Sony A99 prototype has an “All Cross 102 point AF” !

That 'SLT' just kills the usability of these cameras for any high end work, I cannot imagine how a high price Sony is going to compete. Nobody will pay top dollar for a camera that is crippled for action and low light shooting.

And for people who don't care about action or low light, there is the D800 (which is actually still better for both), better for landscapes and which is married to a better lens line.

I understand going head to head with Canon / Nikon in the exact same market is probably extremely difficult, but this 'SLT' idea is not going to cut it outside of the enthusiast market either.

JeffreyG wrote in post #14156076
That 'SLT' just kills the usability of these cameras for any high end work, I cannot imagine how a high price Sony is going to compete. Nobody will pay top dollar for a camera that is crippled for action and low light shooting.

And for people who don't care about action or low light, there is the D800 (which is actually still better for both), better for landscapes and which is married to a better lens line.

I understand going head to head with Canon / Nikon in the exact same market is probably extremely difficult, but this 'SLT' idea is not going to cut it outside of the enthusiast market either.

D800's low light ISO test results is about 1000 ISO higher than 5d2. So I would argue that's pretty decent. Definitely not very fast though. Although I have lived with my 5d2's 4 frame per second in the last 2 yrs. Don't really feel like I am missing much speed and I had a 50D before that. AF on 5d2 however definitely could be tons better.

For Sony's SLT, how many stop of light does it loose? Is it 0.3 or 0.5? Does the electronic view finder lags on current production Sony SLT?

Holy Batman!!!

liupublic wrote in post #14156317
For Sony's SLT, how many stop of light does it loose?

The spec sheet I read suggested 30% of the light is diverted from the sensor by the mirror. The problem is '30%' is kind of a useless way to phrase what is being lost since none of us are working in total photon levels. So I'm not sure what that means in terms of stops, but historically pellicle mirror cameras are noted to lose about 1 stop of light.

Even if it was only a half stop, very few people who are shooting low light and scratching for every bit they can get are going to find giving up that much to be OK.

EDIT - DPreview says the loss is a half stop due to the fixed mirror.

Yes, it lags. Especially if you shoot a burst.

In burst mode, the EVF simply shows you the last image taken for the 100ms duration between actuations. This means as soon as you start shooting a burst, you stop seeing live action completely. This makes it impossible to follow and track what you are supposed to be seeing.

I don't see how the EVF makes shooting dramaticall easier in many situations, but I do know of several situations where the EVF makes shooting dramatically worse.

Wow. I've just emailed my mate, a Sony Advocate, to see if he's any wiser to that

Edit: News to him as well

Wow!

I'd jump ship.

Screw the 5D. Sony is doing something correct if some of you get your panties so bunched up.

As long as it's an SLT, it's not a contender.

Diverting some of the light to the viewfinder with a fixed mirror means a darker viewfinder image as well as less light hitting the sensor.

Shadowblade wrote in post #14167143
As long as it's an SLT, it's not a contender.

Diverting some of the light to the viewfinder with a fixed mirror means a darker viewfinder image as well as less light hitting the sensor.

It is an electronic viewfinder. The light directed is then used to portray the image. I still hate EVF. I am yet to experience the appeal of them.

I think the fixed mirror is a solution looking for a problem.

The moving mirrors on my SLRs have never given me any reliability problems. They give me no image lag, and show me the image real time between blackouts.

The moving mirror appears to have essentially nothing to do with the maximum frame rate. The same mirror system is used in the 1D Mark iV, 1D Mark III and 1Ds Mark III. The reason the 1Ds Mark III is slower is because it has too much data to drive through the dual digic three processors.

Look back through the Canon SLR history and you will see that frame rates are pretty much always pegged to the data transfer rates through the processors.

I just do not see what the fixed mirror / EVF is supposed to do for me. I do see several new problems that is creates, some of which are complete showstoppers for me.

palaima wrote in post #14167587
It is an electronic viewfinder. The light directed is then used to portray the image. I still hate EVF. I am yet to experience the appeal of them.

How does an EVF have cross-type AF points?

EVF is good because it allows for a reduced flange distance between the lens mount and the sensor, allowing for smaller and better wide-angle lenses, and a smaller overall camera size. Only helps if smaller, good-quality lenses are actually available, though. It works well for shooting anything other than action, and action capabilities are improving all the time. Just like shooting in live view.

what are some of the other pros to having this type of set up? I mean there has to be a reason sony thinks this is a good business move.

elitejp wrote in post #14168248
what are some of the other pros to having this type of set up? I mean there has to be a reason sony thinks this is a good business move.

It's all down to the market they are after. Adding a fixed mirror to the flagship means they can tout it as a "professional" feature on the lower level cameras.

On the lower level cameras, the marketing they now have using the fixed mirror:

• Faster frame rates. The $650 A35 has 7 FPS versus, say, the $750 D5100, or $800 Rebel T3i at "only" about 4.5 FPS
  
• Live view AF as fast as through-the-viewfinder AF. Sony has been on this kick almost since (I think) the A300, but the fixed mirror is a cheaper way to achieve this. (Before the fixed mirrors, Sony was using a second, low-res sensor in the VF area to show a live-view image. This allowed for the normal, phase-detection AF to work, as the mirror was always in it's "normal" position.)
  
• Movie AF as fast as photo AF. This is actually a big selling point for a "Mr. and Mrs. America" type buyer, as the Canon line won't AF during movie recording, and the Nikon movie-AF is slow and messy to watch

Cool! I'm not interested in an SLT at all, but cool. Hopefully it packs amazing IQ, AF, FPS, etc, into a low price point. We need more competition. Hopefully they introduce some awesome affordable lenses, too. More competition the better. *cheers Sony*.

Sony camera new model lunch in market. This camera features are good and photo result also clear and good. Sony movie is also good.