A rendering of the A950 from Tecnofotografia
According to SonyAlphaRumors sources the next A900
successor should be announced in a little bit more than one year. The A950 (tentative name) will be announced a few months after the new Nikon High-end camera which will use the same new high-resolution sensor (over 30 Megapixels!). I was told that Sony has two possible release dates. One by end 2011 and one by early 2012. Why two released dates? Because Sony still didn’t decide if the camera will be a classic DSLR or use the [shoplink 3617]translcuent technology[/shoplink]. They need feedback from photographers to understand if a translucent camera would be accepted from professionists.
So should we help them a little bit? Please answer only if you really want to buy the FF camera! Invite your friends to vote and comment the rumor…Sony is reading us!
[poll id=”25″]
One more thing:
One of my trusted sources sent me the link to an older A900 successor rumor written by wedding photographer Marc Williams. The source told me that Marc is very close to the real final A950 specs! Here is what Marc wrote: photo.net that “Sony is a late bloomer, and strong rumors indicate mind boggling innovations are on the horizon … notably a 35 meg camera with a top shutter speed of 1/12,000th and a true flash sync speed of 1/1000th.”
If you know something about the A950 please contact me at sonyalpharumors@gmail.com. Thanks!
Reminder (SR = Sonyrumor):
SR1=probably fake rumor
SR2=rumor from unkown sources
SR3=50% chance it is correct
SR4=rumor from known sources
SR5=almost certainly correct!
159 Responses
It is not EVF/OVF problem. THE PROBLEM IS TOO LATE RELEASE DATE. 2012? Is it a joke? Sony offer is so obsolete and crap compared to N and C… they need 7x and 9x class cameras ASAP. I guess instead of focusing on this class they will release another ten more almost same 2x-5x class cameras in the next year. So sad… They are losing so many old customers.
dude, n and c has no reliable rumor on their new FF. and it is possible they will be announced around the same time too.
7x and 9x isn’t where the money is. NEX, 3x and 5x is. The volume of sales for 7x and 9x cameras will be tiny in comparison.
Without building from the bottom up, who is going to buy these 7x and 9x class cameras? Certainly not current prosumer and professional Canikon users.
You HAVE to start at the bottom and work your way UP the range.
I think it’s difficult to answer wheter the next gen. EVF or the OVF is preferable for this model. We should first know how the EVF performs.. If it’s not inferior to A900 OVF, then I guess the amount of additional informations and functions we could have on EVF is simply welcome.
“Without building from the bottom up, who is going to buy these 7x and 9x class cameras?”
Current A700, A850 and A900 users?
“You HAVE to start at the bottom and work your way UP the range.”
Now while Sony is working its way UP, what should current A700, A850 and A900 users do with their outdated (especially A700) cameras lacking of features other camera manufacturers offer to their users?
crap…. still need to wait so long…
i need a good high iso FF machine for weddings and events….
..
keep fercing me to jump ship…
If you need high ISO FF then Sony is not the manufacturer for you. I know its painful, but you really need to move to Nikon for that.
Learn to post-process noise. In fact, ACR6 / LR3 can fix 90% of the noise problem on old Sony bodies.
I voted for OVF because EVF can’t compete with a FF OVF right now, but if sony manages to make a decent EVF that competese let’s say with the OVF found in the a850, then for sure i wouldn’t mind Translucent mirror.
release date seems to fall about in the canon nikon release cycle for FF cameras so i don’t see why it’s a problem.
The only thing i would like to see if a a850 replacement with the same sensor.
i would prefer A fullframe DSLR (Optical Viewfinder) over Translucent, not really a fans of Electronic OLED Viewfinder yet. would prefer Hybrid! OVF and EVF switchable 😀
EVF’s are useless.
I’ve played around with both the a33 & a55, its a 2d image, blue and well flat.
Give me a OVF anyday
You obviously don’t do low-light photography then. I think the A33/55 EVF is pretty damn good for a first try.
With strong rumors that Canon is going to replace the 5D2 and Nikon the D700 within the next 6 months, Sony is going to fall even further behind in the prosumer market. As for an EVF having the same clarity as a pentaprism OVF, rubbish. The A900’s viewfinder is a sight to behold. Don’t buy Sony’s marketing hype, EVF technology is decades away from equalling it.
“EVF technology is decades away from equalling it.”
3 generations 5 years tops
you do realize digital photography is just 2 decades old now.
http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bldigitalcamera.htm
yeah, i vote for “OVF and EVF switchable” choice!
Voted EVF. Want the A950 to have a killer AF system that bests everything C/N can offer.
why not make it Hybrid Sony? just flip a switch then you’re either in EVF mode or OVF mode. This feature would be the killer of the new nikon’s and canon’s
I voted EVF, due to all the added technological bonuses we get from the SLT move. No mirror slap, quite, liveview, etc. If you had only 70% of the light hitting a normal OVF, it would seem quite dim. I think the a55 showed us what a cheap, first-go, EVF from sony could look like. With a higher budget and 18 more months to refine the technology, there is no reason the idea of a top-notch, professional grade, EVF cannot best the pentaprism.
Cheers, Josh
How can an EVF that is a digital reproduction of the light coming through the lens be superior to the actual light coming through the lens? It is a matter of physics, a reproduction will never be superior to the original.
Not really. The EVF on the a33/55 has already beaten the OVF of the a5xx on many occasions. Let’s not forget the massive advantage of having full time AF on SLT design.
Hey James,
I wouldnt think of it as a reproduction. In the same sense that the light you see through the OVF has gone through 20 odd elements and is therefore not the same light your eye sees. The EVF is just more more tool you can use to improve your photography, like a light meter, or TTL flash, or autofocus for that matter. The SLT & EVF technologies can be more useful to the user if you think about the added benefits of no lens slap, smaller, lighter, PD autofocus during video, LV, to name a few. Its as silly to me as saying that film cameras are always better than digital cameras. Digital is the future of photography because of the more benefits it brings to the table than drawbacks.
“a reproduction will never be superior to the original.”
so the use of ANY viewfinder is inferior to the naked eye?
Exactly : Naked Eye + LiveView or EVF > OVF.
“How can an EVF that is a digital reproduction of the light coming through the lens be superior to the actual light coming through the lens?”
I have the advantage of being a physics graduate, but here’s a few for you
1) an OVF does not use the same light path as the final image whilst the EVF does insofar as it shows what the main sensor sees
2) the EVF and electronics is optically superior to the eye. It can, for instance, zoom into individual pixels and nobody, absolutely nobody, can get anywhere near resolving 30MP through an optical viewfinder using the naked eye, even if the OVF optics were up to the job (which they are not)
3) and EVF can show what the electronics makes of the image from the main sensor which is fundamentally what matters (as that is what the final image is based on). That can include processing done by the cameras electronics.
4) the EVF and main sensor is capable of showing a much brighter image in dim light than the eye can manage, and it can do this with a stopped-down view.
The eye is a wonderful thing, but it’s actually a lousy bit of optical design. To improve it, we use lenses and optics that can do far better than we can manage.
Really the important thing is that the EVF can show you what the main sensor is seeing – no OVF can do that.
i’d get EVF if they massively improve it… let say 3mp EVF, no lags, and full time (even when capturing, sound weird to have shutter moving but still able to see @.@
I vote for OVF, however I would agree with substantially improved EVF only if mirror will be moving.
Any way A900 weakest point is AF. Indoors or in dim light it is too slow even with 24-70mm CZ. I doubt I will buy a950 if AF area will be without improvements. My A900 still is very good especially after LR3 release.
Why not an EVF with a mirror that can flip up when needed.
Doing this Sony would provide the adventage of both.
In low light conditions, you will benefit from the EVF which delivers a very good image in the view finder and by flipping up the mirror, you will rich the highest ISO.
In daylight condition, taking the picture trough the mirror, will allow you to reduce the DOF by selecting a bigger openings.
Comes with 2 models for now, one SLR version and one SLT version.
Comes with only SLT when Translucent Tech is totally mature.
Goes on Sony, I am sure people will change their mind when see the future improved Translucent Tech.
I am waiting for mew FF camera from Sony and my patience is almost over.
I like the idea of SLT – this is how traditional fotography at some point looked like (was called real time camera)
IMHO the EVF of the a33 and a55 are crap regarding professional use. The AF advantage is indeed something that should not be underestimated, however I absolutely dislike the EVF image. The resolution of the additional information displayed makes it look like a 320×240 display (of course the resolution of such OSD information doesn’t really matter but it just leaves a really bad impression since the display could obviously do better) and I can see rather pronounced color borders/shadows when changing my view direction inside the EVF too quickly. Furthermore – apart from bad lighting conditions – I cannot see how this should be any superior to a standard OVF (not those small A550 editions due to quick live view, but that’s another story) in terms of pure image quality (which should still be the main concern, even if OSD information can be really neat). Maybe in 5-10 years, but clearly not now. And clearly, C/N are able to deliver high-standard AF systems without SLT technology, so this can’t be the limiting factor.
Back to the original topic: I seriously hope that either Sony *seriously* improves the EVF before slapping it onto a (semi)pro model such as the a950 or that they simply stick to the OVF system until the EVF technology is a match for its analogue companion. Its a great idea for low- and midrange products and it’s absolutely justifiable for its obvious advantages in terms of AF, noise, wear, lighting enhancements and additional OSD information. But please, not for the a950, not in its current state…
Do you people think Sony will let some Pro’s try out an EVF prototype behind the scenes before making the final decision?
No doubt about it.
I voted for OVF, but it will be interesting to take this poll again, after the A77 is released. That is, if Sony provides an outstanding, over-the-top, awesome EVF in the A77, I would change my vote. Specifically, they would need to offer something like the SXGA LV product from Kopin in the A77’s EVF and that it would be instantly responsive as would be expected from a VF. If they did, then I would trust Sony to provide the right EVF for the A99, too.
It’s not a matter of EVF vs OVF, it’s a matter of the right EVF.
– – – – – –
For what it’s worth here is quote from the SXGA LV product lit. from Kopin “1280 x 1024 in an ultra-compact (0.97″ diagonal) package. Each square full-color pixel is composed of three primary color dots.”
See the following link for more info. It would be nice to see Sony provide this in the A77: http://www.kopin.com/sxga/
EVF is the way to go. In a few years’ time it will almost be the norm and people will wonder why they every thought anything else. I can recall exactly the same reaction to AF and digital cameras.
The advantages are more information in the viewfinder, eliminating the mirror, reduced vibration, reduced mechanical complexity, reduced weight, higher frame rates, zoom in the eyepiece, 100% coverage, support for multiple aspect ratios, brighter images in low light, seamless integration, with LiveView (as it is LiveView). EVFs are the norm in video recording, and they will be in still photography.
Yes, EVFs are not perfect yet, but even now, for my purposes, they have far more advantages than disadvantages. In 18 month’s time that balance will move ever more to EVFs.
OVFs are looking backwards (at least metaphorically). They belong in the past.
What people forget about EVF technology is that it attracts new dSLR buyers to Sony.
Given the choice between a dSLR with an “old fashioned” OVF and one with a shiny EVF, your average new dSLR buyer will be attracted to the EVF version.
Most A33/55 users will have never used a dSLR before, never mind one with an OVF.
Pros are not your average camera buyers. No pro is going to buy a camera body with a viewfinder that has lower resolution than the best optical viewfinder available. And so far, even the best EVFs fall short.
Thank you for your clarification, and there you go. Sony will do their best for the average camera buyers because that’s what brings them with the most money.
If the average camera buyers would be more attracted to the pro level because EVF instead of OVF, that’s what they’ll focus on first.
After all, if the current pros don’t spend enough on Sony, why should Sony spend enough on them?
Sad, nonsensical, but reality.
That’s why I said “average”.
just release A950 in 12 month and A99 in 16 month. why not?
35meg? i highly doubt it.
What’s the Nikon D3x gonna do?
Err… the D3X replacement will likely use the next Sony FF sensor as the current D3X does.
I do not get why ppl are bitching about the release date of the FF. If you look past, flag ship cameras from Canon and Nikon usually on the market for 2 and half to 4 years. Is Sony really late for a new flag ship? I do not think so. A900 is there for a little over 2 years now. By the second half for a mockup, and end for annoucement and commencing sales early 2012. This makes total sense to me. Rather than rushing out a garbage, they should carefully craft the new camera that can make Canon/Nikon users feel they are doomed. Sony has nothing to lose by delaying it as the market share for FF camera is very low anyways.
For the poll, I want another entry – I do not care if the image quality is good. We are not paying beta tester of their cameras. At the end, all that counts is the images.
Sony may release two versions, one SLT and one traditional since the full frame body is big enough for room to have either type’s organs fitted.
I believe that is the way to do it.
I would get an SLT version over the mirrored one as long as the SLT version is CHEAPER 🙂
For me, the viewfinder is the most important part of a camera. You need to be able to connect with your subject. A bright, clear image is essential to that. It’s one of the reasons I upgraded from my a300 to the a850. That being said, if a future EVF can give a fantastic view, I’m all for it.
The big problem with a FF semi-pro/pro camera is that it may be 2-3 years before it is upgraded. I have never expected to upgrade my a850 before then. So what happens if the EVF isn’t up to the task when it is first released? It may be yeas before a next gen camera is available with a higher quality EVF. They need to get it right the first time.
