DPReview reviews the D810... two years after release
- Thread starter ahsanford
- Start date
Well, who say Sony A9 is just about the sensor. Actually i expect only minor progress on that end ... not needed for Sony, since A7R II is already more than good enough to fend off the next 2 generations from Canon.
What is needed an will hoefulle be delivered on is
* AF-system matching or even besting any mirrorslapper (incl. 1D-X) in performance, frame coverage (90% ?) and accuracy - including tracking moving subjects. - albeit limited to maybe 7 fps ... which is fine with me 8)
* a real 14+ Whrs battery for 500+ shots, not a toy - yes it will fit into handgrip of an A7 II sized camera
Bigger issue is Sony glass. If they want people like me to switch, they need FF glass equivalent to Canon EF-M lenses: small, optically decent (not Otus stuff) and dirt-cheap.
What is needed an will hoefulle be delivered on is
* AF-system matching or even besting any mirrorslapper (incl. 1D-X) in performance, frame coverage (90% ?) and accuracy - including tracking moving subjects. - albeit limited to maybe 7 fps ... which is fine with me 8)
* a real 14+ Whrs battery for 500+ shots, not a toy - yes it will fit into handgrip of an A7 II sized camera
Bigger issue is Sony glass. If they want people like me to switch, they need FF glass equivalent to Canon EF-M lenses: small, optically decent (not Otus stuff) and dirt-cheap.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
AvTvM said:
Sad that you can't wrap your mirrorslapped brain around the fact that no one – not Canon, Sony, or even last-place-in-the-market Fuji – care what you or the infinitesimally small minority of 'people like you' do...
AvTvM said:
Yes, dirt cheap FF lenses for expensive FF bodies, that's what they need. I'm worried that all your mirrorslapping is doing some serious damage, you might want to get an MRI and a neuropsych workup, just to check. :
Upvote
0
AvTvM said:
Yes, that is what is needed. Is there ANYTHING that would suggest they have cracked it?
Another 'yes that is what is needed'. But given part of the remit for Sony mirrorless is smaller body, that means smaller batteries and smaller batteries mean lower power reserves and shorter life especially considering the requirement to power EVF. So unless they overcome the next major obstacle in battery design (or the laws of physics) it just ain't gonna happen anytime soon. And even the 1-Dx sees the need for a battery specifically for the AF system.
So both of your commetns fall definitely into the 'whishlist' category
So that leads me to conclude that by the time both of those have happened, Canon has moved fullbore into the mirrorless market and driven the Sony to the margins.
Add to that Sony's quite frankly appalling record on post-market follow up and support and any self-respecting professional (which feeds the kudos on which the mass market thrives) will not give them the profile they need.
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:AvTvM said:
Yes, dirt cheap FF lenses for expensive FF bodies, that's what they need. I'm worried that all your mirrorslapping is doing some serious damage, you might want to get an MRI and a neuropsych workup, just to check. :
Yep. But I'll say it more nicely than Neuro will
: Mirrorless --> smaller volumes out of the gate --> higher price for the same quality as FF SLR lenses.
And do you really think that someone who just dropped $3K on an Battery Sucker 6000 because it has 72 megapickels and can push shadows 14 stops is cool with a mirrorless-specific version of the 40mm f/2.8 STM for (say) $250? I think a7R II and a9 owners will slap f/1.4 primes and f/2.8 zooms on that rig all day until Sony offers the same. Why buy a Ferrari for a 35 mph cruise down a country road?
And once you are using that big glass, the wheels come off the bus and the 'small and light' value proposition of FF mirrorless implodes: at that point, you are trying to out-mirrorslapper a mirrorslapper and beat a pro SLR at its own game, and that. will. take. Sony. years. to do.
I want mirrorless to take off, I do, but to imply Sony is 1-2 pieces away from setting the world alight is nonsense. They are years of targeted investments and continuous improvement away from that.
- A
Upvote
0
we had the battery topic already, so just the most important facts:
* a FF MILC with overall size and handgrip like Sony A7 II could hold a "regular DSLR"-battery [e.g. Canon LP-E6N)
* these batteries store 12-14 Whrs of charge, which is at least 50% more than the toy batteries currently used in MILCs
* charge would be sufficient to power an FF MILC for 500+ shots for most user's real-life practical use
This applies for current gen, widely available batteries without anything "innovative" at all. And laws of physics do apply. But no such law states, that MILCs must only be outfitted with tiny, weak toy batteries, when there is room for a beefier power source.
* a FF MILC with overall size and handgrip like Sony A7 II could hold a "regular DSLR"-battery [e.g. Canon LP-E6N)
* these batteries store 12-14 Whrs of charge, which is at least 50% more than the toy batteries currently used in MILCs
* charge would be sufficient to power an FF MILC for 500+ shots for most user's real-life practical use
This applies for current gen, widely available batteries without anything "innovative" at all. And laws of physics do apply. But no such law states, that MILCs must only be outfitted with tiny, weak toy batteries, when there is room for a beefier power source.
Upvote
0
AvTvM said:
It's more complex than that.
"For power, the Canon 80D uses an upgraded LP-E6N rechargeable lithium ion battery pack like the 7D Mark II...
According to CIPA ratings, the 80D should last a healthy 960 shots on a full charge with the optical viewfinder...
According to Canon's specs, the 80D should last around 1390 shots on a full charge when not using flash. With Live View shooting, as expected, battery life decreases noticeably, but the camera is still CIPA-rated for around 300 shots, up from 210."
- http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-80d/canon-80dA.HTM
Compare
- A6300 NP-FW50 battery (7.2V, 1020 mAh, 400 shots)
- E-M1/E-M5 BLN-1 battery (7.6V, 1220 mAh, 350 shots)
- X-T1 NP-W126 battery (7.4V, 1250 mAh, 350 shots)
- EOS-M3 LP-E17 battery (7.4V, 1040 mAh, 250 shots)
- 80D LP-E6N battery (7.4V, 2000 mAh, 300 shots in LV)
Upvote
0
I am pleasantly surprised with AF of 85mm 1.8 lens with 70d. It is like fish to water. Then I have latest sigma 30mm art lens. I am yet to understand which side it is (back/front) consistently focusing. May be that is why they have huge customer base.d said:
Upvote
0
How is AF on your Sigma 30mm f1.4 art lens? I got used copy. I did some crude focus tests. It is just front focussing even with +20 MFA. Tried reaching seller. No response.Woody said:
Looks like Canon is focusing on making crop EF-M lens. Not sure if they are going to make any EF-S lens. I am hoping for cheaper STM versions for 17-55 and 15-80? Sigma is dumping 17-50mm lens for less than $300.
Upvote
0
ritholtz said:
My copy requires +10 MFA on the camera. So far, it's OK. But needs more testing.
If your Art copy needs more than +20 MFA, you can either use the Sigma USB Dock to apply the necessary change or get the Sigma service centre to service the lens.
I am using the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 non-VC lens. AF is OK but noisy. Optically, it's as good as Canon 17-55 f/2.8 but the non-VC Tamron lens is much lighter.
Upvote
0
@woody: yes, current cameras are typically not very energy efficient. i am convinced, a well-designed, new Mirrorless camera (milc) not larger/heavier than a Sony A7 series II could hold a current technology battery and get 500+ shots in a regular usage scenario, and also 500+ CIPA shots.
better firmware/software could already do the trick, with existing battery packs. no new battery technology or "bending laws of physics" needed.
with "modestly innovative technology" and next gen battery packs, 1000+ shots on a charge should be no major technical obstacle. camera makers dont even have to invent anything themselves, they could license/buy it from smartphone and drone companies and their suppliers.
better firmware/software could already do the trick, with existing battery packs. no new battery technology or "bending laws of physics" needed.
with "modestly innovative technology" and next gen battery packs, 1000+ shots on a charge should be no major technical obstacle. camera makers dont even have to invent anything themselves, they could license/buy it from smartphone and drone companies and their suppliers.
Upvote
0
