T3

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jul 1, 2003

Comments

Total: 2824, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

RubberDials: Question for everybody, which do you think will come out first?

A). Full-Frame Canon/Nikon mirrorless with a range of lenses.

B). Sony 400mm f2.8.

@cbphoto123 - by the way, when you look through an OVF, you're not seeing the world at the same full resolution as the human eye. Why? Because what you are seeing is a world that is filtered through a piece of cloudy, rough etched plastic (yes, the focusing screens of OVFs aren't even glass...they are plastic).

https://goo.gl/f31ktS

https://goo.gl/Bg63L5

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/31TM96ogHOL.jpg

http://photographic.co/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Lens-Mount-535x400.jpg

http://www.focusingscreen.com/work/picture/d5100/008.jpg

So you are fooling yourself if you think that the view through a DSLR's OVF is the same as the full resolution of the human eye, after passing through that piece of cloudy etched plastic.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 21:51 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

RubberDials: Question for everybody, which do you think will come out first?

A). Full-Frame Canon/Nikon mirrorless with a range of lenses.

B). Sony 400mm f2.8.

@cbphoto123 - maybe you consider a viewfinder to be a pretty window. I see it as a tool. The problem with DR is that no sensor can capture all the DR that the human eye can see anyways! Hahaha! The beauty of EVF is that it not only shows me an approximation of what the captured image will look like (real-time exposure preview), but I can also set it to show me where highlight or shadow clipping will occur within a scene. An OVF simply can not do that!

As for your question of how many megapixels the eye can resolve, I don't see the point of that either. A camera isn't resolving that same amount anyways! I guess some people just want viewfinders to be pretty windows to look through. I want my viewfinder to be an informative, feature-rich tool that enhances my photography, not just some sliver of rough etched glass.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 21:37 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ed Ingold: Wedding photographs outnumber sports professionals by (guessing) 1000 to 1. Seeing even one Sony A9 on the sidelines is good advertising for those who have less "inertia" to switch, not to mention those who envy pro equipment.

Cthulion - The A9 has the seals to easily handle spilled drinks, lol.

https://www.imaging-resource.com/ee_uploads/news/6931/sony-a9-sealing-diagram-250px.jpg

Also, today's cameras can handle far more than most people realize. Watch these "torture test" videos that DigitalRev put together, abusing two entry-level plastic, non-weatherized DSLRs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1tTBncIsm8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWzsXeXCwuc
In spite of being hammered, doused with water, slammed onto concrete, and even torched, they still survived and worked fine. A camera like the A9, which is built much better and has weather/dust seals, would definitely do as well and better.

And you're worried about "being bumped into or having drinks spilled?" LOL. I travel extensively with a lowly unweatherized A6000. It's been through monsoon rains in Sri Lanka, extremely high humidity in Singapore, dusty conditions in India, it's been dropped, it's been in snow-- and it still works perfectly fine.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 21:21 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

RubberDials: Question for everybody, which do you think will come out first?

A). Full-Frame Canon/Nikon mirrorless with a range of lenses.

B). Sony 400mm f2.8.

@cbphoto123 - As for how you can "see the world" through an EVF, here's one thing I really love about EVF: I like to set my EVF to black-and-white simulation mode. That means I see everything in the EVF as black and white and shades of grey. I've found this has really helped the quality of my compositions tremendously because I can concentrate on shapes and forms and lines in the viewfinder rather than being distracted by colors. This slight abstraction of the world is really really helpful. I highly recommend it for anyone who wants help improving their compositions. (Of course, since I shoot in RAW, I still get a color image.) You just can't do this with an OVF!

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 19:25 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

RubberDials: Question for everybody, which do you think will come out first?

A). Full-Frame Canon/Nikon mirrorless with a range of lenses.

B). Sony 400mm f2.8.

@cbphoto123 -"I would be surprised if an EVF could "replace" what the human eye is capable of seeing."

