John Fisher wrote:

Taken with a new EOS 1n, I remember thinking, "can it get any better than this?"

I have mentioned recently that I have a friend, Manny Rodriguez, who is a Sony Professional (primarily video) and he has been bending my ear about Sony's new mirrorless (Alpha 7 and Alpha 7R) and electronic viewfinder SLT(?) cameras (the A99, A77 and A77 Mark II). He is getting some help in that one of my regular assistants, Gary Mercer, shoots with a Sony A77 and just bought a Sony A77 Mark II.

Anyway, I've played around with the A77 and now the A77 Mark II, and I have to say inspite of my original aversion to electronic viewfinders, they are starting to peak my interest. For those of you not familiar with an EVF, an electronic viewfinder camera doesn't have the optical viewfinder we are familiar with on our beloved DSLR's, but a projection similar to live view like we see on the back of the camera (except you see it through the viewfinder!). While this seems weird, it is a real time projection, and it has one remarkably interesting quality (once you get used to it). You actually see in the viewfinder the image with all the lighting corrections you have dialed in exactly as you will take it. Pretty cool, you don't have to take the picture, then chimp to see the result. You see the picture in the viewfinder before you take it (and there is no short blackout while the mirror goes up and down).

The Alpha 7 and the A77 do this directly off the sensor, there is no mirror. The A99 and A77 electronic viewfinder cameras do this with a translucent mirror which stays permanently in place, directing a small amount of light to the focusing module, and the balance goes directly through to the sensor. This loss of light (although slight) does reduce the high ISO performance of the A99 and A77 compared to the Alpha 7 and 7r, however it would appear that the auto focus performance of the A99 and A77 is a little better than the Alpha 7 series.

I'm getting into this (inspite of being a Canon shooter of some thirty years now) because these are serious cameras. The Alpha 7r is a full frame, 36 megapixel camera, currently one of only two 35mm cameras with this much resolution. And the others are all 24 megapixel cameras with essentially the same sensor that appears in the current Nikon cameras (and a higher resolution, although not by much, than any current Canon DSLR).

All is well and good, but the other shoe dropped recently. Sony announced a Professional Services Group to work with professionals. Yes, it's early and they only support professionals with two full frame Alpha series cameras (The Alpha 7's or the A99), but that will change quickly I assume. I know Canon quickly increased the equipment that qualified for pro services. Also, something that may have gotten lost in translation is that people think Sony has to invite you to join their professional services group, which is true, sort of. What their site says is that after you fill out the paperwork and they review your submission, if you are qualified, you will be invited to join. It's not like Sony goes wandering around looking for people to invite, it's just a formality after the paperwork goes in. Like I said, this looks like a translation problem with the original instructions sent to the US offices.

So, what is interesting to me is that this mirrorless and electronic viewfinder technology is pretty much being ignored by Canon and Nikon. Whether these will prove to be important new technologies only time will tell. What I find worth noting it was the introduction of the all electronic autofocus cameras in approximately 1990 that allowed Canon to (for the first time) to make serious inroads into Nikon's overwhelming dominance in professional 35mm cameras. So, will these new technologies open the door for Sony? Inquiring minds want to know, and with the addition of a Professional Services Group, certainly Sony seems to think so!

John
---
John Fisher
700 Euclid Avenue, Suite 110
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
305 534-9322
http://www.johnfisher.com

Selling all of my Nikon gear in favor of the Sony A6000, A7R and A7s. I have the A6000 and the other two will be here this week. I am NPS and been a member since the D100. Looking and found a portable solution with the Sony's. Matthews Jordan Smith uses the A7R for his portrait work and there are some other photos that shoot weddings with the mirrors. I've read all the critics response about not having dual cards, not being durable etc... but I switched and that is that!!

Smedley Whiplash wrote:
I do like the EVFs in the Sonys, but they cant begin to replace DSLRs yet.  The EVFs are great when shooting outdoors, but they fail miserably indoors, making you work slower, and not rendering the preview correctly for studio work.

Smedley, having read the review of the A99 in detail on DPReview, I didn't pick up a complaint about how the EVF performed in a studio. I've fooled around with the A77 Mark II here in my apartment, and again I didn't see a problem with the electronic view finder. Could you go into a little more detail about what problems you were having with the electronic view finder on the camera you were working with? Was there a time delay, an image that wouldn't resolve itself correctly, did the auto focus not lock on quickly? How exactly did the EVF slow you down?

