No Sony SLRs any more, ever.

Started Sep 13, 2012 | Discussions
TrojMacReady
TrojMacReady Veteran Member • Posts: 8,729
Re: No Sony SLRs - they might want to reconsider...

Piginho wrote:

So because Sony have stated so in interviews, that makes it true?

You can think they lied and use the tinfoil hats while coming up with other theories (it's by far the most plausible one to me as well).

I'm not familiar with the tinfoil hats expression, maybe because I'm in the UK, or maybe I've lead a sheltered life. Anyway, it's not beyond the realms of possibility that a manufacturer would either lie, or exaggerate, surely.

Google is your friend. I didn't claim manufacturers never lie. I don't see any motive to come up with this one though, especially since it makes sense. In fact, I see more reason not to mention things like this if it is true than to mention it. For example people expecting much cheaper cameras (already a fact).

More likely they're are trying to drive the market in this direction as they clearly have a lead and their competitors aren't really in the game yet, hoping to steal some market share.

They're not really in a position to drive the market with market shares nowhere near the big 2 apart, let alone combined. Theyt are however in a position to differentiate by combining some of its core strengths.

Maybe I should have said pull, or draw the market then. BTW, do we have any definitive info on market share of the main manufacturers? I would agree about differentiation also, but with the caveat that SLT/EVF is not necessarily a core strength. If CaNikon have such a large market share with OVF, we could just as easily conclude that this aspect of differentiation is a weakness.

No that would be pure assumption or even a fallacy, leaving out the host of other drivers that affect market share (brand recognition, marketing, support, availability etc etc.). Just because the current crop doesn't have it doesn't mean it must be a weakness. Fact is, there have been and still are many technical reasons why they don't offer it as well. And without any knowledge of which part of the potential market prefers an OVF over a good EVF, it's pure guessing.

24MP on an APS-C sensor is nothing special, just look at the 1 inch sensor with a density that's the equivalent of about 65MP on APS-C, not to mention compact sensors with double that density still. That's mostly machine work, from what I've seen classic DSLR's in these classes still have a lot of hand work to them and that's also what I referred to with labour intensive.

The point that I was making is that Sony know how to make things with very, very tight tolerances, thus reducing the level of hand built skill required.

This again doesn't add up. You're assuming that hand built is directly linked to tight tolerances. Which it often isn't.

All you have done by mentioning even higher sensor densities, is to enhance my point. If components are manufactured to tight enough tolerances, you merely assemble the components with little need for adjustment.

See above. Some things still have to be done by hand for many other reasons than tolerances. And often those are expensive processes.

BTW, when were you last in a Sony DSLR/DSLT factory?

There was/is a great Sony website showing many of the production facilities at work, from mid class bodies to the highest end lenses (300mm).
Could have been a hoax set up to drive/pull the market of course.

How much glass is there in a prism, compared to an entry level kit zoom lens? Again, prisms don't have to be that expensive. Also a prism is a lot simpler than a 16 element cheap kit zoom!

Apples and oranges.

It's easier to manufacture a nail than a screw, but both can be made of the same material and use the same amount. You could also say apples and oranges about this, but it doesn't take a genius to know that it's a lot cheaper to make nails than screws.

Without anything to back up the claim that it's much easier, or more relevantly, cheaper , your claims cannot be taken seriously.

Most of you on here thinks it's the best thing since sliced bread! Well give me a nice thick slice of freshly baked bread, with decent butter any day.

Most see the benefits for them. And you're free to follow your own preferences, wherever they lead you.

if you'd read all of my posts in this thread, particularly my first one, you'd know that I see the benefits of EVF. It's just that for me they don't outweigh the drawbacks.

If you read most of the posts here, you won't see most people calling it the best thing since sliced bread. You'll mostly see preference.

What's more, even if in Sonyworld, EVF is becoming predominant, mostly due to bloody-mindedness by Sony IMHO, in the world at large OVF is still king and the assertion of most EVF fans that have posted here, that CaNikon will also have to follow this route and that all cameras will end up EVF, has no basis in fact. Of course, time will tell, but I don't believe that this is in any way analogous to the film/digital situation. It was inevitable that film would at some point be overtaken by digital. The same cannot be said for EVF over OVF.

