apras wrote:
Wow mark, how do you convert the leica
It's a piece of cake. I need to work out the right depth for the shim, and I'll write up a conversion guide for the all-new 16:9 site coming soon! But basically you just unscrew the Leica mount and replace it with one from a donor Minolta lens, adding a spacer for infinity focus. It's a lot easier than converting a 58mm f1.2.
Javier Munoz wrote:
Go to chase a politician, or shoot an athletic meeting all day long with a camera with weird button placement and I will show you how fast that stop of better noise will go to the second hand market. Besides, I didnt use that camera (obviously) but I kind of like the idea of having more functions handy when shooting vertical. A different story is the fact that it looks like big handed people will have severe ergonomic issues. Maybe they are thinking in a body with different size grips (S, M, L and XL ).
I agree...how fast do you need to access the "play" and "garbage" buttons anyway? I have had buttons pressing just by having my 20D dangling off my neck
SONY should know better; they have a tremendous product development and industrial design resource: people LOVE good looking gadgets (take the IPOD for instance), this camera should have been a drool-over piece of equipment. One that makes you feel like a pro holding it; then the minions of serious gadget buyers will eat it up! No offense to the tech or the product SONY is putting out, just design it smarter and make it sexier...It will sell better!
Funny, when looking at DSLRs (coming from medium format,) the look of the Sony bodies and lenses are what made them noticeable to me in the first place. I happen to think they're the best looking DSLRs out there, and people are very inquisitive about the camera when they see me holding it.
p.s. The buttons lock on my A700 (released with shutter,) so you can't accidentally press them. Having ISO, drive, WB, Exp comp, a custom button, and the FN button, that controls the entire LCD, ALL available to your right hand is wonderful. You should really try one out.
I'll take functional over pretty any day (I hate the Ipod interfaces, and for some reason the newer touch ones hate me), but that said with cameras its always worth trying the camera in hand. Though I've only messed with 2 Sony bodies, the KM bodies were surprisingly functional with all the buttons they had on them. Having gone from a 350D to now a 30D I don't find more buttons a bad thing so long as they are the right buttons and well placed!
Aah! Such a mixed bag, the Sony's. I have to confess that I'm done with my Sony trials for now, and coughed up for the 1Ds III. When the flagship – and the new wide lenses – are available, I'll look at it again.
The A700 is a cute camera: quick and slick. The interface and control system is way better than anything Canon has, and the permanent AF is amazingly good: for speed, again better than anything Canon has (maybe) short of the 1D range. And two or three stop IS with every lens is a major boon.
But . . . but . . . the RAW files need very careful handling otherwise they just look rubbish. Noise reduction is the issue: the only workflow that works is to output noisy, detailed files and clean them up with Noise Ninja. ACR is a disaster, and even C1 struggles when using any form of inbuilt NR. And the grip is a problem: it's very comfortable in horizontal mode, but awful in portrait: I do not want a camera heavier than the A700 with that grip.
On the lens front, the Sony range has a few gems: the Zeiss 135mm and 24-70mm are clearly ahead of anything Canon has, the CZ85/1.4 is pretty tasty, and (though I've not used it), all evidence points to the new SSM 70-300mm being outstanding.
But . . . so much depends on the quality of the new wide angles which haven't even been announced yet. It will be interesting to see how things pan out come the winter.
Thanks for reporting on your A700 trials and tribulations, Mark. I'll be considering the A900 and 5D replacement (if it appears) in Sept. and your insights into the world of Sony DSLRs and RAW files is very useful.
And an off topic thanks for the Nikon G-Canon adapter. I just sepnt 2 weeks with a rental 14-24 on my 5D. Wow.
mcbroomf, why would you post the review of a consumer level DSLR as anything that pertains to this thread?
hubsand, I really can't believe your so taken aback by the portrait grip. That design has been a Minolta mainstay for nearly ten years, and they purposefully switched to this design. I shoot in portrait mode 85% of the time (for shoots that can last all day,) and I wouldn't trade it for any other grip. Granted, I appropriately bear the camera weight with my left hand, so I don't have any issues like you've mentioned.
My opinion seems to be a minority view in the matter of the grip, but everyone in whose hands I've placed the 5D+grip and A700+grip says exactly the same thing: in portrait mode the Sony is horrible. Sure, you're likely to be using two hands when shooting, and of course you do adapt when you use something a lot, but the inescapable fact is that the Sony V-Grip doesn't permit you to use the whole of your hand in P-mode, and it's badly top-heavy, and that's a weakness.
For some it's a foible, for me it's a flaw – one serious enough to spoil my enjoyment of the camera every time I shoot vertically with it. If the advantages of the Sony flagship outweigh the 1Ds III, I'd have to make a concerted effort to adapt to it, but it's definitely a item on the 'cons' list for now . . .