Like I said, I've only fooled around with the A77 Mark II here in my apartment, and not under actual studio conditions, but obviously this would be a serious concern.

John
---
John Fisher
700 Euclid Avenue, Suite 110
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
305 534-9322
http://www.johnfisher.com

John Fisher wrote:
Smedley, having read the review of the A99 in detail on DPReview, I didn't pick up a complaint about how the EVF performed in a studio. I've fooled around with the A77 Mark II here in my apartment, and again I didn't see a problem with the electronic view finder. Could you go into a little more detail about what problems you were having with the electronic view finder on the camera you were working with? Was there a time delay, an image that wouldn't resolve itself correctly, did the auto focus not lock on quickly? How exactly did the EVF slow you down?

Like I said, I've only fooled around with the A77 Mark II here in my apartment, and not under actual studio conditions, but obviously this would be a serious concern.

John
---
John Fisher
700 Euclid Avenue, Suite 110
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
305 534-9322
http://www.johnfisher.com

First, when you shoot with a DSLR, you can keep your eye to the viewfinder and the blackout time is only related to the shutter speed, which if greater then 1/100, is negligable somewhat. With mirrorless, the EVF is rendering the preview, so you have to add the render time to the shutter speed, so it's not uncommon to blackout for a second (or longer). Even if you are someone who chimps with a DSLR, the EVF setup is even slower, and its especially exaggerated in the studio using monolights.

Secondly, all the Sony mirrorless cameras I've used in the studio gave an off-color preview when using studio strobe. Usually its blue. I think the reason for this is because the camera is trying to simulate live-view all the time and correct the color, so since the modeling lights are incandecent, the corection is to add blue...  but when the strobe fires for the actual exposure, the preview is based on the simlation, not on the file itself. If you hit the play button, it will look normal again, because the play preview is based in the actual file. This is what slows the process way down. Canon shooters are used to the best previews availible, they are the best in the industry. If you tweak the contrast, tone, etc on a Canon, the rear screen previews those tweaks in real time, even if you're shooting RAW.  Nikon's preview isnt anywhere near as good, even on their best cameras, but at least they are neutrally colored. Sony's previews are great in availible light, but they are very disorienting in studio shooting. You find yourself thinking you've got your settings wrong. I believe the contrast looks out of whack too when shooting in the studio, far more contrasty + blue. Samsung's mirrorless are even more problematic in the studio.

Typical AB modeling lights are 100w, and the EVF doesnt really respond very well under such low light levels  - so you lose shooting speed as the EVF sort of hunts, and trys to boost the visual through some sort of gain programming, which makes the preview grainy.

So, even though your final file looks normal, its like you are shooting sensory deprived in studio situations. This would probably not apply to daylight studios. In any case, I was back to my DSLR after less then 10 frames. I need to confirm that I'm on track while shooting quickly, and the brief accurate post-preview that you get with a DSLR aids in that, whereas the mirrorless required you to hit play after the preview expires to see it accurately. Hope that makes sense.

The thing is, even trying to shoot live-view in the studio using a DSLR is only reasonable using constant light sources (hot lights, fluorescents, LED) on stationary products, using a tripod...., but miserable when using strobe, especially on a live model, and practically impossible handheld.

Smedley Whiplash wrote:
The thing is, even trying to shoot live-view in the studio using a DSLR is only reasonable using constant light sources (hot lights, fluorescents, LED) on stationary products, using a tripod...., but miserable when using strobe, especially on a live model, and practically impossible handheld.

Thanks for the informed answer, Kelvin. You raise some interesting issues, and the science makes sense. I haven't shot with the A77 or the A77 Mark II in a studio yet (with strobes and modifiers), but I hope to in the next day or so. Also, if I can pry an A99 out of Manny's hands, I can see if that camera performs any differently. (Although the A77 Mark II is the newer camera, and should have the latest technology.)

