Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 14 of 23 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 224

Thread: SONY a99

  1. #131
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560
    Hey... I still will not own one. It's not what I NEED in my photography. 'Nuff said.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 04-10-2013 at 10:59 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr® & Sdi

  2. #132
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    Your loss.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  3. #133
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560

    No loss, Hoss!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rooz View Post
    Your loss.
    I'm just not feeling that way. Had I dropped the $3,000.00 for "old" technology, I would concur. That would be a loss.

    Right now, I just feel better with all that money properly in my pocket, for now, and not advancing, what I still strongly contend was, quite literally, a short-sighted mistake. I'll simply plow ahead with the a850, until it either drops dead or change brands for something more in line with my photography. At least everything works with a850 and I do not have to spend more money to get, effectively, the same thing.

    If SONY ever does adopt a real, in-camera-body RF-flash trigger and ratio-control solution, then I may invest more money... but, for the moment, the heck with it. No holes burning through these trousers. I am not very proud of the fact that I have burned through a couple thousand dollars desperately trying to put forth a viable remote RF-flash solution, like so many other unfortunate photographers. SONY has not made this easy, either. So, to continue NOT to have it in my newest camera... just feels like a slap in the chops.

    Like I say, "Give me something I want... not something YOU want."

    I won't get over it, Rooz... they're not paying me enough! Tossing another $3,000.00 in the hopper would just be silly.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 04-12-2013 at 01:52 AM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr® & Sdi

  4. #134
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560

    Busted!

    One of the more fascinating and recent arguments/discussions I had with another current SONY DSLR user was trying to justify the purchase of the new SLT-a99 (24MP), over keeping an existing DSLR-a900/a850 (24MP). Frankly, when SONY had JUST the body (with no special deal – such as adding the Vertical Grip and HVL-flash) @ $2800, we just could not do it… especially, if you already owned an a900 or a850 FF DSLR. Another $3000 outlay seemed excessive and, for the most, unnecessary, considering the limited capability upgrade you were doing. 24MP vs... yeah, 24MP!

    The main issue was that you could not use your existing and expensive SONY flash equipment (HVL-whatever) w/o having to slide an adapter on the new SONY camera. I mean, really? Does it not seem a little strange to do something like this to the top-of-line camera? Good lord. It is so bad an idea, now, they have to throw the HVL-F60AM flash in with the camera to sell it! If that doesn't make my point, what does?

    The only way it made any sense at all was IF and only IF you needed the “movie” capability in the DSLR-style camera. The idea of getting a “real” movie camera seemed to make a lot more sense,

    Name:  NEX20.jpg
Views: 47
Size:  15.3 KB Name:  NEX FS100.JPG
Views: 47
Size:  15.5 KB

    with it being exclusively designed for movie-making and freeing the FF-DSLR to do reliable, top of the line still-images. The cost of the current NEX VG-30, with "power-zoom" is around $2,700.00

    Name:  NEX VG30.jpg
Views: 48
Size:  43.7 KB

    A much more appropriate purchase and keeps the separation of "church and state."

    It seemed no matter how we tossed that “ball” around, it always came back to being a major mistake, by SONY, to forcibly marry the movies to the still-capability, when most still-photographers rarely make movies. To make compromises that have to be endured with the still-camera just to allow this movie-making feature seems truly annoying and without any real merit to it, considering SONY had also been making the NEX video camera system, which real was the best solution for using the Alpha/E-mount-lenses, rather than using a still-camera design to support video shots for an extended period of time. The true improvements that are needed to the still-camera are just being ignored or at the very least, just not being focused on, if you will.

    In the end, the a900 is the real bang for the buck, especially since you can, now, get them for roughly $1300 or less.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 04-12-2013 at 02:34 AM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr® & Sdi

  5. #135
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    You should move to North Korea. Your incessant repetition of nonsense long since debunked with facts verges on the purest form of unsubstantiated propaganda.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  6. #136
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560
    We call it WISTFUL thinking, where I hail from. Sorry, Rooz-ifer... just a thorn in my side.

    I guess what I kind of find troubling, is that after all; this time, you would stand aside as a halt takes place serious progress in the right direction. Instead, you tend to offer little support and look the other way. What is this attitude? What end does it serve? Get on the bandwagon, mate. Join the rowdies... and let's get this DONE!
    Last edited by DonSchap; 04-12-2013 at 10:46 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr® & Sdi

  7. #137
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    I've told you why upteen times. there are already devices that can execute IR flawlessly. it wouldn't work with any of my flashes so why would I really care ? I have a perfectly capable IR system in cybersyncs that work with ANY flash and ANY camera. I can take my transmitter off my d800 and put it right onto my Fuji or any hotshoe camera and fire any flash. im not about to pony up $500 a pop for IR enabled flashs. i have 4 flashes, so by your system not only would i be paying for a body but id also be having to pay another $2k for the fancy new compatible flashes. and to make matters worse i only get the joy of using it on the ONE camera. and for what gain ? nothing. not a damn thing.

    sorry...NO SALE !!
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  8. #138
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560
    There is absolutely no reason why RF flash manufacturers... or even IR triggeed/controlled flashes cannot have a adapter they can ride on, that would work. A simple, UNIVERSAL language could be added to FIRMWARE of the flash controller that would work with EVERY single flash system. You would not be trapped within your particular system, like you say.

