T3

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

Comments

Total: 2804, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On article Sony a9 shooting experience: Here's why I'm impressed (781 comments in total)
In reply to:

dash2k8: Can someone confirm if the Sony Eye AF is the same thing that Canon had in the EOS-3 from the 90's? I believe it was called the Eye-Control system.

@mart1234- by today's standards, Canon's ECF is primitive technology. Today, if they were to revise it, they'd probably want to put a tiny imaging sensor into the viewfinder instead of a bunch of infrared beams. Put a tiny inexpensive camera in there, like from a cheap smartphone, to "see" the location of the pupil. That would take up less space than Canon's IR array of beams, and it'd be more accurate.

The system was probably dropped because it didn't work for everyone. With the old system, I think eye color might have been an issue. Lighter eyes were harder to track than darker eyes. Plus, some people don't consistently position their eye in the viewfinder. If you were a shifty viewfinder user, the system wouldn't work well.

I personally loved it. It worked pretty well for me, even as an eyeglass wearer.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 10:47 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience: Here's why I'm impressed (781 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kevin Coppalotti: Carey is 100% correct on the frame rates. it is a hindrance to a sports shooter doing big events for hours, -all those pics have to be looked at and edited, and stored.

@Kevin Coppalotti - the A9 has adjustable frame rate. If you want a slower frame rate, just select a slower frame rate. For your particular situation, which doesn't seem too demanding because riders are following a predictable path, and there's not a whole lot of variation, 5 fps may be sufficient. So on an A9, you'd select the 5 fps setting. But other photographers shooting other sporting events might feel that 20fps gives them an advantage. So they'd set the A9 to 20fps. Different people have different needs. 5 fps may work for you, but it may be totally insufficient for someone else. (I don't see *any* 5 fps cameras being touted as great sports cameras.) Someone else might prefer 20 fps bursts.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 10:22 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience: Here's why I'm impressed (781 comments in total)
In reply to:

dash2k8: Can someone confirm if the Sony Eye AF is the same thing that Canon had in the EOS-3 from the 90's? I believe it was called the Eye-Control system.

No, it's totally different. Canon's Eye Control Focus allowed you to select which focus point to use simply by looking at the desired focus point in the viewfinder. Canon used a series of infrared beams to track the location of the pupil, and from this it was able to extrapolate which focus point you were looking at. In Canon's Eye Control Focus system, the camera is tracking the *user's* eye.

Sony's Eye AF uses facial recognition off the sensor to identify the location of the *subject's* eye, then locks onto the eye and tracks AF to that eye, keeping the subject's eye in focus.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 10:08 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience: Here's why I'm impressed (781 comments in total)
In reply to:

Deorum: Due to much less materials cost (most of the cost here is R&D i guess) this camera has the potential to be much cheaper in a few years, than a big - pro DSLR has, that carries much more complex mechanical parts.

@Zdman- " At one point the Nex 3 and Nex 5 were really cheap. Samsung was selling some lower specification mirrorless at giveaway prices and these were introductory prices."

Well, you basically explained what was going right there: these were initial "really cheap" "giveaway prices" design to be "introductory prices" to get people to try mirrorless, which was very new and unfamiliar at the time. Obviously, that strategy just isn't sustainable, especially if you don't have high volume "mass consumer" sales that can compensate for the "really cheap" "giveaway prices." That the manufacturers eventually re-adjusted the prices to more reasonable levels to generate a sufficient profit is not "price gouging."

As for the claim that "you can't buy a good mirrorless for less than a grand"-- that's just pure non-sense. I have a Sony A6000. It's a great camera, and it's only $500. The Fuji X-T10 is also a great little camera, and it's also $500 ($480 at B&H).

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 09:55 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience: Here's why I'm impressed (781 comments in total)
In reply to:

KLO82: It seems to me that there is huge difference in philosophies between Canon and Sony regarding their imaging products.

In Canon's view, all the problems/ limitations in photography have already been solved, the technology is matured. There is no need for anything revolutionary. Just fine tune/ slightly modify your existing products and reiterate them - and ensure the reliability of the products. If you still can not get your intended photographs with the current products (cameras and lenses), may be the limitation is you.

Whereas in Sony's view, there are still many more limitations/ problems to overcome in imaging - there is much to be done.

Eventually, we will see who's view is closer to reality.

Back then, it was Canon that was the hungry underdog, compelled to innovate in order to catch Nikon-- which they eventually did. At the time, Nikon was the reigning king, and they were comfortable in their position. Today, it is Sony that is the hungry underdog, compelled to innovate. And Canon now is the reigning king, comfortable in its position.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 09:31 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience: Here's why I'm impressed (781 comments in total)
In reply to:

KLO82: It seems to me that there is huge difference in philosophies between Canon and Sony regarding their imaging products.

In Canon's view, all the problems/ limitations in photography have already been solved, the technology is matured. There is no need for anything revolutionary. Just fine tune/ slightly modify your existing products and reiterate them - and ensure the reliability of the products. If you still can not get your intended photographs with the current products (cameras and lenses), may be the limitation is you.

Whereas in Sony's view, there are still many more limitations/ problems to overcome in imaging - there is much to be done.

Eventually, we will see who's view is closer to reality.

Oddly enough, your description of Sony's "philosophy" matched Canon's in the late 1980's and 1990's, while your description of Canon's current "philosophy" mirrored Nikon's during the same era. Canon felt there were a lot of limitations/problems to be solved. So they came out with electronic focus lenses (their "EF" lenses) that had quiet, fast in-lens motors which electronically communicated with the camera body. (Now everyone does it too.) Same with Canon introducing Image Stabilization lenses, so that photographers could get steadier shots. They also had innovations in there cameras such as Eye Control Focus (ECF) which allowed you to select focus points with your eye, and DEP mode which allowed you to set depth of field simply by focusing on the near point you wanted in focus, then the far point you wanted in focus; the camera then automatically set aperture and focus to achieve that desired DOF. Nikon, on the other hand, didn't do much more than "tune/modify" what they had.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 09:22 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience: Here's why I'm impressed (781 comments in total)
In reply to:

KLO82: There are many photographers who are impressed, but will not consider buying this camera because they think they do not need the "advantages" and features this camera offers. Their current camera is good enough for what they photograph. In a sense, Sony is offering a solution to some problems. But these problems do not exist for some photographers. As if it has been done because it can be done (technologically feasible), not necessarily because it is needed.

There are sometimes when new products had been offered which we didn't even know that we needed. Only after getting it, it has become essential for us. Example: Facebook. So we have to see if this product is like that, or just a technological showcase.

Well, I think silent shooting with full e-shutter is one of those things that "you didn't know you needed until you had it." I think a lot of wedding photogs are going to like it. It's something that is going to be valuable anywhere that the *clack* sound of a mirror and/or shutter are undesirable-- recitals, dance performances, theatre performances, weddings, you name it! Heck, it's great for street shooting, too. Great way to maintain your stealth and unobtrusiveness if you can take shots without a sound. Ah, the sweet sound of silence.

Yes, the A9 certainly is a "technological showcase." Nothing wrong with that. These technologies will eventually trickle down to lower-cost mirrorless cameras. It has to start somewhere. Typically, it starts in a flagship "showcase" product. It's not as if the A9 is a "concept design" made for an auto show that will never go into production. The A9 is an actual product. And its tech will filter down, because Sony want to maximize ROI on their R&D.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 08:16 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience: Here's why I'm impressed (781 comments in total)
In reply to:

Deorum: Due to much less materials cost (most of the cost here is R&D i guess) this camera has the potential to be much cheaper in a few years, than a big - pro DSLR has, that carries much more complex mechanical parts.

@quiquae- You're right, Canon/Nikon have economies of scale with their low end models. But that doesn't do much for their other DSLR models that use entirely different parts and sell at much lower volumes. Plus, if future consumers start choosing mirrorless over DSLRs in greater numbers (as I think they will, as mirrorless gains more acceptance-- and impressive "halo" cameras such as the A9 certainly help), economies of scale shift to mirrorless, and away from DSLRs. So then, DSLRs are faced with the double-whammy of more parts/greater manufacturing complexity combined with diminished economies of scale (which have shifted to mirrorless)

It's even more troublesome for Canon/Nikon if they embrace mirrorless, because they'll shift even more volume away from their DSLRs, further robbing their DSLRs of economies of scale. It's a sticky situation for them. No wonder they've been so reluctant with mirrorless. But mirrorless isn't going away. To quote Game of Thrones: "Winter is Coming"

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 07:47 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience: Here's why I'm impressed (781 comments in total)
In reply to:

Deorum: Due to much less materials cost (most of the cost here is R&D i guess) this camera has the potential to be much cheaper in a few years, than a big - pro DSLR has, that carries much more complex mechanical parts.

Yes, this is where the future of cameras is headed: solid state, fewer parts, greater ease of manufacturing, which equates to lower cost of manufacturing. When you can do away with complicated reflex mirror mechanisms, mechanical shutters, separate focus modules, etc, that makes things cheaper. Consumers may not care about this, but manufacturers certainly do. With the volume of digital camera sales being much lower these (and they'll probably never return to what they were), lower cost of manufacturing will be very important. Back when DSLRs were flying off of shelves, you had massive economies of scale helping to keep costs down. Those days are gone.

Sure, some DSLRs still sell in high volumes (mainly just certain low end models like Rebels or D3300's), but other DSLR models sell at much lower volumes. And I don't think economies of scale for a Rebel are going to do all that much for the manufacturing cost of a 7D MKII or 1DX II which uses entirely different parts.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 07:30 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience: Here's why I'm impressed (781 comments in total)
In reply to:

sandy b: The Nikon D5 buffer vs the Sony buffer. The D5 can shoot 200 jpgs and clear the buffer in one second. Or 180 14 bit raw and clear the buffer in 5 seconds. At 12 FPS, full AF

That horrible blackout time? .13 seconds. Barely a flicker. the blink of your eye, in contrast, is .333 seconds.

And an incredible AF where the subject can actually leave the frame and stay in focus when it comes back in.

And it can do it in a monsoon or after driving nails.

And NEF (RAW): 12 or 14 bit, lossless compressed, compressed, or uncompressed, L/M/S; RAW+JPEG; TIFF.

The Sony looks cool, and sooner or later Nikon will introduce some or all of its features. But it has ways to go where it can compete with D5 multi media monster.

"That horrible blackout time? .13 seconds. Barely a flicker. the blink of your eye, in contrast, is .333 seconds."

I think it's going to be quite a revelation for many people when they finally try the A9 with zero blackout. Everyone who's used it seems to say the same thing about the lack of blackout. Even Carey says it, saying that shooting "without any blackout whatsoever is a revelation." Think about it: you're now finally able to see the exact moment that you're capturing. With a DSLR, you are literally not seeing it because that's the moment the mirror is blocking the view. You're only seeing the moment before and after the moment of capture, and at high frame rate you're basically seeing a stuttered view of the world between blackouts.

What if EVF with zero blackout existed before DSLRs, and suddenly DSLRs were introduced. People would be saying, "Wow, this blackout is annoying! You mean I can't see the moment I'm capturing because a mirror flips up to block my view? Crazy!"

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 05:06 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience: Here's why I'm impressed (781 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kevin Coppalotti: Carey is 100% correct on the frame rates. it is a hindrance to a sports shooter doing big events for hours, -all those pics have to be looked at and edited, and stored.

@Jetfly- hahah, oops, didn't even see that. Typing too fast! Usain :)

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 04:37 UTC
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1877 comments in total)
In reply to:

sknippen: Mirrorrless is a rather new evolution in the camera market (like digital was a few years ago). Canikon produce very good and reliable camera's and have the advantage of a mature system. But electronic's are finding it's way into the camera market and electronic evolution can go very fast. The problem with DSLR is that it's depends on mechanical systems where less evolution is possible (Sony tried with SLT). The problem with Canikon is that they hold on on their "mechanical" DSLR and invest little in new tech. I agree that current pro's won't ditch their system for another, but young pro's who haven't invested yet don't have that problem. I hope that Canikon will bring mirrorrless camera's that can compete with Sony (competition is good, it keep's the prices down and keep challenging the camera producer's)

Yes, there is a bit of confusion with rangefinder cameras. Some people erroneously want to label rangefinder cameras as "mirrorless" because they don't have mirrors. But that's not even correct; rangefinders *do* have mirrors! These mirrors are located in the top portion of the body, in their split-image rangefinding focusing mechanism.

https://2.img-dpreview.com/files/p/E~forums/57197252/ed225b2a1ea24a4e89dfd3d06d46ea4b

https://cameraquest.com/Epson-R-D1/_r-d1/images/rangefinder.gif

https://www.heise.de/foto/imgs/13/4/8/0/9/2/8/rangefinder_system.jpg-dbd2e5d5000fa59e.jpeg

So technically, rangefinders shouldn't be called a "mirrorless" cameras due to the inconvenient fact that THEY DO, in fact, have mirrors. It's simply more appropriate and correct to refer to them as rangefinder cameras because that's what they are, and rangefinders have mirrors!

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 04:08 UTC
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1877 comments in total)
In reply to:

sknippen: Mirrorrless is a rather new evolution in the camera market (like digital was a few years ago). Canikon produce very good and reliable camera's and have the advantage of a mature system. But electronic's are finding it's way into the camera market and electronic evolution can go very fast. The problem with DSLR is that it's depends on mechanical systems where less evolution is possible (Sony tried with SLT). The problem with Canikon is that they hold on on their "mechanical" DSLR and invest little in new tech. I agree that current pro's won't ditch their system for another, but young pro's who haven't invested yet don't have that problem. I hope that Canikon will bring mirrorrless camera's that can compete with Sony (competition is good, it keep's the prices down and keep challenging the camera producer's)

Here's the breakdown summary of rangefinders vs mirrorless vs the latest Leica M for the uninitiated or confused:

Classic rangefinder camera: no TTL viewing, separate rangefinder mechanism used for focusing.

MIrrorless camera: native TTL viewing, full-time live view and autofocus via the sensor.

Digital Leica M rangefinder cameras: these are hybrids in that they are still rangefinder cameras, still mainly designed to be used without TTL viewing in classic rangefinder fashion, but you can enable Live View off the rear LCD (like a DSLR) and you can attach an EVF to the hotshoe. Still no AF though. But because they still retain the rangefinder mechanism, they are still rightly referred to as rangefinder cameras...but with Live View enhancements.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 03:51 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience: Here's why I'm impressed (781 comments in total)
In reply to:

Edmond Leung: It is still not a camera system for tough and demanding jobs. Especially color reproduction may not fit for high-end demanding clients.

What?!? Now it's about color reproduction? I guess everyone should stop using Sony sensors, then! Including Nikon, Pentax, and so many other companies that are using Sony sensors.

Seriously, though, the idea that the A9 is going to have a problem with color reproduction is just nuts for "high-end demanding clients" is just nuts. But then again, I've seen this petty argument used by Canon users against Nikon, and by Nikon users against Canon, and by Fuji users against Canon/Nikon, etc, etc, etc.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 03:22 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience: Here's why I'm impressed (781 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kevin Coppalotti: Carey is 100% correct on the frame rates. it is a hindrance to a sports shooter doing big events for hours, -all those pics have to be looked at and edited, and stored.

Kevin, the A9 can be set to shoot at different frame rates. 20fps is just the maximum setting. I believe the other settings are 15fps, 10fps, and 5fps. Anyways, here's a demo of the A9 at 5fps, 15 fps and 20fps:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6iHmGp4nMo

That's the beauty of e-shutter. There's nothing mechanical about it, so in theory you should be able to program the shutter to fire at any frame rate up to 20 fps, even in one frame increments.

So, yes, if you think 20 fps is too fast, and you don't mind missing those in-between-frame shots that might result from a lower frame rate, then you can certainly set the A9 to shoot at a lower frame rate. But in sports photography, those uncaptured "in-between" moments might mean the difference between capturing the perfect moment that gets seen all around the world, or getting images that never see the light of day. If you're assigned to shoot Hussein Bolt running the 100m finals at the Olympics, trust me, you're going to want 20fps.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 03:16 UTC
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1877 comments in total)
In reply to:

sknippen: Mirrorrless is a rather new evolution in the camera market (like digital was a few years ago). Canikon produce very good and reliable camera's and have the advantage of a mature system. But electronic's are finding it's way into the camera market and electronic evolution can go very fast. The problem with DSLR is that it's depends on mechanical systems where less evolution is possible (Sony tried with SLT). The problem with Canikon is that they hold on on their "mechanical" DSLR and invest little in new tech. I agree that current pro's won't ditch their system for another, but young pro's who haven't invested yet don't have that problem. I hope that Canikon will bring mirrorrless camera's that can compete with Sony (competition is good, it keep's the prices down and keep challenging the camera producer's)

@osv - hate to break it to you, but the most recent Leica M's are basically hybrid bodies, because they allow the attachment of EVFs that allow through-the-lens viewing and focus peaking like a conventional "mirrorless camera". But aside from not having autofocus, they do conform to the current criteria for "mirrorless cameras": the sensor is used for focusing, viewing, and capture of the image.

https://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2012/09/IMG_3589.jpg

So yes, if you buy a recent Leica M that has the electronic connections for an EVF, and you do add the EVF, you can convert your rangefinder into a "mirrorless camera." But prior to the ability to add an EVF and focus through the lens, the Leica M was definitely not considered a "mirrorless camera".

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 01:01 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience: Here's why I'm impressed (781 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gearsau: Just look at the shape of the thing. Looks like a rectangular box. No ergonomics there :-)

All those sharp corners. It's too small. Look at a Nikon D5 or similar . A proper size to balance the weight of hand holding 300mm f2.8 or 500mm f4 lenses..

No thanks .

@Gearsau - yes, I'm sure there are the odd venues that force photographers to handhold 500/4 and 300/2.8 lenses. Seems a bit cruel, but whatever. It's certainly not the common practice. And it looks like the smart motorsports photogs are still not handholding these big lenses.

http://www.smugmug.com/photos/170375566-L.jpg

http://adn.gpupdate.net/news/240585.jpg

http://lifeblasters.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/MG_08721.jpg

http://roa.h-cdn.co/assets/cm/14/47/546cc1f381bd5_-_001-sj-2011-motogp-08-mugello-sun-0785l-lg.jpg

http://octanephotos.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/253550_2003808064335_2902478_n.jpg

http://www.motorsportlens.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/AKupfermanCamera300.jpg

https://cdn-6.motorsport.com/static/img/mgl/1300000/1300000/1302000/1302200/1302206/s8/f1-malaysian-gp-2012-bernard-asset-photographer.jpg

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 00:57 UTC
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1877 comments in total)
In reply to:

sknippen: Mirrorrless is a rather new evolution in the camera market (like digital was a few years ago). Canikon produce very good and reliable camera's and have the advantage of a mature system. But electronic's are finding it's way into the camera market and electronic evolution can go very fast. The problem with DSLR is that it's depends on mechanical systems where less evolution is possible (Sony tried with SLT). The problem with Canikon is that they hold on on their "mechanical" DSLR and invest little in new tech. I agree that current pro's won't ditch their system for another, but young pro's who haven't invested yet don't have that problem. I hope that Canikon will bring mirrorrless camera's that can compete with Sony (competition is good, it keep's the prices down and keep challenging the camera producer's)

@osv- feel free to go on about your erroneous belief. But it's not an argument or issue for the rest of us. There is a common consensus within the photographic community as to what "mirrorless" means, just as there is a common consensus within the photographic community as to what "full frame" means. There are always going to be the oddballs who choose to argue against this consensus, but these people are clearly outliers.

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 00:37 UTC
On article The Sony a9 is a 24MP sports-shooting powerhouse (1877 comments in total)
In reply to:

sknippen: Mirrorrless is a rather new evolution in the camera market (like digital was a few years ago). Canikon produce very good and reliable camera's and have the advantage of a mature system. But electronic's are finding it's way into the camera market and electronic evolution can go very fast. The problem with DSLR is that it's depends on mechanical systems where less evolution is possible (Sony tried with SLT). The problem with Canikon is that they hold on on their "mechanical" DSLR and invest little in new tech. I agree that current pro's won't ditch their system for another, but young pro's who haven't invested yet don't have that problem. I hope that Canikon will bring mirrorrless camera's that can compete with Sony (competition is good, it keep's the prices down and keep challenging the camera producer's)

@osv- You don't get it, lol. Stubborn fool. Walk into any camera store and say, "Show me a mirrorless camera", and they are not going to show you a rangefinder. They are going to think Sony mirrorless, or Fuji mirrorless, or Olympus m4/3. They are not going to think Leica M. Sorry, buddy, but you're completely ignoring the current common usage of the word "mirrorless". Rangefinder camera are rangefinder cameras, and mirrorless cameras are mirrorless cameras. Everyone knows what that means, and everyone knows the distinction. In language, majority rules, especially in specialized communities-- in this case, the camera equipment community. With communication, you gotta go with the flow and understand the current usage of words in that community. If you want to the the anal retentive guy carrying around a dictionary, ignoring the contextual meaning within a community, going against the stream, then knock yourself out, hahaha!

Link | Posted on Apr 24, 2017 at 00:27 UTC
On article Sony a9 shooting experience: Here's why I'm impressed (781 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gearsau: Just look at the shape of the thing. Looks like a rectangular box. No ergonomics there :-)

All those sharp corners. It's too small. Look at a Nikon D5 or similar . A proper size to balance the weight of hand holding 300mm f2.8 or 500mm f4 lenses..

No thanks .

Why are you handholding a 500/4, or even a 300/2.8? Most users put those on a monopod, gimbal, or tripod anyways. Go look at the sidelines of sporting events. No one's handholding these big telephotos!

http://assets2.static.vosizneias.com/uploads/news_photos/thumbnails/800_up0flstovtrygy2zqm6cigf5gup8mibb.jpg

http://cdn.picturecorrect.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/sports-photographer-tips.jpg

http://gillmoorephotography.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/olympics_togs_gizmodo_com.jpg

http://upic.me/i/9k/aj201207260016m.jpg

http://sittingapple.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/586874514.jpg

http://cdn.makeuseof.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/lucrative-photography-careers-sports.jpg?edc8eb

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2017 at 23:01 UTC
Total: 2804, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »