swifty168 wrote:
Huh?
My only point is we’re trying to make comparisons with very little actual technical info and b4 the Z9 is even in public’s hands.
And even cameras we have in the wild we don’t have all the technical details whilst ppl are trying to do technical comparisons.
So let’s just wait until at least we have the cameras in hand.
And if the technical data still eludes us then, well the subjective impressions will have to suffice. After all it’s the subjective shooting experience that matters at the end of the day. No?
what do you think they are going to do? there is a thing called proprietary design info. i am a tech and i understand this. i do accept to a degree what i am purchasing and i have a good idea of what's going on inside. my priority is does it do what i need it to do and will it help me create better images. digging in the dirt does not help me be a better maker of images.
i am not constantly questioning my tools. i do question my capability
We can continue beat this EVF refresh rate horse forever. However, we will not really have answers until we get to use the EVF in different situations ourselves. I suspect that different people will have different preferences even then.
Unfortunately the press in this industry doesn't have high credibility. Too much bias. Too many agendas. Too many pressure points between manufacturers and press that allow for reward and punishment. Too many financial influences. People here too often assign credibility based on which reviewers says things they like to hear, and assign malice and disrepute to the others. Both probably unreasonably.
From what I have seen so far I remain confident that the refresh rate of the Z9 will allow for a good experience when shooting very fast moving subjects like BIF. I know for a fact that the a1 does as I use it for that. I am also confident that high resolution is an important criteria in providing the best experience in image review, and shooting slower moving subjects such as landscapes, macro, portraits, products. I think this is going to be a big advantage for the a1 for those looking for the best "all around camera". Finally, I think that superior optics in a viewfinder can make it appear better than it's screen specification suggest. This has been clearly demonstrated in Nikons existing mirrorless offers.
I am not sure why Nikon is being so coy about the refresh rate of the Z9 EVF. I suspect it has to do with how the World responds to specification numbers. I do wish they would just publish the number like everyone else does. Then rely on the user experience to confirm that their engineers made a good set of compromises in creating an excellent EVF. Unlike attributes like "ergonomics" which are purely subjective, EVFs do have a numerical specification component that is significant when doing an evaluation. Why leave it fuzzy?
one can have a full heaping of technical data and in the end it will be "does it do the job?" and does it do the job colored by information that is for the most part irrelevant because it is a intangible number to be praised or dismissed?
sjms wrote:
what do you think they are going to do? there is a thing called proprietary design info. i am a tech and i understand this. i do accept to a degree what i am purchasing and i have a good idea of what's going on inside. my priority is does it do what i need it to do and will it help me create better images. digging in the dirt does not help me be a better maker of images.
i am not constantly questioning my tools. i do question my capability
I’m not questioning the tool. Not am I asking them to reveal any proprietary info,
I am pointing out the pointlessness in debating technical specs when the technical data is missing,
When camera is in hand there will be some who do deep dives to gain deeper insights, for those who are interested.
FYI, I wrote much earlier on that I believe the dual stream is one of the most important development with the Z9 and corroborates with Nikon’s earlier statements regarding their stance on the viewfinder experience,
So I have no idea where you think my position lies in terms of the EVF but to be abundantly clear, I think Nikon understands extremely well the importance of the EVF performance and has done an exceptional amount of work to prepare that for the Z9.
We just lack the technical info currently to really compare it technically in a meaningful way.
But on a subjective basis, sure. All accounts are welcomed and adds to the collective database.
I am pointing out the pointlessness in debating technical specs when the technical data is missing,
you are absolutely correct though the info is not "missing" its just not there. why is it not there you are asking? at this point in time they feel it is not to be released to the general public.
We just lack the technical info currently to really compare it technically in a meaningful way.
you want to "technically compare". do you have all the data, schematics and test equipment on other products do do that?
sjms wrote:
you are absolutely correct though the info is not "missing" its just not there. why is it not there you are asking? at this point in time they feel it is not to be released to the general public.
And they may never do. But it’s in people’s inquisitive nature to ponder and after release, ppl will test and test until they get an answer in an effort to understand. And I for one am very grateful for that technically community that contributes freely to open knowledge,
Say subjectively it turns out most ppl agree that the Z9 EVF is superior. After testing they find out it is x FPS and of x bit depth. Then some form of conclusion can be made about lower sampling frequency at high sampling quality can be advantageous to higher sampling frequency at lower sampling quality.
These meaningful technical conversations will happen in due time.
swifty168 wrote:
And they may never do. But it’s in people’s inquisitive nature to ponder and after release, ppl will test and test until they get an answer in an effort to understand. And I for one am very grateful for that technically community that contributes freely to open knowledge,
Say subjectively it turns out most ppl agree that the Z9 EVF is superior. After testing they find out it is x FPS and of x bit depth. Then some form of conclusion can be made about lower sampling frequency at high sampling quality can be advantageous to higher sampling frequency at lower sampling quality.
