After yesterdays news about the discontinued [shoplink 3028]Sony A850[/shoplink] I got many mails from readers that asked me what will happen with Sony’s full-frame line. So here is the summary of what I know!
First of all Sony will not only keep but also reinforce the full-frame system. Until know we had the A850 and A900 which shared the same sensor and had only minor differences. We heard Sony is developing two full-frame sensors with two different resolutions. So there could be two new (and very different) full-frame cameras! Both will be announced in 2012.
I am also certain that all future FF cameras will use the translucent technology. I don’t believe Sony will use the hybrid technology from the [shoplink 6075]Fuji X100[/shoplink]. Would be amazing but technologically (and economically) almost impossible to realize.
And I also get many mails confirming to me that Zeiss is working very clsoe with Sony to develop new FF lenses.
Now let’s see how good the A77 will be. It will certainly be a good indication how terrific good the next FF cameras will be!
61 Responses
This is the best news I’d ever seen in this year.
New Sony Fullframe cameras.
But don’t do like Nikon that if user want high pixel have to go D3x
I want to have High,Low pixel model in near price and different in Noise,Burst rate,Focus system…
A900? 😉
It’ll be more likely a high & very-high MPx cameras. Read & watch few interviews with Sony management – they don’t see a point in developing anything with a low MPx count like Nikon did. Especially not when Canon is racing with itself for megapixels.
My guess on the ‘two new sensors’:
A900 type camera aimed at professionals, “A99” I guess. 30-40+ MP. Hopefully with lots of refined photographic operations.
An A800 type budget camera. Full-frame, but even cheaper, knocked down features and operations, but still with the basics. It would go in line with the 85/2.8 ‘easy choice’ full-frame lens.
😉
Sony did bring out a range of budget FF lenses so I’m confident that they will continue to produce a FF camera, possibly two. Perhaps Sony are stopping production of the A900 and A850 NOW because they have limited sales and they want increased production capacity for the A77 and other new cameras.
I’ll take the cheaper one. Look forward to put my CZ 24-70 on it. 20-24MP FF, plastic body like A55, is enough for me as long as it has competent AF system.
And please super wide CZ FF prime with SSM please.
In it’s current configuration the translucent mirror technology is unusable for pro use. One look through the a55 reveals that highlight and shadow detail shown in the viewfinder are nothing like what is being recorded on the chip. (Oddly, the only advantage with a translucent mirror would be the lack of “image black out” which occurs when the mirror on a traditional camera swings up, yet the image on the a55 still blacks out!!??) Unfortunately, camera manufacturers do not make cameras for pros, we have to live with what will sell to the amateur market, and for the future, that seems to be the desire to have AF while shooting movies. I guess I’d better stock up on a few more a900 bodies while I can still get them.
What is shown in the A900 viewfinder is also nothing like what is being recorded on the chip. And, surprisingly there are plenty of other advantages to having an EVF.
There are practical and theoretical advantages and disadvantages for both, optical and electronic viewfinders.
Some tasks simply cannot be accomplished using an EVF, and for others, EVF designs will (indirectly) turn out to be quite useful somewhen in the future — but not in the form of the EVFs implemented in the SLT-A33/SLT-A55, which IMO are a mere toys compared to any full-frame SLR viewfinder of the past 30 years — personally I could not stand the really bad quality of these EVFs for more than a few minutes. I am not a videographer, and I don’t want to become one — it turns me away from what I am trying to accomplish in photography.
With enough research put into it, however, I expect the resolution, dynamic range, color accuracy, refresh rate, rainbowing and compression artifacts problems can all be solved, and then EVFs will come close to top-quality full-frame OVFs. I don’t expect this to happen near-term, but in about five years we may have reached this point. However, power consumption will always remain an issue, and I seriously doubt the delays caused by digital signal processing can be brought down into the low milliseconds range to undercut the limits of human recognition (which is somewhere between 2 and 20ms) — no issues at all for OVFs.
That’s why IMO Sony should NOT focus on one of these technologies, but offer them both, ideally, combined in the same camera, f.e. by designing a camera with a 100% OVF and an optional hotshoe-pass-through-adapter with integrated EVF for the camera’s hotshoe, if you need one.
Of course, this could not be a SLT-like design, but SLT was a dumb idea right from the start, a technology, which will be put down soon. Having a fixed half-transparent optical element in the light path to the imager is just a bad idea quality-wise. It may be accepted by some (perhaps those who put useless UV filters on their lenses as “front glass protectors”), but you just don’t want any technically unnecessary, quality deteriorating optical elements in the light path in conjunction with lenses in the thousands of dollars. As soon as future image sensors will implement sensor-based phase-detection AF in addition to contrast AF (and I am quite sure we will see this next year), there is no longer a need for SLT designs.
So, the key to a top-quality camera is a dual OVF/EVF design.
I choose SLRs when I really want the through-the-lens optical viewfinder. If I don’t want/need that, I use other tools. I have no problems with Sony bringing more options to our mount, however, I don’t like the fact, that they are fading out what, for me, is the very reason of existance of this mount. If I would want EVFs, I would not choose A-mount for this…
Since fall 2008 Sony has had a habit to combine the worst of alternative solutions (SAM lenses, dozens of vital features removed, etc.), when instead they should have combined the best of the worlds. They are going one step forward and two steps back. However, true progress, in my view, is effectily moving forward while not give up on prior achievements of the past. I don’t see SLT as a move forward as they are removing a lot more good properties than they are adding. Being different just for the sake of it, but not better.
Greetings,
Matthias
Thats all wonderful.
Its all about the ultimate image quality you say?
Do you shoot with a Phase One, or a Hasselblad?
You don’t?
Well you, by your own definition, are full of crap.
“I seriously doubt the delays caused by digital signal processing can be brought down into the low milliseconds range to undercut the limits of human recognition (which is somewhere between 2 and 20ms) — no issues at all for OVFs.”
Average human reaction time = 215 milliseconds…
http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/stats.php
Test you own time here….
http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/index.php
Of course after the human reaction time you also have to add on to that the cameras shutter lag.
Which in the case of the Sony A700 is 0.208 second in full auto focus with steady shot active.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/AA700/AA700A6.HTM
Hardly the speed of light.
“As soon as future image sensors will implement sensor-based phase-detection AF in addition to contrast AF (and I am quite sure we will see this next year), there is no longer a need for SLT designs.”
When that happens we are talking mirrorless soooooo….
Goodbye OVF
Mirrorless is the future and i guess the EVF will have to follow..:-)
““I seriously doubt the delays caused by digital signal processing can be brought down into the low milliseconds range to undercut the limits of human recognition (which is somewhere between 2 and 20ms) — no issues at all for OVFs.”
Average human reaction time = 215 milliseconds…
http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/stats.php”
Sorry, but you got me wrong here. I was not talking about reaction time, that’s much longer for sure. It is an important factor if you want to react on unpredictable events.
I was talking about recognition, actually, the time between two events which can still be distinguished by a human. That’s about 2-3ms for audible events and 10-30ms for visible events (depending on test conditions). Only, if the delay caused by the signal processing will fall below these limits, a human will no longer be able to feel “something’s wrong here” and easily tell there’s a delay between the real world still surrounding her/him and what s/he sees in the electronic viewfinder. That’s a real problem with EVFs, which cannot be solved easily (if ever because of the quite complex signal processing from sensor readout to viewfinder feed), and it’s no problem at all for OVFs with their true zero delay.
““As soon as future image sensors will implement sensor-based phase-detection AF in addition to contrast AF (and I am quite sure we will see this next year), there is no longer a need for SLT designs.”
When that happens we are talking mirrorless soooooo….
Goodbye OVF”
With sensor-based phase-detection AF a mirror is not needed for an EVF, sure. But they could (and IMHO should) continue to use/reimplement the classic mirror for the OVF. The user then had a choice to either use classic phase-detection AF with OVF or sensor-based phase-detection AF with EVF. So s/he can take advantage of more accurate focusing (when combining phase-detection and contrast AF at the same time), possibly even faster focusing (depending on camera construction), more reliable ambient and (preflash-less, realtime TTL) flash light exposure metering, and liveview in EVF mode, but can switch to use the OVF in shooting conditions where using an optical viewfinder is preferable (see above). Best of both worlds.
“Mirrorless is the future and i guess the EVF will have to follow..:-)”
Depending on purpose, mirrorless is one future, right. But the geometry of the A-mount (and other classical SLR mounts) is just not designed for mirrorless. It can be done, but it isn’t optimized for this purpose, and since its geometry cannot be changed, it will always remain a compromise. With 44.50mm the flange register is fine for a SLR design, but much too long for a mirrorless design. There are a lot of optical compromises in lenses for to maintain such a large flange register. M-mount or E-mount are much better suited for mirrorless cameras. That’s why, for example, wide-angle lenses for M-mount easily outperform SLR wide-angles.
