Live View and the Optical Viewfinder

Sony Live View impressed us at PMA, and now that we've spent more time with a production A350 we are even more impressed with the Sony version. Sony Live View is definitely unique compared to others, and their description as Quick AF Live View is justified.

Everyone else now uses the imaging sensor to provide Live View, and while that method works and is fairly cheap to implement, it does have serious limitations. First, it eats precious power, as the mirror has to be flipped up and held out of the image path during Live View. Second, the camera must flip down the mirror for focus and metering, which slows down shooting and momentarily turns off Live View. This makes Live View more a check-box feature on today's digital SLRs than something truly like the Live View seen on Point-and-Shoot cameras. Some variations of this exist, such as the Canon Live View system with contrast-detection focusing that has been announced for the Canon XSi, but all the Live View systems have been slower and less capable than optical AF.


In the A300 and A350, Sony introduces a totally different Live View System, based on an additional live view sensor and a tilting pentamirror. In the Sony Quick AF Live View, the pentamirror tilts and the optical viewfinder closes during live view. It can also run continuously without overheating the sensor, which is an early reported problem with the Canon system.


One huge improvement from the prototypes we saw at PMA is the top mounted switch for Live View or the Optical Viewfinder. It is a mechanical switch that works with or without camera power, and it is exceptionally easy to slide without the excessive resistance we saw on the PMA cameras. When the switch is in Live View, the viewfinder blind closes so there is no mistaking the camera mode.

In our shooting with a production A350, the Quick AF Live View seemed just as fast as the optical viewfinder. Sony specifies a slight speed penalty with Live View, however, with continuous shooting of 2FPS in Live View and 2.5FPS with the Optical Viewfinder. If you look closely at the specs on page two you will see this is slower than the 10.2MP models (A200 and A300) which manage 3FPS with less info to write with the lower-resolution sensor.

Those who are used to the Live View capabilities of their point-and-shoot digitals will love the new Sony A350 and A300. They will seem very familiar and Live View is exceptionally easy to select and use. The bad news is that the 2.7" Live View LCD only shows 90% of the image you will capture. That won't matter for the snapshots LV will mainly be used for, but it is an obvious problem if you are using Live View for high or low-angle Macro shots with the tilting Live View Screen. When you process or review the captured images, there is a lot more around the image than you framed on the Live View screen. Keep that in mind during critical shooting and it will be less of a problem.

Optical Viewfinder

It's a good thing the Live view is useful and fast because the optical viewfinder is absolutely horrible - both dim and tiny with a pronounced "looking down a tunnel" effect. You can see why this is the case with a close look at the viewfinder specs on page two. The top A700 has a good viewfinder with a .90x magnification, and it uses a true pentaprism for a bright clear image.

The 2006 A100 had a decent .83X pentamirror viewfinder that was both larger and brighter than normally seen on cropped sensor DSLR cameras. That viewfinder appears to be carried over intact to the new A200. Then there is the new A350/A300 with a .74X optical viewfinder. The view is reasonably bright - for a light at the end of a tunnel - but the tunnel is so long you are left with the impression that the viewfinder is dim. The screen itself appears tiny and the usefulness of the optical viewfinder is seriously reduced in the A350 and its sister A300.

If you will mainly shoot with the optical viewfinder and don't really care about the tiltable LCD and Live View, then go with the A200 as the viewfinder is much better. The fly in the ointment comes if you want the 14.2MP sensor because the other options are 10MP - and that gives the A350 about 40% higher resolution than the other entry-level Sony cameras.

It's a good thing the A350 has good full-time Live View because we would flunk the camera if we had just the optical viewfinder to depend on. Even the tunnel-like Olympus E-510/410 viewfinders are better than the new A350 - and they are hampered by the smaller sensor with the 2X multiplier. There are ways to get around most viewfinder issues as Olympus showed us with the superb viewfinder in the new E-3, where the small sensor is assisted with a high pentaprism with a 1.15X magnification. The A350 optical viewfinder is usable, but in general it is pretty awful. Sony really needs to improve this viewfinder because it will matter to most users who don't mainly use Live View, and many will be buying this camera for the 14.2MP sensor and not just the Live View.

Features and Handling Resolution, Sensitivity and Image Quality
Comments Locked

113 Comments

View All Comments

  • Wesley Fink - Monday, March 31, 2008 - link

    The Nikon D300 has an MSRP of $1799, so it is more than twice the price of the A350. As we discussed in the review the price-comparable Nikon to the A350 would be the 10 megapixel D60, which probably uses the same sensor as the Sony A200.
  • dug777 - Monday, March 31, 2008 - link

    The D60 is $749 RRP with the kit VR lens (and you can already get it for less), which is rather a gap ;)

    According to your table this is $899 with a kit lens...head to head with the XSi (Nikon & Canon usually bracket their cameras, both feature & price-wise, rather than going head to head).

