New Sony DSC-R1 APS Sized 10 Meg Camera

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by deryck lant, Sep 8, 2005.

  1. deryck  lant

    ASAAR Guest

    Was this an attempt at humor? If not, have you seen the A2's EVF
    and if so, do you think its resolution insufficient? You just may
    be the sole human on this planet waiting for an EVF or LCD display
    to match the sensor's resolution.
    ASAAR, Sep 10, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. deryck  lant

    Skip M Guest

    "David J Taylor"
    Or produced one that was as capable, but much smaller, which is what I, for
    one, would find attractive.
    Skip M, Sep 10, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. deryck  lant

    Skip M Guest

    And that lens gives the 350D IS, a capability that the Sony lacks...
    Skip M, Sep 10, 2005
  4. deryck  lant

    Skip M Guest

    Not much faster, 1 stop at the wide end, 1/3 stop at the long end, and it
    lacks IS, so the comparison is very valid, unless you stubbornly push the
    advantages of non slr type cameras in the face of the invalidity of such an
    And SLR users don't often need live preview, since they have useable
    Skip M, Sep 10, 2005
  5. deryck  lant

    Skip M Guest

    That's an interesting argument from you, since, when the 20D came out, so
    many remarked that the 2mp advantage of the 20D over the 10D and Nikon D70
    was minimal. The percentage of increase of the 10mp Sony over the 8mp Canon
    is even less than the 8mp 350D/20D over the 10D/300D...
    And, judging from the images posted, the noise of the Sony sensor cancels
    much of the res advantage, since resolution is lost to noise reduction
    Skip M, Sep 10, 2005
  6. deryck  lant

    dj_nme Guest

    Skip M wrote:
    Sad (for Sony that is), but true.
    There are lots of "should-haves" for this camera, perhaps they decided
    to use the gigantic sensor and scrimp on everything else to make an
    overall cheaper camera?
    I don't know and can only speculate.
    dj_nme, Sep 10, 2005
  7. Yes, that's what I was meaning really, show broadly the same capabilities
    as a DSLR but is the size of a ZLR. With a sensor half the linear size of
    a 35mm frame (the 4/3 format) everything could approach half the linear
    scale, or one eighth of the weight.

    David J Taylor, Sep 10, 2005
  8. deryck  lant

    l e o Guest

    The EVF is a in fact a video device. Yes, I am talking about EVF, not
    movie mode of those P&S. The lowly S5100 you mentioned has even worse
    EVF resolution, less than 240x180?
    l e o, Sep 10, 2005
  9. deryck  lant

    Skip M Guest

    I don't see that as unreasonable, since a) a prism type viewfinder may
    actually exceed the resolution of the sensor and b) some may find that high
    res necessary for critical work.
    Skip M, Sep 10, 2005
  10. deryck  lant

    deryck lant Guest

    The message <>
    User report with preliminary test data:

    deryck lant, Sep 10, 2005
  11. deryck  lant

    Skip M Guest

    "David J Taylor"
    Except the one proponent of 4/3, Olympus, hasn't really reduced the size of
    anything, lens or body...
    Skip M, Sep 10, 2005
  12. deryck  lant

    ASAAR Guest

    And it's a floor wax. Half of the time I read your replies I get
    the strong sense that you don't know what you're talking about.
    ASAAR, Sep 10, 2005
  13. It may be that requiring the lens to work on an SLR style body (i.e. with
    an optical reflex mirror rather than an electronic one) introduces a
    retro-focus requirement which limits the size reduction which could be
    achieved. I have been disappointed to see that Pentax have (I think)
    produced a smaller DSLR camera based on a bigger sensor!

    David J Taylor, Sep 10, 2005
  14. deryck  lant

    deryck lant Guest

    The message <>
    In Brief:

    Excellent optical quality
    Very low chromatic aberration due to only 2mm back focus
    Good corner sharpness
    Attractive colour
    Very appealing tonality
    A little noisy at 1600 ISO, very noisy at 3200
    Fast shutter release but a little sluggish overall compared
    with DSLR cameras

    deryck lant, Sep 10, 2005
  15. deryck  lant

    Neil Ellwood Guest

    I thought that it was Yashica that made Contax and Minolta that made
    Neil Ellwood, Sep 10, 2005
  16. deryck  lant

    Skip M Guest

    "David J Taylor"
    Actually, the Canon 350D is smaller in all but height than the Oly E-300,
    and some of the lenses for it are, too. I figured Oly's odd sideways
    flipping mirror would allow more than just a reduction in height, but room
    is needed for it to pivot, no matter the direction. One benefit (the only
    one I can discern) is that you can use the pop up flash and a shoe mounted
    flash at the same time, giving simultaneous fill and bounce capability.
    Skip M, Sep 10, 2005
  17. deryck  lant

    ASAAR Guest

    It's quite unreasonable because Chris mentioned none of your
    qualifications, that in any case seems more of what might be
    theoretically possible that what's practical and likely to be
    implemented. I've owned cameras having prism viewfinders (Nikon F
    types) and don't recall that I was ever able to see the fine detail
    possible to capture on film. Maybe if some type of optical gadget
    was coupled to the viewfinder that provided magnification you'd be
    able to see the kind of detail that could be captured by a 10mp EVF.
    But how many people do you know that need to capture high resolution
    images, and don't do it using DSLR's sensor, but choose to utilize
    the optical viewfinder path instead? And of those that do, how many
    would be willing to substitute a P&S using a 10mp EVF hooked up to a
    Rube Goldberg type optical device?

    I think what's more interesting is to determine the resolution
    needed by an EVF so that anyone switching from an optical viewfinder
    would have no complaints about inferior resolution. An EVF might
    even have much lower resolution than that possible with the best
    optical viewfinders, but if a difference can't be seen, then a
    higher res. EVF isn't really needed. The first time I tried a 120k
    EVF I immediately noticed the coarse resolution. When I later tried
    a 240k EVF the apparent resolution seemed a good deal better, more
    than sufficient for all purposes except for perhaps fine manual
    focusing. While I never tried the A2's 900+k EVF, I highly doubt
    that I'd find it limiting in any way except for speed or possibly
    brightness in low light conditions. So my guess for a really good
    EVF that would satisfy more than 99% of users would be somewhere in
    the 600kp to 1.5mp range, which is nowhere near a 10mp EVF, and
    would be far less expensive.

    I also think that if anyone needs to use a P&S camera to provide
    an image for live, critical high resolution work, it's more likely
    to be done using the sensor to feed the signal to a high speed data
    cable. Not by coupling a super high res. EVF to a clunky Rube
    Goldberg optical device.
    ASAAR, Sep 10, 2005
  18. deryck  lant

    Chris Brown Guest

    If it doesn't match the sensor's resolution, it can't be used for critical
    focusing whilst still displaying the whole frame.
    Chris Brown, Sep 10, 2005
  19. deryck  lant

    Alfred Molon Guest

    Not 100% sure, but I think that the human eye is limited and can't
    resolve 10 million pixels. I guess others will be able to quantify this
    better, but for "critical" focusing a screen with 1MP might be enough.
    And by the way, with an EVF you can always zoom into the image to check
    Alfred Molon, Sep 10, 2005
  20. deryck  lant

    Chris Brown Guest

    Er, the picture is black and white...
    Chris Brown, Sep 10, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.