If Sony introduced an OVF A950 now how many would be interested?

[JohnyP]

I'm on A900 right now and if i don't see OVF FF by the end of the summer - I'm out of Sony camp. Which is too bad, since i LOVE A900 and would love to get the same thing but with the video. It is an almost perfect camera, but I want video since it would open up a new territory for me.

To me the importance of technology is

OVF > Clean stills output > Video > FF sensor > environmental sealing > weight > on-board flash > tilt screen > GPS >

 

[Aloeignut]

My A850 is still pleasing me after two and a half years and I have no plans to upgrade it. But the FF SLT is more interesting to me simply because it is something different and most of the A77 owners seem to be pleased with the camera. But the specs on it would really have to impress me and the slide show effect gives me some concern for shooting sports. With an A100, A700 and A850 all still working I would still have the OVF when I wanted it. So unless Sony wants to make a D4 clone I think I would pass on an OVF upgrade.

 

[bloomoose]

... I think it started with the EVF of A77/A65
But there´s still room for improvement, of course.
--
Greetings from Germany,
Pam
http://www.model-kartei.de/sedcard/fotograf/184280/

 

[nemist]

I won't buy Sony again, for the EVF and other reasons. And I love my Zeiss glass and a850. The burnt hand teaches best.

 

[arkestral_sun]

I'd consider it, as I'll never buy into the SLT concept (don't really like looking through a viewfinder to find a telly at the end of it), but, as some have stated, would need some assurance from Sony that this will not be the last OVF DSLR - Sony's too capricious to deserve my trust on this and other matters (an electronics corporation, really, which also reflects on how slow it is in plugging gaps in its lens lines).

I find the A900/850 great, and so would like an upgraded A900. Live View; retaining IBIS (which for me is very important); increases in DR, megapixels and high ISO would be great; keeping the form factor and the simple, no-nonsense controls and interface - don't care about DSLR video.

Two things make it hard for me to switch to Nikon D800: lack of IBIS and a lens mount that is much less adept for the use of alternative mount lenses - for instance, wouldn't be able to use the Mirex+Mamiya 645 combination.

On the other hand, the D800 has LV, which is of great assistance when composing and focusing adapted MF lenses, particularly when using tilts, as any OVF will darken and mask when tilting farther than a few degrees.

So, yes, A950 please, with LV, IBIS, better DR, 36MP, better high ISO and retaining the Minolta 'ethos' in form factor and control - but don't spoil it by hinting that this will the last OVF Sony...

 

[john175bramley]

I'd consider it, as I'll never buy into the SLT concept (don't really like looking through a viewfinder to find a telly at the end of it), but, as some have stated, would need some assurance from Sony that this will not be the last OVF DSLR - Sony's too capricious to deserve my trust on this and other matters (an electronics corporation, really, which also reflects on how slow it is in plugging gaps in its lens lines).

I find the A900/850 great, and so would like an upgraded A900. Live View; retaining IBIS (which for me is very important); increases in DR, megapixels and high ISO would be great; keeping the form factor and the simple, no-nonsense controls and interface - don't care about DSLR video.

Two things make it hard for me to switch to Nikon D800: lack of IBIS and a lens mount that is much less adept for the use of alternative mount lenses - for instance, wouldn't be able to use the Mirex+Mamiya 645 combination.

On the other hand, the D800 has LV, which is of great assistance when composing and focusing adapted MF lenses, particularly when using tilts, as any OVF will darken and mask when tilting farther than a few degrees.

So, yes, A950 please, with LV, IBIS, better DR, 36MP, better high ISO and retaining the Minolta 'ethos' in form factor and control - but don't spoil it by hinting that this will the last OVF Sony...

You seem very keen on LV, isn't it just like looking at a telly on the back of your camera?

 

[gblatchford]

When David Bailey started using 35mm in the 60's, Vogue told him to re-shoot on MF. He re-cropped 35mm negs and they were accepted. What happened to him?

When video killed super-8 &c in the '80's for moving-image purists they all said it wouldn't last. Where do we see 2k, 4k & 8k going now?

When the horse was superceded by the internal combustion engine, I'm sure it was remarked that the fad would pass too.

