4 ms·

I'm curious as to why you say they haven't really innovated in the last round? "Real-time tracking AF" was pretty mind-blowing at release and forced Canon and N

by starky 7y ago

I'm curious as to why you say they haven't really innovated in the last round? "Real-time tracking AF" was pretty mind-blowing at release and forced Canon and Nikon to spend the past year making firmware updates to their bodies to try to get closer. Not to mention that the Sony A7RIV debuted their 61MP sensor. In reality, the cameras available on the market today are amazing and take excellent photos in most conditions. Rather than trying to push the envelope I'd much rather see some of these companies try to refine their products to make them nicer to use. You could definitely make the claims about lack of innovation in the latest A6XXX series and the A9II though, both of those were small iterative upgrades that ignored some very real issues with those cameras.

Ididntdothis 7y ago
“Rather than trying to push the envelope I'd much rather see some of these companies try to refine their products to make them nicer to use.” Same for my Fuji X-T3. It’s a great camera but there a few annoyances that get mentioned on a lot of forums (meaning I am not the only one) but they aren’t being addressed although it would be a simple change.
jungletime 7y ago
I don't want to get into an argument about specs. Huawei and Samsung just released a 100 MP phone this month. So even in the specs department, Sony is behind, and was no further ahead than phones back then. Increasing mega pixel count, and adding eye tracking is not that innovative. Computers could do eye tracking for a long time. Also for video, really fast auto focus is not always desirable. Sometimes you want a slower smoother ramp. You also don't want everything to be in focus, often you want things to be blurred out in the background, to bring attention to your subject. The small choice of lenses, really limits how you can do that on a sony camera. The lack of stabilization, horrible rolling shutter, and plastic look to their image, with awful skin tones, is what Sony should innovate on. Here's a video comparison of skin tones. This girl switched from a $500 Canon g7x mark ii to a $1000 Sony RX one generation ahead. Canon has 1080p, Sony 4k. You would thing it would be an easy win for the Sony. But sony somehow Sony manages to bring out every blemish and adds a green tone to her face. http://www.youtubemultiplier.com/5db87f9d399d0-sony-rx-vs-canon-g7x.php http://www.youtubemultiplier.com/5db87f9d399d0-sony-rx-vs-ca... This guy does funny camera reviews. Perfectly summarizes what some of the problems with Sony are. https://youtu.be/Xf6Y1QPXRb0?t=238 https://youtu.be/Xf6Y1QPXRb0?t=238
- starky 7y ago
  I don't want to get into an argument about specs either, because in the end all that matters is whether you can get the shot. From a technological standpoint there is a significant difference between the 1/1.8" sensor or whatever those 108MP sensors are, and a 61MP FF sensor in a high end camera. How does computers doing eye tracking have anything to do with whether is is impressive that a handheld camera can do it? It is the implementation in a compact, low power device that is innovative. Re-framing the discussion to be about video here doesn't help your argument at all. Having fast autofocus means that you can choose how smooth transitions are, better autofocus just allows you to better control how your camera reacts to a situation. Sony doesn't have a small choice of lenses, they have the largest native selection of lenses of any mirrorless system and really have very few holes at this point. I don't know why you are comparing two compact 1" class prosumer point and shoot cameras when this discussion was about mirrorless cameras. Similar to RAW for stills, when it comes to video, if you really care about skin tones you will probably be shooting in log and doing your own colour grading or at the very least creating your own picture profiles with your preferred adjustments.

by starky 7y ago

Ididntdothis 7y ago

“Rather than trying to push the envelope I'd much rather see some of these companies try to refine their products to make them nicer to use.” Same for my Fuji X-T3. It’s a great camera but there a few annoyances that get mentioned on a lot of forums (meaning I am not the only one) but they aren’t being addressed although it would be a simple change.

jungletime 7y ago

I don't want to get into an argument about specs. Huawei and Samsung just released a 100 MP phone this month. So even in the specs department, Sony is behind, and was no further ahead than phones back then. Increasing mega pixel count, and adding eye tracking is not that innovative. Computers could do eye tracking for a long time. Also for video, really fast auto focus is not always desirable. Sometimes you want a slower smoother ramp. You also don't want everything to be in focus, often you want things to be blurred out in the background, to bring attention to your subject. The small choice of lenses, really limits how you can do that on a sony camera. The lack of stabilization, horrible rolling shutter, and plastic look to their image, with awful skin tones, is what Sony should innovate on. Here's a video comparison of skin tones. This girl switched from a $500 Canon g7x mark ii to a $1000 Sony RX one generation ahead. Canon has 1080p, Sony 4k. You would thing it would be an easy win for the Sony. But sony somehow Sony manages to bring out every blemish and adds a green tone to her face. http://www.youtubemultiplier.com/5db87f9d399d0-sony-rx-vs-canon-g7x.php http://www.youtubemultiplier.com/5db87f9d399d0-sony-rx-vs-ca... This guy does funny camera reviews. Perfectly summarizes what some of the problems with Sony are. https://youtu.be/Xf6Y1QPXRb0?t=238 https://youtu.be/Xf6Y1QPXRb0?t=238

starky 7y ago
I don't want to get into an argument about specs either, because in the end all that matters is whether you can get the shot. From a technological standpoint there is a significant difference between the 1/1.8" sensor or whatever those 108MP sensors are, and a 61MP FF sensor in a high end camera. How does computers doing eye tracking have anything to do with whether is is impressive that a handheld camera can do it? It is the implementation in a compact, low power device that is innovative. Re-framing the discussion to be about video here doesn't help your argument at all. Having fast autofocus means that you can choose how smooth transitions are, better autofocus just allows you to better control how your camera reacts to a situation. Sony doesn't have a small choice of lenses, they have the largest native selection of lenses of any mirrorless system and really have very few holes at this point. I don't know why you are comparing two compact 1" class prosumer point and shoot cameras when this discussion was about mirrorless cameras. Similar to RAW for stills, when it comes to video, if you really care about skin tones you will probably be shooting in log and doing your own colour grading or at the very least creating your own picture profiles with your preferred adjustments.