As you said, the bar for me is pretty high. I shoot with really good Canon DSLR's all the time in the studio and on location, and I'm paid to do it. Michael Fryd has a studio here in South Beach where I park my ass all the time, and he has the  new Canon EOS 7D Mark II, so I can use that for comparisons as well. I get what you are saying about the possibility of problems with the view finder in the studio because of modeling lights (the ones we use are 250w so they should be even more of a problem for the EVF). It's strange that this never came up in the glowing reviews on DP Review and other sites, but what you say makes a lot of sense.

Again, Kelvin, thanks for taking the time to write an interesting and informed answer.

John
---
John Fisher
700 Euclid Avenue, Suite 110
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
305 534-9322
http://www.johnfisher.com

John Fisher wrote:

Thanks for the informed answer, Kelvin. You raise some interesting issues, and the science makes sense. I haven't shot with the A77 or the A77 Mark II in a studio yet (with strobes and modifiers), but I hope to in the next day or so. Also, if I can pry an A99 out of Manny's hands, I can see if that camera performs any differently. (Although the A77 Mark II is the newer camera, and should have the latest technology.)

As you said, the bar for me is pretty high. I shoot with really good Canon DSLR's all the time in the studio and on location, and I'm paid to do it. Michael Fryd has a studio here in South Beach where I park my ass all the time, and he has the  new Canon EOS 7D Mark II, so I can use that for comparisons as well. I get what you are saying about the possibility of problems with the view finder in the studio because of modeling lights (the ones we use are 250w so they should be even more of a problem for the EVF). It's strange that this never came up in the glowing reviews on DP Review and other sites, but what you say makes a lot of sense.

Again, Kelvin, thanks for taking the time to write an interesting and informed answer.

John
---
John Fisher
700 Euclid Avenue, Suite 110
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
305 534-9322
http://www.johnfisher.com

The "New" 7D is a bunch of crap...basically a small incremental upgrade over the previous model. My E-M1 beats it at any use under ISO 6400. Matter of fact the previous 7D beats it strictly on image quality alone. It only get's better at higher ISO's and still lags behind Sony.

Canon just a$$-boned the market...not a single new innovation to compete.

Leighthenubian wrote:

The "New" 7D is a bunch of crap...basically a small incremental upgrade over the previous model. My E-M1 beats it at any use under ISO 6400. Matter of fact the previous 7D beats it strictly on image quality alone. It only get's better at higher ISO's and still lags behind Sony.

Canon just a$$-boned the market...not a single new innovation to compete.

Just curious, is that opinion from your own use of the new 7d in real life?

John Fisher wrote:
Thanks for the informed answer, Kelvin. You raise some interesting issues, and the science makes sense. I haven't shot with the A77 or the A77 Mark II in a studio yet (with strobes and modifiers), but I hope to in the next day or so. Also, if I can pry an A99 out of Manny's hands, I can see if that camera performs any differently. (Although the A77 Mark II is the newer camera, and should have the latest technology.)

As you said, the bar for me is pretty high. I shoot with really good Canon DSLR's all the time in the studio and on location, and I'm paid to do it. Michael Fryd has a studio here in South Beach where I park my ass all the time, and he has the  new Canon EOS 7D Mark II, so I can use that for comparisons as well. I get what you are saying about the possibility of problems with the view finder in the studio because of modeling lights (the ones we use are 250w so they should be even more of a problem for the EVF). It's strange that this never came up in the glowing reviews on DP Review and other sites, but what you say makes a lot of sense.

Again, Kelvin, thanks for taking the time to write an interesting and informed answer.

John
---
John Fisher
700 Euclid Avenue, Suite 110
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
305 534-9322
http://www.johnfisher.com

I'll be very curious to hear your report. Tech does change, and even different studio applications might favor using one, or not. My guess is the brighter the studio, the better.

Mirrorless/liveview cameras have a setting where the rear screen can either simulate the exposure, or just used as a finder without the simulation. If used as a finder, the 250w modeling lights should work better for composition, but I'm betting the instant preview will still be blue. I'd love if if they fixed that.