    This is truly a software issue. The hardware already exists.

    It is this continual short-sighted thinking that screws the whole photography world. I am just sick of it and it is starting to give me a headache.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr® & Sdi

  9. #139
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    There is absolutely no reason why RF flash manufacturers... or even IR triggeed/controlled flashes cannot have a adapter they can ride on, that would work.
    Hold on...I thought using adapters were a no-go on planet don. Haven't you been raving on about this given the new Sony hotshoe ?

    A simple, UNIVERSAL language could be added to FIRMWARE of the flash controller that would work with EVERY single flash system. You would not be trapped within your particular system, like you say. This is truly a software issue. The hardware already exists.
    You're not making a compelling argument. It's akin to saying there should be one TTL standard or one metering standard cos it's "just software". Yes, it's just software but if you think any time in the near future every flash is going to work off one ir standard you really are living in dreamland. You're making your argument about standard ir even more remote a possibility of occurring.

    There are already devices that do what you want, and they do it reliably and exceptionally well, so in truth there's nothing holding your photography back but you. Why would I want another adaptor ? What possible benefit would that provide from my current adaptor in the firm of the transceiver ?

    It is this continual short-sighted thinking that screws the whole photography world. I am just sick of it and it is starting to give me a headache.
    You're giving yourself a headache coz you're making no sense.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  10. #140
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560

    The rising tide of improvement...

    You're right about my contention that a flash adapter that slaps on the top of a new camera is a mistake. SONY/Minolta TTL flashes have their own encoding for flash operation, with the current IR system. The SONY flash units respond to it. In order to make the detachable TTL flash compatible with an RF-source... they would need to have an RF-transceiver built into them. Regarding the current inventory of external flashes (1995-2013) that currently only have the IR-transceiver in them, they would REQUIRE an adapter be fitted to the hot shoe stem (to provide RF-transmitted TTL and ratio control) to bring them up to speed. Also, the RF-transceiver adapter would be required for almost any non-SONY flash device. That is a given. Again, the adapter would not be on-the-new-camera-body.

    Now, change the SONY name and make it a Canon or Nikon system. You would have a Canon or Nikon style RF-transceiver built-in the camera body, also. You would need a RF-transceiver at the removable flash or other strobe lighting, also, that would respond top that manufacturer's digital encoding. So, since it is in the very same location, lets make that RF-transceiver adapter unit UNIVERSAL, so no matter what manufacturer is triggering/controlling it... it obeys. That is entirely doable with software (even encrypted software) and would make everything sing as it was born to. Upgrades to software is a "magical aspect" of the digital word.

    It is troubling that you cannot picture this, but I will draw up some simple (basic) illustrations to help you focus, mate. The overall idea is exceptionally simple (compared to the nonsense we currently are put through)... and the worst part, entirely doable, in very short order.

    My contention is to eliminate any kind of silly RF ADAPTER riding on the camera body at all (free up that hot shoe... or even eliminate it from the camera body) and make the flash controller an integrated part of the camera's software, so you can directly manipulate it through a soft button and the LCD panel. It eliminates the need for additional batteries and the RF flash-controller is always there, no matter what.

    Having an RF-adapter of some kind, at the flash unit, seems to be a necessary evil, because who knows what is being used as the light source. It could be a simple ISO flash unit, a complete studio strobe set with sync cords or a few of the manufacturer's more complicated TTL devices. The remote RF-adapter would convert SONY to SONY, SONY to Nikon, Nikon to Canon, Canon to Hasselblad, Hasselblad to Rikoh, Rikoh to Panasonic, Panasonic to Olympus, Olympus to Pentax... so on and so forth. Lighting control is pretty standard, when you look closely. The idea is to eliminate any boundaries and provide well-timed and precise flash performance. There is always going to be a RF-transceiver at the flash, unless the RF-transceiver functionality is built into the flash (something new).

    Like any idea, this one lives... because it has been expressed and offered, publicly. It is an idea whose time has come and needs to be implemented as soon as practical.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 04-14-2013 at 07:56 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr® & Sdi

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •