interesting article on Sony FF mirrorless

http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...rrorless-fatal
mistake/

--
sid

In article , sid
wrote:

http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...rrorless-fatal
mistake/

the only fatal mistake is you got the url wrong.

here's the correct url:
http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...orless-fatal-m
istake/

as for the article, it's just another ignorant rant. he starts off by
refuting sony's size claim and then shows a picture of three cameras
where the sony camera is clearly the smallest.

In article , sid says...

http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...rrorless-fatal
mistake/

It's actually a pretty old article.

The big lenses could be a result of Sony still using an old (DLSR) lens
design, where the lens is designed to be at a certain distance from the
sensor (just guessing), rather than designing the lenses from scratch to
be close to the sensor.
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

On 7/10/2016 12:22 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , sid
wrote:

http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...rrorless-fatal
mistake/

the only fatal mistake is you got the url wrong.

here's the correct url:
http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...orless-fatal-m
istake/

as for the article, it's just another ignorant rant. he starts off by
refuting sony's size claim and then shows a picture of three cameras
where the sony camera is clearly the smallest.

Thanks for posting the correct link, and for once I completely agree
with your assessment of the article.

--
Best regards,

Neil

On 7/10/2016 2:14 PM, Alfred Molon wrote:
In article , sid says...

http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...rrorless-fatal
mistake/

It's actually a pretty old article.

The big lenses could be a result of Sony still using an old (DLSR) lens
design, where the lens is designed to be at a certain distance from the
sensor (just guessing), rather than designing the lenses from scratch to
be close to the sensor.

I've been considering buying an A7 to use with my Leica R lenses, so I
don't really care about the sizes of the lenses in the article. Once you
take those lenses out of consideration, the writer's comments become
pretty much unjustifiable. The main thing that matters to me is the
performance of the camera, and I've seen some very good results from
users on the Leica R list that have an A7.

--
Best regards,

Neil

On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 12:22:18 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , sid
wrote:

http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...rrorless-fatal
mistake/

the only fatal mistake is you got the url wrong.

here's the correct url:
http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sonys-full-frame-pro-mirrorless-fatal-mistake/

as for the article, it's just another ignorant rant. he starts off by
refuting sony's size claim and then shows a picture of three cameras
where the sony camera is clearly the smallest.

But not when fitted with a lens.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 20:14:06 +0200, Alfred Molon
wrote:

In article , sid says...

http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...rrorless-fatal
mistake/

It's actually a pretty old article.

The big lenses could be a result of Sony still using an old (DLSR) lens
design, where the lens is designed to be at a certain distance from the
sensor (just guessing), rather than designing the lenses from scratch to
be close to the sensor.

A lens which will work closer to the sensor works to the disadvantage
of the sensor.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...ss-fatal-mista
ke/

as for the article, it's just another ignorant rant. he starts off by
refuting sony's size claim and then shows a picture of three cameras
where the sony camera is clearly the smallest.

But not when fitted with a lens.

yes when fitted with a lens.

the author of that article intentionally chose lenses that make the
sony look worse than it normally would.

nospam wrote:

In article , sid
wrote:

http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...rrorless-fatal
mistake/

the only fatal mistake is you got the url wrong.

here's the correct url:
http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...orless-fatal-m
istake/

Thanks for being so helpful, dunno what happened there, it was a copy and
paste.


as for the article, it's just another ignorant rant. he starts off by
refuting sony's size claim and then shows a picture of three cameras
where the sony camera is clearly the smallest.

Of course, your opinion is more valid than any other on the internet eh?

there is a link on the page I nearly linked to that has a differing opinion
also

http://petapixel.com/2016/04/05/defe...rless-cameras/

--
sid

In article , sid
wrote:

http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...rrorless-fatal
mistake/

the only fatal mistake is you got the url wrong.

here's the correct url:
http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sony...orless-fatal-m
istake/

Thanks for being so helpful, dunno what happened there, it was a copy and
paste.

linux, that's what.

as for the article, it's just another ignorant rant. he starts off by
refuting sony's size claim and then shows a picture of three cameras
where the sony camera is clearly the smallest.

Of course, your opinion is more valid than any other on the internet eh?

of course, you turn it into a personal attack.

there is a link on the page I nearly linked to that has a differing opinion
also

http://petapixel.com/2016/04/05/defe...rless-cameras/

looks like i'm not the only one with that opinion, eh?