  • Heidfirst - Monday, March 31, 2008 - link

    D60 is 10.2Mp with no live view - Sony's competitor to that is the A200 which lists at $599 msrp with kit 18-70mm.
  • Wesley Fink - Monday, March 31, 2008 - link

    The A350 WAS compared in features and handling to other entry level DSLR cameras. The only time the K20D and Canon 5D were used for comparison was when it came to the sensor. We were trying to answer questions about the noise and sensitivity of the 14.2 megapixel CCD sensor and nothing else in entry level is higher than 10 megapixel until the Canon XSi (450D) actually ships.

    The Pentax K20D is similar in resolution (14.6 megapixel) but CMOS so we thought that would be an interesting comparison. The full-frame Canon 5D at 12.2 megapixel is always mentioned for it's low noise at all ISO settings so we thought that comparison might answer some questions on photosite size that inevitably come up when higher resolution sensors are the subject.

    We plan to compare the Canon XSi and A350 in more detail when the XSi is available for testing. The price is almost the same which will make the comparison interesting.
  • haplo602 - Monday, March 31, 2008 - link

    I took a look at the EXIF data of the images at ISO 100:

    sony:

    Exposure time: 0.2
    F number: 2
    Focal length in 35 mm film: 75

    pentax:

    Exposure time: 0.166667
    F number: 1.4
    Focal length in 35 mm film: 75

    canon:

    Exposure time: 0.166667
    F number: 1.4
    Lens focal length: 50 (of course this is a full frame)

    I wondered why is the Pentax shot so much more SOFT !!! Why the hell are you using a different F-stop on comparisons ? They have the same crop factor, so no DOF difference issue (would not be there anyway). Even the Canon was shot with F 1.4 ...
  • Wesley Fink - Monday, March 31, 2008 - link

    This is the first attempt at the crops to compare noise at the range of ISO settings. The procedures will be refined until the procedure better converys the differences in a web view. The full images are linked as they better show what we saw in the review.

    Focus was manual, but we left exposure on Program assuming exposure would be the same with f1.4 prime lenses. As you point out with your EXIF data, the camera programs make different assumptions about how to handle exposure in our test lighting. In the future we will also manually control the exposure, or at least use aperture priority, to assure the same aperture at all ISOs.

    The other issues were the Image Stabilization features of the Sony and Pentax. Both advise turning off IS for tripod shots which is what we did. In the future we will always use remote shutter release since the Pentax "softness" is possibly the result of not having a remote shutter elease handy for the Pentax, combined with unintended aperture variations. In fairness the Canon 5D was shot with a remote cable but it exhibits similar softness on the web screen so we plan to look more closely at the crop method as a potential problem and refine that process. The downloadable full images do a much better job of showing the noise variations.
  • Maxington - Monday, March 31, 2008 - link

    Why were they shot at f1.4 anyhow, all lenses perform worst at wide open. (I assume thats what haplo quoted in exif data)

    Should be shot at f8 in raw to eliminate as much lens variation as possible between brands, and to avoid narrow DOF focus errors being classed as "soft" images.

    Sony already has a slight advantage since its not shooting wide open, for example. Not that it would be noticable really.
  • Wesley Fink - Monday, March 31, 2008 - link

    You are correct. Future comparisons will use the common f1.4 lenses where possible but aperture will be constant. We plan to use two to four stops down at f2.8 to f5.6 depending on the lighting we use for the tests. f8 is a difficult choice for low ISOs with a scene lit by a 100-watt Tungsten bulb, but it would be a reasonable choice for studio lighting.
  • haplo602 - Monday, March 31, 2008 - link

    Exactly. I was wondering why the hell is the Pentax shot so soft ...

    Anyway all the lenses are f1.4, so stopping down to even f5.6 for better sharpness is desired.

    If you are shooting for NOISE comparisons, you always dial in the same aperture/shutter speed on each camera after first settling down on an aperture that all lenses can handle and it is not the lowest one (5.6 - 8 are ideal). this way you get a nice constant EV on all systems at the set ISO.

    as to the IS being off, man I suggest you read up on the self timer feature of the bodies. I bet all of them have one. thus you don't need a remote.

    anyway I'd give the Sony system the credit for choosing the best aperture in the test :-)

    I also credit that you are willing to improve the testing methodology, I'd suggest you read up established lens/camera testing sites on their methodology and adapt yo your conditions.
  • dug777 - Monday, March 31, 2008 - link

    No desire to bash you here Wes, we're just providing some constructive criticism :)

    I think it's great that AT is branching out into this kind of stuff, and it's pedantic people like us who let you know if we think you're not doing it right ;)

    Aside, I love my ML-L3 wireless shutter release, incredibly responsive and convenient, and it's as small and simple as you'd expect it to be.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now