._._z Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 Steve, this is not a 'rah rah' postive-posts-only, us-against-the-world forum. If you don't like it, sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricardovaste Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 I got a post saying that I should kill myself and that I was pothetic this morning. So Z's posts are fruitfully light hearted by comparison :-). Though extremes shouldnt be mentioned, I have to agree that there is no need to be negative all the time and it can bring the discussion "down", or in some cases bring yourself down when people resort to personal attacks... Enough of that though. I think you hit the nail on the head Tim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gegjr Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 So how many of you all are engineers? Do you any of you work for Sony, Nikon, or Canon? Just wondering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gegjr Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 I think the video was marginally interesting and then only from an aesthetic point of view. The pentaprism looks huge like the one on my very old Argus-Cosina STL and the rear LCD looked huge no doubt for Live-View which I personally don't really care about. I think a lot of people have talked themselves into needing live-view. In my opinion if you want live view get a video camera capable of shooting still images. I do find it interesting that there appears to be a top LCD window, hmmm? More Video and images: http://crackle.com/c/Blogs_and_Podcasts/Part_2_DSLR_Alpha_Flagship_Model/2170367/ http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/cmsdata/news/12467/Sony-DSLRr-04.jpg http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/cmsdata/news/12467/Sony-DSLRr-03.jpg I am not a full-time professional shooter but I would like a full frame sensor at a reasonable price with a reasonable number of MP. I don't think 25 MP is necessary. I would rather see Sony put their efforts into super image quality and equipment reliability than into # of MPs. I think 16 or 18 would be great if the image quality is superb. Steve C in an earlier post bought up the storage issue and I agree where will it stop. I don't want to spend $3K to $5K on a camera than turn around and spend spend almost the same thing on hard drives and redundant backup systems. If I ever need something with 24 or 25 MP detail I'd rather shoot large format film and have it scanned. Just my 2 cents. Regards, GEGJr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 <small><i><blockquote> I am not a full-time professional shooter but I would like a full frame sensor at a reasonable price with a reasonable number of MP. </blockquote> </i> </small><p> Every few weeks Adorama gets from Canon Canon-refurbished 5D bodies they sell for $1650. They sell out instantaneously, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricardovaste Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 You can get a 5D in great condition second hand here in the UK for as little as 800GBP, thats oustanding value IMHO. Of course it will be a while before Sony bring out a lower MP (great high iso) full-frame I would imagine, and even longer before second hand prices go way down! But I dont NEED that of course, im perfectly content to shoot film if i need something really wide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_c.5 Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 People who are in the market for this camera will choose it because a) they are already invested in the Sony/Minolta mount lenses, or b) they are looking for a high-performance DSLR camera system to buy into (and aren't invested in one brand yet) which offers something Nikon and Canon don't have (full-frame sensor with image stabilization, and probably real-time focus tracking/live view). The Alpha platform also is compatible with a base of millions of Maxxum lenses including their professional series, the Zeiss lenses, the Sony/Tamron connection, plus Sigma providing new lenses for this mount. I don't think we'll see many Nikon and Canon shooters jump ship because they're invested in their lenses, and will probably be pretty brand-loyal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricardovaste Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 Hmm I'm not too sure about the live view Steve. Looking at the pics, there doesnt seem to be a button there for it... but we just dont know of course! Some people seem to be very certain that they DO NOT want live view on this thing, but if they can put it in there and its not going to effect quality in anyway - why not? It might make people think its 'not that pro' if they put it in maybe. Brand loyalty is a big thing. And im certainly not jumping ship! That would be silly. I have no demand, just a pleasant hobby. I know a lot of current Sony/Minolta users will want this camera though, maybe not brand new, but they will definately want to buy it. As will I, someday. Not sure what lenses to keep though... With full-frame in mind. 20mm on my dynax 7 is great, dont think i need anymore. Its especially fun with the sigma too, because it close focuses well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timb196 Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 George Reading from your message, I get the implication that you are a part time pro. Well that bill fits me also. In my full time job, I'm an engineer and one of the things I routinely deal with is the application of digital imaging technology to various imaging things, primarily aerial. The MP race is just as prevalent there as it in the consumer market and it is primarily driven by the need for increased resolution. From an engineering point of view the size of an object that you desire to image directly correlates to the amount of MPs and the size of of a pixel on the chip. Hubble, as an example, has a 17.6 MP array. Next Generation Telescope (NGT) may well be 3x-5x of Hubble. The same is true especially for landscape photography. For example, landscape photo garphers often desire to resolve leaves in the tree at some distance x from the point of the image. Scenes not only consist of luminous and brightness valuse but also a resolution factor. Scenes that consist of lots of small items generally have what is called a "high frequency" component. The larger the object the lower the frequency and the less MPs you need to resolve it. Animals for example have lots of high frequency components; hair and feathers being examples. The resolution of an imaging system is defined by the resolution of the optics (lens) and the capturing media. Techically you should include the body because of variations in the distance of the film plane. This was very important in the days of film which is why you have the registration marker on the camera body because it was virtually impossible to have a completely flat film plane. That problem is much less a factor in digital cameras for obvious reasons and as result can be disregarded. High Frequency components in the scene are not only applicable to landscape type scenes but also to macro photogrpahy. Take for example, coin or insect photography where you have extremely fine small features such as scratches or veins. For absolute replication you need to be able to see these type of details. I recently assisted on a series of portraits of some elderly people which was shot was a 39 MP hassie. The lines and wrinkles that came out in the photograpy added a a great deal of character to the finished image (much in the same fashion as they did for Richard Aviedon. The other reason why I think Sony is going to the 24.6 Mp is to attract the MF crowd. Right now a 39 MP is extraordinarily expensive. I would love one but cannot justify the expense based on my income from the photography side of the house. 24 MP however provides me an entry into that level of performance for a relatively low level of cost. A 22 MP Mamiya costs $10K versus say $3K-$3.5K for the Sony (neglecting the costs of lenses of course). Photographers have been searching for increased resolution since time immemorial. Look at film and the desire to reduce film grain size for any given level of sensitivity. The advances in film grain size reduction which directly translates to what can be resolved has been tremendous. What required 10-25 ISO 50 years ago now can be matched by 200-400 level film. I would argue that there is no difference between that technology leap when compared to what we are going through now with the leaps in MP. Where is the upper limit? I speculate it is in the 30-50 MP range. But that is my opinion only. Lastly the storage size issue is not only confined to the camera but also the digital darkroom. Memory is cheap as an indivual component of the imaging system. Plus it is small. I just purchased Adobe Creative Suite 3. That change rippled through the digital darkroom. I had been running with a rock solid win 2k system. Now I need XP or Vista and I'm going to change my drive setup from a 120/60 GB setup to twin 250 GB disks. The cost of making this change just to take advantage of what Adobe offers is easily equal to the cost of the camera. That would be true regardless of what type camera I bought. Sorry to all for the length of this missive. cheers Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now