To summarize, for a mirrorless camera, A-mount will never be as good as E-mount could be. A-mount was designed and optimized for cameras with mirrors and that’s where it’s at its best. It’s not a question of our personal preferences, it’s down to optical physics and therefore cannot be changed. So, while there may be a mirrorless future for A-mount, from the quality point of view, it should better remain only one of the options, not the single one-size-fits-all solution.
Anyway, whatever the future, mirrorless or not, or both, SLT will have no future in either scenario, as there simply is no need for it in one or two years. That’s why I think it is not a good idea by Sony to put everything on this single card, as they seem to be determined to do.
Greetings,
Matthias
“There are practical and theoretical advantages and disadvantages for both, optical and electronic viewfinders.”
Agreed. My point was that David Crane’s arguments were pretty weak.
“the EVFs implemented SLT-A33/SLT-A55, which IMO are a mere toys compared to any full-frame SLR”
Agreed, but that is a bad comparison.
“That’s why IMO Sony should NOT focus on one of these technologies, but offer them both.”
That would be complex and expensive. It is much easier for them to build on the advantages of the EVF until it becomes”good enough”.
“Being different just for the sake of it, but not better.”
At this point I consider this a very valid strategy for the current market. And it works, they do sell.
Yes, what your eyes see is optically different from what your OVF shows you, what your OVF shows is different from what the sensor records, what the RAW conversion software shows is different from what the sensor recorded, what your monitor shows is different from the output from RAW to JPEG, what you print is different from your display.
Plus of course 99.999% of monitors that display your images are un-calibrated, so your target audience will NEVER see the “real” thing that you “think” you saw through your OVF.
People make such a fuss about viewing through the OVF yet the image at the end of the process is NOTHING like the original subject, whether viewed on a monitor or printed.
I think this all comes down to misunderstanding the way some (many?) people operate when taking photos.
When I look through my [optical] viewfinder I don’t expect to see things looking how the photo will turn out, in fact I actively don’t want that. The dynamic range we see is much wider than our cameras can record (back in the film days we only got about four stops of real latitude out of slide film – tiny). It’s my artistic decision as a photographer what to expose for and what not to, and I understand the way my camera works well enough to adjust exposure intuitively, and not need or require my camera to hold my hand or obstruct me during that process.
With an EVF you have to take your eye away from your viewfinder to make this sort of artistic decision. The camera decides how the exposure will look, and you need to either accept the results or wrestle with it to get it to look the way you want. This slows me down and makes the process of photographing less enjoyable and fluid. I want the camera to act as an extension of my body, not an electronic device that I’m fighting with all the time.
For soccer mums or whatever who haven’t developed the ability of picturing the finished result in their mind’s eye EVFs are a great thing, I have no problem with them being there as an option. And there are certainly times where I’ve been manually focusing in tricky conditions (low contrast objects during twilight, for example) where I would have loved for my A900 to have magnified live view. But for me, and I know for sure I’m not the only one, no EVF offers as natural and immersive a photographic experience as a good optical viewfinder does.
Very good point.
nicely said 🙂 hopefully the FF models will be priced above a900 and below a850, since there is no more OVF, first of all let’s see what the new 24mp APSC sensor is capable of.
Admin, no NEX FF plans?
NEX fullframe is doubtful. All the lenses and the LA-EA1 are designed for aps-c, and Sony would really have to optimize offset microlenses to deal with the short registration distance.
Actually I’d like to see.there’s two FF camera , one dSLT , one dSLR .but I think it.won’t XD
Also , I really hope a hybrid dSLR/dSLR selectable FF introduce. But it might be too hard or impossible. Also it will too expensive if it’s real .
hohoho, I’m still day dreaming.let’s wait and see how Sony deal with their next FF 😀
mhh i would dream of the 2 sensors being 1 highres version for FF SLT Alpha cameras and one lower res with onchip phase detection autofocus version for FF NEX 😉 to me this would make perfekt sense.. this would keep both lines happy and differentiate them enough to not harm each others sale too much. My guess: A99 and NEX 9 😉
bring me the new Full Frame camera and new lens Zeiss!! 😀 we want 12-24mm f2.8, 35mm zeiss and 50mm zeiss 😀
I want an H16-like len on nex system. The 35G is enough, no need to make a zeiss one.
I’ll be very satisfied if Sony’s next entry into pro DSLR’s matches or betters the Canon and Nikon guys I compete with in image quality.
My A850’s have been very reliable and have produced many good images.
I don’t need much of this extra sillyness.
I shoot only in RAW and I can take the pictures myself and I don’t need a camera with consumer stuff. I need the camera to stay out of my way
i just think about…… if FF SLT + HIGH FPS + fast & Precise AF + Lot of AF point (at least same as 1Ds or D3 series ofcause) , will it be a camera with very powerful full time zone AF? if yes, that will be great~ sport photog maybe love it.
For the lens , i just think will they try to made some Tilt-Shift lense for sonyalpha.
Sony never was good in “Lot of AF point” so I wouldn’t count on that. BUT Sony also nicely shows that you can make superior AF system without 52 AF points,lol 🙂
They better improve the AF system over the A900. I’m a non-pro who does a lot of manual focusing, and I still find the peripheral auto focus precision lacking. I can only imagine how it is for professionals who work in demanding fields like birding and sports.
Yes yes yes!!! Bring on a 24-30MP FF SLT with on sensor Phase detect af. Let’s see if they can reallymuster the 5D II killer that most of us think they’re capable of! Oh yeah and some more Zeiss SSM primes 35 1.4 50 1.2 e.t.c wouldn’t go a miss!
mhh, i`m not sure the 5D II will be the cam to beat if the new FF Sonys are actually available 😉 would be great though
I think 5D II/III will kill Sony and Panasonic large sensor camcorders.
If Sony put 24Mpix on APS, then no doubt on FF should be 40-50Mpix and only primes and/or Zeiss zoom lenses will be with sufficient for such resolution.
Dream on.
There unlikely will be any FF frame still sensor that will be able to outperform a sensor designed for motion.
Aliasing, rolling shutter, dynamic range, noise will be always inferior.
I just don’t get these Canon diehard wishful thinkers.
Wake up!
It’s my grammar, I already want to say that Sony and Panasonic large sensor camcorders will kill any still camera which sales depend on video rather than photo capabilities.
24-30MP FF SLT with on sensor Phase detect auto focus???
What would be the point of the SLT mirror?
+1 😀
Now this is the news I have been waiting for… Hopefully they really launch it in 2012, with the quake and not so good financial report last year I have doubt that Sony can really make it.. But thats probably just me.. I am happy with my a900 and I really hope the replacement should at least be on par, if not better with the current offering from N and C… That way Sony can really move forward with their DSLR sales, I still hope they put optical viewfinder in one of the FF model since that is one of the reason I’m getting the a900 (bright and beautiful viewfinder).. I’m currently happy with the a55 aside from excessive purple fringing it creates(compare to traditional SLRs), I hope they put some sort of in body reduction for the purple fringing like N does… The additional prime lens from zeiss would be a great plus since it is the first reason and now the only reason I’m still using Sony… But kudos to Sony for bringing KM tech to this level since it acquires it back in 2006… Anyway I agree that we will see much of their new tech in the a77, I bet it will be the base for their full frame lineup in the future… Cheers
“I still hope they put optical viewfinder in one of the FF model since that is one of the reason I’m getting the a900 (bright and beautiful viewfinder)”
+1. At least one. To satisfy those who cannot live with looking at LCDs all their life.
so maybe a translucent/slr mirror dual release like the a55/580 ??
The a580 will be the last OVF DSLR Sony makes.
will, or will not. Certainly for some time now it’s the last one. But I wouldn’t play a prophet here. It’s too early to verify what market wants, especially: pro market.
Hopefully by making the new FF line SLT we will see bodies sell for under $2k. I would love to get something with the same performance as the 5D mkii but for a reasonable price. Even if it’s a NEX model.
IMHO it will only get cheaper. The A850 was selling for 2000US, an SLT replacement should be lower.
I don’t mind consumer cameras, they may be a lot of fun and a better market for sure. Sony don’t forget pro market please – clean straightforward designs like a900 are always welcome.
Led screen in a55 is hard to work with because one cant tell true dynamic range, contrast and brightness of the scene thus making it tough to predict how it will record. Ovf does it better for now
I agree here. As much as I’m excited about what’s coming (hey, I’m reading a rumour site, so obviously I’m interested) I also hope my a850 lasts a long, long time! I love the OVF, love the responsiveness, love the images and have never been happier with a camera!
But I wouldn’t complain if they reissued it with a newer sensor. 😉
All of this in 2012 ? This must be the end of the world for Canikon 😉
I hope new the new lenses include:
1) at least one tilt shift lens (perhaps a 21mm or 28mm f/4)
2) an updated 28mm prime (f/2 or faster and reasonably compact)
3) an updated 50/1.4 (reasonably compact)
4) an updated 35/1.4 (reasonably compact)
Weather sealing certainly wouldn’t hurt either.
Sad.. no optical view finder in the future of all Sony Alpha lines?
I’m not a FF user and I’m sure you guys have discussed this before.
Here’s my question:
Why do you think did Sony decide to only go for SLT with FF?
FF, where the prosumer market is, is one segment I would expect most to have the SLR & SLT versions developed side by side instead of favoring SLT.
if you look at the present a900/a850 the only real competitor is the Canon D5. about the same price, a little bit better high ISO, a more sophisticated flash system, a somewhat better AF, a more extensive lens range. and also a lower image quality at lower ISO, not as good color rendering and a viewfinder that is clearly inferior to the Sony. and of course it does video, for those who want it – and it cannot use Zeiss AF lenses.
the Canon D1 and Nikon D3 varieties do compete in the same format, but are clearly build for a different type of customer – a customer who wants the best in terms of durability and versatility and who is willing to pay a lot of money for that.
future Sony models could nicely fit in halfway between those two types of camera: better high ISO, possibility to use third party radiocontrollers for TTL flash exposure, improved AF and improved dust/rain sealing. there is not much need for even more megapixel i would guess. whether a EV is a improvement over the present VF i do not know, but maybe that is the way to go in future.
maybe Sony should also come up with two bodies: one with high FPS and a somewhat smaller high-ISO capable sensor for sportsphotography and a FF where the accent is on IQ at lower ISO and relatively low FPS
Sony is not Nikon. They rather release one expensive body that cover both needs. If anything, Sony ‘might’ make a budget FF camera that cost close to $1500.
Sony is not in this to ‘match’ the competition, they are redefining the field.
I am going to buy that higher megapixel FF a900 replacement for sure! I’m guessing it will have a hybrid SLT/mirror that can act as a traditional reflex mirror or as a SLT. Awesome!! Imagine, you can buy it and two great zeiss lenses for the same price as just a nikon pro body.
Great news from Sony for SLT Fullframe cameras. I want Sony to bring out a Fullframe NEX!!!
I want NEX FullFrame too
It will be mini Leica-M
@John, I knew some t*t would pick up on that 😉 Just kiddin. I meant mirrorless of course when I was referring to on sensor phase detection, the phrase mirrorless just seems wrong somehow to describe sony’s future direction though, seeing as I have tried the current generation of mirrorless PENs and G’s and been unimpressed. I guess they will be mirrorless though.
Why the full frame fetish? An A77 will be a better camera than most people need. Same goes for the Nikon D400.
The D500 and the Sony equivalent will be better cameras than ANYBODY needs. But needs and wants are two different things.
Me, I’m waiting for a Professional Micro4/3 or NEX. The NEX-FS100 give me hope that Sony will produce Professional E-mount lenses and a Pro still camera.
Because the depth of field on APS-C is bad. Not to mention the viewfinder size…
that’s cool, but some of us do want or need the best image we can get.
I don’t understand why you think all of us need what you need.
Lowest common denominator is not what photography is about
My preferred shooting style is wide and shallow, so bigger the sensor the better.
Before I bought my A900 I seriously considered getting a medium format camera, despite their slowness and girth, but I just couldn’t find a digital back with price/performance I was happy with. Besides, I like Minolta lenses.
@cd
Because we don’t have Zeiss UWA for aps c that’s why. =\
Does 100% view on apsc = 100% view on ff?
no. 100% APS-C is a 1.5x cropped image on FF.
Folks should realize that by switching to EVF the viewfinder no longer has to relate to sensor size, only the H vs W ratio. All the other OVF measures are meaningless. Thus Sony could save money by simply putting the same size EVF display in both the a77 and any future FF SLT. No difference at all between APS and FF viewfinder view. Would not be at all surprised to see Sony do that as a cost cutting measure.