When used outdoors, mirrorless rear screens and EVFs work much like (or way better then) the Polaroid backs we used to use. They have better color and contrast then the Polaroids had, as well as sharpness. The difference being, that with a mirrorless (outdoors), you can see everything you need to see and adjust the camera before the shot, not as a reaction to the preview like you do on a DSLR. In that sense, they are brilliant!!!  I was up in the San Juans whale watching shooting a mirrorless with 10FPS, and I would get 10 perfect exposures, perfectly focused, of a fin out of water, whereas the people around me wouldn't even get a single shot off. You only have a couple of seconds by the time somebody spots it, till it goes back under. In full manual, there is no delay, so you can press the button like a freakin' machine gun and no chimping... you already did it while anticipating. In some respects, a DSLR feels cumbersome for the same task.

In other words, the EVF is a different tool in the arsenal, better suited for some tasks, less so for other tasks. I love having both DSLRs and Mirrorless.  It's like asking if you want monolights or speedlights.... the correct answer is BOTH. 

The other advantage to mirrorless is that they typically weigh much less, and some of them have pretty good wifi.  I had a model a few months ago who wanted me to shoot an overhead pic of her on a horse (like from a satellite POV), with her laying on her back on the horse. With a DSLR, the setup would have been pretty involved (boom arm, stand height, sand bags, etc), but with the low weight of the mirrorless, I just mounted it to a paint pole (Kaycee adapter) with an umbrella bracket, and shot it via wifi. Setup took a minute or so. The POV from a 16ft paint pole was straight down. I held the pole with one hand and my foot at the base, and shot with my iphone.  I wouldn't do that with a DSLR/lens combo because the weight difference wouldn't work out, nor would I want to compromise the model's safety should I drop it.

John Fisher wrote:
So, what is interesting to me is that this mirrorless and electronic viewfinder technology is pretty much being ignored by Canon and Nikon.

I suppose the main reason while traditional producers that have established a duopoly on the market ignore this segment is derived, simply, for avoid to cannibalize some of their products.
For the moment the game still works because the mirrorless are not able to fully replace the DSLR segment limits for AF and telephoto lenses.
But I do not think that it will take many years for the mirrorless to overtaking since the development of the electronics is much faster than the rest of the components present in traditional DSLR segment.

Caitin Bre  wrote:
in MHO it is a very nice picture. Great color and lighting. But still too much noise in the shadows for a web size photo. I can only imagine what the crop would look like and much larger print size. I rely heavily on flash to get clean images and the EVF is a absolute no go for me.
But walking around the zoo on a sunny day with the kids? great cameras for very nice snapshots. I think they are a ways away from meeting the needs for professional use (lenses especially). Great Idea and innovation but they need to concentrate on the professionals needs if they want in on professional market share.

Did you happen to take note of the camera the OP says took this image?

Caitin Bre  wrote:

Just curious, is that opinion from your own use of the new 7d in real life?

Yes.

I used the original 7D for close to two years and it's very easy to compare it to the new model's IQ.

Good Egg Productions wrote:

Did you happen to take note of the camera the OP says took this image?

LOL now I do. He He!

Leighthenubian wrote:
Yes.

I used the original 7D for close to two years and it's very easy to compare it to the new model's IQ.

But you have used the 7d MKII or are you comparing it to what you read is what I am trying to find out.
I ordered the 7dMKII to replace my 7d with. My 7d is a great camera. To me it looked like there are several upgrades in Literature. But as I have found the real truth is in real world testing it out. Is why I asked. I have not got mine yet so I can't say anything about it.
So many people will read about cameras online then form a opinion and review them like they have actually experienced the unit when they haven't even touched one. Drives me crazy.
Like when I ordered My 6d I was expecting a entry level FF. There were several reviews on the camera by people who only read about it (bad mostly). But when I got it, I was completely amazed with how well it functioned and the image quality. The reviews were absolutely bogus and incorrect.

Caitin Bre  wrote:

But you have used the 7d MKII or are you comparing it to what you read is what I am trying to find out.
I ordered the 7dMKII to replace my 7d with. My 7d is a great camera. To me it looked like there are several upgrades in Literature. But as I have found the real truth is in real world testing it out. Is why I asked. I have not got mine yet so I can't say anything about it.
So many people will read about cameras online then form a opinion and review them like they have actually experienced the unit when they haven't even touched one. Drives me crazy.
Like when I ordered My 6d I was expecting a entry level FF. There were several reviews on the camera by people who only read about it (bad mostly). But when I got it, I was completely amazed with how well it functioned and the image quality. The reviews were absolutely bogus and incorrect.

Thought I was pretty clear...I used the 7D and 7D MKII and formed my opinion that at best it's an incremental upgrade.

If you are shooting fast action in low light it's handy. The ISO sensitivities over 6400 are very competitive with other cameras in that section of the market. However, at ISO's where most people live 100-3200 it does not perform as well compared to other cameras that cost less.

In fact the opinion is shared by a number of sources...do a Google search and ignore the BS chatter. Focus on what's reported on the IQ.

Your opinion may well vary from mine. I thought the 7D was pretty good, and better in some ways than my old 5D MKII. The only way to know for sure is to take one for a spin yourself.

John Fisher wrote:
You actually see in the viewfinder the image with all the lighting corrections you have dialed in exactly as you will take it. Pretty cool, you don't have to take the picture, then chimp to see the result. You see the picture in the viewfinder before you take it (and there is no short blackout while the mirror goes up and down).

Great post - thanks for your time and effort.


I think you've identified the benefit that will affect the most people.

I'm curious if you found yourself setting the camera up and interacting with in differently in response to this.

If you haven't tried this already, the next time you use one in ambient light, try setting the rear thumb wheel to control the ISO. If you set your shutter and aperture manually based on esthetic choices, the ISO wheel becomes a brightness control (as long as there's enough light that you don't have to worry about noise, or you're using the A7s where you really have to get pretty extreme for noise to be an issue.

Kelvin Hammond wrote:

First, when you shoot with a DSLR, you can keep your eye to the viewfinder and the blackout time is only related to the shutter speed, which if greater then 1/100, is negligable somewhat. With mirrorless, the EVF is rendering the preview, so you have to add the render time to the shutter speed, so it's not uncommon to blackout for a second (or longer). Even if you are someone who chimps with a DSLR, the EVF setup is even slower, and its especially exaggerated in the studio using monolights.

Secondly, all the Sony mirrorless cameras I've used in the studio gave an off-color preview when using studio strobe. Usually its blue. I think the reason for this is because the camera is trying to simulate live-view all the time and correct the color, so since the modeling lights are incandecent, the corection is to add blue...  but when the strobe fires for the actual exposure, the preview is based on the simlation, not on the file itself. If you hit the play button, it will look normal again, because the play preview is based in the actual file. This is what slows the process way down. Canon shooters are used to the best previews availible, they are the best in the industry. If you tweak the contrast, tone, etc on a Canon, the rear screen previews those tweaks in real time, even if you're shooting RAW.  Nikon's preview isnt anywhere near as good, even on their best cameras, but at least they are neutrally colored. Sony's previews are great in availible light, but they are very disorienting in studio shooting. You find yourself thinking you've got your settings wrong. I believe the contrast looks out of whack too when shooting in the studio, far more contrasty + blue. Samsung's mirrorless are even more problematic in the studio.

Typical AB modeling lights are 100w, and the EVF doesnt really respond very well under such low light levels  - so you lose shooting speed as the EVF sort of hunts, and trys to boost the visual through some sort of gain programming, which makes the preview grainy.

So, even though your final file looks normal, its like you are shooting sensory deprived in studio situations. This would probably not apply to daylight studios. In any case, I was back to my DSLR after less then 10 frames. I need to confirm that I'm on track while shooting quickly, and the brief accurate post-preview that you get with a DSLR aids in that, whereas the mirrorless required you to hit play after the preview expires to see it accurately. Hope that makes sense.

The thing is, even trying to shoot live-view in the studio using a DSLR is only reasonable using constant light sources (hot lights, fluorescents, LED) on stationary products, using a tripod...., but miserable when using strobe, especially on a live model, and practically impossible handheld.

I haven't noticed a difference in the EVF shooting indoors, but I'm going to try to recreate the issue you describe. I shoot with the camera set to B&W most of the time, so that may be the simple explanation. Plus, with an A7s I've never shot with an off-camera flash because certain accessories don't exist yet.


As far as the delay you're talking about, that can be caused by certain settings. At one point I started experiencing long delays and seeing the image change from the one shown, to the settings in the JPEG, which the camera hadn't been doing initially. I eventually realized that I'd been curious about the DRO function and left it on and what I was seeing was the camera rendering the DRO image.

Some of what you're describing sounds like that. There are different shutter options, silent shoot mode and electronic front curtain - all of which affect these things. If you hadn't gone through and checked it with each option, that could be an explanation.

There's also a color temperature option for the EVF.


Though it does make sense that ambient light would look wrong with the WB set for strobes. Shooting in AWB would solve that, though I prefer not to do that when I don't have to.

Caitin Bre  wrote:
in MHO it is a very nice picture. Great color and lighting. But still too much noise in the shadows for a web size photo. I can only imagine what the crop would look like and much larger print size. I rely heavily on flash to get clean images and the EVF is a absolute no go for me.
But walking around the zoo on a sunny day with the kids? great cameras for very nice snapshots. I think they are a ways away from meeting the needs for professional use (lenses especially). Great Idea and innovation but they need to concentrate on the professionals needs if they want in on professional market share.

I've been trying to figure out what you're referring to with shadow noise - shots you've seen, or taken or the one posted?

Keep in mind the one posted is with a Canon mirror less and the OP's point is that the Sony's are an improvement.

Also, there are three Sony's and the A7s is pretty unanimously considered the best lowlight/high ISO camera at the moment, so shadow noise won't be an issue.

Kelvin Hammond wrote:
Mirrorless/liveview cameras have a setting where the rear screen can either simulate the exposure, or just used as a finder without the simulation. If used as a finder, the 250w modeling lights should work better for composition, but I'm betting the instant preview will still be blue. I'd love if if they fixed that.

That solves the problem on an A7s. I just tested it with the VF displaying the setting off, and selecting every WB option and it made no difference in the colors of the VF.

Armando D Photography wrote:
I'm loving a7r for this non-generic reason is that it gives me a color, dynamic range reproduction of a meduim format camera. I set that ISO to 50 (true not fake 50) and I can soak in all the dynamic range I want.

I thought the optimum was 100 iso ... At 50 iso isn't the dynamic range compressed.

Mikey McMichaels wrote:
That solves the problem on an A7s. I just tested it with the VF displaying the setting off, and selecting every WB option and it made no difference in the colors of the VF.

Are you saying the instant preview looked normally colored?

And to get there, you had:
dro = off
Exposure simulation = off

Well!!! This has been a productive thread for me. On my Sony, the dro had no effect on the preview.

I then started thinking like a programmer instead of a photographer. I typically set my white balance using K, but when I do that, my instant preview is blue, BUT...  I just set the WB to flash and wala, the instant preview color is neutral. Rotating through the availible preset WB's, only the flash setting gives me a neutral instant preview in studio conditions. Since i shoot Raw, it makes no difference really. However, that makes the liveview look incandecent, and it still has gain grain, but I could sort of live with that. I never tried that before since its not a preset i ever use.

btw, the same setup worked on my little Samsung NX300.

simple. duh oh. Thanks for moving me in the right direction.

Mikey McMichaels wrote:

I haven't noticed a difference in the EVF shooting indoors, but I'm going to try to recreate the issue you describe. I shoot with the camera set to B&W most of the time, so that may be the simple explanation. Plus, with an A7s I've never shot with an off-camera flash because certain accessories don't exist yet.


As far as the delay you're talking about, that can be caused by certain settings. At one point I started experiencing long delays and seeing the image change from the one shown, to the settings in the JPEG, which the camera hadn't been doing initially. I eventually realized that I'd been curious about the DRO function and left it on and what I was seeing was the camera rendering the DRO image.

Some of what you're describing sounds like that. There are different shutter options, silent shoot mode and electronic front curtain - all of which affect these things. If you hadn't gone through and checked it with each option, that could be an explanation.

There's also a color temperature option for the EVF.


Though it does make sense that ambient light would look wrong with the WB set for strobes. Shooting in AWB would solve that, though I prefer not to do that when I don't have to.

What part of the menu do you find the EVF color adjustment? I don't think I've noticed it before.

Kelvin Hammond wrote:

Are you saying the instant preview looked normally colored?

And to get there, you had:
dro = off
Exposure simulation = off

Well!!! This has been a productive thread for me. On my Sony, the dro had no effect on the preview.

I then started thinking like a programmer instead of a photographer. I typically set my white balance using K, but when I do that, my instant preview is blue, BUT...  I just set the WB to flash and wala, the instant preview color is neutral. Rotating through the availible preset WB's, only the flash setting gives me a neutral instant preview in studio conditions. Since i shoot Raw, it makes no difference really. However, that makes the liveview look incandecent, and it still has gain grain, but I could sort of live with that. I never tried that before since its not a preset i ever use.

btw, the same setup worked on my little Samsung NX300.

simple. duh oh. Thanks for moving me in the right direction.

I haven't had DRO on for a long time.

I just switched off the option to have the EVF show the creative setting and it looked normal no matter what I changed - WB or even set to shoot B&W.

Kelvin Hammond wrote:

What part of the menu do you find the EVF color adjustment? I don't think I've noticed it before.

The last menu - the one with the format option. I don't remember which page it is.

I think it's labeled "EVF Color Temp"

Robb Mann wrote:
Sony and Fuji seem to be the only ones really innovating in the industry right now. New Nikon and Canon cameras are about as predictable as a school cafeteria menu. Still, I'm not sold on an EVF for studio use...

Olympus has been one of the stand out innovators in this field. Going way back to their OM1, and now their OMD, they pioneered many features which are so common now as to not even be mentioned. Smaller size, dust reduction, in-body (currently 5 axis) stabilization, live view. Their E3 and E5 models had fully articulating LCD screens. The 4/3 system itself was an innovation which kind of opened the door to smaller, lighter, more compact dslr's and now mirrorless.

Mikey McMichaels wrote:

The last menu - the one with the format option. I don't remember which page it is.

I think it's labeled "EVF Color Temp"

Not found a use for that setting.


MENU → (Setup) suitcase icon → [Finder Color Temp.] → desired setting.

When you select “－,” the viewfinder screen changes to a warmer color, and when you select “+,” it changes to a colder color.

Ken Fields Photography wrote:

Olympus has been one of the stand out innovators in this field. Going way back to their OM1, and now their OMD, they pioneered many features which are so common now as to not even be mentioned. Smaller size, dust reduction, in-body (currently 5 axis) stabilization, live view. Their E3 and E5 models had fully articulating LCD screens. The 4/3 system itself was an innovation which kind of opened the door to smaller, lighter, more compact dslr's and now mirrorless.

They were also the first to add video to dslr.

Joseph Peffer wrote:
Sony is slowly but surely taking over the photo & video industry. Canon and Nikon especially, lack new age thinking and marketing. Sony is the Apple of consumer and prosumer electronics. They have brilliant marketing, and with every product they introduce, it sets the standard and generates a new market for that camera body. When sony released the 1st actual mirror less digital compact camera, everyone followed suit. About 5 manufacturers are using sony sensors now, including canon. The next Gen Sony for 2016 is going to be a game changer, as usual.

Im personally selling my nikon gear to go back with sony, a A7s to be precise from a D800e. I started with a A850 and with minolta glass the hideous colors of Nikons raws will never compare. I just think people are so caught up with the old they are limiting themselves by focusing on the size of a "pro body" vs its functionality in the real world. The A7s currently leads low light performance in both 4k video and stills. And costs only $2300. Ive shot everything from a 1ds Mark III, A850, and D800e. And personally the Sony's color accuracy even for a 2008 body lead the way, canon following and the nikon last. I think smaller cameras are going to be reinforced and become more durable as professional cameras. The size of pro bodies is purely to intimidate new photographers, impress clients, and for durability in the field, thats about it. The design has very little bearing on the cameras overall performance. I just think its time for a new era of cameras, from a company who takes risks by introducing exciting products people want to invest in.

I would never advise someone to buy a Nikon new. They flood their own market, and currently have about 8 FF bodies priced between $1600-3200. Your investment with nikon depreciates at a rapid rate. D800e was devalued just over a year by $1500. Each camera does a distinct look out of camera, and its not about fandom, its about what gets the job done, while giving you the most bang for your buck and being current with the demand of technology in this field.

Oh please spare me.....the drama

Sony is not taking over anything. Panasonic has a lock on it in every way that counts: Price, features, performance and size.

The only thing Sony has in it's favour is the money to pursue new technology and industrial design.

Seriously..people were saying this kind on nonsense about Canon 4 years ago with the addition of 1080p video.

Slow your roll. It's early days yet.