There are numerous benefits to a translucent system in nearly every field of photography, so I am definitely interested. I just want them to do it right.
“They need to get it right the first time”
or produce 2 models 1 SLT fixed mirror EVF 10 FPS , 1SLR
moving mirror OVF 5 FPS and see which outsells the other
I can easily “connect” with the subject using the live view of my A350. Point refuted.
I really wanted a new FF for next summer. Oh well.
I also vote for “OVF and EVF switchable”
I voted for OVF as it still provides the best image – no streaking, no lag – real intimacy. However, I have seen the A33 and will buy an A55 shortly. The advantages in low light are indisputable. I would urge Sony to not add pixels, but rather add low light capability and reduce noise. The A900 already resolves to the limits of the lens; no need to go beyond that. I hope the actual model looks something like this rendering. It is the best looking camera Sony ever made.
The Zeiss A-mount lenses are capable of resolving beyond the 24 megapixel limit. The 950 will be a flagship pro camera and it needs to push the envelope, even if it means one has to buy the most expensive lenses to take full advantage of it. But I agree that improved high ISO/low light capability is crucial. If Sony can do that as well as give us more megapixels then I’m all for it.
I’m all for more advanced tech. However, Sony should realize that this is their top model. This would be a game changer in the pro segment. It all comes down whether they would be able to nail it right. A77’s feedback should be an indication of which way they should go.
I have a A900 and an Olympus latest EVF (similar to A55 EVF). It’s not as bad as some people make it out to be. In most cases, people just picked the camera up, looked through the EVF and they would either hate it or love it. For those who hate it, it’s too quick to pass their judgment.
Personally, I like what SLT offers (more reliable AF, more FPS, no blackout, etc.) Ghosting doesn’t happen that often (but preferably no ghosting). EVF can also help with manual focus as well (not important to pro). ISO is worse.
“Not as bad” is not good enough for a pro. If Sony listens to feedback from users of the prosumer A77 on this issue they’d be making a big mistake. It all hinges on real world performance. Pros will want the viefinder to be tack sharp under all lighting conditions. So far the best EVFs underperform the best OVFs. If Sony puts an EVF in the 950 that has lower resolution than the 900’s optical viewfinder few, if any, pros will buy it.
I think whether one uses OVF, EVF, or LCD screen is a personal preference and how one quickly adapts to one way or another. A good photograph can be produced without using OVF if one has excellent composition/photographic technique.
OVF resolution? Where did you get such an idea. There will be none as it is ultimately limited by your eyes.
Hello,I’m live in Japan and I’m a photographer.
If the next alpha flagship camera will be EVF, I will be able to drop the alpha mount.
Some times the technology makes our life is happy.But this is not such this case.
OVF has a Riality and EVF is just monitor. no heart no feel.
Why not release A950 for people who like OVF and an affordable A88 for advanced enthusiasts who aren’t professional photographers but just want to have FF to best couple with all the high-quality Zeiss lenses.
Releasing 2 versions isn’t very viable for Sony. Their sale volume is just not there yet.
I’m not a professional photographer, and I don’t use the OVF on my A550 at all. I will buy A55 soon. The reason I choose Sony cameras is because of the fantastic Zeiss line-up with SSM Auto-Focus over what competitors could offer. In addition, with SLT technology, Sony is able to implement fast/usable live-view in both photo/video modes. I am ready to invest into the Zeiss 24-70 F2.8 as well as all the other beautiful Zeiss prime lenses. I need an affordable FF live-view SLT camera to truly enjoy the FF Zeiss glass.
It is however Sony’s standard business practice as of late. Think A900/A850, A580/A560, A390/A290, A55/A33, NEX5/NEX3. All of Sony’s current models have been released in pairs with mild spec differences.
This is why I expect a A950/A99 pair (along with the A750/A77 pair).
I thought I read Sony had abandoned FF. Glad to hear that’s not the case.
I only am using Sony via a NEX3, but as I also shoot FF on a 5D, I’m open to see what Sony offers.
If they stay in the FF game, then I think Sony more than anyone else might produce a FF compact, which is what I really want.
That Sony abandoned FF is a myth, started by a Nikon fascist known as Thom Hogan.
I also conclude that Thom is not an honest analyst – he is very selective in what he comments on – and always aims to diminish the inventive and better-valued Sony products. His last comments centered around pixel-peeping and some marginal differences, but didn’t mention in-camera hand-held HDR, twilight, panorama, high ISO (Sony as good as anyone) etc etc.
In terms of the new high end camera – I suspect that I’d just get an A55 or A77 for video – and want the big camera for stills. As such, I’d prefer the OVF unless there’s a HUGE improvement in EVF. There’s no need for a translucent mechanism unless video or high frame rate photography is required – and a 30 plus meg sensor will preclude the high frame rate. Or, perhaps the new camera will shoot video RAW – which would change my mind.
EVF vs OVF is a bit of a frustrating argument.
IMHO an EVF is more than adequate & don’t understand why anyone doesn’t think that (please enlighten me if so). Yeah sure, an EVF might have worse resolution than OVF not fully representing what the eye sees…. but surely an OVF doesn’t actually represent what the sensor records either though… so it seems that this is a bit of a floored argument. If you want to get the full detail of what you are taking a photo of & want to ‘connect with your subject’ then just open up your other eye…
Personally i voted for OVF though. I do a lot of nighttime shooting where that bit of lost light from the pellicle mirror could be quite important & any chance of ghosting would potentially be be a big no-no.
If the pellicle mirror is movable & that technology will work out cheaper than OVF then my vote would be EVF all the way.
Sony A33 has a sensor that has been tested to be more sensitive than Canon T2i. This will compensate for the light loss. In fact, the result is even brighter than the mirrored approach on T2i. See review:
http://cameralabs.com/reviews/Sony_Alpha_SLT_A33/outdoor_results.shtml
“. They need feedback from photographers to understand if a translucent camera would be accepted from professionists.”
NO.
So after already being at least a year and half behind the pro camera companies, they are going to wait another year and a half? Just give up and keep making camcorders for soccer moms.
Those soccer moms gave more feedback than professional photographers sadly.
Do you think that Sony will keep the Minolta ergonomics on the future A9xx? Considering they’ve dropped it largely for the rest of their cameras does it seem likely? (I think not.) Always was my favorite favorite ergonomics. 🙁 Ah crap.
NO, we do NOT want SLT and EVF in the flagship FF camera. The only reason to use SLT would be to allow for continuous PDAF during video. And on-sensor PDAF is just around the corner. SLT is purely a stopgap technology.
For still photography, you might use Live View on the LCD for macros and that sort of thing, but who wants to shoot portraits, architecture, landscapes, candids, events, or sports with an EVF if you have the choice of using a big, bright OVF instead?
You just can’t see the richness nor the subtleties in tonality, nor the interplay between light and dark, colours and shading, etc. on an EVF. Even if the EVF is high contrast, saturated, and sharp, the scene still looks flat and “dead”.
It’s hard to put into words, but anyone who is used to “seeing a shot” through a FF OVF knows what i mean. You just frame / compose the shot without thinking because you can see the tonal and colour contrasts clearly. Nothing gets in the way.
Only a small subset of photographers would specifically buy a FF camera for video and/or macro use. Anybody who wants a dSLR for video and/or macro can buy an A55 or A77. They don’t need FF for that. And those who specifically want to buy a FF camera will buy it for portraiture, landscape, events, etc. not for video.
FF / pro shooters want a big, bright OVF with simple, direct access controls and proven ergonomic design that the A900 and A700 was known for. That’s what sold people on the A900.
When they held it in their hands, looked through that stunning OVF with a Zeiss 85/1.4 or 135/1.8, and instinctively knew how to operate the controls, that’s when they thought to themselves “could it be true? wow, this Sony is actually a really good photographer’s camera” They don’t get that reaction when looking through an EVF or LCD. The people who would be impressed are electronics enthusiasts and regular consumers, but they are the ones who buy A33 and A55’s. Professional photographers are not impressed by “cool features”.
The people who would want FF for video are indie filmakers who are obsessed with shallow DoF and 24p and maybe event photographers or PJ’s who need to submit a video along with stills to their clients / editors. But for people who are not indie filmakers obsessed with shallow DoF, they actually want MORE DoF and would prefer shooting video on APS-C instead.
But honestly, how many A99’s are you going to sell to indie filmakers after you tried selling them the disappointing NEX-VG10?
– 7690×4320 with 4×4 binning mode for 1080p HD video (or even 4k video with 2×2 binning mode)
– no AA filter will be implemented – resolution is just too high
I hope that Sony will figure out how to implement 14bit read mode, its so simple…..
OK. a US$3000 EVF a99 and a US$4000 OVF a950 should do it for everybody.
I am in for the EVF. (But it better be good)
Can’t see the real life without OVF? Simply remove the camera from your face and use both eyes to see the real world in 3D.
I thought Pro photographers SEE the shot before they raise their hand with the camera. Camera is a tool to capture the image. isn’t it?
When I take photos of dances with zooms, especially for Viennese Waltz, it doesn’t make sense to rely on OVF. It’s pretty limiting. While from an EVF, I can see both the EVF and what’s in front of me and overlay them.
Granted half of the time when I look through an OVF, I keep my other eye open to see what’s in front of me, but it’s harder when you press your eye to the camera to see the rest.
Just my two cents 🙂
For actual photographers who read these comments, do think before you read the comments.
I realize half of the comments here is just rambles and talking about something they haven’t tried, sounding smart from repeating what reviews has said, or for the sake of complaining.
Don’t blame the site for hosting these comments, but I hope you can look through the comments to find which ones have value ^^
Granted it’s hard, but some of the comments here actually comes from a rational perspective 🙂
Once in a while I post these kind of messages just so people use their brain instead of their mouth and hands (to type) ;p
But granted, it’s been a while since there’s an interesting rumor, so I can understand why suddenly 40+ comments pop up in a day 🙂 Everyone seems to want to contribute (hopefully)~
For those who cannot yet appreciate the true advantages that the SLT technology and EVF bring to the camera world, learn more by watching this Sony LearnTV video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXA0mTZCQbI&feature=related
Sony’s EVF has poor refresh rate and resolution – compared with Panasonic GH1’s. Also, the outer AF points are unreliable, unlike contrast detection on GH1.
In fact, I shoot with LCD screen on the back of the camera only. I do not use or like to use any type of viewfinder as they are just too small to look at compared to the 3″ LCD screen. Plus, with swivel LCD screen, you could compose shots in different angles with ease. Before, I had doubts in the new SLT technology. But after reading real-life reviews and comparison with other cameras of the same class, I now fully understand the added benefits of digital SLT cameras.
I thought they have the same resolution…
A EVF or LCD screen may be fine for composition and exposure, but for critical focus there’s nothing that can compare to a good OVF. Pros need to have razor sharp manual focusing capability for working with narrow depth of field and you just don’t have that with today’s EVFs.
“critical focus there’s nothing that can compare to a good OVF.”
That’s untrue – for critical focussing a zoomed view on to the main sensor pixels is definitively better, if only because the final image is taken at the sensor and not via the OVF which follows quite a different optical path. That light path includes the eye, which through an OVF, however, good, cannot resolve the detail of the sensor (at least without further magnification), not to mention issues such as dioptre adjustments.
Before the advent of AF, good quality film SLRs would have focus assist systems as the unaided eye through an OVF is far from the last word in focus accuracy. That feature is missing off all AF DSLRs that I’m aware of.
If you want the very best focussing, then a pixel-level zoom taken from the main sensor, wether via an EVF or a rear screen is optimal. It can also be automated using contrast-detection AF. If you wish, you can compare it to the use of a loupe on the ground-glass screens of a large format camera.
Razor sharp focussing with LiveView is not a problem – in fact it is the most accurate method available.
Nonsense. With an optical viewfinder you see what the lens sees. Nothing can be sharper than that. And no pro wants to take his eye off the viewfinder to focus by looking at a rear LCD screen. That’s just ridiculous.
Rubbish – it’s the image on the sensor that matters. The OVF image follows a completely different optical path after the leaving the lens being reflected and refracted several times on the way using optical components that degrade the image including the rather flawed optics in the eye. Why on earth do you think that pro-level films SLRs often had focus aids?
The only true focussing is at the image plane, and that’s where the sensor is. Everything else is only an approximation. That’s why photographers used to use loupes on ground-glass screens place in the image plane. Using the image direct from the sensor, magnified as required, is the precise equivalent.
Sony’s EVF has a higher refresh rate than the G1/GH1 (it pretty much holds 30fps or better when the G1 is dropping frames visibly), but lower resolution and more tearing. Colour is better on the Sony though.
I’ve owned both
Sony should just let nikon suffer. seriously
As a working professional, I can tell you that I don’t think most FF buyers want/need anything more than the best tool possible for the job. Ideally, I’d personally love a camera that shoots 10fps, performs well to at least 6400 ISO and handles and feels like a A900. Beyond that, I couldn’t care less about video, live view or any other slick new technology. I also don’t care how Sony achieves the good performance…if it’s SLT or not is irrelevant as long as it performs. As for EVF…HELL NO!
NOT GONNA HAPPEN!!!! If you are to judge Sony’s future timeline for releasing pro-level DSLR bodies, there will be no upgrade for at least 2 more years. Don’t kid yourself, if they took this long wasting precious time replacing the A700 what makes you think they’d be in any rush to replace the A900? By the way…whatever happened to that solid rumor that the A900 had been discontinued? That didn’t happen either. It’s fun to have these fantasies though, and that’s a monstrously kickass rendition of a future A950 but if it has an EVF I won’t touch it no matter what. EVF sucks now and will always suck well into the future.
1/12000 shutter speed would be nice. I exceed 1/8000 far too often, which sticks me with using under base ISOs or screwing and unscrewing ND filters.
I firmly believe EVFs are the future, and very much welcome the strides that Sony are making in this respect. It makes sense to have a great quality EVF over even the best quality OVF.
What you see is what you get: I would really value seeing the exposure
and DOF change as I twiddle the dials, all while not removing myself
from the VF.
Virtual horizon: This would be a nice bonus.
Information displayed: You could have everything displayed on screen,
ISO, DRO, HDR, buffer remaining, space on card remaining, lens focal
length, flashing highlights/shadows that clip etc.
Increased sensitivity in the dark: While not really a problem with the
a900 OVF, but certainly with lower APS-C models, shooting in the dark
with a tiny OVF is horrid. Having a EVF that shows everything as would
be captured would be fantastic.
The positive side-effects of an EVF are also great.
Less cost: High quality OVFs are expensive, so having a high quality
EVF means cheaper bodies or allowing more to be spent elsewhere (AF,
sensor, GPS etc).
High speed continuous shooting: 10FPS on the A55 is amazing, so for
the pro level I’m expecting something pretty special.
AF performance: No longer does the AF cut out during the mirror flip.
By the time the shutter has returned the next shot is ready, AF already
confirmed.
Now I know it’s not all roses, but if Sony produced an a95/a99 and simply allowed for the option of having a moveable translucent mirror for in low light situations, would there really be any reason to not go SLT?
You nailed it mate. Couldn’t have said better than that.
Sadly many can’t see / realize those, especially the much much overlooked price advantage.
Thou I have to say, at the current state of affair, OVF is a much lower risk way to go for Sony.
OVFs forever.
Plus, the original image looks sexy as hell.
That is your argument for OVF?
Sony, please, the new FF body needs to have phase-detection AF live-view.
To everyone drinking the Sony Coolaid and saying that the EVF is a true depiction of the final result. That is false. The EVF is a 1.44M total pixels (480,000 in reality) image from a tiny secondary sensor. It is NOT the final full resolution image from the large main sensor. That is why the EVF image has lower contrast, dynamic range and much lower detail than the final image.
An OVF is not the same as the final image either but at least it looks a whole lot better than an EVF.
For those who say the A55’s viewfinder looks better than the A580’s viewfinder, that is because Sony have equipped it with one of the worst DSLR OVF. Have a look through the Canon 7D or Nikon D7000’s viewfinder which is the equivalent sized OVF to the A55’s EVF and then tell me the A55’s viewfinder looks better.
“For those who say the A55′s viewfinder looks better than the A580′s viewfinder, that is because Sony have equipped it with one of the worst DSLR OVF. Have a look through the Canon 7D or Nikon D7000′s viewfinder which is the equivalent sized OVF to the A55′s EVF and then tell me the A55′s viewfinder looks better.”
And what might the price of the A580 body only compared to the 7D D7000 be?
The current EVF are not up to the quality of 100% view pentaprism OVF but get used to EVF’s because they will become the norm at all levels and the OVF will be relegated to a small niche market.
I remember the same arguments with manual/auto focus back in the early 80’s
Times they R a changin
Sony A580’s viewfinder is terrible even compared to the Nikon D3100 or Canon T2i. I was comparing the viewfinder of the A55 to the Nikon D7000 and Canon 7D as they are an equivalent sized pentaprism OVF to A55’s EVF to highlight that a pentaprism OVF produces a far superior image. EVF’s maybe the future but they will never produce a superior image to a pentaprism OVF.
EVF’s maybe the future but they will never produce a superior image to a pentaprism OVF.
1986
Auto focus will NEVER be as good as manual focus
1994
Digital photography will NEVER be as affordable as film.
1997
Digital cameras will NEVER outnumber film cameras
2005
Digital will NEVER out resolve film
2007
Sony can NEVER implement IBIS in a full frame sensor
2010
EVF will never produce a superior image to a pentaprism OVF.
Lol. Awesome!
A580 and 550D (t2i) have identical size OVF. 7D costs twice more than A580. D7000 costs $400 more than A580. A55’s electronic viewfinder is bigger than 7D and D7000’s OVF.
You are smoking too much pot. A580 doesn’t have electronic viewfinder. A55 does. And A55’s EVF is not powered by small secondry sensor. It uses the main sensor for the feed. Get educated before posting.
Sony Coolaid? You are pretty fast with judging others, while you don’t even take the time to inform youself correctly. The SLTs use the main sensor for the EVF/LCD display.
Thanks for mentioning EVF resolution -> 1,440,000 dots (of which 1,152,000 are used)
In reality it means only 0,384Mpx and if they magnified it We would see terribly rough raster… thats why they keep it small in size.
So how much resolution do You prefer in next gen EVF? Depends on it’s magnification…
btw: Admin, if You add 2mpx EVF into voting pool with big magnification i vote for it 🙂
Because, how can I vote for something which has no specs…
Actually a 1.44M EVF with a 3:2 aspect ratio will be fine. Superimpose critical information instead of putting it on the sides. At least double the EVF refresh rate to reduce rainbow artifacts.
Double everything but price!
Please Sony, make the next FF camera smaller.. Like the Nikon FG20´s..
Please Sony, DON’T make the next FF camera smaller.. a tiny bit smaller is fine, but i have tried the a33/55 & found them to be too small for my average sized male hands if i want to be using the camera all day every day as a pro would be doing – the a5xx size is by far as small as should be considered, preferably a bit bigger though.
I don’t know the exact specs of the future EVF but one thing I’m sure of that the EVF in future a950 ( if sony would go this route!) will be far more superior than the one found in a55, maybe comparable to OVF or even better! who knows?
i do respect those who make the changes that might become a revolution!
Ok guys here’s my point of view as a proud Alpha 900 user. Anyone who has ever used the A900 will tell you that its 100% coverage OVF is one of the best and brightest on the market at the moment (perhaps even the best). The stunning OVF of the camera is one of the main reasons why I and thousands of others have opted for this camera. The 24.6 MP sensor, ability to use Zeiss AF lenses, the stunning ergonomics, bright OVF and fast frame rate are all reasons why the A900 still lives up to Minolta’s great legacy. The look and feel of the A900/850 are unparalleled in my opinion. OVF is a must for any future generation full frame Sony DSLRs. After all this segment of the market is reserved for professionals and those wanting the very best photography experience and as things stand OVF is the only way to offer this. In the future this will change but at the moment I nor any other A900 user who will purchase a future FF Sony dslr wants a viewfinder that is worse than that of the A900 which has big shoes to fill.
It’s presumptuous of you to say what other people want from a FF dSLR. What you want is not necessarily a priority for others.
Instead of betting on the EVF and loosing customers who need a modern fast machine right now, not that A900/850 are bad, Sony may release their updated top of the line Optical View finder model with a new sensor sooner and have the EVF design with a fast high iso capable ultra speed machine for those who need it (sports/events/weddings) later.
Any opinions on this?
SonyAlpha700, too bad for you the majority agrees with my opinion… Did you bother looking at the poll results!!!!
66% vs 34%. There’re 2x the number of ppl that want OVF vs EVF. More yes, majority, uhm… depends on how you define majority.
Don’t forget half the people that vote wont buy the camera either way.
The results of the vote here will have zero impact on what Sony decide.
I voted OVF though i really wouldn’t mind EVF – just to muddy the waters up a bit 😉 Its the pellicle mirror i’m against. If it flips out the way then i’m EVF all the way.
Do you REALLY believe that they are all pros who are voting in that poll? You are very naive if you do.
Sony, as you know, the majority of the professional photographers still prefer Canon or Nikon systems as they own lots of their lenses and they are brand loyal. If you compete head-to-head with them (OVF, single lens reflex), you already see what the result is for A900 and A850. The SLT technology solves all conventional problems (100% true AF live-view, fast AF video) and enables many innovative features (mentioned by Bob). SLT is a fantastic idea which differentiates advanced Sony camera systems, as attested by many real-life reviews. Bringing an affordable FF camera ($1300-$2000) with SLT and all the easy-to-use features will surely attract a broader audience, hence increasing market share in the FF category. Please move on and define the future, FF should not be only reserved for professionalism and those who are used to OVF and unwilling to adapt to new things. When you drive the cost down, every one benefits. Just like how expensive the LCD TVs used to be, but not anymore.
Using an example, just until recently, neurosurgery doctors sit in a remote room, looking at the LCD monitors, and use haptic controllers to operate on the patient with robotic arms. These doctors don’t see the patients directly but rely on precision robots and monitors which assist them to do the most difficult jobs. Camera is a tool that helps take great photographs, and advanced features (found in SLT) enable things that were otherwise not possible using a conventional approach. A33/A55 are just like version 1.0 of the SLT design, and this technology still needs refinement to make it better.
SLT technology is going to be dead before it even starts. On chip phase detect autofocus will kill SLT technology and Sony will place most of their eggs in the NEX basket. You SLT A mount fans will be left high and dry like the A700 users. Not that I can blame Sony. If they bring out a NEX 7 with on chip phase detect autofocus and an LCD viewfinder why would they need to continue SLT?
On-chip phase detection auto-focus, evidence? Dreaming? Well, E-mount is meant for compact camera bodies, and A-mount connects to Zeiss/G lenses without additional adapters and AF performance slow-down. It makes sense to have two separate product lines.
Fuji has a phase detection autofocus on a compact camera http://www.dpreview.com/news/1008/10080505fujifilmpd.asp As for being able to use Zeiss and G lenses, what do you think those mockup Zeiss and G E-mount lenses were at photokina? The E-mount also focuses silently for video and the diameter is big enough accomodate a future 35mm sensor. But keep investing in A-mount lenses. At least you’ll be able to use them with an adaptor when Sony abandons the A-mount.
Thanks for the link, I learned something new today! Competition is always a good thing. After reading Fujifilm’s “Hybrid AF” approach, several questions could be raised including: (1) Some AF sensels only receive 50% of light, wouldn’t this create an uneven photograph (dead pixels)? (2) Is there only one center focus point? (3) Does this work correctly on larger sensors? There seems to be more compromises there.
Sony disappoints me at Photokina this year as I’m a huge Zeiss fan. They only showed off 1 Zeiss prime lens and no zoooms for the E-mount, which pulls me away from the NEX series.
“SLT technology is going to be dead before it even starts. On chip phase detect autofocus will kill SLT technology”
SLT is only a stopgap between SLR and Mirrorles.
Agreed. My guess is 2 more generations of SLT before PDAF on sensor becomes the norm, for Sony anyway.
The old boys club may lag behind though.
What do you think will happen to your OVF when a mirror is no longer required???
95% of interchangeable lens cameras will be mirrorless PDAF
Canon Nikon and maybe a few others will STILL provide a standard pentaprism OVF camera for those that insist on one.But demand will be low and prices will increase because of low volume, Eventually they will be special order. You can still buy film cameras new.
Last time I checked you can buy a new saddle for your horse and a new buggy for the horse to pull but unless you are in Amish country you don’t see many going down main street USA.
Any time you replace a mechanical moving part with an electronic equivalent you get FASTER/CHEAPER/LIGHTER/MORE RELIABLE.
The next hurdle will be global shutter with CMOS sensors and then cameras will become truly EVIL.
Last hurdle will be electronic aperture in lenses. Then there will be no moving parts between front element and sensor. Then the image from viewfinders will be TRULY TTL! Not reflected off mirror, bounced around a 5 sided prism and focused and magnified on an OVF
Its really hard to believe but digital photography as we know it is JUST 2 decades old.
My first digital camera circa 1997 was an HP 2.1 MP no video no viewfinder. Cost about $700 CDN
Compare that to the A55 now for about the same price.
Camera technology is advancing at an ever increasing pace.
Everyone needs to take a deep breath and enjoy the ride…:-)
Could anyone explain me why should FF cameras more expensive?
I think 100$ price increase over APC should be fine. Don’t u think so?
ps: what about consumer FF? :]
One thing that is interesting (at least to me) is the heat in the whole EVF/OVF debate in Sonyland.
Over in Micro 4/3s land there are lots of (albeit low level) pro’s just loving their camera’s and taking great images with none of this angst. Even when the topic of OVF’s come up its waved away as an interesting but not particularly important ‘con’ to their system.
The OVF/EVF debate is essentially an emotional one not a rational one. An evf (as currently implemented) has a few bugs – it doesnt do studio lighting particularly well, possibly isnt great for astro and well, thats about it really. It doesnt every thing else ok. Is it great, terrific, unbeatable – no, but 99.9% of the time it gets the job done. Also, it has to be remembered that it also brings some new party tricks like more accurate rendering of the captured image, higher fps rates, interesting AF modes etc. However, none of that addresses the core emotional issue that people are having with losing their OVF and what it reresents in changing the direction of photography.
Which is why polls on this site are going to greatly skew towards keeping the OVF. If you can be bothered scouring the net for rumours and hang out on gear forums and take part in these sorts of polls you are probably pretty passionate about photography. However, I note we are only a small percentage of the people that actually buy these products. If one of these sites did a poll on what would you but, an 580 or A55 I suspect it would be relatively close, the A580 might even win. Out there in the real world however A55’s outsell A580s at a rate of about 5:1.
People will continue to want cameras with reflex mirrors into the future, just as they wanted them back in the 50s/60s when rangefinders of the day were much easier to focus. There’s more to composing a photograph than just getting the framing and focus right.
For people who just want it quick-and-dirty, with a viewfinder image that looks like their in-camera JPGs will, there’s a lot to like about EVFs, but if you’re doing more elaborate things with depth of field, colour, exposure, post-processing, etc, an optical viewpath is necessary to avoid a guessing game.
A whole lot of Sony’s high-end market will be jumping ship if they only make EVF models in the future, though there may be room for OVF and EVF models to coexist for different markets if they can get enough extra sales to cover the higher R&D costs of making both.
I can’t see myself ever replacing my A900 with an EVF based successor.
Since the Sony community is in such gridlock over the issue of the optical/electronic viewfinder … then both options should be allowed in the same way with the A55 and A580. Problem here is … most people who commented here aren’t pro users and will never opt for a A900 successor to start with. I’ve tried the A55’s viewfinder and in every sense imaginable, it is FARRRRRR inferior to the viewfinder found on the A900! They just can’t compare. Unless, Sony revolutionizes the EVF, it just isn’t the same experience!
Seriously you don’t expect to find the a55 EVF on the a950 do you?
Why do you insist on comparing a cheap first generation A55 EVF to a non-existent EVF on future cameras?
It’s like saying you’ll never buy a car because you don’t like the Model-T Ford. You have NO idea what future EVFs are going to be like.
I agree with Mat but let’s specify how much must the new EVF be better than A55’s?
btw: maybe every OVF on FF camera naturally benefits from size of sensor over APC. In EVF this is not true anymore.
I think Sony going EVF for low-midrange is a good idea. Their pentamirror (not prism) ovfs were small. They also help Sony compete with M4/3 segment.
On FF, i hope Sony continue to make prism OVF solutions. Wether it’s OVF/EVF hybrid, or traditional prism. And FF NEX-8/9 would give Leica something to worry about.
And how about a bigger prism OVF on FF?
Minolta 7000 OVF was .85 magnification with 94% view.
I think Sony should introduce an A950 with basic video using contrast detect just like Canikon does right now whilst they are still decidng what to do with their transparent mirror techniology. This camera should have a 100% view optical viewfinder. If they were to include the latest sensor – with the great high ISO capabilities, people would accept it for what it is – a step-wise improvement.
This should keep the market going till they can get their minds sorted out about what direction they want to take. And maybe give them the time to produce a really good evf that everybody will drool over.
FEAR NOT…
All you OpticalViewFanatic/ElectronicViewFobics
(yes I know it’s spelled Phobics)
This planet still makes Film SLR’s
All you analog stereo sound lovin DJ’s
This planet still makes vinyl records
All you minimalist couch potatoes
This planet still makes B&W CRT televisions
All you fresh air breathin,tree huggin, planet savin environmentalists
This planet still makes horse drawn carriages
On the other hand…..
😉
For those that harsh on the idea of an EVF/new-fangled tech may have not worked as much in a crowd taking concert work.
Take for example Friday. I worked one with two bodies, a “traditional” dslr with a flash and a NEX-5, the philosophy being that I use one for a more “polished” look and the other for spontaneity.
Because I had height issues trying to get other people’s cameras out of my shots, I ended up getting a few shots with the traditional dslr, while a majority of my shots were done with my arms in the air, manually focusing on the subject in an underlit area with an electric screen upside down and my face to the sky just to keep track of the artist through the crowd. It worked, and it worked well: the electronic zoom feature helped and I don’t know if it rasterized or not, but I do know the image quality was spot on despite a frenetic night with a methodology that would have gotten blurry photos otherwise, especially since I was shooting wide at f1.8.
The reason I brought this up was to point out that if I can do this with a liveview screen, I can only imagine how well an EVF can do, moreso if they offer the same zooming methodology.
But that said, I can’t harbor a survey opinion on which is better since my last experience with an EVF was with a 4 year old bridge camera, I will only say that we’ll probably see how well this works for higher end models since the success of the E-mount system has probably guaranteed the NEX-7’s release.
End of 2011, or 2012… WTF?
What’s the holdup. I need a FF Sony now, and there’s no point in picking up the a900 now since we’re closer to the next gen.
Pick up the pace!!!
LOL
the A700 was discontinued in sept/2009
Sony still manufacture the A900
learn to be patient.:-)
Indeed!
Yeah, I have no problem waiting for a good camera if the end product is gonna blow me away, but you know in the end we’re gonna end up with something they could just as easily have done now.
All I want is AVCHD recording capabilities at 24p inserted into a a900.
That’s it.
waaaaay to late for many professionals
I think you should make a poll that has 2 questions:
1. Do you currently use a FF camera?
2. Should the future A99/A950 have an OVF or EVF?
I think you’ll find that most people who want an EVF have never used an A850/900 before, and that most people who have will want an OVF.
To people who like EVF and say that OVF supporters don’t know what you’re missing, i think that works both ways. Use an A850/900 and see what you’re missing.
BTW, i have an A900 and an A55. The A55 doesn’t hold a candle to the A900. Not even close. The EVF sucks. Seriously. I end up using the LCD screen on the back because the EVF is so mediocre. I have always said that EVF is preferable to a small, dark pentamirror OVF like you find on entry level dSLRs, but compared to even a pentaprism on a APS-C body like the D90 or A700, the OVF wins out.
Another one insisting on comparing the A55 EVF to an EVF that doesn’t exist yet…you don’t know how good or bad future EVFs will be, comparing it to a cheap A55 is pointless!
You say it’s pointless, but it’s the truth. The truth might not always be what one wants to hear, but you can’t ignore the current realities. The thing is, you DO know how good / bad future EVF’s will be, especially one that could be used on the A99. Predicting how good a future EVF would be on an A99 is pretty easy. Why? It’s only 1 year away!
EVF’s have been around for a long time, and it’s taken the industry this long to get them to the current state of the art level in the Panasonic G series and the Sony SLT series. They didn’t just show up with the A55. And even still, they leave much to be desired relative to a premium OVF like the one in the A900.
Given that there’s less than 1 year of additional development time available for whatever EVF’s going into the A99, it’s highly unlikely that there will be some miraculous breakthrough that puts EVF technology into another league. It will be a modest improvement at best.
Personally, one generation of modest improvement with EVF technology isn’t even close to what i would need to consider it a viable alternative to a premium OVF. I’m talking about 3 or 4 generations of improvement here. Let them work out the kinks in successive generations of A55, A56, A57, A77, A78, A79, or whatever the model numbers will be, and then put something that is actually better than a premium OVF into the FF Alpha at that time.
But Sony, don’t you dare treat the flagship FF body as a guinea pig and experiment with mediocre EVF’s before they’re ready for prime time.
The translucent technology is too new to win professionals over. It will scare them away.
Make a 950 with decent proven technology to last which can compete with Canon and Nikon. Keep the translucent technology for next version when it has proven its use.
e-dawg, You’re a star … I couldn’t agree more. Your point is the basis of my belief as well. Anyone who has used a A900/850 loves its amazing OVF. I don’t have an A55 but I have tried it on numerous occasions and must say that its EVF just can’t compare to the far superior viewfinder found on the A900. One must remember that most people who have said they want a EVF in this thread have never used an A900 or A850 for that matter and are hoping that SONY releases a 1500$ FF camera. Well I personally would rather pay 2500$-3000$ for an amazing new camera with OVF, 5-7 FPS, HD video, Live view, great ergonomics and grip and performs well in low light. Most A900 users would love these features on a replacement to the current FF model and would definitely consider purchasing such a replacement to the A900. With EVF, I doubt I would bother purchasing a A950.
A900 perform well in low light.
with LR3, it has not more than 2/3 of a stop disadvantage from the 5d2. probably less.
To say that all rooted for EVF haven’t used the A900 is a gross generalization. Personally, I shoot mainly with MF, alternative primes on my A900. While the OVF is certainly very good, I would still prefer the ability to zoom in for better accuracy, and the ability to have real-time DOF assessment. To disregard an EVF option at this point is quite premature. I certainly agree that the current EVF would not be a good alternative. In the end, I hope Sony know what they’re doing and release a “real” successor. I would take any improved FF from Sony whether it’s EVF or OVF.
A950 should be OVF model since no profit even new EVF but AF-C speed in movie, preview.
Pros: AF-C speed in movie, color/ apperture preview
Cons: degrading resolution by mirror, bad handling of cleaning mirror, slow reactivity of finder at sports usage
Cons will not be accepted by high class user
because no such Cons in other camere.
The a900 replacement is not late.
These cameras should have a 4 years life cycle. (like the 1ds2 had and the 1ds3 is going to have).
With the image quality they deliver, it does not make sense to launch a marginally better new camera after 2 years.
4 years cycle will allow to more development and therefore a more tangible improvement and you will get your money worth of camera.
In the mean time keeps those 3 grands in the bank or take some needed holidays.
Those that are so frantically in the need of an a900 replacement, seriously need to chill out.
Cheers!
There are at least two major segments.
Pure Photographers and people who wants good photos and videos.
Sony could produce two hi-end models…
1/ FF OVF camera focused on highest possible raw photo quality
2/ FF EVF innovative multimedia production tool, including superior video, HDRv2, multi exposure panoramas, less megapixels for better high ISO.
I have a feeling that will be the end verdict. The FF EVF will go to an E-mount while the FF OVF will be the A950. Compatibility will still be there for alpha glass in the former (hopefully at a zippier speed), and the latter will appeal to the pros.
Of course if they find that the SLT will allow incredible groundbreaking performance like, say, it’ll be the first interchangable camera that can pull off 12+ fps, then it might be a different story.
“Of course if they find that the SLT will allow incredible groundbreaking performance like, say, it’ll be the first interchangable camera that can pull off 12+ fps, then it might be a different story.”
They would have to do a bit better than 12FPS.
Back in 1984 the Canon F1 shot film at 14FPS.
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/canonf1/html/canonf1nhighspeed.htm
🙂
lol and whole debate ends when we find out that We are actually 20 years back 🙂
I agree with Don and John, today’s new post says that they are working on nx camcoder based on e-mount.. E-mount overtakes it
How much engies are required if 12fps in A950 32Mp?
No possiblity found A950 EVF by engine issue.
How much engies are required if 12fps in A950 32Mp?
Dual BionzII or Quad Bionz
Sequentially burned to 4 of the fastest memory cards.
Could be utilized in optional tethered Battery/memory card belt pack that also powers off board flash.
Hopefully Sony decide on OVF till EVF is perfected
Since there’s a lot of talk about OVF here, this is an article worth reading:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/viewfinders.shtml
The largest overall viewfinder (multiply magnification and % coverage) for MAF mount was the 7000.
This is why i’m glad Sony is moving away from pentamirrors on their crop sensor cameras.
I Use a sony a900 and I tell you I have used all the Major pro level Cameras
I just recently dumped Canon to get on with the Zeiss Optics . I would Hate for them to lose the Optical Viewfinder it is near perfect in Fact the A900 is near perfect the only Change I would love to see is Live View for the odd time when I need to shoot Tethered from an Extreme corner of a room where I cant get my eye behind the Viewfinder.
A little less Noise on Higher ISO levels 24 mpx is more then enough for anyone who shoots 35mm so give us better enviro sealing live view and less Noise then give us a tilt and shift 24mm and 85mm
Give us a 500mm f4 14mm prime a 18mm prime bring back the Minolta 200mm F4 Macro and let us loose
The A900 is 90% perfect as it is It reminds me of the days I used the Canon F1 and Later the Nikon F4s They were no gimmick Fast and precise tools made for pro’s to take Pictures for a living and the A900 is almost there
i wonder are there anymore news about the new FF body?
Full frame pro all the way
I want a fullframe DSLR instead of Translcuent technology. The reason why I bought A900 is because of its’ excellent OVF and impressive Dynamic range. I don’t need 30+ Megapixels, 24MP (for me) is more than enough
I have been using a900 for almost 2 years, and I agree to Arthur’s comment on OVF, lack of liveview and noisy High ISO.
I can live with 3 Sony cameras:
1. A950 >30MP FF DSLR OVF, >5fps, clean ISO 50-1600
2. A7x >16MP APS-C DSLR, 15fps, clean ISO 100-3200, 3D focus tracking
3. NEX 9 >24MP APS-H or FF, clean ISO 50-6400, high bitrate HD video
Also, please give us the famous Zeiss lenses:
Distagon 21/2.8, 28/2, 35/1.4
Planar 55/1.2, 85/1.2
Makro-Planar 100/2
A950, 24mp is enough, OVF please….. I have an A77 and hate the EVF
But love my A850 OVF.. Sony we need a Dslr with better ISO please…
The A900 is great already, but just some imperfection as in noise issue.
Cleaner image noise above 1600 iso, don’t care for movie mode, don’t need live view I’m not making a movie, just need better low light image quality.
5fps is fine. Just a nice Dslr for the photographer made for a photographer not for movies.
Keep the CF cards iv seen Sony has been putting SD cards slot in the Dslr.
Only thing I’m losing in when I challenge friends with Nikon and Canon is low light iso image noise…
sony a950 i nid pris