OVF isn't dead, but the technology is old.

EVF is more than 2 generations old now, in any usable way with mature tecnology.
Proven technology from a company that leads in broadcast technology.

Do you watch your TV but refuse to watch anything that wasn't shot on 35mm or knowingly that has an OVF?

The picture is King, not the technology.

If the technology is proven and it works, it only leads to the conclusion that those who refuse to adopt or the companies who refuse to develop and release, will surely be left behind.

Not by the professionals, but by those who accept the technology as normal and continune to push the boundaries of their parents and mentors.

I picked up the A55 a couple of years back looked through the EVF in Jessops in Oxford. I panned the camera, got horrendous image tearing and put the camera back down. Unusable in any professional way, reliably.
It was a toy but I knew it would get better. It has.

The A77 and EVF is absolutely usable from a professional standpoint for photojournalism, portraiture and anything else I can think of.

The audio is derisory, but that'll get better, so we shoot with external mics anyway.

The ergonomics could do with a few minor tweaks and a bit of user-input, but Sony will learn.

Unless they're utter morons, they'll get it right, with design, feedback and firmware tweaks, so we;ll get what we want.

The OVF is good for what it does, but times move on.

I have one caveat, I refuse to pay money to Apple, ethically and for many other reasons. I find the company and many of their users akin to evangelical fundamentalists.
Apple may have some nice tech, but plurality...doesn't exist with them.

Sony are at the progressive edge of image technology, long may it stay thus.

GB

 

[moimoi]

Sony MUST update its lineup of FF lenses. They also need to develop a dedicated customer service for professionals. If not, that would be a big failure...

 

[chlamchowder]

If they did release an a950, I might not buy it because full frame cameras are expensive, but the presence of that camera would be a huge factor in convincing me to stick with Sony.

But in addition to the OVF, Sony also needs to improve in other areas, like autofocus and customization ability. Looking back, they seem consistently unable to match Nikon and Canon in those areas (7D still is preferred over the a77 for AF tracking). I would still be hesitant to stick with Sony, because I can't be sure of the company's direction. It seems like their efforts in the high end ($500+) cameras aren't focused enough. Because of how successful the NEX cameras are, it seems like the A-mount system is only getting half their attention. I can't tell what's going to happen next with the A-mount.

In contrast, Canon, Nikon, and Pentax are very consistent in their commitment to their DSLR mounts. Canon and Nikon also have a large professional user base that probably won't take too nicely to compromises or experiments with immature technology (features in those systems tend to go from bottom to top). Spending money on Sony seems like a bit of a gamble.

Die hard OVF dslr users have been driven to despair by the move to DSLT. Sony are a funny bunch though, and it cannot be ruled out that they bring out an A950 as a surprise. Maybe they get cold feet on the pure DSLT approach, maybe the A99 EVF is not quite good enough to be the only option, maybe...

The point of this OP is to simply ask, after being messed around by sony so much how many OVF fans would still be happy to purchase an A950, if it were a significant upgrade to the A900?

 

[chlamchowder]

LV is incredibly useful. The ability to stand back while still being able to frame is a pretty big advantage, especially if the camera is on a tripod. With a flexible screen, LV also allows for high and low level shots to be taken with relative comfort. Magnifying the LV feed allows incredibly accurate focus to be achieved with incredible ease. I found that I could achieve similar accuracy with the OVF, but it required much more effort and concentration, especially with wide angle lenses.

I would really hesitate to buy a camera that doesn't feature LV, simply because electronic previews have tons of advantages (exposure preview/live histogram/WB preview for JPGs, manual focus aids, easier to see in moderately dark conditions). To me, the flexibility offered by having both preview options - optical and electronic - is very important.

You seem very keen on LV, isn't it just like looking at a telly on the back of your camera?

 

[goetz48]

since I got my A2. Neither A100 nor A700 could change that. And A77 conviced me.

 

[dlkeller]

maybe to EVF fans. Considering the popularity of EVF cameras in the overall DSLR picture, far from it.
--
Dave

 

[imarollingstone]

Sony MUST update its lineup of FF lenses. They also need to develop a dedicated customer service for professionals. If not, that would be a big failure...

