Comments on: Debunking myths: The translucent mirror reduces (slightly) the image detail!

By: Renaud

Renaud — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 21:09:17 +0000

I meant D700.. I also own a GH1.. which is -despite the not-so-fast 14-140- better when making clips : fast and silent autofocus, far, far better face detection.
A55 has a poor face detection, especially for close-up portraits..

By: Renaud

Renaud — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 20:25:35 +0000

I had 2 Minolta X700. I own several Sony : A100, A700, A55.

Quite disappointed by the first reactions and tests of the so long awaited A77. Where is the beef ? Why is the AF area so tight ?

I like my A55, but I’m disappointed by the slight delay I have with my A55 : what I get was not what I saw when I pressed the shutter button, and heard the shutter.

And by the comparison before-without mirror. See the photos on thesybersite.com : we sure lose a lot of details and contrast.

I begin to wonder if the all “translucent + EVF” strategic choice is not a big mistake, at least for the serious/enthousiast user. Not speaking about the lack of any FF foresight.

And I begin to wonder if it’s not the time to jump out of the wagon, drop the consumers electronics company that Sony has always been, and switch for a serious cameras and lenses maker, I mean Nikon or Canon, maybe Pentax. Not speaking about Oly and Panny.

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 18:56:13 +0000

A 5% drop in resolution is NOT a 5% drop in pixel count.

The picture will have exactly the same size and amount of pixels. But you’ll simply see less details.

By: JustAThought

JustAThought — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 08:06:11 +0000

I’ve seen a few results from the A77 now and, although it is not yet the production model, they seem uninspiring.

Is this a sensor or a software matter? If it is the first than Canon may end up as the big winner this autumn since Nikon is highly likely to use the new Sony sensor or Nikon has to stick with its current senors (which I believe are from Sony).

By: tipper

tipper — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 07:42:25 +0000

A filter in front of the lens has much less optical effects then a filter behind the lense!