The argument has been made before that Minolta has used this grip design for a long time. The same argument could be extended: everyone else has been using a different design for longer.
hubsand, I'm bummed that you're having such an adverse reaction to the grip design, but that argument can't be extended, because Minolta did it the old way long before the newer design. They switched for a reason, and I happen to think it's a good one. Hilariously, I've been waiting to see if the other companies will switch, because I like the design so much. I frequently have all day photo shoots where I'm in portrait orientation a large majority of the time. **The advantage of this vertical grip design is that it moves the right hand down closer to the left hand, recreating a similar position to the camera's grip in horizontal mode, which for me seems to actually add stability, instead of having the weird, higher-right-hand hold like most V grips have. Having both hands close in proximity not only decreases fatigue, but it also allows for less torsional movement, which aides in my camera stability. When I shoot, my left hand cradles under the lens and provides a steady platform which bears nearly all of the weight, and my right hand grip is very soft. I don't notice any of the ailments that you've mentioned before, and having a nearly exact mirror of the camera controls on the v-grip is very nice. I barely notice a difference between shooting vertical or horizontal with this setup.
Maybe it just has to do with different shooting styles? I spend long hours in portrait mode. The upcoming fullframe looks to be nearly identical to the A700 with appropriate upsizing for fullframe, so hopefully that doesn't deter you. It won't have nearly the features of the 1Ds III, but hopefully similar IQ. I'm excited to see some Sony/Zeiss lens discussion on your site.
**this is assuming a two hand grip. I agree that the more conventional v-grip design is better for one handed shooting.
Barry, you maybe right about the body design. I found this quote from another forum that describes the various lens aesthetics, and it cracked me up:
"Nikon: Nice, contemporary look
Canon: Odd "if AF lenses existed in the 60s" look.
Pentax: Billet Piece of Art, (for some), for others like their older Big Teles they have the "Soyuz/Russian Rocket" look.
Sony: German Minimalist/Sharp Circle
Oly: We aren't going to make any effort.
Zeiss ZF: "The flyball governor is on the other side" look (ode to classic turn of 20th century machined brass look)"
I think you've hit the nail on the head: to me, the grip seems designed so that the camera handles the same in P-mode as it does WITHOUT A GRIP in landscape orientation. Which surely defeats the object of having the grip?
But even this is misguided, because in L-mode, there isn't a stonking great overhang looming over the top of the lens – don't you find it suddenly becomes weirdly top-heavy in portrait?
Conventional grips – and the 1 Series – work hard to give the same handling characteristics no matter how you hold the camera; that principle seems to have been thrown out of the window with the later Sony/Minolta design.
I understand that Minolta used to have a more 'orthodox' grip (clearly someone preferred it) but I fear that most Canon or Nikon users will be unconvinced by the current Sony design.
I'm also bummed about it, because in landscape, the camera+grip feels nicer than just about any camera I've handled, which doubly winds up the disappointment factor when you spin it 90°. Talking of which, it's such a pleasure to return to a Canon grip, where you can 'feel your way' blind round that continuous handling ridge. Try that with the Sony and you initally end up with your hand all over the place, shooting with your middle finger. But even when you've familiarised yourself with it, it's a jerky H-to-P transition compared with the Canon or Nikon.
hubsand wrote:
I think you've hit the nail on the head: to me, the grip seems designed so that the camera handles the same in P-mode as it does WITHOUT A GRIP in landscape orientation. Which surely defeats the object of having the grip?
To me, it doesn't defeat the purpose at all. Having extra hand holding real estate in L-mode from a vertical grip is just a convenient by-product of the grip. Sure, it's nice to have that extra extension for one-hand holding, but once my left hand goes on the camera, my right hand bears little weight. The primary function of the grip (aside from batteries) is to create a natural portrait grip, and getting both hands down on the same axis does this for me. Coming from shooting Hasselblad, I had little handling bias going into 35mm, and the Minolta style just makes more since to me.
I know it's none of my business, and I respect your views and opinions very much, but it seems like you must be gripping the camera like a vice with your right hand for the above things to be a problem.
I agree that the standard V-grip is a touch quicker moving back and forth between L and P mode, but I guess that's the trade-off. The Minolta design vertical grip specializes in exactly that: vertical shooting.
I guess this grip is probably getting exhausting for everyone reading it. Talk about beating a dead horse. lol
Maybe it will make people curious to try it for themselves!
I do some product design myself and the tactile interface of anything is always very important to me: probably more than it is to most. My comments are partly coming from a product design perspective, and in that regard it seems the majority has it right: a vertical grip should provide ulnar palm muscle support: QED.
'Comfort' is a somewhat subjective experience, and history is full of sub-optimal designs that people got comfortable with: the Sony grip seems to be in that category. Sonolta users upgrading to the flagship will of course be delighted, but for the Canon and Nikon contingent Sony needs to bring on board, it might be a stumbling block, a deal-breaker even. It was for me.
Maybe, maybe not. I came from a clean slate without any vertical grip experience, and I preferred the Minolta style grip immediately. MInolta was definitely a pioneer in design and technology. Some ideas have been well received: AF, top lcd, twin dials. Others have more controversy: vertical grip design, hotshoe*, white lenses. Although I've never owned a Minolta camera, I like all of these ideas.... except the white lenses. lol.
*the MInolta hotshoe is a much better technology that hasn't been wide spread either, but people complain about compatibility.
