p.5 #2 · Pre-order: Sony A7C Compact Full Frame ($1,798)
Since it's supposedly called a7c, I guess, e-mount is a matter of course.
I know preciously little about video, so I'm interested to see what kind of lenses they are going to release for that kind of market. Are f1.8 or f2.8 primes fast enough? An updated version of the 24-70 4? Of course, if you want affordable and (very) compact AF FF lenses (i.e. something like the 35 2.8), then something's gotta give (performance/correction, speed, cost). Pick your poison, ladies and gentlemen .
p.5 #3 · Pre-order: Sony A7C Compact Full Frame ($1,798)
I can remember when 400 ISO was fast film, so combined with modern sensors I’d take f/2.8 lenses, like 21/2.8 and 85/2.8 to combine with the Zony 35/2.8.
Since I remember when 400 ISO was fast film, I also need reading glasses, so I use the EVF.
p.5 #5 · Pre-order: Sony A7C Compact Full Frame ($1,798)
Could be interesting for sure. I was probably going to buy at $1000-1200, but $2500 (for something that is basically an A7III by all accounts?) is a no go. At the end of the day, an A6600 is very similar in size to an RIII, so while I'd like a smaller camera, unless it's literally RX1R sized there's a limit to how much I'd pay.
The big thing now is the lenses. I would definitely love some smaller options. Hopefully they do my f2 or 2.5 wishlist (24, 35, 50, 90 and a 28-55 f2.8-4 zoom)
p.5 #6 · Pre-order: Sony A7C Compact Full Frame ($1,798)
chiron wrote:
I like EVFs, don't get me wrong. And yet...
There are things the LCD can do that the EVF isn't as good at. I can shift the camera and composition much more easily and quickly while looking at my composition on the LCD rather than the EVF, and I think that I do shift my compositions more readily and flexibly--up, down, left, right, forward, back--when using the EVF to view and compose the scene. Doesn't work if you are using a tripod, of course.
Also, having the EVF occupy more of my field of vision is not necessarily an advantage in many shooting situations where being able to see both your composition and also what is happening around you may be better than only seeing what you have framed. And the LCD makes it possible to see both your composition and the scene itself through your own eyes at the same time.
I'm not even sure the EVF is really better for seeing the framed composition itself since the EVF limits your view to one eye, losing the extra information provided by binocular vision. To see what I mean, try reading this text with one eye closed. Better or worse than with two eyes?
I think the bright light and the diopter are real difficulties for EVFs, but not insoluble. I would imagine a diopter function could be built into the software for an EVF or even overlaid on the screen and the screens themselves can be made brighter, as many already have been. It's all just a matter of NITS.
I wonder if we are not, unlike phone-camera using millennials, mired in the habits and expectations of an older technology that may be in the process of being replaced. My sons and daughter-in-law wouldn't use an EVF if you glued it to their heads.
Still, I'm glad the A7C will apparently have an EVF of some sort....Show more →
That's all true, but for those of us that use MF most of the time, occupying a big area of the field of vision is not optional! It's not about habits (except for the habit of using MF lensed and vintage glass, but millennials are as keen on vintage glass as us.
For AF it might well not be essential, except insofar as using the screen loses about a stop of stability...
p.5 #9 · Pre-order: Sony A7C Compact Full Frame ($1,798)
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I think there is bulk and weight. At least for me, the bulk reduction is as attractive as the weight reduction.
It’s attractive to me too, but not 2 grand attractive as a specialist cam for hiking. If you cared about the bulk enough that you would use it as your primary body, that would make perfect sense.
p.5 #10 · Pre-order: Sony A7C Compact Full Frame ($1,798)
DavidBM wrote:
It’s attractive to me too, but not 2 grand attractive as a specialist cam for hiking. If you cared about the bulk enough that you would use it as your primary body, that would make perfect sense.
Well, it’s it’s really an a7iii (comparable sensor and AF) and it’s a little over 2k and the a7iii is still 2k new, you’re really just paying a couple hundred, not thousand, for the miniturization.
p.5 #11 · Pre-order: Sony A7C Compact Full Frame ($1,798)
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Well, it’s it’s really an a7iii (comparable sensor and AF) and it’s a little over 2k and the a7iii is still 2k new, you’re really just paying a couple hundred, not thousand.
I was thinking, like I said, in terms of a specialist hiking cam - keeping the A7r4 and getting so one thing smaller for multi day hikes. So a couple of grand is the extra outlay.
Sure, like I said, if it’s your primary cam - an alternative to the A73 - it might make good sense. Basically do you value compactness over two card slots and not having to pop up the EVF? I can see people going either way there. I would probably go with compactness, depending on the details.
p.5 #12 · Pre-order: Sony A7C Compact Full Frame ($1,798)
DavidBM wrote:
I was thinking, like I said, in terms of a specialist hiking cam - keeping the A7r4 and getting so one thing smaller for multi day hikes. So a couple of grand is the extra outlay.
Sure, like I said, if it’s your primary cam - an alternative to the A73 - it might make good sense. Basically do you value compactness over two card slots and not having to pop up the EVF? I can see people going either way there. I would probably go with compactness, depending on the details.
I agree. As someone whose 21/35/75 lenses weigh about 800g total with adapters, if I can get a smaller body, I’d be pumped. Like you, I’ll keep my a7r2 for the res and the a7s for Astro.
It’s been my experience that I always use smaller gear far more than I anticipated, and larger gear far less, no matter how lovely the files.
p.5 #13 · Pre-order: Sony A7C Compact Full Frame ($1,798)
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I agree. As someone whose 21/35/75 lenses weigh about 800g total with adapters, if I can get a smaller body, I’d be pumped. Like you, I’ll keep my a7r2 for the res and the a7s for Astro.
It’s been my experience that I always use smaller gear far more than I anticipated, and larger gear far less, no matter how lovely the files.
So you have an A73 you’ll sell, or will this be an extra body?
p.5 #14 · Pre-order: Sony A7C Compact Full Frame ($1,798)
chiron wrote:
I was speculating very loosely about the possibility of a new mount, so even if you were to be correct, we are just jawing around here and enjoying ourselves in a sort of excited late-at-night moment before a dawn.
But it is also true that a new mount doesn't mean abandoning other mounts, certainly not the FE, and the idea of a system as a single vast Canon-like array with a single mount stretching to the horizon for all purposes and all photographers may no longer be the best way to think about a system in a time of extremely rapid technological change. It may be better to think about a system as comprising several systems or mounts that optimize performance for different purposes, as many do now with APS-C and FE, not to mention their i-phone. And Sony has officially committed to a design philosophy of making cameras for more specific purposes--thus the ZV-1 and the A9II, which each serve very specific needs.
Given the rate of technological change in electronics and manufacturing, more specific applications make sense. As long as you can get the lenses you need for the bodies you own, and those bodies are optimized for your purposes, different mounts could make a lot of sense.
On the other hand, this is really just all wild speculation and fun at this point! ...Show more →
If the curved sensor allows for significantly smaller lenses, this could replace APSC cameras. By making smaller and slightly slower lenses at a cheaper price point, similarly to the size of APSC, we wouldn't need APSC anymore.
p.5 #15 · Pre-order: Sony A7C Compact Full Frame ($1,798)
I have used DP2 Merrill, merrily 😊 without a VF and without an issue. Its a bit of in your head thing also. Sometimes we are so used to something that its just perfect to assume that something else may not work out.
Objectively also, we see just one ‘classic’ ‘human’ or ‘photo journalistic’ point of view through view finder when we put the camera to our eyes. This is how the camera was meant to be used. The only time we detach our camera from our eyes is when we are on a tripod, but there also, we expect the tripod to reach the eye level.
Enter the world of framing. You have a boon called flip out LCD and you appreciate how you can shoot low angles without having to sleep on the wet ground. Suddenly, your camera is not fixed to your eye and you can look at things differently, as you said. Its an alternative to the classical view finder.
All those cranes, Jimmy jibs, drones were invented for us to be able to put the camera where we couldn’t put it before. In the sky for example. How will they make the movies without those things? Isn’t photography all about framing, and rest of it about light?
Its a classic purist notion of photography vs relentless march of tech and outcomes affected by that.
Despite the mind block i was just fine with DP2 Merrill and i am yet to match my output from that camera with my current Sony gear. That tells a lot.
From a market standpoint, the newer generations are glad with LCD. They don’t even know what an EVF stands for. Give your cam to a teenager and she will likely ignore where an EVF sits.
rps_23 wrote:
I almost didn't buy my Sigma fp due to it not having a viewfinder. I bought the loupe vf for it thinking it was absolutely necessary.
It was a bit of an adjustment at first, but outside of really bright light I have no issues (the vf attachment solves that if needed).
It's changed how I use the camera. Using the LCD has gotten me to move the camera more freely since my eye doesn't need to be attached to it. It works great for AF and MF. If I am close MF'ing I move the camera to focus in addition to adjusting the lens.
I would buy a small evf attachment if sigma made one though, for those bright situations. A pop up evf on the a7c would solve that "in case of emergency" vf need. The articulating screen also would be nice to have, making it easier to position the camera in different angles.
The only thing I don't like on the a7c (or a6k cams) is the grip. I prefer not having one, or adding what I want like I can on the fp. Having the grip kind of defeats it being "compact" imo.
p.5 #16 · Pre-order: Sony A7C Compact Full Frame ($1,798)
nandadevieast wrote:
From a market standpoint, the newer generations are glad with LCD. They don’t even know what an EVF stands for. Give your cam to a teenager and she will likely ignore where an EVF sits.
Sure, but the teenager is almost certain using automatic focus, and an LCD screen is pretty much fine with that. Of course when that teenager eventually gets presbyopia, as we all will, they'll need a viewfinder, or graduated glasses.
p.5 #17 · Pre-order: Sony A7C Compact Full Frame ($1,798)
Holger wrote:
If the curved sensor allows for significantly smaller lenses, this could replace APSC cameras. By making smaller and slightly slower lenses at a cheaper price point, similarly to the size of APSC, we wouldn't need APSC anymore.
Yes and no. I think people are thinking about this possibly the wrong way. This would not be a "new mount" system that would threaten Emount. People should think about it as a fix lens camera that you basically get to pick the focal length that works for you. Meaning I could totally see Sony offering a FF A6600 style body (with removable lens) with say a 5 lens selection. Just say 20, 24,28, 35 and 50. New designs that only work on this new curved sensor camera. It would be no different than a Rx1riii except you get to pick the lens that you want. Sony gets to make the same body with out having to make 5 different fixed lens cameras. My guess would be body and one lens would be roughly the same price as an existing Rx1Rii. I think in that context it would be a win for Sony and us. It doesn't compete with anything Sony sells because it is an add on camera. It also can attract users outside the Sony system. I don't see it replacing APSC because of price point and longer lenses than the limited line this would have. All speculation of course at this point
p.5 #18 · Pre-order: Sony A7C Compact Full Frame ($1,798)
trogdon wrote:
I’m just looking forward to the lenses. The 35mm f2.8 ZA is a very underrated, incredible optic. More lenses like that and I’d be a happy camper. Maybe some short zooms like a 20-60, 24-50, and 100-200
I suspect short zooms are what we will see initially, similar to Nikon's 24-50.
p.5 #19 · Pre-order: Sony A7C Compact Full Frame ($1,798)
To me, the whole EVF vs LCD debacle boils down to one question:
do you ever choose to use LCD when you can use EVF?
I use LCD very often but because I have to, like to get down to my kids eye-level or angle, but I often hate it because the viewing angles are pretty bad, brightness is pretty bad, colors and contrast are also worse than on my EVF, so it's a necessity for me not a choice. So, LCD is mostly for framing as it's difficult to judge other picture qualities accurately on it.
Maybe it's because I'm using a relatively thrashy LCD by todays standards on my A7III, but I doubt the viewing angles in portrait mode on a bright day have been improved much in the newer models. I hate enabling "sunlight mode" or whatever it's called because it throws the colors off a lot, but it's a must on a sunny day (well maybe except using an attachable screen shade, but I never got used to that).
p.5 #20 · Pre-order: Sony A7C Compact Full Frame ($1,798)
I have a similar type of pop-up EVF on my R1rii. Together with the diminutive size of the body, this thing is a nightmare in use at least for me as a glasses wearer. Never ever again such a waste of fun and consequently money.
.