p.2 #1 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
Teo Rey wrote:
I think it's a big deal. If I'm paying for the world's highest resolution EVF I would like to get it. Or at least have the option of deciding when to lower resolution myself.
Just checked the A1 EVF myself a minute ago and I've got to say that while it's good it didn't blew my socks off. So I wouldn't set the expectations too high like 'world's highest resolution EVF', it's just the EVF and gets the job done like the lowly A7III too. Sure it's nice to have and makes a difference in some situations, but overall it's just an EVF not a mountain or ninth miracle of the world. Ie. there's a bit of a marketing hype going here as well
Seriously, this is a compromise (dropping the resolution) that's always been there with A7 cameras as far as I know. From my perspective it doesn't affect my ability to take pictures (most of the people doesn't even notice it) and as far as something else is gained by this, it's a good compromise.
p.2 #2 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
Kalainen wrote:
Just checked the A1 EVF myself a minute ago and I've got to say that while it's good it didn't blew my socks off. So I wouldn't set the expectations too high like 'world's highest resolution EVF', it's just the EVF and gets the job done like the lowly A7III too. Sure it's nice to have and makes a difference in some situations, but overall it's just an EVF not a mountain or ninth miracle of the world. Ie. there's a bit of a marketing hype going here as well
Seriously, this is a compromise (dropping the resolution) that's always been there with A7 cameras as far as I know. From my perspective it doesn't affect my ability to take pictures (most of the people doesn't even notice it) and as far as something else is gained by this, it's a good compromise. ...Show more →
I see it similarly. I found it nicely larger, clearer and sharper, too, compared to the other cams I use. Like I wrote in my initial assessment on FM after using it, people shouldn't expect a miracle. Linear resolution is higher but not drastically so and is compensating in part for having a larger image.
I am fine with 60Hz most of the time, sometimes 120 Hz. When the camera does 120 AF calculations/s there should be an impact on the EVF anyway. Can one see/experience a slightly larger resolution in this case in AFC anyway, if the image is constantly changing? It is not that we do a still image and compare at 100% side by side here.
I saw the biggest benefit when doing the 2s timer landscape shots (AFS) or reviewing images, where I found the quality of the EVF to show its potential.
p.2 #3 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
Holger wrote:
I see it similarly. I found it nicely larger, clearer and sharper, too, compared to the other cams I use. Like I wrote in my initial assessment on FM after using it, people shouldn't expect a miracle. Linear resolution is higher but not drastically so and is compensating in part for having a larger image.
I am fine with 60Hz most of the time, sometimes 120 Hz. When the camera does 120 AF calculations/s there should be an impact on the EVF anyway. Can one see/experience a slightly larger resolution in this case in AFC anyway, if the image is constantly changing? It is not that we do a still image and compare at 100% side by side here.
I saw the biggest benefit when doing the 2s timer landscape shots (AFS) or reviewing images, where I found the quality of the EVF to show its potential. ...Show more →
Hmm, coming from A7III the A1 EVF in High quality mode blew my socks off... You can actually see more detail then on LCD when reviewing images, but I also tend to use EVF more as I find it a better experience then LCD. This applies only to High quality mode though, I don't really like the combination of lower res + larger effective area when the resolution drops...
I guess what I'm trying to say is that this is subjective, but to me High quality EVF is one of A1's technological marvels .
p.2 #4 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
j4nu wrote:
Hmm, coming from A7III the A1 EVF in High quality mode blew my socks off... You can actually see more detail then on LCD when reviewing images, but I also tend to use EVF more as I find it a better experience then LCD. This applies only to High quality mode though, I don't really like the combination of lower res + larger effective area when the resolution drops...
I guess what I'm trying to say is that this is subjective, but to me High quality EVF is one of A1's technological marvels .
Yes A73 to A1 is quite a difference. From A7riv to A1 the difference is not as pronounced ;-)
Don't understand me wrong, it is great to have it. I just don't see it as a technological marvel ;-).
p.2 #5 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
I also wasn't blown away by the A1 EVF at all. Of course I'd read lots of hyperbole about it before getting my A1. When I got my A1 I wasn't even thinking about the EVF as I was most excited to try out BEAF and AF in general. I think it wasn't till the 2nd day of shooting where the EVF crossed my mind and my thoughts were basically that I hadn't paid much attention to it and therefore it really wasn't any type of WOW moment. I almost find the .9x a little too expansive as I don't like to jam my eye socket into the eye-cup as hard as one would have to in order to see the entire FOV at once. But I'm still shooting at 0.9x for now and occasionally experimenting with 0.7x to see if I prefer the zoomed out view more for where I rest my eye.
I never noticed much difference between my A9II and A7RIV EVFs either. I never owned a camera with the lower EVF resolution (like A7III etc). I'm sure jumping from an A7III to an A1 would be significant. My slow progression from A9 to A7RIV to A1 wasn't all that significant.
p.2 #6 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
arbitrage wrote:
I also wasn't blown away by the A1 EVF at all. Of course I'd read lots of hyperbole about it before getting my A1. When I got my A1 I wasn't even thinking about the EVF as I was most excited to try out BEAF and AF in general. I think it wasn't till the 2nd day of shooting where the EVF crossed my mind and my thoughts were basically that I hadn't paid much attention to it and therefore it really wasn't any type of WOW moment. I almost find the .9x a little too expansive as I don't like to jam my eye socket into the eye-cup as hard as one would have to in order to see the entire FOV at once. But I'm still shooting at 0.9x for now and occasionally experimenting with 0.7x to see if I prefer the zoomed out view more for where I rest my eye.
I never noticed much difference between my A9II and A7RIV EVFs either. I never owned a camera with the lower EVF resolution (like A7III etc). I'm sure jumping from an A7III to an A1 would be significant. My slow progression from A9 to A7RIV to A1 wasn't all that significant....Show more →
My main issue with 0.9x is that due to the mask I need to keep some space between my eye and the EVF, in order to prevent fogging, and that makes it hard to see the whole area ...
Regarding A7RIV EVF, I find it a bit surprising as I think it uses the same resolution as dropped resolution in A1, minus the bigger area. So maybe this is the case where "less is more" and the same resolution on smaller area actually gives better effect in A7RIV compared to A1.
Still, to me there's massive difference in quality between High and standard (dropped resolution), but we all are different after all .
p.2 #7 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
j4nu wrote:
My main issue with 0.9x is that due to the mask I need to keep some space between my eye and the EVF, in order to prevent fogging, and that makes it hard to see the whole area ...
Regarding A7RIV EVF, I find it a bit surprising as I think it uses the same resolution as dropped resolution in A1, minus the bigger area. So maybe this is the case where "less is more" and the same resolution on smaller area actually gives better effect in A7RIV compared to A1.
Still, to me there's massive difference in quality between High and standard (dropped resolution), but we all are different after all ....Show more →
The thing with the A7RIV is it is dropping resolution in the same types of situations. Likely down to 3.7M dots or so. Same goes for the A9/A9II where it is dropping from 3.7M down to 2.3M dots in these same types of situations.
Therefore I think you are always better off with the A1 in any given situation. Although maybe there are some situations where the A7RIV and A1 are the same if you drop the A1 to 0.7x mag.
p.2 #8 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
Interesting stuff, I think. Correct me if I am wrong: none of the above affects the raw file.
When I am photographing birds I look at the moving AF points and the position of the subject in the frame (and of course, the Zebras). If I am correct above, I do not understand what the problem is ...
Or, perhaps someone can splain it to me
with love, a
ps: my a1 files are superb with great color and amazing detail. And the AF system is science-fiction-like ...
pps: I can surely do without the EVF blackout though ....
p.2 #9 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
birdsasart wrote:
Interesting stuff, I think. Correct me if I am wrong: none of the above affects the raw file.
