SJGordon
02-21-2012, 03:51 PM
Well it really does look like Sony is going to follow through with a previous statement about no more optical viewfinders and everything is going to be the SLT models from here on out. While I do think the Electronic viewfinders are going to be the future of photography, I think Sony is jumping the gun a bit. The technology is still new and to hang your entire line on a technology that is long-term unproven yet seems ludicrous to me. If/when the technology for the evf matches that of the performance of the ovf... THEN make your entire line evf. Right now there are still too many questions and too many drawbacks to the evf for everyone to use it. I am afraid they are going to lose their tenuous toehold in the professional market with the abandonment of the ovf. All it takes is a side-by-side comparison of images taken with the a65/77 and the a580 to see that the pellicle mirror DOES affect final image quality. Any time you take away 1/3 of available light reaching your sensor you take away 1/3 of the information that sensor is capable of capturing and you lose image quality. Yes the Sony SLT line does produce some stunning images, but when a "lessor" model can outperform in the IQ department I think that should be a HUGE sign for Sony to take a hard look at the direction they are taking their dslr line.
I have been a longtime Minolta shooter and firmly believe that the line-up of lenses are some of the best out there and better than 90% of the others makes line-ups. Dollar for dollar I don't think you can beat the quality of Sony and earlier Minolta lenses. I firmly think that Sony has the ability to make HUGE inroads to the professional market and that would lead to more sales in their consumer line as well. After all, if you go to an event and the Professional is shooting Sony camera equipment it will leave a lasting impression. Just like it does now with Canon or Nikon. People just getting into photography will likely buy the brand they see those who they hold as "professional" shooting. Going strictly evf is going to turn away some of those pros who are on the fence about swapping systems to Sony.
After following the "A" mount from Minolta in 1985 through to Sony, I am now at a crossroads. It is time to update my Camera body and I have been struggling with which direction to go. Do I abandon Sony and all my legacy lenses and switch to Nikon (While making a great product, Canon has too screwy of a menu system for me to get used to.), or do I pick up a Sony a900 while I still can. If I go a900 now then I have to hope that by the time the a900 needs replacing, evf performance will be acceptable for the types of shooting I like to do and that they have worked out how to keep IQ while using evf technology. Arrrrg! I've been pulling my hair out over this for a long time and still no closer to an answer. If it didn't mean having to buy a whole new line-up of lenses if I go to Nikon it would be a no-brainer.
I have been a longtime Minolta shooter and firmly believe that the line-up of lenses are some of the best out there and better than 90% of the others makes line-ups. Dollar for dollar I don't think you can beat the quality of Sony and earlier Minolta lenses. I firmly think that Sony has the ability to make HUGE inroads to the professional market and that would lead to more sales in their consumer line as well. After all, if you go to an event and the Professional is shooting Sony camera equipment it will leave a lasting impression. Just like it does now with Canon or Nikon. People just getting into photography will likely buy the brand they see those who they hold as "professional" shooting. Going strictly evf is going to turn away some of those pros who are on the fence about swapping systems to Sony.
After following the "A" mount from Minolta in 1985 through to Sony, I am now at a crossroads. It is time to update my Camera body and I have been struggling with which direction to go. Do I abandon Sony and all my legacy lenses and switch to Nikon (While making a great product, Canon has too screwy of a menu system for me to get used to.), or do I pick up a Sony a900 while I still can. If I go a900 now then I have to hope that by the time the a900 needs replacing, evf performance will be acceptable for the types of shooting I like to do and that they have worked out how to keep IQ while using evf technology. Arrrrg! I've been pulling my hair out over this for a long time and still no closer to an answer. If it didn't mean having to buy a whole new line-up of lenses if I go to Nikon it would be a no-brainer.