> Forum Home > Equipment forums > Camera Talk > A-mount APS-C

Dyxum website

Dyxum home

Filter posts

Last 200 forum topics

Last 200 forum posts

New Posts

FAQ

The A77 thread (cont'd)

Page 12 3 81 >

Author

Message

Topic Search

Topic Options

kiklop

Admin Group

Dyxum owner

Joined: 14 July 2005
Country: Croatia
Location: Rovinj
Status: Offline
Posts: 10564

Topic: The A77 thread (cont'd)
Posted: 25 August 2011 at 18:22

admin note

Time for a new thread.
Thread closed.

Please use the
new thread

We may have questions waiting for answers !

Yakim

Senior Member

Joined: 04 November 2010
Location: Israel
Status: Offline
Posts: 370

Posted: 25 August 2011 at 18:12

tigertimb wrote:

So I agree; a headline feature of 12fps which is probably impossible to match with a traditional DSLR; but then severely hobbled by both buffer and SD, making it a far less attractive selling point.

Shame. It's could have been a sport shooters dream machine.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

mwildwood

Senior Member

Joined: 08 January 2010
Country: United States
Location: St. Louis
Status: Offline
Posts: 203

Posted: 25 August 2011 at 18:00

One way to handle the buffer is to dump the pix quickly.

In the IR article using the UHS-1 cards with 45mb/s speed dumped the buffer in 13 seconds.

Would using the Panasonic 90mb/s UHS-1 cards get us down to 6.5 seconds to dump the buffer?

Does anyone know the maximum speed of the a77 UHS-1 interface?

Senior Member

Joined: 10 August 2008
Country: United States
Location: SF Bay Area
Status: Offline
Posts: 1706

Posted: 25 August 2011 at 17:48

OK, I see.

Yeah, the only way to shoot at continuous maximum speed would be to shoot jpeg only at reduced resolution.

sybersitizen wrote:

al wrote:

I've never tried this with the A700, but the A850 (and A900) allows RAW+jpg where RAW will be at maximum resolution and the jpg can be set to a different (smaller) resolution.

Yes, yes... and that will slow down operations even further. The original thing I was replying to was about speeding up operations by shooting reduced resolution files only. That in fact works great if you can live without RAW at all.

Peekayoh

Senior Member

Joined: 19 January 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 3162

Posted: 25 August 2011 at 17:26

artuk wrote:

Peekayoh wrote:

Shrek wrote:

I'm sorry, but the supposed benefit on vibration with a mirrorless camera is a nonsense. ......clip.

I'm guessing you'll be in a minority of one with that POV!

From my experience with film rangefinder cameras, and some mirrorless, there is a benefit to not having a mirror when photographing with a shutter speed that is "marginal" (near or below the 1 / focal length). With my Konica haxar (35mm lens) and good technique, shutter speeds well below 1/35s are possible.

At "safe" shutter speeds, I am not convinced SLR photos are any less clear than from mirrorless cameras...?

Art, you're quite right to point that out but the fact is that the vibration from the Mirror/Shutter is well, a fact; even if the effects are reduced with increasing the shutter speed, the vibration remains.

The corollary is that, in order to achieve the higher shutter speed, you will be choosing a wider aperture or higher ISO which in itself may offset any gain.

Techno

Senior Member

Joined: 20 October 2006
Country: United Kingdom
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 210

Posted: 25 August 2011 at 17:25

tigertimb wrote:

Techno wrote:

tigertimb wrote:

Techno wrote:

BTW, you can't "tweak" a sensor. All Nikon do to the sensor itself is put a different interface on it (with the 16Mp they changed it from 12 bit to 14 bit). This has no effect at all on noise.

But Nikon won't have the translucent mirror in the light path.

Where it loses a 1/3rd of a stop of light, this is recovered by Sony by gaining up the sensor, so effectively gaining 1/3rd of a stop of ISO and corresponding noise and dynamic range etc in the process.

This is clearly evident when you compare existing results of the A55 to the A580 - if Nikon are going to be using the same sensor, then they'll be significantly ahead of the game before they make any adjustments themselves

A third of a stop - big deal. The Nikon SLR will lose significant clarity because of its moving mirror and its less accurate focus. People seem to dwell on the loss of light because of the fixed SLT mirror but can't see that the idea of a moving mirror (exactly at the time the photo is taken, of course) is a disaster for high resolution cameras. It might have worked OK in film cameras (when there was no alternative to looking through the lens if you wanted to see what the picture looked like) but not any more.

But I'm not quite sure why the focus would necessarily be any better - they're both using PDAF and neither being driven off the actual sensor?

David Kilpatrick wrote a good article about this on photoclubalpha. You're right that neither are being driven off the sensor but there are many more components for error in the SLR than there are in the SLT. Kilpatrick list all the problems. He said that the A55 he used seemed to be far less prone to focus problems than other Sony SLRs.

sybersitizen View Drop Down

Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 14444

Posted: 25 August 2011 at 17:22

al wrote:

I've never tried this with the A700, but the A850 (and A900) allows RAW+jpg where RAW will be at maximum resolution and the jpg can be set to a different (smaller) resolution.

Senior Member

Joined: 10 August 2008
Country: United States
Location: SF Bay Area
Status: Offline
Posts: 1706

Posted: 25 August 2011 at 17:19

sybersitizen wrote:

RubberDials wrote:

The camera also shoots at 12mp and presumably this would give you more headroom if you required it, even more if you switched to jpeg.

You might have to switch to JPEG to get images smaller than 24mp. That's the way most Alphas, including the A55, work. After a brief excursion through some user manuals, it appears that the A700 is the only Alpha that allowed RAW shooting at anything less than maximum resolution. If that's wrong, somebody please correct me.

I've never tried this with the A700, but the A850 (and A900) allows RAW+jpg where RAW will be at maximum resolution and the jpg can be set to a different (smaller) resolution.

sybersitizen View Drop Down

Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 14444

Posted: 25 August 2011 at 17:15

Peekayoh wrote:

Would it be considered flippant to say that the A900 will do that in crop mode?

Maybe not flippant. The A77 also has a Smart Teleconverter thing that we may assume works similarly. But can it save those crops as RAW files? I have doubts.

Edited by sybersitizen - 25 August 2011 at 17:19

sybersitizen View Drop Down

Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 14444

Posted: 25 August 2011 at 17:12

Fine, that's as I understood it to be, although the A700 manual appeared to describe it somewhat differently from the other manuals I checked.

So... for RubberDials and others: You can indeed gain a significant speed boost for almost all camera operations by shooting reduced resolution files, but only in JPEG format. I do it all the time with the A55.

Peekayoh

Senior Member

Joined: 19 January 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 3162

Posted: 25 August 2011 at 17:12

sybersitizen wrote:

... snip You might have to switch to JPEG to get images smaller than 24mp. That's the way most Alphas, including the A55, work. After a brief excursion through some user manuals, it appears that the A700 is the only Alpha that allowed RAW shooting at anything less than maximum resolution. If that's wrong, somebody please correct me.

Would it be considered flippant to say that the A900 will do that in crop mode?

eccles

Senior Member

Joined: 20 August 2007
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Bristol
Status: Offline
Posts: 998

Posted: 25 August 2011 at 17:03

sybersitizen wrote:

eccles wrote:

The A700 has Raw and cRaw.

I'm not distinguishing between RAW and cRAW for this discussion. Only trying to see if an Alpha can provide a RAW or cRAW file at less than maximum resolution.

What the A700 does allow is to choose the resolution of the accompanying jpeg image when shooting raw+jpeg

So it sounds like you're saying that the A700 does not allow you to shoot RAW (or cRAW) at less than maximum resolution either.

Correct. When you think of it, the raw file is supposed to be just that. If it's smaller than maximum then it isn't the original raw file. Remember the big stink about earlier firmware not allowing NR to be turned off in the raw file.

artuk

Senior Member

Joined: 06 July 2007
Country: United Kingdom
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 3751

Posted: 25 August 2011 at 17:03

Peekayoh wrote:

Shrek wrote:

I'm sorry, but the supposed benefit on vibration with a mirrorless camera is a nonsense. ......clip.

I'm guessing you'll be in a minority of one with that POV!

Art

Peekayoh

Senior Member

Joined: 19 January 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 3162

Posted: 25 August 2011 at 16:52

Shrek wrote:

I'm sorry, but the supposed benefit on vibration with a mirrorless camera is a nonsense. ......clip.

I'm guessing you'll be in a minority of one with that POV!

> Forum Home > Equipment forums > Camera Talk > A-mount APS-C

Page 12 3 81 >

Forum Jump

Forum Permissions View Drop Down

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.