[Guest]

[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1284530590' post='2772']

Anyway, technically the K-5 seems to be the best new APS-C DSLR of the season. It seems superior to the 60D/D7000/A55/E5 to me at least.

[/quote]



K-5 is rumored to be the most expensive APSC camera released this year. It's like rumored to be $1000 more than A55. That's like declaring 1DIV to be a better camera than K5.

[Brightcolours]

[quote name='evilthought' timestamp='1284913675' post='2924']

And I explained to you why it's not gimmicky. There are many situations where you can use 7 fps without need for continous AF, like here







Besides, you can always release the shutter button and press it again and the camera will AF again with first shot again.







That's outright nonense. You claim to know that without ever even touching the A55/A33. According to IR review, A55/A33 AF tracking matched that of 7D in their tests (and A55/A33 do have AF in 10/7 fps modes).

[/quote]

If you claim it is nonsense, go complain to dpreview (who actually REALLY tested the AF tracking performance).

We read:

"[color="#8B0000"]On paper, the SLT A55 should be an ideal tool for shooting fast action. It can shoot at 10fps with continuous autofocus. The A55 also has a trick up its sleeve that even the Canon EOS-1D Mark IV cannot match - because its mirror is fixed, the AF sensor can operate full-time, without interruption. This should ensure more accurate continuous AF performance, since the camera is constantly being fed data with which to make the necessary calculations.[/color]"



Then we read:

"[color="#8B0000"]That's the theory, but unfortunately it isn't born out in practice. We have found that when presented with fast moving subjects (we shot a range of subjects, including cyclists on a track), focus accuracy is far from 100%. In 10fps mode it is clear that the A55's AF system is simply unable to predict subject position accurately when presented with fast-moving subjects at relatively close range, and in a typical sequence of images of cyclists on a track, whilst the zone of focus shifts from frame to frame, it is almost always slightly behind the intended subject.[/color]"



We continue to read:

"[color="#8B0000"]Even when it finds its mark, the A55's auto exposure/ISO system (which is set by default and cannot be adjusted in 10fps mode with continuous AF enabled) appears to be using a simple 1/focal length calculation to determine the ideal shutter speed. This is fine for eliminating camera shake but is not always fast enough to freeze fast-moving action (which is what many people will be trying to do with 10fps bursts).[/color]"



"I[color="#8B0000"]n our shooting, we've found that in good light, at the long end of a 70-400mm lens, the A55 will aim for as low an ISO sensitivity setting as possible - typically sets a shutter speed of no higher than 1/500sec. This is fine for static subjects, but not always fast enough to ensure sharp images of a fast-moving cyclist or soccer player, even if the AF is accurate.



If you want to take control over exposure but still shoot fast bursts it is necessary either to switch to single-servo AF or leave the dedicated 10fps setting and select continuous shooting (6fps or 3fps) in one of the other exposure modes.[/color]"



No, it is not a good implementation. Why you keep insisting it is great, I am not sure. Might it be that you have a Sony, and feel compelled to defend it, no matter what?

To me that A55v 10fps mode (and 6fps mode in lesser degree) is not something desirable. Better get a 60D, D7000, 7D or D300s if a fast burst mode is needed.

[Guest]

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1284914794' post='2926']

If you claim it is nonsense, go complain to dpreview (who actually REALLY tested the AF tracking performance).

[/quote]



DPR review is just one of several review and they were comparing the AF tracking to 1DIV. The IR did side-by-side test with 7D and claimed AF tracking matched that of 7D. There are several people who own the camera and/or have used it who report better AF tracking than A700/A850/A900.



Besides, how is this just a "gimmick" when someone was able to shoot a whole tennis game (400 shots with less than 10 out-of-focus) win 10 fps mode ONLY? (as I showed you the link already).











more here



http://www.flickr.com/photos/sportsphoto...002118928/



the whole tennis game shot just in 10 fps mode.

[Guest]

double post

[boren]

Back to the E-5...



[url="http://photofan.jp/camera/html/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=7735&forum=2&viewmode=flat&order=ASC&start=20"]This[/url] comparison (scroll toward the end of the page) hints that the E-5 improved resolution may be more than just marketing talk.







Judging from dpreview.com studio shots it seems that the amount of details the E-PL1 12MP sensor can resolve is already very close to the 18MP EOS-7D sensor, so if the above samples are anything to go by, then the E-5 should provide practically the same effective resolution for everything but shots resolution diagrams (where the Canon may still have an advantage).

[Guest]

The E5 release may not be as bad as everyone expects. It seems like they dealt with a lot of the complaints people had about the E3. High ISO capability seems 2 stops better than the E3 without a banding issue. Olympus claims that AF has been improved, both SAF and CAF. Although I can see how the number of AF points matter, the algorithm they use is more important. If they can't get that right the number of points won't matter. In the same line their software processing seems to have improved quite a bit. The better ISO listed above, as well as being to be put in a weaker AA filter. The few shots floating around suggest it captures a lot more detail. Although I'm sure some people may use 1080p, 720p is high enough for any high res video I'd do, and I'd probably choose it anyway for the size difference. Again, not everyone's needs are the same. If anything I kind of wish the size was a bit smaller, more K-7 or E-30 size. The price is in the realm of affordability for me, for a solidly built weather sealed camera.



Although I always like more specs, I don't see how a minor upgrade to a 14 or 16MP sensor would suddenly make the camera more worthwhile. Even 7 fps vs 5 doesn't seem like a make a break deal. I know it's not the highest specced camera, but it seems like a worthy upgrade to Oly shooters. I'm looking forward to the reviews, and in particular if the AF has been improved. That will be an important point.





[quote name='boren' timestamp='1284489328' post='2752']

Let me have the honor to start...

<bits clipped>

With 7 fps, 14-16MP sensor and 1080P movie mode the E-5 could have been a contender, but the way it is the only thing that could save it is a huge price cut (or a 12-60 lens free with every purchase of a body <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />)



PS.

Klaus will need to eat some crow for claiming Olympus would never release an upgrade to the E-3. I must admit I was a bit surprised myself though.

[/quote]