These meaningful technical conversations will happen in due time....Show more →
people are for the most part unreliable. look at the wild world of the internet. empirical data is hard to come by.
sjms wrote:
people are for the most part unreliable. look at the wild world of the internet. empirical data is hard to come by.
remember the bell curve
and by then there will be the next "big thing"
We’ll you’d just have to make up your mind for yourself who you think is reliable.
And it’s not like you take ppl’s words for granted. It’s usually corroborated by many sources.
Heck the scientific community questions everything so the peer review process there is much harsher.
this says a lot to me. it says someone's been busy. do you want the schematics too? :
it's marketing drivel
think about it... if you shoot aps-c or super35 with any ff milc, is the display in the evf cropped? no, because it's not the same as what's being recorded on the memory card.
from the official sony a1 website:
"Panning shots with electronic shutter
Using electronic shutter at low shutter speeds can reduce display response, making it difficult to follow fast subjects. Turn [Low Frame Rate Limit] ON to improve display response and allow panning shots."
how can sony do that, if they don't have this earth-shaking nikon "dual-stream" technology?
As already said, I don't expect Nikon to release much more technical information, if any, going forward. And which company really does.... skim off a few choice sound bites about bus rates, pixel counts and sizes etc but the deeper details also impinge on IP and such. The EVF rates of these more fully electronic cameras also appear to rely primarily on the SoC CPUs and (stacked) Sensors. Both these advanced products are the complex eventual results of obscure industry partnerships.
And in Japan, these have always been tight lipped unless they want choice tidbits into the marketing grapevines. A skilled electronics engineer with the skills and free time can delight in rvs engineering etc by analysing RAW files etc but much of almost all what's going on under the proverbial hood is going to remain hidden from consumers.
The same applies to optics. Who honestly analyses the vast diversity of principal and trace elements which are blended into the painstakingly cast and annealed optical glasses, invented by the Japanese imaging industry? Then there's the opaque intricacies of how a company such as Nikon design and make modern lenses, downstream of the glass foundries. Again all we hear are choice snippets....
"I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest...." Sir Winston Churchill.
swifty168 wrote:
We’ll you’d just have to make up your mind for yourself who you think is reliable.
And it’s not like you take ppl’s words for granted. It’s usually corroborated by many sources.
Heck the scientific community questions everything so the peer review process there is much harsher.
yes you would and as things go less and less to choose from these days.
oh yes more people.
i can't say that thats all fact these days too.
you decide at which point you are and the bell curve.
think about it... if you shoot aps-c or super35 with any ff milc, is the display in the evf cropped? no, because it's not the same as what's being recorded on the memory card.
from the official sony a1 website:
"Panning shots with electronic shutter
Using electronic shutter at low shutter speeds can reduce display response, making it difficult to follow fast subjects. Turn [Low Frame Rate Limit] ON to improve display response and allow panning shots."
how can sony do that, if they don't have this earth-shaking nikon "dual-stream" technology?
oh well
different method and it doesn't work all that well in my opinion what little weight it carries.
yes it is market driven and Sony is driving a big bus. they "revise" their cameras at a high rate with relatively smaller updates. but it is new and thats the sell.
At 14:00 he does a *handheld* video clip of a Polar Bear with the 800.
Somewhere in the promos it says that the VR is a combination of both the Z9 and the lens. Do not know if that is only for stills, or video too. I believe it is for both.
Also, I believe that's a Manfrotto fluid head. I replaced my gimbal with the Man. fluid head that's in the following Hudson Henry video.
Works for both video and stills (although I prefer handholding stills). Have a look
edited: I loaded the wrong link the first time. Here is the correct HH one.
when i was playing with it for the limited amount of time last year i found it a distraction. it really wasn't needed for the way i shot i was shooting an individual on a bicycle track indoors. not much of a challenge for my meager skills.
1bwana1 wrote:
Configuring a camera and exploring its options is a distraction?
doing it in mid work sure can be.
i'm used to frame blackout for all my using life so i know how to adjust/time myself. i just got done very recently trying the 9 and even that took a bit of getting used to. the feedback on the screen helped but again took a bit to get it into my head i was going through frames at a accelerated rate w/o any feel or visual keys in the first few minutes. then i added what i needed which if i owned it for a day or two would be in place as a standard preset.
So I guess we agree. Since you have actually held an a1 briefly, your comments on the a1 EVF are are just a little more meaningful than someone who comments on the Z9 EVF based solely on the spec sheet. But not meaningfully so.
