd get the new 24 meg sensor..great for cropping . Just hope the Nik body is not too big/heavy.

 

[toomanycanons]

EVFs suck. And super fast fps? Pretty soon it's just choppy video!

 

[zirtico]

Wow those samples look horrible. I can't even believe Sony would release a DSLR with such horrid IQ. Noise at ISO 100 is already strong and blurs out tons of detail in water and skies. Nikon hates playing the megapixel race with Canon and I will be quite surprised and disappointed if they use that sensor in the D400 as it will be a step back from low light performance in the D300S, not even the D7000....

 

[madecov]

I dumped Sony when they announced they were going EVF on all camera's and went with the D7000. I've been a happy camper since.

The one thing to remember is that this is all pre production and the fimware isn't even v1.00 yet. sample images floating around are using various firmware versions from camera to camera.

We will see how the sensor performs on a full production model.
--



In god we trust, all others are suspects

Licensed firearms dealer in Houston, Texas

 

[Peter Jonas]

What is the practical advantage of an electronic viewfinder over optical, other than drain more battery ?

The potential practical advantages of an EVF over an optical VF are overwhelming. I do not know how well Sony has implement this in their new A77, but the possibilities are virtually limitless.

The EVFs can be bigger, brighter and more legible than an optical viewfinder. You can superimpose useful information over the viewfinder image, like live histograms etc. You can have a magnified area around the focus point, you can make it all wireless if you want to, with the EVF on your eye and the camera high up in your hands. These are just a few ideas that will be offered soon. And all this could be software customisable to a large degree. And on top of all this, after a while a good EVF will be cheaper to produce than a good OVF.

Technology may not be able to offer all these yet with the image quality that the market demands, but historical evidence shows that technology will catch up with our imagination, and it is only a matter of a finite amount of time before we see them proliferate. EVFs are the future for sure. In my opinion within 2 to 3 years we will have EVFs that have good enough image quality, and will offer so much more than the OVFs could ever hope for. From then on it will be a one way street.

If you doubt this, think of how far technology has come with all sorts of solid state devices, like memory, processing, imaging, rendering etc. This may go back a bit too far, but 20 years ago I bought my first HDD. It had a capacity of 200 MB and cost about $1,000. Today you can buy one, which is half the physical size, will hold 10,000 times more data (2TB) and cost ten times less ($100). Had you predicted this to me in 1991 I would have loughed at you big time.

In 1998 the top of the line DSLR had 1.3 megapixels and cost about $10,000. Today the top DSLR still costs about that, but it now has 24 megapixels or more with far superior sensitivity and of course processing power and storage capacity to match.

You guys better get used to the idea of EVFs. Just because they are is not good enough today does not mean they won't be that soon. And I am sure you will like them, and wonder how you got by without them before.

--
Cheers,

Peter Jonas

 

[Barry Fitzgerald]

The potential practical advantages of an EVF over an optical VF are overwhelming. I do not know how well Sony has implement this in their new A77, but the possibilities are virtually limitless.

Erm calm down! It's a viewfinder not some mega gadget!

There are some advantages but what we're on about here is being able to see your subject clearly..and EVF isn't great here.

Technology may not be able to offer all these yet with the image quality that the market demands, but historical evidence shows that technology will catch up with our imagination, and it is only a matter of a finite amount of time before we see them proliferate. EVFs are the future for sure. In my opinion within 2 to 3 years we will have EVFs that have good enough image quality, and will offer so much more than the OVFs could ever hope for. From then on it will be a one way street.

I guess that's why folks went loopy over the recent OVF cameras such as the Fuji X100 ;-)

You guys better get used to the idea of EVFs. Just because they are is not good enough today does not mean they won't be that soon. And I am sure you will like them, and wonder how you got by without them before.

We don't have to get used to them I'd wager most prefer an OVF and many simply won't entertain them.

You can overlay info on EVF all you like, movie recording through the VF (the real reason it's there) I can shoot movies on my DSLR but I rarely do. Some just want a good OVF and I actually think you're wrong on a lot of things because histogram all you want sometimes you just don't have the time to do that with some shots

It's all very well having these "walking aids" but quite a few people here are experienced. Sony's hand holding EVF comes with some serious drawbacks..poor battery life. SLT compromises the IQ, the fast FPS has a small buffer meaning it's not likely to murder the sports shooters choices either.

I wouldn't even look twice at such models..thanks..no thanks ;-)

 

[Peter Jonas]

The potential practical advantages of an EVF over an optical VF are overwhelming. I do not know how well Sony has implement this in their new A77, but the possibilities are virtually limitless.

Erm calm down! It's a viewfinder not some mega gadget!

There are some advantages but what we're on about here is being able to see your subject clearly..and EVF isn't great here.

Technology may not be able to offer all these yet with the image quality that the market demands, but historical evidence shows that technology will catch up with our imagination, and it is only a matter of a finite amount of time before we see them proliferate. EVFs are the future for sure. In my opinion within 2 to 3 years we will have EVFs that have good enough image quality, and will offer so much more than the OVFs could ever hope for. From then on it will be a one way street.

I guess that's why folks went loopy over the recent OVF cameras such as the Fuji X100 ;-)

You guys better get used to the idea of EVFs. Just because they are is not good enough today does not mean they won't be that soon. And I am sure you will like them, and wonder how you got by without them before.

We don't have to get used to them I'd wager most prefer an OVF and many simply won't entertain them.

You can overlay info on EVF all you like, movie recording through the VF (the real reason it's there) I can shoot movies on my DSLR but I rarely do. Some just want a good OVF and I actually think you're wrong on a lot of things because histogram all you want sometimes you just don't have the time to do that with some shots

It's all very well having these "walking aids" but quite a few people here are experienced. Sony's hand holding EVF comes with some serious drawbacks..poor battery life. SLT compromises the IQ, the fast FPS has a small buffer meaning it's not likely to murder the sports shooters choices either.

I wouldn't even look twice at such models..thanks..no thanks ;-)

I think it would be foolish from me to enter into a debate over what is coming in the future, even though it is I think in the near future.

However, most of your objections to the EVF are based on shortcomings in today's technology, which will be overcome sooner rather than later.

It is not unlike the LP-CD debate in audio reproduction. While LP systems can be really good, only the highest quality and most expensive systems survive. For most of the public it is CDs and much worse MP3s.

We shall see ...

--
Cheers,

Peter Jonas

 

[lonewolf69]

Double post sorry...