When I am photographing birds I look at the moving AF points and the position of the subject in the frame (and of course, the Zebras). If I am correct above, I do not understand what the problem is ...
Or, perhaps someone can splain it to me
with love, a
ps: my a1 files are superb with great color and amazing detail. And the AF system is science-fiction-like ...
pps: I can surely do without the EVF blackout though ....
Yes, this thread is only about the resolution of the viewfinder, which does not affect the produced picture files.
p.2 #10 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
speedmaster20d wrote:
I made a video to show this problem, I had to use my phone and it's not great but it shows it
the steps to reproduce this problem
1. Set the EVF to standard (60Hz 9.4 million dots)
2. Set the camera to AF-C
3. Half press the shutter button to initiate AF and AE
4. As long as the shutter is half pressed the EVF image looks coarse to the eye. If you have a target such as an MTF chart this effect will show as moiré’ or jagged lines
I provided this info to Sony. we will see what they say. I encourage all owners of A1 to call Sony and share their finding, this will put more pressure on them to fix these issues. ...Show more →
I’m curious if owners of the A7s3 (which has the same 9.44M dot EVF) see the same resolution hit in certain circumstances or whether it’s just an A1 thing.
p.2 #12 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
ftllens wrote:
I always thought the 240hz was more impressive and important than the max res. Glad to see 5.7 at 240hz
Sony manual states some not completely clear restrictions on when it is enabled. Combined with the fact that it's not that easy to see 120hz vs 240hz (for me at least) makes it a bit of a grey area ...
p.2 #13 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
wordfool wrote:
I’m curious if owners of the A7s3 (which has the same 9.44M dot EVF) see the same resolution hit in certain circumstances or whether it’s just an A1 thing.
I've read somewhere that A7S3 uses full resolution only in playback, not sure if that is completely true though...
p.2 #14 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
I just stick with 120hz and 5.76 million pixels mode. You still see some moiré introduced when activating C-AF, but it doesn't seem like the actual resolution drops.
It's honestly a bit disappointing how Sony marketed the EVF and let so many people mistakenly assume that 9.44M pixels and 240hz would be possible simultaneously.
p.2 #15 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
davidnumrich wrote:
I just stick with 120hz and 5.76 million pixels mode. You still see some moiré introduced when activating C-AF, but it doesn't seem like the actual resolution drops.
It's honestly a bit disappointing how Sony marketed the EVF and let so many people mistakenly assume that 9.44M pixels and 240hz would be possible simultaneously.
Not really. The brochure made it clear from the beginning:
.*2 Field of view is fixed at 33° and resolution is UXGA when selecting frame rate at 240 fps
Sony didn't mislead people, people wanted to be mislead ;-).
p.2 #16 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
Holger wrote:
Not really. The brochure made it clear from the beginning:
.*2 Field of view is fixed at 33° and resolution is UXGA when selecting frame rate at 240 fps
Sony didn't mislead people, people wanted to be mislead ;-).
I respectfully disagree. Here's the reveal video.
?t=384
"The viewfinder is also designed to achieve both high resolution and speed."
"It features the highest resolution OLED in its class, with the largest viewfinder magnification."
"To track fast moving subjects, it features up to a 240 frame per second refresh rate for super smooth display."
With this description that very much makes it sound like 9.44 million dots, 0.90x magnification, and 240hz refresh are possible at the same time:
"The 9.44 million-dot (approx.) OLED viewfinder in the α1 offers the highest resolution in the industry at this time. It features 0.90x magnification. with a 41 ° FOV for a clear, wide view, and an updated structure that results in a 25-mm-high eyepoint. A 240fps refresh rate with UXGA FOV is another world-first, for a clear view of fast action."
Sure, anyone who is seriously looking into spending that kind of money should really dig into the details before making a purchase. I know I did, and knew what I was getting into (well sort of, the details were very murky until people got it in their hands and did tests), but it still comes across as extremely misleading to me.
p.2 #17 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
davidnumrich wrote:
I respectfully disagree. Here's the reveal video.
?t=384
"The viewfinder is also designed to achieve both high resolution and speed."
"It features the highest resolution OLED in its class, with the largest viewfinder magnification."
"To track fast moving subjects, it features up to a 240 frame per second refresh rate for super smooth display."
With this description that very much makes it sound like 9.44 million dots, 0.90x magnification, and 240hz refresh are possible at the same time:
"The 9.44 million-dot (approx.) OLED viewfinder in the α1 offers the highest resolution in the industry at this time. It features 0.90x magnification. with a 41 ° FOV for a clear, wide view, and an updated structure that results in a 25-mm-high eyepoint. A 240fps refresh rate with UXGA FOV is another world-first, for a clear view of fast action."
Sure, anyone who is seriously looking into spending that kind of money should really dig into the details before making a purchase. I know I did, and knew what I was getting into (well sort of, the details were very murky until people got it in their hands and did tests), but it still comes across as extremely misleading to me....Show more →
Disagree again. From your text: "A 240fps refresh rate with UXGA FOV is another world-first, for a clear view of fast action."
My link from the brochure:
.*2 Field of view is fixed at 33° and resolution is UXGA when selecting frame rate at 240 fps
The 5.76 million dots is 1600 x 1200 pixels, 1.92 MP (UXGA). Full res is 2048 x 1536 pixels, 3.14 MP (QXGA), i.e. 9.44 Million dots.
p.2 #18 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
Holger wrote:
Disagree again. From your text: "A 240fps refresh rate with UXGA FOV is another world-first, for a clear view of fast action."
My link from the brochure:
.*2 Field of view is fixed at 33° and resolution is UXGA when selecting frame rate at 240 fps
The 5.76 million dots is 1600 x 1200 pixels, 1.92 MP (UXGA). Full res is 2048 x 1536 pixels, 3.14 MP (QXGA), i.e. 9.44 Million dots.
Yes, you're technically right, but I don't imagine most people know what resolution "UXGA" translates to, especially in the context of of 9.44 Million dots being mentioned without a similar acronym, as in the examples I posted.
I just wish they were clearer and more straightforward with the fact that you can choose either "highest resolution" or "highest framerate." I watched a lot of previews and reviews for the A1 and it's clear that a great deal of people thought you could have both. I still see people who own the camera and seem to think they are getting 120fps/240fps AND 9.44 million dots, but that's probably just because they are upgrading from the A9 or A9ii and the 3.68 million dot EVF they had, so even 5.76 million dots is a significant improvement.
p.2 #19 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
davidnumrich wrote:
Yes, you're technically right, but I don't imagine most people know what resolution "UXGA" translates to, especially in the context of of 9.44 Million dots being mentioned without a similar acronym, as in the examples I posted.
I just wish they were clearer and more straightforward with the fact that you can choose either "highest resolution" or "highest framerate." I watched a lot of previews and reviews for the A1 and it's clear that a great deal of people thought you could have both. I still see people who own the camera and seem to think they are getting 120fps/240fps AND 9.44 million dots, but that's probably just because they are upgrading from the A9 or A9ii and the 3.68 million dot EVF they had, so even 5.76 million dots is a significant improvement....Show more →
I agree. I didn't know it either and had to look it up. Clear information is what I would like to have. I am generally suspicious beforehand ;-)
p.2 #20 · A1 EVF resolution -- theoretical vs actual
Sony Pro just confirmed my observation, apparently all Sony cameras have it
"We were able to test your issue with different models including the A1, A9 and A7M3 and were able to replicate the issue. From my perspective it looks like the refresh rate is what is possibly changing when pressing down the shutter half way. I don't believe there is anything wrong with your unit since were were able to replicate on different models."
they are calling it refresh rate change, but that does not explain resolution drop. In either case this is a limitation tat must be disclosed upfront.
...