Yes, Sony is in a bit of a pickle with that. While they do have quite a few lenses, there are some big holes in the lineup. Then as you mention, the service for professionals. Additionally, the availability of equipment to rent, third party support, both terms of accessories and software is less robust than with Canon and Nikon.

I really think that in order to be successful, Sony is going to have to seriously undercut Canon and Nikon on price to build some market share and make it worthwhile for the third party vendors to support them.

Given their financial situation, that seems unlikely.
--
Shawn

 

[WaltKnapp]

Die hard OVF dslr users have been driven to despair by the move to DSLT. Sony are a funny bunch though, and it cannot be ruled out that they bring out an A950 as a surprise. Maybe they get cold feet on the pure DSLT approach, maybe the A99 EVF is not quite good enough to be the only option, maybe...

The point of this OP is to simply ask, after being messed around by sony so much how many OVF fans would still be happy to purchase an A950, if it were a significant upgrade to the A900?

What you are asking is if Sony is trustworthy to support long term a DSLR system at a higher level? DSLR are a system and a lot more factors go into it than just producing a camera. At this point I'd personally like to see a lot more commitment to DSLR than one camera. And commitment over time. Sony has lost a lot of trust about long term support. They cannot get that back easily.

Maybe produce both an a950 and a750, at least as a minimum start. And they would have to be completely up to date, not shortchanged compared to SLT. Or produced in short supply. Also Sony needs to expand on things like flashes (particularly macro), lenses, long term repair and parts support. A lot longer on parts than the current official 7 years which they have shortchanged on the a700. One repair facility that takes several weeks on repair is not near enough in the US. In other words Sony needs to show that they understand DSLRs are not a single sale item like P&S or Cybershot but a system to support.

 

[epsilon sigma taph]

I will only buy their full frame if it has an EVF. I don't like using OVFs anymore.

 

[tesch]

I will only buy their full frame if it has an EVF. I don't like using OVFs anymore.

+1

 

[Samsolar]

If they were which they are not, I would think about which I don't have to because they are not. The a99 is what they are going to do and this is the camera that I think I would welcome. It has got to be great if it is going to replace the A900.

 

[moimoi]

Sony MUST update its lineup of FF lenses. They also need to develop a dedicated customer service for professionals. If not, that would be a big failure...

Yes, Sony is in a bit of a pickle with that. While they do have quite a few lenses, there are some big holes in the lineup. Then as you mention, the service for professionals. Additionally, the availability of equipment to rent, third party support, both terms of accessories and software is less robust than with Canon and Nikon.

I really think that in order to be successful, Sony is going to have to seriously undercut Canon and Nikon on price to build some market share and make it worthwhile for the third party vendors to support them.

Given their financial situation, that seems unlikely.

Wise comments. I am afraid that you are 100% right on this. Tough times for Sony!

--
Shawn

 

[GodSpeaks]

The point of this OP is to simply ask, after being messed around by sony so much how many OVF fans would still be happy to purchase an A950, if it were a significant upgrade to the A900?

For me, it would depend on the specs of the new camera and the price point. Sony would have to go some to beat the Nikon D800. Plus, until my A850 dies, I am really not in the market for a new stills camera.

--

The greatest of mankind's criminals are those who delude themselves into thinking they have done 'the right thing.'

• Rayna Butler

 

[dongfanghong]

What you are asking is if Sony is trustworthy to support long term a DSLR system at a higher level? DSLR are a system and a lot more factors go into it than just producing a camera. At this point I'd personally like to see a lot more commitment to DSLR than one camera. And commitment over time. Sony has lost a lot of trust about long term support. They cannot get that back easily.

Maybe produce both an a950 and a750, at least as a minimum start. And they would have to be completely up to date, not shortchanged compared to SLT. Or produced in short supply. Also Sony needs to expand on things like flashes (particularly macro), lenses, long term repair and parts support. A lot longer on parts than the current official 7 years which they have shortchanged on the a700. One repair facility that takes several weeks on repair is not near enough in the US. In other words Sony needs to show that they understand DSLRs are not a single sale item like P&S or Cybershot but a system to support.

If you want such support in a short period of time, you'll have to with Nikon or Canon.