The Sony's EVF is 1024x768 vs. the E-M5's 800x600. But the increased
resolution is illusory since 1024x768 is 4:3 format and not 3:2 to fit
the full frame aspect ratio. What that means is that when a 3:2 image
is displayed 1024 wide it will only be 683 pixels high leaving 85 pixels
of the vertical dimension unused. Perhaps they'll use that area for
shooting info and leave the image unobstructed.
ps: It seems lenses are extraordinarily expensive. I think it was the
DPReview article that comments that the Sony 55/1.8 costs about twice as
much as a Nikon 50/1.4. Ouch!
Chuck Norcutt
On 10/16/2013 12:14 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
> I'm going to respond to Daniel's and Moose's posts in one shot.
>
> Moose wrote:
>> I'll believe it when I see the first image from your own 7r. ;-)
>
> Well, the difference is that now there is actually a camera that I can
> feel as though it meets my requirements AND desires. As brilliant as
> some of these cameras are, they aren't full-frame. That happens to be
> a deal-breaker for me. I really don't want to be buying the new shiny
> every six months. I would like the next digital camera purchase to be
> identified, going in, as a long-term buy. Any crop-sensor camera
> wouldn't be that for me. I've been using crop-sensor cameras from the
> beginning and I'm ready for the real deal.
>
> Moose wrote:
>> I'm curious, though; why is LV EVF so desirable? Weren't you looking for an
>> OM quality optical VF on you FF digital back? An acceptable compromise?
>
> And Daniel wrote:
>> Now if only someone can figure out how to make a mount adapter that reads
>> and activates the aperture mechanism from legacy systems.
>
> EVFs have pretty much gotten to the point of sufficiency. There will
> always be better, but I think we've finally gotten where they are no
> longer a hinderance. Sony's have been outstanding, anyway. I've always
> been a fan of EVF and that love of them goes way back when only video
> cameas had them. I don't think I've ever told this list, but I had
> juryrigged a video camera up to an SLR somewhere around 1980. So, it's
> just been a matter of time.
>
> Which brings me to Moose's and Daniel's statement/question. With
> live-view and a satisfactorily sensitive sensor, the need for an
> automatic aperture stopdown mechanism is just about eliminated.
> Everybody hitching legacy lenses on the E-M5 is showing that it works
> pretty well. At issue, though is that when you are stopped down a lot,
> critical focus is difficult as you don't have the narrow DoF to
> assist. Otherwise, live-view with legacy lenses works quite well and
> is improving with every single camera that comes out.
>
> The only thing that bothers me about the new Sony is that it is a
> Sony. The disidence is rattling,I know, but I would prefer that this
> be done by Canon.
>
> So, it's now just a matter of me finding the funds for this beasty.
> It's an ugly beast, though.
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|