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

    Beyond some point you're not going to be able to see any
    difference in the viewfinder no matter how great the resolution.
    What makes you think that point won't have been reached until the
    EVF's resolution is 10mp or greater? You didn't answer my question
    about whether you'd ever seen the A2's EVF, and if so what you
    thought of it's ability to focus. Without that, I remain critical
    of your opinion. When saying things like "it can't be used" it
    implies certain knowledge, usually through experience. So far all I
    can assume is that you've never used digital cameras with anything
    but relatively low resolution EVFs.

    Note that when using optical viewfinders, critical focusing is NOT
    done by noticing the sharpness of the image in the finder. Other
    methods are used, such as split images, microprisms, etc. Why would
    this be different with an EVF. What I'm trying to describe is that
    beyond a certain point (and I believe it to be well below 10mp),
    increasing the resolution of the EVF wouldn't allow you to focus any
    better, because at that point more accurate focusing would require
    some additional aid, much as the two methods I mentioned above are
    employed with optical viewfinders.
    ASAAR, Sep 10, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. deryck  lant

    Alfred Molon Guest

    Well no, it's kind of pinkish. Sepia perhaps ?
    Alfred Molon, Sep 10, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. deryck  lant

    l e o Guest

    What you get from the EVF is a downsampled image recorded by the sensor.
    The constrast level is limited by the 8bit display and the refresh rate
    is limited by the video circuit. You can't really tell how bright the
    actual scene because it's an interpretation by the sensor. This is why a
    live histogram is important to these poor P&S users. You should read the
    KM A2 review in imaging-resource. It's better than other EVFs but no
    substitute to optical viewfinder and the article has the explaination.
    Also, do not forget that a smaller pixel pitch of the A2 sensor allows
    you a greater degree of errors in focusing. The A2 has 640x480pixels.
    Also note that all these previews about Sony R1, about how bad it is for
    manual focus... Jerky refresh rate etc. When the EVF improve, then we'll
    talk, now we don't want to be limited by those craps. Putting in an EVF
    to a dSLR is no brainer for many manufacturers if they see there are any
    l e o, Sep 10, 2005
  4. deryck  lant

    Chris Brown Guest

    That point is well beyond 900k pixels (which is probably actually only
    300k). Something which looks sharp on that monitor would probably be blurred
    in the final capture.
    I can critically focus a 70 year old medium format TLR with the lens wide
    open and get a scan which gives me about 25 million DSLR quality megapixels.
    If I can do that by eye, 10 megapixels should be do-able.
    I haven't, but that's somewhat irrelevant because small sensor digicams have
    a huge depth of field, which will mask small focusing errors. This isn't the
    case with the new Sony camera. regardless of how good that little LCD
    monitor is, if its resolution is an order of magnitude less than the output,
    then it's not going to be possible to simultaneously view the entire frame
    and critically focus.
    *all* EVFs are relatively low resolution. This is simple arithmetic - plenty
    of blurry 10 megapixel images will look sharp when you downsize them to VGA
    Cobblers. I shoot all the time with medium and large format gear which has
    none of these bells and whistles - just the ground glass screen and a
    magnifying glass. OK, with the large format gear I can't see the whole frame
    while I'm looking through the magnifier, but I can with the MF stuff.
    Chris Brown, Sep 11, 2005
  5. deryck  lant

    Chris Brown Guest

    That's because the PSD it was created from is in duotone format. One has to
    wonder when the last time you saw a pink duck was?
    Chris Brown, Sep 11, 2005
  6. deryck  lant

    ASAAR Guest

    In that case I'm in favor of EVFs' remaining unchanged.
    ASAAR, Sep 11, 2005
  7. deryck  lant

    ASAAR Guest

    Chris, have you met l e o?
    ASAAR, Sep 11, 2005
  8. deryck  lant

    l e o Guest

    You are ignorant.
    l e o, Sep 11, 2005
  9. deryck  lant

    ASAAR Guest

    Sometimes it is useful to know who to ignore.
    ASAAR, Sep 11, 2005
  10. deryck  lant

    ThomasH Guest

    However, he posts no images backing his opinion about the noise.
    Someone else did, and the noise even at ISO 800 appears horrend.
    ThomasH, Sep 11, 2005
  11. deryck  lant

    deryck lant Guest

    The message <> is a very reliable camara test site and does
    the most in-depth technical tests of camera noise etc. Of course
    this is only a preliminary look. The complete test will come later
    with a production camera.

    Here are some snapshots taken at a trade show:

    deryck lant, Sep 11, 2005
  12. deryck  lant

    Mike Guest

    Very romantic technical appreciation list.
    It is not a new class of noise.
    Let's forget this!

    Mike, Sep 11, 2005
  13. deryck  lant

    Mark B. Guest

    Digital SLRs have the best live preview possible - you see EXACTLY what the
    lens sees, at the exact moment it happens, with no electronic
    interpretation. Until the electronics can show WYSIWYG in real-time, with
    no delay, then it'll be worth mentioning.

    Mark B., Sep 12, 2005
  14. deryck  lant

    ASAAR Guest

    Come on now. It may not yet be available, but there'd be an awful
    lot of people that would like to have a super-sensitive EVF with
    "night-vision" capabilities that would let you see in conditions
    where a DSLR would be operated virtually blind. Digital SLRs may
    have the best live preview *today*, but to say that it's "the best
    live preview possible" is to speak carelessly and inaccurately. And
    every camera has a delay, it's all a matter of getting it down to
    the point where it's not noticed anymore. Why do you insist on
    using extreme descriptors, such as "best possible" and "no delay"
    instead of "minimal delay"? Maybe because to require "no delay" is
    an impossibility and you can therefore erroneously conclude that
    DSLRs can *never* be equalled?

    Then too, do all DSLRs show EXACTLY what will be captured by the
    sensor? My last Nikon SLR didn't show exactly what was captured on
    film, although the better "pro" models were pretty close. The EVF
    in my Fuji shows virtually the same thing that is captured by the
    sensor. Whether it's 99% or 100% I can't say but I can't tell the
    difference, and it's much more accurate representation of what would
    be captured than that displayed by my last SLR. What you consider
    to be worth mentioning is worth less than you think.
    ASAAR, Sep 12, 2005
  15. deryck  lant

    l e o Guest

    We use a camera NOW so when the current EVFs are crap, how would it help
    your S5100 if the future EVF ever improves?

    Even KM A2 which has the best EVF only has 640x480 pixels (and reduced
    frame rate 30fps). HOW could you judge focus with such a low resolution?
    Do you enjoy switching zoom in/out many times to get it right?

    I can down sample a slightly out of focus 8MP photo to 2400x1600 and it
    would look very sharp but this is not acceptable to me. Perhaps, it's
    good enough to you.

    And I realize that your S5100 has a clumsy system to push buttons to set
    focus manually, no wonder you don't care, so you use EVF for framing only.

    Even for framing, the optical viewfinder is crystal clear, and with
    mechanical zoom range, it's much easier to track subjects.

    It would be laughable for an experienced photographer to depend on live
    preview and histogram. The camera's metering system should do a decent
    job and in unfamiliar lighting situation, one only needs to do one or
    two test shots would be enough to get the manual setting correct.

    And finally, we never regard live preview on LCD screen as a bad thing,
    but low resolution EVF is useless.
    l e o, Sep 12, 2005
  16. deryck  lant

    ASAAR Guest

    If you don't understand what the discussion was about why do you
    even bother to add your, uh, droppings to the conversation?

    Is that the Imperial "we" or does it just represent you and the
    other asylum inmates? It seems pretty obvious that most of your
    observations are useless, but you keep trying. I'll give you that.
    ASAAR, Sep 12, 2005
  17. deryck  lant

    ThomasH Guest

    The forums at dpreview seem to be indeed often "brand fanclubs"!
    Pardon me if I will remain sceptic about the R1, and wait for
    a production version and for some more detailed tests before
    drawing final conclusions.

    So far the images published by:
    are the best what we have, and they are not very good
    looking for Sony.

    Frankly, this might be bad news not only for Sony.
    I was thinking that the R1 will not find really attract
    too many buyers of EVF pseudo DSLR because the large
    sensor takes so much away from the lens compared to
    the DSLR alikes from Fuji (S9000) Lumix F30 etc.

    However, since this sensor is almost APS sides, this
    might be the technology to which Nikon. Minolta and
    Pentax will be condemned. And with such sensors they
    will not be able to compete successfully against Canon!

    ThomasH, Sep 12, 2005
  18. deryck  lant

    Alfred Molon Guest

    Impossible to frame with a DSLR when diving (and in other situations as
    well). The diving mask won't let you get close enough to the viewfinder.
    But with an LCD screen accurate framing will be possible.
    Alfred Molon, Sep 12, 2005
  19. l e o wrote:
    With a well thought-out design, no switching is required. Example: the
    Panasonic FZ20 - just touch the focus ring in manual focus mode, and the
    centre portion of the viewfinder automatically shows and expanded image of
    adequate quality for focus checking.

    David J Taylor, Sep 12, 2005
  20. deryck  lant

    Bill Tuthill Guest

    Partly it might be a sales technique for camera shops to sell digicams
    instead of DSLR, which might have a lower profit margin.

    Aside from the angle advantage you mention, another advantage might be
    live histogram to nail the exposure on single-opportunity shots.

    I used a Yashica T4 Super for many years, and though its angle viewfinder
    was touted as a great feature, I only used it twice: once (upside down)
    for a landscape shot taken over some bushes, and once for a portrait.
    In the second case, I could have kneeled. So really only once bonafide
    usage over ~ 5 years.

    What LCD composition really does is promote camera shake. It might be
    the single biggest reason for unsharp photos from modern digicams.
    Bill Tuthill, Sep 12, 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.