Big deal.There are no action-oriented mirrorless cameras that work, because EVFs are too slow.
Upvote
0
Big deal.There are no action-oriented mirrorless cameras that work, because EVFs are too slow.
There are no action-oriented mirrorless cameras that work, because EVFs are too slow.
In the auto sales industry there is a word for people who test drive every single car and never buy complain and never buy.
Certainly a Gaylord Resort property somewhere...Opryland Hotel? Rather, that's what it was called 30 years ago.
“Verdict. The Sony A9 II is the fastest, most ferocious full-frame sports camera we've ever used. Its blistering speed and autofocus performance are matched only by its phenomenal connectivity, which promises to be a game changer for pro shooters.”
I have no experience with this camera but it seems to be good enough or “better” for a lot of sports shooters vs DSLR. The EVF actually has the advantage of no blackout vs a DSLR. I only see performance getting better and cheaper within the next few years.
So either the market was really small, or most of those users were happy with an evf. Or both Nikon and canon are making a mistake, and will introduce a replacement eventually.Nikon has also abandoned the segment. D500 is the last of the series for them as well. So it's not just Canon.
I'd like for it to be #3, but I'm not optimistic. On the other hand, I expect that in about three years the 90DII will have caught up with the 7D II, but with a better sensor.So either the market was really small, or most of those users were happy with an evf. Or both Nikon and canon are making a mistake, and will introduce a replacement eventually.
I'm a married father of two.
That's a very unusual niche genre, might really be better to stick to DSLR because of the EVF's lag.Radio controlled jets.
That's a very unusual niche genre, might really be better to stick to DSLR because of the EVF's lag.
But I disagree on benefits of seeing the actual scene through OVF, an EVF view with exposure compensation is more useful in most of the imaginable scenarios, including radio controlled jets.
With high-speed subjects, the lighting is changing millisecond to millisecond. You don't have time to adjust so you have to trust the meter. One problem I had with the A7ii I tried was that it responded super-slowly to changes in lighting. For example, if I was inside and pointed the camera through a window, it would take about a second to go from indoor exposure to outdoor exposure, meaning the EVF was pure white for about a second when I did that. Same with going back - the EVF would be pure black for about a second.
I'd still like a hybrid viewfinder. I use a Hoodman Custom Finder kit on mine now (for video) but being able to get away with that system built-in would be even better.
That’s a common and reasonable request. Some online YouTube reviewers mock canon for continuing to produce the 90D, and announcing the 5D4/1dx 3. And yet a lot of users still want a DSLR. Seems that canon decided that it wasn’t worth making a 7D3. So while you and a few others really want one, maybe they just didn’t sell enough. The market just wasn’t there, even though the market for a 90D and 5D is.
Doesn’t Nikon make a great mid range sport/wildlife camera? Is it possible for you to switch brands and send a clear message that these are still in demand? (I understand brand switching can be expensive and unfeasible)
Well, there's never been an A9 to test in my city. The A7iii's viewfinder is awful, and people I've talked to say the A9 is similar or slightly worse.
I'd like for it to be #3, but I'm not optimistic. On the other hand, I expect that in about three years the 90DII will have caught up with the 7D II, but with a better sensor.
Uhm. They say it is because of a shorter RF flange distance and wide Mount throat that they can afford to design lenses with a larger rear elements and zooms like 28-70/2.0.That’s quite a different ask though, isn’t it. I can understand why you’d want that. Canon says it’s because they’re using an evf instead of an ovf that they can even design these new lenses.
I honestly don’t know if that’s actually true or not, since I’m not a lens designer.
Uhm. They say it is because of a shorter RF flange distance and wide Mount throat that they can afford to design lenses with a larger rear elements and zooms like 28-70/2.0.
Such a lens is impossible on EF.
I may have skipped a few steps in my logic, my apologies. You’re right that’s it’s the RF Mount vs EF; but an RF mount requires the EVF, as the short flange distance is only possible because they dumped the mirror. That’s why I said the RF lenses are only possible because they dropped the O for E.