Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


SLT to go next year


kodachrome 3 474
11 Sep 2013 2:28PM
I would not like to see the demise of any camera brand, as it often has a knock on effect and is bad for the industry as a whole.
I always judge my cameras performance on 'real world' pictures and so far I have been more than pleased with the Sony's performance. Its a pleasure to use and the Info on the EVF is so easy to read.

Reading an article in Alphamountworld, it was revealed that more in house production of A mount lenses was to take place as Sony had set up new production lines. Many Sony lenses including a couple of Zeiss lenses were contracted to Tamron, but things are beginning to change. I hardly think this would be going on if A mount was going to be dropped.

Many people on the Photoclubalpha forum including some pros are bewildered at the direction Sony are taking and much critisism has been directed to the people in charge at Sony for not steering in the right direction. 2 great cameras dropped for one inferior entry level A58 which has been cheapened to be a joke.
I can only think this A58 is a stop gap model to keep the A mount alive until new rumoured A mount cameras appear next year?
One review of the A37 said they could not detect any negative results because of the SLT system, although sadly SLT has been used as negative propaganda by some reviewers in promotion of other DSLR's.
I'm not ashamed to admit that I'm a Sony SLT fan but I also loved my old Nikon D90, but it became to heavy and bulky. Much more compact cameras such as the A37 were available at fantastic prices.
Why didn't I go M/4/3, simple, I prefer APS-C and I won't try to describe why.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Steppenwolf 3 971
11 Sep 2013 4:39PM

Quote:
As for my pronouncements well it looks like Sony is heading in the direction I have consistently mentioned so the issue you have is?





It's difficult to reply to your posts strawman because there is too much wrong to adequately answer.

Nearly all your pronouncements have been wrong strawman. There are too many to list, but the 12Mp "sweet spot" has been proved wrong by all the manufacturers and the stuff about diffraction making 24Mp cameras counterproductive is also wrong - not only in practice but also theoretically. Absolutely the only thing you got "right" was that the SLT was a stop-gap, but, like I said, all technology is a stop-gap until something better comes along.

You can't pass judgement on Sony's range of SLTs because you've never even used an SLT - except possibly in a camera shop - yet you've been slagging off the SLTs ever since they were introduced. You're one of these people who make the internet such a dangerous place to get information, because you insist on giving your opinions on things that you know very little about. I suggest you stick to helping people out with Canon problems and stop trolling on the Sony forum.
strawman 10 22.0k 16 United Kingdom
11 Sep 2013 5:58PM
I have some Minolta cameras and it is the Sony/Minolta forum I read at the top so why should I not post on a discussion on where Sony could go next. It was an open question. But I guess all this poses a question for EPZ. Does it want its forum threads to explore one persons view only and let unsubstantiated commentary go unanswered? Is it not good sometimes to question things and explore Is this a good or a bad thing. i.e. Can only the faithful reply?

All I said on diffraction was correct, I linked to some articles and research that backed it. Nikon even put out a note and the maths even lined up. I am sorry you have had trouble comprehending the issue. I gave you the detailed explanation and maths behind diffraction and still you bring it back up. The sweet spot was also explained quiet a few times.

Lets give it one more shot in a slightly different way. It also goes for the results side brand to brand. As one pundit put it. If in good light you cannot get a good A3 print from any of the modern 12mp plus cameras out there it is your technique more than the camera that needs looking at. If anyone cares the sweet spot was aimed at the “if you are making up to A3 prints at what point do you stop chasing for more pixels and focus on other aspects of performance.” Does that mean you should not have more pixels, no it just attempts to put it into context. For too long you could read things that espouse that more pixels had to be better, and sometimes it was not. All that was asked was that people looked for the point where you start to get less and less.

Blindly proclaiming more is good is not always smart. Sometimes people feel with the rush of technology they have to update to the latest new camera. It happens in so many fields. Sometimes the money would be better spent on training, or a lens or even on a few trips to photograph something new. Sometimes you need to explore the counterpoint to decide; no in fact I still want the new thing.

But life is too short. Please stop making it personal and take the actual facts. In the past these items have been explained to you it is boring to keep on having to tell you explanations time and time again. Try sticking to the topic and try not trying to shout down or pick on any person who has a view that is different from yours.

As for camera technology the choice of viewfinder is one of the choices that is both technical in nature and highly subjective. Sometimes people will pick an EVF, sometimes an optical finder. People will have preferences and those preferences will change depending on what they are doing and what they get for making the change. In addition the clever people are making the EVF’s better and better, so the time for picking one or the other changes.

Personally if I had to pick one or the other I would pick optical now. And some of that is just because I like it better. Personal prejudice it is real. Just like saying I want a black not silver camera etc. But if you say I can have a lighter smaller camera (like a m4/3 type product) then I might say OK I will take the EVF. Horses for courses.

And no I do not think any brand is perfect, Canon and Nikon could be about to drop the ball, or they know more than we do and have picked a path. The mirror less attempt by Canon was not a patch on the NEX camera series for example. I think Sony have the potential to rise a lot higher, I hope they do.
kodachrome 3 474
11 Sep 2013 6:43PM
Many people have said including very promenant pros, invest in glass and stop worrying about the body, just because a body is no longer made, it doesn't mean your camera is going to stop working immediately.
I like that and it was one reason I chose Sony SLT, I had a vast range on Minolta/Konica Minolta AF lenses to look for. Now, most of my system comprises Minolta glass.
If Sony drop the A mount which I don't think they will, many people are going to be well peed off and will probably jump ship.
Not worth getting blood pressure over. Plenty more fish in the sea, but they are not all swimming too well at the moment. CHILL.
12 Sep 2013 7:32AM

Quote:...
If Sony drop the A mount which I don't think they will, many people are going to be well peed off and will probably jump ship.
...


Sony A57 was introduced in March 2012. With 1.5 years in production and no successor SONY would flush down the toilet millions of dollars worth of equipment and invest another truckload of money into something else? Really? All of written above is just a clash of wishes and ambitions so typical for every Internet forum. The last word here will be after the company, and...see above.
Steppenwolf 3 971
12 Sep 2013 9:15AM

Quote:I have some Minolta cameras and it is the Sony/Minolta forum I read at the top so why should I not post on a discussion on where Sony could go next.


The fact that you have some Minolta cameras, strawman, does NOT make you competent to comment on SLTs - and nearly all your comments have been negative. I think most people who have actually USED these cameras understand the reasons that Sony ditched the DSLR, but I'm not going to explain it all again to you because you have a closed mind. It's probably a generational thing as you also seem to hanker after cars that are based on 30 or 40 year old designs and dismiss the latest technology in favour of a clutch and a stick.

The facts about diffraction are not in dispute, and I resent the accusation that I don't understand the subject - I spent many years at university studying this stuff. What is in dispute is your interpretation of the facts. You have a very simplistic view that diffraction is a limiting factor and that pushing sensor resolution beyond this limit will not result in an improvement in image quality. You need to read some of the articles that Professor Bob Newman has written in AP about sensor resolution and lens performance. You might then realise that the camera and lens is a more complex system than you think.

Your stuff about the 12Mp sweet spot was patent rubbish at the time and has since been demonstrated to be rubbish as higher Mp cameras have delivered significantly better image quality. You plainly don't understand that image quality is improved by collecting more data - even if the resulting image is printed at a resolution less than the data collected.

I quoted a Benjamin Franklin remark, but in your case it doesn't seem to be true - neither time nor reason will ever change your views because you're so convinced that you know more than everybody else.
Steppenwolf 3 971
12 Sep 2013 9:38AM

Quote:
Many people on the Photoclubalpha forum including some pros are bewildered at the direction Sony are taking and much critisism has been directed to the people in charge at Sony for not steering in the right direction. 2 great cameras dropped for one inferior entry level A58 which has been cheapened to be a joke.



DPR haven't reviewed the A58 yet but if you look at the specs for this camera they're pretty impressive for a £300 entry-level model. There doesn't seem to be much left out - as canon and Nikon do with their entry-level stuff - and it has the latest Sony 20Mp sensor which is almost certainly an improvement on the old 16Mp sensor, which was one of the best available anyway. So it's pretty safe to predict that its IQ will be among the best of any APS-C camera. People just get hung up about the plastic (i.e. composite) mount. If Sony have chosen to make it this way they must think that it's good enough - maybe it's better than metal.

The Sony APS-C range seems pretty good to me. You've got the entry level A58, the mid-range A65 and the top of the range A77 with prices ranging from £300 to £700. And they all either match or exceed the performance of the competition while being cheaper. Some people are hard to please.
petebfrance 2 1.3k France
12 Sep 2013 10:53AM
The A58 is interesting. I think it's seen in some quarters as 'dumbing down' from the A57, but the reviews I've read in my copy of Chasseur d'Images and here on Imaging Resources:
IR - Sony A58 Review
suggest that it's a very good camera.
I don't fancy the idea of a 'polycarbonate' lens mount, but.....
strawman 10 22.0k 16 United Kingdom
12 Sep 2013 10:54AM
Steppenwolf what part of

Quote:All that was asked was that people looked for the point where you start to get less and less.
is wrong or difficult to understand?

With everything you get the point of diminishing returns. So again prove to me that for an A3 print having more than 12mp results in better image quality. I have seen stunning A3 prints from 12mp cameras with fabulous detail. Also check out the print resolution of most photo printers.

It is a common thing to reach a position where the law of diminishing returns for adding more starts to hit. And number of pixels per sensor is one of those things. Of course diffraction will at some point start to limit resolution. You do look to struggle with comprehending this. There is a point where more becomes no great advantage and you start to look for improvements in other places. Seriously what is the problem? I point out areas where simplistic more is more answers break down and you fly off the handle and make personal accusations. Also you look to resent points of this is good for A but not so good for B. I have spoken to Fernando Alonso about driving pleasure, have you? Is he retro and out of touch also? I think he is younger than both of us.

As for cars well I have designed parts for cars that have been award winners and I am involved in vehicle designs that will not be on sale for a few years. Whilst you may not appreciate the comments I make, the people who make cars are more than aware of them. Let me let you into a secret. Different types of people buy cars and they have different desires and objectives. That is why the car makers make different types of cars. They can happily live with the fact that not everyone wants the same and that not everything that is done satisfies all customers. What you may call retro a company like BMW may call a distinctive combination of driving pleasure and safety for example. You may not like it, but other people may. Different requirements you know.

But here is the question why must you always belittle my opinion or try to make it out to be old fashioned and attack me. In short what is your problem?
kodachrome 3 474
12 Sep 2013 11:27AM
Petebfrance

I must admit, the review on the A58 is quite positive and the test pictures were stunning. People have used the words dumbing down from the A57, but I suspect the composite mount was to reduce weight and cost. There is a lot of anti A58 posts on the Photoclubalpha forum, which I won't begin to even try and explain, read them yourself.
My main interest was the vastly improved Jpegs which Sony never really got under control until this new A58. Another big critisism of all Sony cameras is there is little or no user control over noise filtering in JPeg mode. Many other cameras do give you various settings at all ISO numbers including off, Pentax and Olympus being two examples.

Still all things considered, I might just look for a body only as it does tick a few more boxes than previous models. Don't get me wrong, I still rate by A37/57 highly for ease of use and IQ.
I just wonder how long it will be before this new camera is replaced by a better all singing all dancing new model and thats if A mount is still in production, I hope so.
Steppenwolf 3 971
12 Sep 2013 2:10PM

Quote:My main interest was the vastly improved Jpegs which Sony never really got under control until this new A58. Another big critisism of all Sony cameras is there is little or no user control over noise filtering in JPeg mode.


Simple solution: don't use Jpeg. Set the camera on CRAW and leave it there.
Steppenwolf 3 971
12 Sep 2013 2:22PM

Quote:
I have spoken to Fernando Alonso about driving pleasure, have you?



Not that I can recall. Wink

Highly amusing strawman. Grin
Steppenwolf 3 971
12 Sep 2013 2:48PM

Quote: don't fancy the idea of a 'polycarbonate' lens mount, but.....


People feel more comfortable with traditional materials, because they know they work, but modern technology is providing materials that are far better. And they're usually based on carbon - for the simple reason that the interatomic bonds of carbon are by far the strongest of any element. Carbon is also lighter than the stable metals and that's paradoxically why the bonds are stronger - because the shared electrons that control the bond strength are so much nearer the nucleus.

Plainly the Sony bean counters have found a way of cutting the cost of the lens mount, but they've also certainly made it lighter and - quite possibly - they've made it stronger. Who knows. Maybe this new mount will make its way into all Sony lens mounts. They've certainly never been afraid of innovation unlike some manufacturers.
kodachrome 3 474
12 Sep 2013 3:12PM
Not sure if the 'plastic' mount on the Nikon 18-105 kit zoom is the same material as the Sony body mount, but on another site a photo was shown of it broken in half. It was obviously very roughly treated I should think for that to happen or was it? I've seen engineering plastics in the motor trade and it is extremely strong stuff and not prone to heat expansion or shrinkage like metal is.

I think its a bit of a storm in a tea cup and not worth worrying about. Most of the concern by the Photoclubalpha people was, is it strong enough to hold a huge and heavy tele lens for sports work. I would think that would be one of the tests Sony did before adopting the plastic mount.
12 Sep 2013 11:32PM
I would not think of plastic lens mount as a big deal on amateur camera. With right choice of plastic it may be as good as metal one - many plastics win abrasion competition from soft metals like aluminium alloys and stainless steel, and with mount diameter that big are definitely able to support considerable loads. Seriously big and heavy lenses have a tripod mounting thread in their bodies anyway.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.