4 ms·

Ken Rockwell agrees: > I'm amused at how the engineers run Sony's product management rather than product managers who get out in the field face-to-face with fu

by cs702 4y ago

Ken Rockwell agrees: > I'm amused at how the engineers run Sony's product management rather than product managers who get out in the field face-to-face with full-time working career pros to learn what's actually important in a camera. Sony's biggest pitch for this new camera, like most of their new cameras, is it's great autofocus performance, and therein lies Sony's problem: Sony's autofocus performance has never been beaten. Even the basic A6000 from 2014 has superb, clairvoyant autofocus that magically finds faces and things and just focuses immediately - even in the dark with no help. Autofocus is the last area in which Sony needs to improve, but its tunnel vision chasing that one aspect of performance means the things that really need serious help at Sony, which are their opaque menu systems and painful-to-hold industrial designs, are ignored, giving us pretty much the same clumsy camera in the A7R V as we've had for years in other models. The real problem with this camera is that it's still merely an evolution of 2013's original A7, and still has poor ergonomics and industrial design, being uncomfortable to hold and shoot, and has a menu system so complicated and poorly thought out that no one will ever really figure out how to use this camera. It's not you; it's poor design that makes the A7R Mark V so opaque to figure out, especially its overly complex autofocus system.[a] In short, if any Sony engineers are reading this, here's the key take away: FIX. THE. ERGONOMICS. Everything else is great. -- [a] https://www.kenrockwell.com/sony/a7r-v.htm#perf https://www.kenrockwell.com/sony/a7r-v.htm#perf

Manuel_D 4y ago
I've never had a problem with Sony cameras' ergonomics. The menu is just as straightforward as Canon's, though I suppose if one is familiar with Canon there's an overhead to switching. All I really need is the ability to map each aspect of the exposure triangle to a knob, change shooting speed, and push button AF. I never fiddle with the various creative styles or anything, I always shoot raw. The poorer ergonomics stems from the more compact form factor: but that's part of the advantage, too. Harder to hold in the hand, but a lot easier to mount on a gimbal. In this sense, Sony is recognizing the shift towards video and are seeking to delivery truly hybrid cameras. I think the biggest issue leading to sore hands is the weight of modern top-tier lenses. It looks like everyone these days is shooting with super fast f/1.2 and 1.4 50mm and 85mm lenses. I have an EF mount Sigma 85mm f/1.4 and that does take some effort to hold. Looking back on it I think most lenses faster than f/2.8 are overkill unless you're doing sports or bird photography. I'm often stopping down to at least that much or even f4.0. At f/1.4 someone's eye will be in focus while their nose is not, and if they're not perfectly aligned with the camera only one eye is in focus. People often cite bokeh ad a creative choice, but software has gotten good at simulating that. I find myself taking out smaller lenses more and more often just for convenience.
- chem83 4y ago
  Easiest way to spot lazy journalism is the mandatory empty criticism to the ‘dreadful’ Sony menu system. Sure, the original one had flaws, but the new one leaves very little to be desired relative to the modern Nikon and Canon alternatives. It’s that much improved. Sane hierarchy, handy finding of options and eye-candy color coding/iconography etc. And it’s not like it’s immune to criticism, but people don’t substantiate their claims. They say it’s bad, but never expand on what needs to be improved, which is often a sign of people who actually don’t know what they’re saying. Or, like o said, lazy journalism.
  - Manuel_D 4y ago
    With Rockwell in particular, he seems to have a very particular workflow: never shoots raw, heavy use of the in camera image settings. He also says he takes several thousand pictures on a given work day. I think his criticisms are earnest and valid for his particular workflow, but that's not very representative of how most people use their cameras.

by cs702 4y ago

Manuel_D 4y ago

I've never had a problem with Sony cameras' ergonomics. The menu is just as straightforward as Canon's, though I suppose if one is familiar with Canon there's an overhead to switching. All I really need is the ability to map each aspect of the exposure triangle to a knob, change shooting speed, and push button AF. I never fiddle with the various creative styles or anything, I always shoot raw. The poorer ergonomics stems from the more compact form factor: but that's part of the advantage, too. Harder to hold in the hand, but a lot easier to mount on a gimbal. In this sense, Sony is recognizing the shift towards video and are seeking to delivery truly hybrid cameras. I think the biggest issue leading to sore hands is the weight of modern top-tier lenses. It looks like everyone these days is shooting with super fast f/1.2 and 1.4 50mm and 85mm lenses. I have an EF mount Sigma 85mm f/1.4 and that does take some effort to hold. Looking back on it I think most lenses faster than f/2.8 are overkill unless you're doing sports or bird photography. I'm often stopping down to at least that much or even f4.0. At f/1.4 someone's eye will be in focus while their nose is not, and if they're not perfectly aligned with the camera only one eye is in focus. People often cite bokeh ad a creative choice, but software has gotten good at simulating that. I find myself taking out smaller lenses more and more often just for convenience.

chem83 4y ago
Easiest way to spot lazy journalism is the mandatory empty criticism to the ‘dreadful’ Sony menu system. Sure, the original one had flaws, but the new one leaves very little to be desired relative to the modern Nikon and Canon alternatives. It’s that much improved. Sane hierarchy, handy finding of options and eye-candy color coding/iconography etc. And it’s not like it’s immune to criticism, but people don’t substantiate their claims. They say it’s bad, but never expand on what needs to be improved, which is often a sign of people who actually don’t know what they’re saying. Or, like o said, lazy journalism.
- Manuel_D 4y ago
  With Rockwell in particular, he seems to have a very particular workflow: never shoots raw, heavy use of the in camera image settings. He also says he takes several thousand pictures on a given work day. I think his criticisms are earnest and valid for his particular workflow, but that's not very representative of how most people use their cameras.