neuroanatomist said:
Orangutan said:
...I think the general idea is valid: the fact that Sony actually needed customer feedback to tell them to use lossless storage for their top-IQ body is disappointing.
Exactly. The took something that was a fundamental problem which should never have occurred, and after 'listening' to customers they deliver a flawed solution.
The thing that annoys me here is the use of the word "flawed". The solution is not flawed. A flawed solution would be a non-working solution. A non-functional solution. A solution that could not actually work. This is the kind of bullS___ you spout, and the reason I cannot stand you. You carefully choose words to twist facts.
Sony SOLVED a problem. The solution may not be what you, a Canon user, who is familiar with losslessly compressed RAW files, would PREFER, but that does NOT make the solution "flawed". That is the load of crap.
As for Sony's response time. How long have people asked for better DR from Canon, and been stuck with marginal, fraction of a stop improvements (at BEST)? I can remember people asking since the K5 first hit the streets. That was, what, this month 2010? Not everyone NEEDS lossless compression, just like not everyone needs more DR. At least Sony was working the problem. The A7s II has it out of the box, so the option to use uncompressed was completed some time ago, in order to make it into the release for that camera. And they are going to push it out to the rest of the A7 line as well. Canon has refused to deliver AF-point linked metering to their cameras for...god, much longer than they have needed to improve their DR. I think that is the longest standing customer demand for Canon DSLRs that I can remember.
The thing that is a load of crap is to call the addition of uncompressed RAW a "flaw". It may not be the most ideal solution, which probably would have been lossless compression, but it is certainly not flawed.
For the record:
[quote author="DPReview"]This is not the end of the story
In our discussions with Sony, the company was keen to stress that it is still listening. We suspect the reason Sony is offering uncompressed Raw, rather than losslessly-compressed Raw that some users would like, stems from the limitations of working with the cameras' existing processors, rather than any misunderstanding about consumer demands. The company says it will continue to listen and will investigate the development of a lossless compression system if there's sufficient user demand.[/quote]
If any of you die-hard Canon fanboys would actually pay attention to Sony, the interviews with their execs, etc. you would probably find they aren't just some half-assed, ad-hoc floundering fledgling camera company tossing out as many products as possible to see if they stick. I don't think they just see their cameras as advertisements for their sensors. I think they see their cameras as one of the potentially most profitable sectors of their entire company, given the poor state of most of their other sectors, particularly the rest of their electronics. They know exactly what position they are in in the market, have no illusions of the nearly cliff-like uphill battle they have against Canon and Nikon, and are fighting the battle anyway.
THAT is what I admire about Sony. They are honest in a way that I'd LOVE to see Canon be. Instead, we get blatant obfuscation, face saving, and lies (or perhaps just plain old simple naivete? I kind of don't think that is the case...) from Maeda on a fairly regular basis now.
Anyway. Good to see this place hasn't changed.