To me it is very analogous. It took digital many years to come close to the resolution, dynamic range and quality in general of film. That didn't stop manufacturers from pushing it and without them pushing it, the majority would still be shooting film. Fact is, the current and next generation of people is used to digital representations much more than OVF's. Thus acceptance, perception and preferences change too. Faster than many would like to believe.

TrojMacReady
TrojMacReady Veteran Member • Posts: 8,729
Re: No Sony SLRs - they might want to reconsider...

Sounds more like hope as a result of fear than fact.

1DanC Regular Member • Posts: 283
Re: No Sony SLRs - they might want to reconsider...

Bring on the A7 and A9, or is it A7xi and A9Xi, or A7000 and A9000?

Dan C

 1DanC's gear list:1DanC's gear list
Sony Alpha DSLR-A700 Sony SLT-A77 Sony DT 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 Sony 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro
MarkSA Forum Member • Posts: 57
Re: No Sony SLRs - they might want to reconsider...

1DanC wrote:

Bring on the A7 and A9, or is it A7xi and A9Xi, or A7000 and A9000?

I vote for A1000

LaFonte Senior Member • Posts: 2,815
Re: No Sony SLRs any more, ever.

Everybody tries to get rid of OVF because it requires mirror and it makes things complicated mechanically. On small cameras you even don't have space to put mirror at all. Also mirror require mechanical timing, introduces shakes etc...you know.

I like good OVF but sony was actually one of the first one to really mess with previously good ovf, making it smaller to the point where an excellent EVF is actually the better option.

 LaFonte's gear list:LaFonte's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Panasonic FZ1000 Fujifilm X-Pro1 +2 more
jerome_munich
OP jerome_munich Contributing Member • Posts: 745
Re: No Sony SLRs any more, ever.

Time to summarize the answers.

What I never understood is why so many Sony users rejoice at the disparition of the OVF. I, for once, never asked for the phasing out of the EVF. I can understand that the EVF has advantages for some (in particular in video mode) and I actually rejoiced when Sony came with the first SLTs: at the time Sony had a dual range of cameras and SLT gave an additional choice.

OVF users don't ask that Sony abandons the SLT system, it is only EVF users who insist that the OVF must go and will disappear in the future.

From the answers in this thread, it seems that we have more hindsight in the psychology of the average Sony forum user: most of the pro-EVF answers came with the argument that "EVF is the future" or went even further by stating that all other manufacturers will have to go EVF in the near future. We also had some comparison between the phasing out of film and the phasing out of the OVF. So it seems that these users have some emotional, irrational, investment in the idea that they have a "more modern" system and that their brand of choice leads future developments. With that attitude, of course the OVF needs to disappear for Sony to "win": any brand keeping the OVF in the future will disprove the theory that the EVF will displace the OVF in the future.

Only the future will tell what really happens, but Nikon did not announce an EVF camera this year and Canon also seems firmly committed to the flapping mirror. An educated prediction would just appear to be that, in the next 3 to 5 years, only Sony will pursue the SLT route with the competition still producing traditional SLRs. How the market will respond to that remains to be seen, of course.

Rick_X Regular Member • Posts: 310
Re: No Sony SLRs any more, ever.

AMEN!

 Rick_X's gear list:Rick_X's gear list
Leica T Leica TL2 Carl Zeiss C Biogon T* 2,8/35 ZM Leica Vario-Elmar-T 18-56mm f/3.5-5.6 Leica Summicron-T 23mm f/2 ASPH +1 more
TrojMacReady
TrojMacReady Veteran Member • Posts: 8,729
More assumptions.

jerome_munich wrote:

We also had some comparison between the phasing out of film and the phasing out of the OVF. So it seems that these users have some emotional, irrational, investment in the idea that they have a "more modern" system and that their brand of choice leads future developments.

The thought that some people have the stance that EVF's will greatly grow in popularity simply because of rational thoughts rather than "emotional investment" apparently hasn't occured to you.

With that attitude, of course the OVF needs to disappear for Sony to "win": any brand keeping the OVF in the future will disprove the theory that the EVF will displace the OVF in the future.

Differentiaton is no proof for "displacement".

seilerbird666
seilerbird666 Senior Member • Posts: 1,101
Re: No Sony SLRs any more, ever.

Piginho wrote:

Just shows the different way people work. You obviously trust the AF implicitly and only really use the viewfinder for composition. I would suggest that you are in a minority and for shooting fast moving subjects EVF is probably just fine. For portraiture, landscapes, macro work, product shots, still life and much more, critically accurate focus is desired by most photographers, most of the time and some of your EVF buddies on here have been making a big deal of digital zoom and pixel peeping on the EVF as an aid to fine focus.

That's a perfect example of making a positive out of a weakness, i.e. the low relative resolution of the EVF compared to our eyes.

So subject matter makes a big difference here. Let's be clear. I'm not in the slightest bit interested in video, with only the mildest interest in action photography, including birds flying past at 20 mph, so for me, being able to check focus reliably in the viewfinder, without need to resort to button pushing to pixel peep or digital zoom, is very important, as it is for many photographers and is in no way beyond silly as you claim.

BTW, I don't need EVF to get to the level of my own eyes acuity to start using it, but as I've said elsewhere, 36Mp should do it.

I do plenty of macro work. I don't have a problem with focusing. I own both an OVF camera and an EVF camera and I find the EVF much better for doing macro work. Rather than run EVFs into the ground over a silly thing you should actually try use one.

-- hide signature --

My photos:
picasaweb.google.com/seilerbird

seilerbird666
seilerbird666 Senior Member • Posts: 1,101
Re: No Sony SLRs - they might want to reconsider...

Piginho wrote:

if you'd read all of my posts in this thread, particularly my first one, you'd know that I see the benefits of EVF. It's just that for me they don't outweigh the drawbacks. I say again, each to his own. I don't believe that people who prefer OVF to EVF should be spoken down to by people who think that they've seen the light.

No one is speaking down to you because you prefer OVFs over EVFs. We are speaking down to you because you have posted a bunch of BS reasons why the OVF is so superior to the EVF such as critical focusing and backlit subjects. You make it sound like it is impossible to use the EVF in those situations when in fact the EVF is superior to the OVF in those situations. Clearly you have never used an EVF and you are trying to sound like some kind of expert in the field. I own and I use both an EVF and an OVF camera and the EVF wins by a very large distance. If you prefer an OVF I have no problem, I do have a problem with you making up things to prove that OVFs are superior.
--
My photos:
picasaweb.google.com/seilerbird

Old Pirate Senior Member • Posts: 1,451
Re: No Sony SLRs - they might want to reconsider...

And no more tube tv's, 4 barrel carbs, or seasonal packaging of cigarette cartons for gifts.

Things change and typically for the better.

How is your dial phone doing, Princess Phone, any new VHS or 8 track tapes?

I too find OVF hard to return to once I tried a top of the line Sony EVF.

 Old Pirate's gear list:Old Pirate's gear list
Sony a77 II Sony a7R II Sony E 16mm F2.8 Pancake Sony 50mm F1.4 Sony DT 16-80mm F3.5-4.5 ZA Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* +7 more
dennismullen
dennismullen Veteran Member • Posts: 9,019
Re: No Sony SLRs any more, ever.

I'd like to remind everyone that this is the present, the future is not here yet.

-- hide signature --

"Those who would sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin.
You can see larger versions of my pictures at http://www.dennismullen.com .

Scott418 Forum Member • Posts: 73
Re: No Sony SLRs any more, ever.

After going from Canon DSLR's and getting the A57 recently, I'm 100% fine with Sony being all SLT. EVF's are IMO more useful and the live-view phase detection autofocus is such a great feature.

jerome_munich wrote:

With the issue of the A99, it now clear that the prediction was right: Sony will not issue a SLR with an OVF any more, ever. Not even for full frame cameras.

It remains to be seen what the competition will do.

Lee Jay Forum Pro • Posts: 53,182
Their loss

EVFs stink in so many ways it's hard to count. For most of what I use a camera for, they're virtually unusable.

If people don't mind a view with clipped white and crushed blacks, lagged behind reality, while carrying a handful of extra batteries in their pocket, EVFs are fine. For those of us looking for a bit more performance out of our equipment, they're worthless.

-- hide signature --

Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

 Lee Jay's gear list:Lee Jay's gear list
Canon IXUS 310 HS Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM +23 more
Trollmann Senior Member • Posts: 1,311
Re: Their loss

Someone on this forum called me Homer because I said that I missed the EVF when picking up my old a100 - still miss the EVF when picking up my a100. To me the EVF is as dead as twin lens reflex cameras, photographic film and 256MB memory cards...

dka91 Senior Member • Posts: 1,199
Re: No Sony SLRs any more, ever.

Maybe people have this "emotional, irrational, investment", I mean people always do have these feelings over their equipment (myself included).

But, its pretty clear to me EVF will form some part of the future (though theres no mention of that in my post)....and more importantly Sony outlined it as their future FOR NOW (things change) so I s'pose alot of people are making the best of it.

I don't say this often...but I really don't care about EVF or OVF....whatever as long as I can look through something during the sunlight.

Ive never understood the fuss about it. Both are awesome and useful, and I think the argument over them is really petty, honestly. I didnt choose Sony because of the EVF...infact Im happy with either one, if EVFs were to be discontinued tomorrow Id have no problem, OVF's are cool aswell.

Now I don't say that often if at all......firstly, because Id flame myself, secondly Id be called a troll...which Im sure I will be in 5...4...3...2...1....

THAT SAID at the same token, I do understand that people feel strongly about it, so I respect that, obviously people are comfortable with OVF's and if I felt that way and disliked the EVF's in comparison then I probably would switch systems.

Anyway, I'll say it again, sadlly there is nothing you can do now. Sony made a decision...I can understand it for economical reasons (though really is it that hard to offer both? Really? To save the arguments and doubt).

So I suggest either move system, or adapt or keep your older gear.

But this talk yields nothing except for either side proclaiming theirs to be the best....and alot of people getting p*ssed off.

 dka91's gear list:dka91's gear list
Sony a7 II Zeiss Batis 85mm F1.8 Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM Sony FE 50mm F1.8
Lee Jay Forum Pro • Posts: 53,182
Re: Their loss

Trollmann wrote:

To me the EVF is as dead as twin lens reflex cameras, photographic film and 256MB memory cards...

Heh! Yep...I agree.

-- hide signature --

Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

 Lee Jay's gear list:Lee Jay's gear list
Canon IXUS 310 HS Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM +23 more
sye46 Senior Member • Posts: 1,071
Re: Their loss

spoken like a true Canon fanboy... too bad Canon hasn't innovated anything in the past 5 years... but if you want to stick to Canon bodies that have zero innovations and just minor incremental changes each time for more money....then get a Canon. Nikon and Sony are pushing photography further while Canon is just lagging behind.

ljfinger wrote:

EVFs stink in so many ways it's hard to count. For most of what I use a camera for, they're virtually unusable.

If people don't mind a view with clipped white and crushed blacks, lagged behind reality, while carrying a handful of extra batteries in their pocket, EVFs are fine. For those of us looking for a bit more performance out of our equipment, they're worthless.

Lee Jay Forum Pro • Posts: 53,182
Re: Their loss

sye46 wrote:

spoken like a true Canon fanboy... too bad Canon hasn't innovated anything in the past 5 years... but if you want to stick to Canon bodies that have zero innovations and just minor incremental changes each time for more money....then get a Canon. Nikon and Sony are pushing photography further while Canon is just lagging behind.

That's why I still have my Canon dSLRs from 7 years ago. However, if they came out with a state-of-the-art feature-packed EOS camera with an EVF, I wouldn't buy it, just like I haven't bought anything else they have made in the last 7 years. EVFs are just this side of useless. Oh, they're a little better than an LCD, but that's not saying much.

-- hide signature --

Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

 Lee Jay's gear list:Lee Jay's gear list
Canon IXUS 310 HS Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM +23 more
Lucas_
Lucas_ Veteran Member • Posts: 3,076
Re: No Sony SLRs any more, ever.

dennismullen wrote:

I'd like to remind everyone that this is the present, the future is not here yet.

....
Whatch out!

... Lucas

-- hide signature --

Always having fun with photography ...

http://www.lucaspix.smugmug.com/

 Lucas_'s gear list:Lucas_'s gear list
Sony RX100 Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D Sony a7 II Sony a7R II Sony 50mm F1.4 +39 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads