I don't think any sensor will set the world alight now, at least not sensors as we know them currently. The last 12-18months of camera releases have shown that we've pretty much hit the limit of current sensor tech.
Good point. I was just referring to DR, colour and noise scores really
Yup that review is really telling. He loves the camera a lot.
AF point spread is limited by the light reaching the AF module and as such we're reaching the limitations. The only way I can see around this is using a bigger mirror, but this would make the bodies even bigger and potentially cause more mirror slap. We're already seeing issues with having AF points too wide on DSLRs with the D500. The outer points don't work beyond f5.6 meaning that lenses like the Tamron/Sigma 150-600's don't work 'fully' as they're f6.3 at the long end and you're only limited to very few AF points. In comparison these lenses work fine on my D750 and my mate's D7200. So whilst I loved the idea of the D500's AF spread in reality it meant I couldn't use my Tamron 150-600mm how I would've have wanted so unfortunately the camera went back.I've downloaded the Frono RAW file and played about with it, for me the DR seems excellent and its pretty amazing
At present DSLR technology has all the AF points bunched up in the middle of the frame, I can only guess there is some form of limitation as it has been like this for some generations now. Perhaps a technical limitation?
I believe that DSLR technology reached its peak around 3-5 years ago, now we just see small jumps when it comes to revolution.... this of the DSLR like the 911, small changes with each generation.
Sony FF mirrorless is fairly new so the advancements are far bigger and noticeable, hence better marketable too...... but in reality DSLR's are still good enough... its just a matter what the end user wants.
If you want real forward innovation, Sony seems to be leading..... within 4 years they have gone from the A7 to the A9, that's some progress... I also believe they have released on average 1 new FE lens a month!
Most will, as long as it is genuinely a match/superior to DSLR, meaning they have to completely eliminate rolling shutter, perceivable lag, and blackout. There are some though (like myself) that will always prefer looking through optics, and whilst I can see myself changing to mirrorless somewhere in the future the fact will remain that looking at a tiny screen will never be as nice.
Don't think ovf is possible on a mirrorless camera so that you may have to put up with?
There will always be people who prefer OVF over EVF, that's not a bad thing, choice is good.
Yes, that's what I meant. I will probably have to go that way and will 'put up with it'
I'm not averse to using EVF's, I had several cameras with EVF and currently own one (EM1), but I prefer OVF.
Like the Fuji XT2 you meanIt's clear some DSLR users still don't 'get' mirrorless.
IMHO 'pro' mirrorless doesn't need to be FF; why we are still referring to that particular line in the sand as 'full frame' baffles me.
There are loads of advantages to a mirrorless system, and using fast full frame lenses makes them less fun.
An APSC body with fast lenses designed for the format is a much nicer proposition than FF (M43 is lovely but a bit too far for ultimate IQ)
I'd be happy to switch back to Fuji now the XT2 is out, if only they'd ditch the X-trans sensor.Like the Fuji XT2 you mean
However I would never use it for paid work, but that's just mean, doesn't mean the body is inadequate at all. I wouldn't even consider the A7II for paid work although I have seen some photographers use these without issues.
Gaz needs a 20 stop dynamic range FF sensor to be wowed
Yes, you could use slower and clumsy DSLR/A7 bodies to shoot many different kinds of photography, you can even use film camera's if you really wanted to, it comes down to what the individual wants really, this can be a combination of needs and wants.
The first and second generation A7 bodies were not quite good enough when comparing them to the tried and trusted DSLR, the Fuji XT-2 is a far quicker/easier body when compared to the A7's but lacks the FF advantages... one of the reasons I went back to Sony.
Do I need to invest £5-10k, does anybody really need to invest anything when a iPhone/Compact can take great photos? Again it comes down to individuals really, I have already done this once before with the Sony A7RII's, I regret moving away from Sony to Fuji, should have kept the lenses and waited for the Sony A9.
The Sony A9 for me is the turning point for Sony, the lightening quick AF, 20fps, silent shooting, Eye-AF...... for me these features make the art of taking a photo easier and quicker especially with Eye-AF (AF-C)...... when doing paid work its vital for me to nail every shot with less headache.
The Sony A7 paired with the 35mm f2.8 and 55mm f1.8 is a great setup, and small compared to DSLR equivalents, hopefully you'll be ok with the slow AF. IQ is excellent.
I doubt it but they may get forced to if it follows screen technology, like when CRT tech made way for cheaper Plasma tech, which now has made way for even cheaper LCD tech..... for IQ alone CRT was unbeatable (if they made a 1080p line screen), Plasma was great and still better than LCD for certain aspects of IQ..... especially the Pioneer Kuro and the final Panasonic THX models.
Another way to look at it and to put to the DSLR professionals, what are the remaining advantages of the DSLR now that the Sony A9 has quashed most if not all of the negatives people go on about when comparing it to a good old DSLR?
People love to complain but Sony has addressed those complaints and will continue to do so........ if the Sony A9 is still not good enough for the hardcore professional crowd, fear not the A9II will be better! Sony is moving in the right direction
One day there will be no more negatives to go on about, it'll just be nit-picking for the sake of it
So back on topic, hurry up Nikon, competition is good for everybody
Ok perhaps the iPhone argument is too extreme but its possible to delivery great results which has been proven online may times by great photographers.
Confidence aside, kit can be very important to certain photographers, for example you have two cameras.... camera A does something better then camera B and you have afford camera A then why on earth would buy camera B?
Some people in this world are make do'er's, they are quite happy with a 100 year old camera and what it produces, fair play to them.... however others want the latest and greatest that genuinely add benefit to their lives/work etc....... I guess its collect technological progress.
I am pro-mirrorless yes but that's not to say Nikon won't make a better mirrorless system compared to Sony, anything is possible.
However one must accept that DSLR's future is numbered, maybe not now, or in 5 years time but technology will move on and the DSLR will die just like the SLR did.... with only the minoring still using the system and raving on about how good 35mm film is blah blah blah. If it was that good professionals would still be using them!
70-200 F4 and cropping??
Me tooYes, that's what I meant. I will probably have to go that way and will 'put up with it'
I think we're going around in circles here. I've said several times that there are advantages of EVF's that can't be denied. The simple fact is that I prefer looking through optics and that's all there is to it. It's not a debate or argument, just my preference
I think we're going around in circles here. I've said several times that there are advantages of EVF's that can't be denied. The simple fact is that I prefer looking through optics and that's all there is to it. It's not a debate or argument, just my preference