What in the world are you talking about? I use both OVF and EVF. They both work fine with me. But I prefer EVF because it gives me a brighter image (EVF brightness can be adjusted). Not all OVFs are that bright. And they get really dark when the light gets low, because they are dependent on reflected light bouncing up from the mirror. The other advantage with EVF is that EVF size is not tied to format size. APS-C viewfinders are smaller than FF viewfinders because of the big difference in format size. That's not the case with EVF. That's why the X-T2 (APS-C) and E-M1 (m4/3) both have viewfinders as large as a 1DX (FF);
https://1.img-dpreview.com/files/p/TS560x560~forums/55189947/4731f59059334b0d84f034e14cf47a5e

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 19:20 UTC
In reply to:

aramgrg: I highly doubt any pro will consider a9. There is a reason pro bodies are even bigger than any dslr, because that's more convenient for big lenses. What's the point of a9? 20fps? maybe some care about the jump from 14-15 to 20, most won't. My feeling is A9 is a mistake from marketing stand point.

Pros shooting big lenses stick them on monopods anyways. They aren't handholding these lenses. The camera just hangs off the end.

http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/77d01de737e145fa804fabf7c93e780c/photographers-on-the-stands-during-the-swimming-competition-in-aquatics-d695c9.jpg

https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/photographers-field-26129497.jpg

http://home.bt.com/images/amateur-at-anfield-lynne-cameron-shooting-137480706953903901-130809110254.jpg

http://d13uygpm1enfng.cloudfront.net/article-imgs/en/2012/07/26/AJ201207260015/AJ201207260016M.jpg

https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/photo/2012/08/2012-london-olympics-the-first-9-days/l45_49653114/main_900.jpg?1420515503

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ADt43UNOIco/maxresdefault.jpg

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 19:08 UTC
In reply to:

Potemkin_Photo: 1d mkiin still working great on original shutter. By time it fails a9 will probably be very heavily discounted. I'll upgrade around 2025. Never buy new bodies whether car or camera . Too much sticker shock. Get used glass instead

Speaking of shutter:

That's another interesting factor that some people aren't considering. In theory, a solid state camera with electronic shutter should last indefinitely because there are no moving parts to wear out. Every DSLR has a shutter life expectancy. But if you have a solid state camera that has no shutter, that's no longer an issue. In fact, a lot of other issues go away too. No more issues of front focus/back focus, or lens calibration. No issues of a mirror or shutter jamming. We are-- fortunately-- moving towards a less mechanical world. It's like the move from spinning hard drives to solid state drives. How many hard drives have failed over the years because they are inherently mechanical devices with moving parts?

And speaking of buying used, one concern of buying used DSLRs is the age of the shutter/how many activations it has had. In the future, in a world of solid state cameras mirrorless cameras, that won't be an issue.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 18:17 UTC
In reply to:

Scottelly: Pros don't switch . . . ever.

The fact is, some Canon and Nixon photographers will try this new Sony with a lens like a 70-200 or 300mm f2.8, and if they really like it and like their results, they're going to buy the new 500mm Stigma to go with it, and then they just might sell their big Canon or Nixon lens and one of their bodies from that kit. Then they just might get a second Sony body. Eventually they will spend money upgrading to new Canon or Nixon gear, or They'll try an A9. Either way it's going to cost thousands of dollars, so this article is pointless.

@photomedium - dude, I *know* colleagues who switched, hahaha. People do switch. You can't be so close-minded, and you can't make blanket statements like that. It's like saying, "All asians behave like this..." There are many many posts and article online of working pros discussing their experience with switching. Heck, whole agencies even switch.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/27607417

But I think Sony's strategy is to first get something like an A9 into people's hands. I'm a Canon user, but I also now use Sony. One factor that I did like was that I could adapt my Canon lenses to my Sony body. It may not be the *perfect* solution, but it certainly did lessen the friction of deciding to add a Sony body into my arsenal. And that's where it starts. That adaptability is a handy trojan horse that Sony has on its side. It'll get them through the gates of the city wall, so to speak.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 18:08 UTC
In reply to:

fatdeeman: The A9 is such a bold challenge it seems a shame they didn't announce it alongside a supertele prime. Seems like every pro with an opinion on the subject wants the same thing: big lenses.

I think people are writing about the lack of big lenses, but in the real world not every pro uses big lenses. I think it would be interesting to take a poll of all professional photographers in North America, for example, to see just how many professional photographers use or need a super telephoto prime right now. That would give us a better understand of the extent of this "problem". I'm guessing maybe Sony already has a good idea of it. And maybe they realized it's not necessarily a do-or-die issue for now.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 16:08 UTC

I see A9 as initially starting off as a second body for a lot of pros. That's one "in" that the A9 has- adaptability. Would a Canon user ever get a Nikon body as a second body? Or vice versa? No, because there's no possibility of adaptability between them. So this is one way that A9 gets its foot in the door, a way that isn't really available to DSLRs.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 16:02 UTC as 143rd comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Scottelly: Pros don't switch . . . ever.

The fact is, some Canon and Nixon photographers will try this new Sony with a lens like a 70-200 or 300mm f2.8, and if they really like it and like their results, they're going to buy the new 500mm Stigma to go with it, and then they just might sell their big Canon or Nixon lens and one of their bodies from that kit. Then they just might get a second Sony body. Eventually they will spend money upgrading to new Canon or Nixon gear, or They'll try an A9. Either way it's going to cost thousands of dollars, so this article is pointless.

That's non-sense. There have always been pros who have switched from Canon to Nikon, and vice versa. And the differences or gains in switching between Canon/Nikon are really not that great. And yet, pros have done it!
https://fstoppers.com/originals/earth-moving-feeling-youll-get-after-switching-nikon-meh-121496

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/features/why-i-switched-canon-nikon-seth-resnick?BI=572&kw=&c3api=0980%2C106232511053&gclid=CjwKEAjw5_vHBRCBtt2NqqCDjiESJABD5rCJyYgZ-j9GPX2K4ocTXyYjLBWF_Sbup5wwHHEVeOKU5RoCS3_w_wcB

https://hofferphotography.com/2015/02/26/the-3-reasons-why-we-switched-to-nikon/

http://shotkit.com/imagine-photography/ "We recently left Canon for the Nikon D750 and Sony A7ii series cameras, and we both carry one of each."

So pros never "ever" switch? LOL, nope.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 15:52 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ed Ingold: Wedding photographs outnumber sports professionals by (guessing) 1000 to 1. Seeing even one Sony A9 on the sidelines is good advertising for those who have less "inertia" to switch, not to mention those who envy pro equipment.

@Cthulion- "Wedding photographers also always use multiple bodies. Seeing as this is the only one competent for the task..."

First of all, there are plenty of successful wedding photogs already shooting weddings with A7-series bodies.
https://petapixel.com/2016/02/13/wedding-photography-sony-a7s/

Secondly, the fact that wedding photogs work with two bodies is what makes A9/A7 so appealing: a lot less weight and bulk hanging from your shoulders for these all-day shoots, especially when working with two bodies. When I was still shooting weddings, I carried two cameras, with a different lens on each. This saved me the hassle of lens changes. 2 bodies, plus lenses, plus (maybe) speedlights ends up being a lot of weight and bulk you're walking and moving around with. To have something lighter and less bulky would definitely be a plus. Also, as a Canon shooter, Canon doesn't have a 24-70/2.8 IS. And Nikon's 24-70/2.8 VR is *massive*. With IBIS, in-lens IS/VR is not an issue.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 15:25 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ed Ingold: Wedding photographs outnumber sports professionals by (guessing) 1000 to 1. Seeing even one Sony A9 on the sidelines is good advertising for those who have less "inertia" to switch, not to mention those who envy pro equipment.

@Zdman - "Yep too expensive for wedding photographers. This is in the "work buys my equipment" price territory."

Oh, come on, serious? There are plenty of wedding photogs in my area (LA/OC, California) that use 1DX and D5 bodies, which are a lot more expensive. But I'm not talking about $900 photographers you find off of Facebook. I'm talking about real professional wedding photographers. Go to WPPI Expo in Las Vegas and you'll see *plenty* of wedding photogs there with these more expensive Canon/Nikon bodies. So to say that the less expensive A9 is "too expensive" for wedding photographers is not true in my opinion. An A9 as a main body, paired with one of Sony's less expensive A7-series bodies seems perfectly reasonable.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 15:14 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kitschi: some of you mention that there are new photographers which get into the market of weeding photography and need a gear and will now choose the A9

I think you forgot, that these people also compare the brands and offer they'll get from each and then there is the big problem I see ->

Sony might have a IBIS in the camera and Zeiss AF lenses, but first most of them are only F1,8 at max aperture, then the price is in some points higher or same as the CaNikon lenses and the variety of lenses is very small also the lack of 3rd party lenses

and then everybody compares the A9 with it's high price against the D1X MkII and D5, but for wedding photographers those are not the first choice, there are the 5D Mk4 and D810/750 the working tools and those cameras are in a other price range compared to the Sony which plays against Leica with that price...

Probably in a year or two a lot of the technology in the A9 will start showing up in Sony's lower-priced models. Those cameras will be more "accessible" in price and go head to head with the 5D IV and D810/750. (Or just use current A7 series.) The A9 is designed to go up against the 1DX II and D5.

As for 3rd party support, Sigma has said that they'll be making FF lenses for E-mount:
https://petapixel.com/2016/09/26/sigma-plans-make-lenses-sony-full-frame-e-mount-report/

As for lenses being "only f/1.8", I don't mind as long as I have IBIS.

As for "the variety of lenses is very small", there are currently 20 FE lenses, not including 3rd party lenses such as Zeiss Batis. If I were still shooting weddings, I can't think of any lenses that are lacking from the Sony system that I would need. Wedding photogs don't need a massive variety of lenses. But if you need a semi-fish eye lens or some other odd lens not offered by Sony, you can always just use the Canon version and an adapter.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 07:40 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

GarysInSoCal: With all my terrific Nikon lenses and strobes... Sonys offering here is making me REALLY EXCITED for the next new Nikon camera. Nikon lenses ROCK and their current cameras exceed all my expectations. Sony can do backflips, win the lottery, put the next man on the moon and run for president... they still ain't gettin my vote. This comes from a super-pro with lots of paying clients and magazine covers to my credit... ;)

I think after the A9, any new DSLR introductions are going to seem a bit anti-climactic. At this point, DSLRs are just getting fairly minor tweaks and slight enhancements. DSLRs have basically kind of plateaued. So I don't think there will be all that much to be REALLY EXCITED about...other than maybe a $2000 price drop.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 06:41 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

RubberDials: Question for everybody, which do you think will come out first?

A). Full-Frame Canon/Nikon mirrorless with a range of lenses.

B). Sony 400mm f2.8.

.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 05:57 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

RubberDials: Question for everybody, which do you think will come out first?

A). Full-Frame Canon/Nikon mirrorless with a range of lenses.

B). Sony 400mm f2.8.

Choice A) is a pretty heavy undertaking. Considering how long Canon took to get their EOS M system going, I can't imagine Canon being able to move very fast on FF mirrorless. As for Nikon, I have no idea.

Choice B) is not THAT difficult. In fact, compared to all the R&D required to put together an entirely new camera from the ground up, a 400/2.8 seems like a walk in the park. It's not new technology, you don't have to develop new technology for it. It's a lens.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 05:12 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

IdM photography: There are every day young photographers who make the initial camera investment... They should be very tempted by Sony's offering...

Yes, I think it's absurd that people seem to think the world is comprised entirely of a fixed number of potential buyers, and they all already have either Canon or Nikon equipment! They forget that, even in today's slower market, there are new photographers entering the market every day. And there is a whole generation of photographers who have yet to enter the market. And so on, and so forth.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 04:07 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

rfsIII: ...not to mention the cost of buying all new speed lights....

@rfsIII - Speedlites don't do any metering. It's the camera that does the metering. The camera just tells the speedlite how much light to output. But in the past, communication between cameras and third-party speedlites wasn't always the best. That's not the case anymore. Plus, today's third-party speedlites have micro-USB ports so that firmware can be easily updated if needed.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 03:40 UTC
On article Sony a9: Why being better might not be enough (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

CaPi: Very true.. congrats to this article..

@MyReality - that doesn't mean DSLRs will go away entirely. Some people still like the mechanical. Consider that while most people now listen to music on mp3 players/iPods/smartphones (all of which are solid state), there are people who still listen to vinyl records on turntables (mechanical). Just as turntables haven't gone away, neither will DSLRs. But they'll just be a smaller niche.

Link | Posted on Apr 25, 2017 at 03:30 UTC
Total: 2824, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »