So... Sony just dropped their Juggernaut!

[UncleFester]

Cute. But just another dslr.

A Sony rangefinder, however, would have been interesting.

[Fleetie]

So, if the A77 has a purely electronic viewfinder, what's the mirror there for?

Just for the AF system? And if so, why is it half-silvered and not fully-silvered?

Thanks,

Martin

[-zero-]

So... Sony just dropped their Juggernaut!

ouch, did it break?

(sory I couldn't resist )

[awinphoto]

So, if the A77 has a purely electronic viewfinder, what's the mirror there for?

Just for the AF system? And if so, why is it half-silvered and not fully-silvered?

Thanks,

Martin

Kinda like the 7D... ?

[NormanBates]

So, if the A77 has a purely electronic viewfinder, what's the mirror there for?

Just for the AF system? And if so, why is it half-silvered and not fully-silvered?

Thanks,

Martin

I think it's just fot the AF system, and it has to be translucent because it doesn't get out of the way when taking pictures (or feeding an image to the live view LCD/EVF)

this means you lose 1/3 stop of light on the sensor; but it also means it's much more difficult for dust to get to your sensor (eventually, it will get there, and it will be more difficult to get rid of it, but that probably will take longer than the camera will stay with me; in the meantime, I'll be much less worried when changing lenses in a windy day in the countryside: the mirror is much easier to clean than the sensor)

edit: another nice thing about this translucent mirror tech: AF doesn't stop working while you're taking pictures, so this one shoots 12fps whith autofocus
as seen here: http://www.amazon.com/gp/mpd/permalink/mL6KZXE96MW1


now, about those "canon and nikon will bring out something similar soon" arguments...
what you're saying amounts to: "yes, those iphones and android thingys are great, but nokia surely is an amazing company, my last 4 phones were from them and they were great for their time; they surely will respond with similar specs" - or will they?
if at least canon and nikon showed us what they're working on, maybe, just maybe, I'd be tempted to wait for them; if they don't bring anything out, I just have to wait to see if this baby is just as good as it looks like

[macfly]

I've already dumped the garbage G12 and my new Nex7 is on order. Canon have lost me in the section of the market, and with the lack of EOS 1Ds news they may well loose me altogether now.

[DavidRiesenberg]

The spec list looks great but something is iffy with the sample shots. They look too processed. Like they use too much NR and sharpening. At first I thought it is just sloppy job on dpreview's part but imaging-resource shows the same thing.

[Bokehmon]

So... Sony just dropped their Juggernaut!

ouch, did it break?

(sory I couldn't resist )

probably, isn't fully made out of magnesium...

[papa-razzi]

The spec list looks great but something is iffy with the sample shots. They look too processed. Like they use too much NR and sharpening. At first I thought it is just sloppy job on dpreview's part but imaging-resource shows the same thing.

Sony is a marketing machine and focuses on specs to lure in customers - yet the products often do not perform to the level of their specs.  I spent some time in the consumer electronics industry (amps, receivers, etc.) and Sony's gear in a price range always had better published specs, but often did not perform as well as other vendors products with lesser published specs.  I did side by side comparisons on some receivers and was amazed that the Sony receiver was a poorer product all around when according to specs it should have outperformed the competitor's product easily.

I was a Sony fanboy since they first came out with the Sony walkman, but the Sony brand as of late isn't delivering on what the brand originally represented - at least to me - which was highest quality, innovative products for slightly more money.  They are still a good vendor/company, but for me the bloom is off the rose.  It is not a given that it is an excellent product just because it has the Sony name.

[Mike Ca]

So, if the A77 has a purely electronic viewfinder, what's the mirror there for?

Just for the AF system? And if so, why is it half-silvered and not fully-silvered?

Thanks,

Martin

The mirror is just for the AF system. This has advantages and disadvantages. The AF system can function while pictures are being taken. This can in principal make something like AF servo work better at high frame rates. For video shooters this allows continuous AF while shooting video.

The downside is you can not have an optical viewfinder, only an electronic viewfinder. The electronic viewfinder reduces your battery life. The mirror reduces light to the sensor.

As I recall independent reviews of the last generation of Sony mirror less cameras said that the Sony AF system didn't really live up to the expectations. In continuous shooting the AF system did not work as well as the Canon or Nikon AF systems in DSLRs. Shooting video the AF had problems tracking focus. Hopefully, Sony has worked out some of those problems in this new camera. 

[thejoyofsobe]

this means you lose 1/3 stop of light on the sensor; but it also means it's much more difficult for dust to get to your sensor (eventually, it will get there, and it will be more difficult to get rid of it, but that probably will take longer than the camera will stay with me; in the meantime, I'll be much less worried when changing lenses in a windy day in the countryside: the mirror is much easier to clean than the sensor)

but the mirror is down on an SLR when you change lenses anyway. i mean i look at the pictures of their SLT bodies and I see similar gaps on the side and bottom to SLRs that dust would go through.  or is their SLT design more airtight in ways that aren't readily apparent? what would annoy me is that there'd now be two surfaces which affect image quality that can collect dust instead of just one. it's annoying enough to clean a sensor let alone also have to worry about a mirror.



then throw in the overheating problems their previous SLTs had that even flared up when not shooting video because the weather is hot (I live in Florida), the adjustment to an EVF, the diminished battery life and light loss. I got enough concerns that'd would need to be assuaged before considering even a similar Canon SLT with an EF mount if they ever made one.

[Zerg2905]

After the Walkman there was someting that made Sony genius(es) scratch its (their) head (heads): it's called iPod; followed by iPhone; followed by iPad; followed by...

Sony might be the "800 pound electronics industry gorilla" (to quote The Luminous Lanscape article)  but let's say that in photo, serious photo, they are not quite there yet. And they need not just one innovation, but a few dozens more.

My point is not to drop your current C or N gear just yet. If you think that the two old crows (Canon & Nikon) cannot  make a "wundercamera" you are quite wrong. They can. But it is not a matter of possibility & tech, but of price; you cannot have a 36 MP FF shooting at 20 FPS and at ISO 102000 or more and filming in  FULL HD (or maybe not, 21:9 or 2560/1080 will do great too - ouch, it was Philips that implemented that first hand and not Sony, right?...) for 2000 USD...

CANON EOS 1V (35 mm film SLR) was able to shoot at 10 FPS FF. A decade ago; with 45 AF points etc, tank-like construction etc; NIKON F6 - a monster camera; again, just think about price - here is the real war.

Cheers.

Z.

[ZeuZ]

I my modest opinion it doesn't really matter what kind of bodies Sony delivers. In the end it's all about the sensor and the efficiency of the batter. At this moment the sensors of Sony are good, some might say better and that what makes Sony for the pro's more interesting. And yes their bodies are quite ravishing, one can compare it to a miss competition where you're looking at the bikini contest part, but every body needs a content which shows the quality underneath. The question will be, can you Canon do it? (And of course mix it with some nice curves like Sony did.)

ZeuZ

[skitron]

The video and the video autofocus on the a77 look pretty good to me. The stills didn't impress me and the 5D2 looked much better in comparison (but then it should have been compared to a 7D or 60D to be fair). But I'd take a hard look at a77 as a video DSLR based on those clips if Canon fails to bring comparable performance. Sadly, I'm guessing in the video autofocus dept, Canon is probably not going to even come close. Sony claims they had to do the translucent mirror technology to make it work and there are no rumors of Canon doing that. I'll wait to see what 5D3 offers, but I suspect it will be not much different than 5D2 in terms of video autofocus. I sincerely hope I'm wrong about this.

Gotta hand it to Sony for tackling what is "the biggest fly in the ointment" for the average DSLR video shooter (as opposed to indie shooter) in getting a good autofocus system. Sony also tackled "the biggest fly in the ointment" for the average camcorder shooter in creating what is imo hands down the best IS system for a camcorder on the market in the CX550. I've had that camcorder a year now and still utterly amazed I can get 10X zoom handheld that is pretty close to tripod and 1X walk-around that looks not that much different than dolly. Obviously not the same as tripod and dolly but simply amazing just how close you can get.

[Sunnystate]

After the Walkman there was someting that made Sony genius(es) scratch its (their) head (heads): it's called iPod; followed by iPhone; followed by iPad; followed by...

Sony might be the "800 pound electronics industry gorilla" (to quote The Luminous Lanscape article)  but let's say that in photo, serious photo, they are not quite there yet. And they need not just one innovation, but a few dozens more.

My point is not to drop your current C or N gear just yet. If you think that the two old crows (Canon & Nikon) cannot  make a "wundercamera" you are quite wrong. They can. But it is not a matter of possibility & tech, but of price; you cannot have a 36 MP FF shooting at 20 FPS and at ISO 102000 or more and filming in  FULL HD (or maybe not, 21:9 or 2560/1080 will do great too - ouch, it was Philips that implemented that first hand and not Sony, right?...) for 2000 USD...

CANON EOS 1V (35 mm film SLR) was able to shoot at 10 FPS FF. A decade ago; with 45 AF points etc, tank-like construction etc; NIKON F6 - a monster camera; again, just think about price - here is the real war.

Cheers.

Z.

This is not some pissing contest or some funky brad loyalty issues.
Olympus, Panasonic or Samsung mirrorless cameras were not in any means a game changers, but this new Sony begins to be a serious problem, and really has potential to turn large portion of a market away from both, high end point and shoot and low to mid range SLRs.
Just give me one with compact super wide lens and, I will ditch my still bulky Rebel with his holster bag for ever, as my companion for daily walks with my dog to shoot opportunistic landscapes.