Surface Pro 3 Thoughts

As an educator, I think a lot about how students can best learn. In a technical subject like physics, my main concern is that students learn concepts rather than simply ingest large amounts of information. Part of getting to know physics is being familiar with the equations and formula, knowing how the various variables relate to each other and being able to manipulate them to derive key results. It may sound like a case of, " When I was a lad...", but I think that "chalk & talk" with students taking comprehensive notes, can be more effective for learning quantum physics, for example, than watching a set of Powerpoint slides and relying on printed notes. After all, a student could simply open up a textbook to get all the information they need, what they should try to learn from a lecture is understanding.

New research has suggested that even the act of writing, rather than typing notes leads to better educational outcomes, especially conceptual understanding. I think it is a very important question given the massive changes in education due to technological progress. In the drive for efficiency in a massified higher education system, the presumed advantages of Powerpoint and electronically supplied notes are understandable. However, can we utilise technology to enhance learning quality, not just quantity.

With this background I am very interested in the new Microsoft Surface Pro 3 (SP3), a device touted to be able to replace both a tablet and a laptop. The main features are a 12" high resolution screen, an active pen for notes and drawing, a full PC operating system, and a powerful processor. The basic form factor is a 9.1mm thick slate/tablet, but the addition of a type cover allows laptop functionality together with an integrated kickstand to prop up the screen. Depending on your own usage pattern, this may work as a decent laptop replacement. If I need to do any serious typing on my current laptop, I will sit at a desk so the SP3 form factor won't pose an issue. If you do type a lot with a laptop in your lap, then it may not be as comfortable with the SP3 than a conventional notebook computer, but "your mileage may vary".

What attracts me most to the SP3 is the possibility of having a high resolution, fairly lightweight, powerful slate for reading papers, annotating PDFs, taking notes, and giving handwritten lectures. The SP3 seems to have finally hit the right specifications for a device that can adequately fulfil these functions. I previously had an 8.9" penabled convertible notebook that was slightly heavier, had worse inking capability, and was considerably slower. This showed glimpses of the possibilities enabled by electronic ink but the technology was not at the stage to make me give up paper and pen. At least from initial impressions, the SP3 could be the device to finally fulfil that promise for a large sector, not just for current niche markets.

What many commentators fail to see is that the SP3 represents a new way of using portable electronics. Sure, it tries to accommodate conventional laptop usage patterns but one needs to remove the blinkers and consider new capabilities not available to a separate tablet and laptop. In the educational context, having a large electronic-ink-enabled slate on which to make notes synced to the cloud and made instantly searchable represents an opportunity to combine the advantages of old-school handwritten notes but with the convenience of digital storage and retrieval. There are other penabled tablets and convertible laptops out there but the SP3 is the first to really hit the sweetspot in terms of size, weight, power, and support. It might have taken Microsoft three attempts but I think the SP3 was worth the wait.

Exam Depression

It's that time of the year when students and academics both find themselves in low spirits. The students as they have to take exams, academics because they have to mark said exams. And every year I sit down to a large pile of exam scripts and consider alternate careers where I do not have to deal with the despair of seeing the same desperate attempts encoded in barely comprehensible chicken scratchings.

As an educator I wish to see my students improve, not just in the knowledge they possess but more importantly in the skills needed to make the most of that knowledge. The biggest paradigm shift that students face when progressing from high school to university is the change from simply recalling facts or formulae to being able to understand, reason with, explain, and utilise knowledge, often in situations for which they have not been explicitly shown before. Dealing with the unknown, making judgements, and synthesising new solutions should be critical skills that our students should display.

Unfortunately, even at advanced stages of the undergraduate degree, a large proportion of students are showing that they are still stuck in the old paradigm. Students are thoughtlessly applying formula, they do not understand what the variables represent, use formula in inappropriate contexts, make crucial sign errors that would be obvious if they understood the underlying physical situation. When asked to explain or derive a physical relationship, they just randomly manipulate formula (valid in a regime explicitly not appropriate in the situation presented) without examining the physical basis of the phenomena, leading to entirely erroneous results.

Worrying is also the inability to recognise patently wrong answers that are many orders of magnitude out, e.g. the volume of a Krypton atom being half a cubic metre, or that a buoy requiring a terrawatt of optical power to be visible at a range of 5km. Mistakes happen, especially under exam conditions, but not being able to make physical sense of the numbers calculated speaks to a fundamental lack of understanding of basic concepts.

I do not know what can be done practically. Perhaps 12 or 13 years of prior conditioning through primary and secondary education cannot be undone effectively even in 3 or 4 years. But I'd suggest these general steps:

• Improve mathematical skills. The maths should be the least of your worries allowing you to concentrate on the physical content
• Put in the effort. Do lots of examples, without reference to solutions. Do difficult problems, stretch your thinking. Learn from your mistakes.
• Explain to others, discuss things. The best way of learning is trying to teach it to someone else.
• Integrate your learning. Make connections between subjects. Use knowledge in one area to help learn another.

For all the government rhetoric about universities supplying skilled workers for the economy, we're failing the basic principles of higher education, that of producing graduates who can think critically and effectively.

Overview of Samyang 8mm/2.8 and NEX-7

I'm calling this an overview rather than a review because I haven't taken any test images to give a systematic look at the performance of the lens+camera combination. I am going to give my impressions of using the Samyang 8mm/f.2.8 fisheye lens with the NEX-7 over the last few months. Over that time, I've travelled a bit and taken several panoramas which is my main use of this lens.

The lens itself is small, light, and complements the NEX-7. The aperture and focus rings have a nice feel and damping. The front element is quite a bit smaller than the Samyang 8mm/3.5 fisheye which I have in Alpha mount. The built-in lens hood protects the front element from inadvertent knocks. A clip-on lens hood and pouch completes the package.

The first thing to note is that the lens does have issues with the sensor on the NEX-7. The position of the exit pupil means that the angle of the light rays hitting the sensor is too far from the vertical leading to colour shading in the corners of the image. In this case, it is a magenta cast which can be quite noticeable on images which would otherwise be neutral. In some very strongly coloured circumstances, for instance twilight, you may not see the colour shift. Luckily this colour shading is correctable using software and a reference image. This will require converting your RAW files to DNG first before passing it through corrections tools. CornerFix is a free program which can build a correction profile from a reference image which can then be used to remap the DNG data. A similar process is used by Adobe Lightroom DNG Flat-Field plugin. These can reduce the colour shading to an acceptable level for most applications, panoramas included.

If the colour shading issue doesn't put you off, then the rest of the performance of the lens+camera combination is well worth it. Even at maximum aperture, the image is reasonably sharp, but at f5.6 (optimal for centre sharpness) the lens is stunning giving incredible amount of detail across the frame. One thing to note is that the field of focus is not flat but can be quite irregular especially at the corners. Even with the very wide depth of field inherent with using a fisheye lens, to gain maximum sharpness requires fully magnifying liveview and adjusting the manual focus. However, the effective hyperfocal range is approximately 50cm to infinity at f/5.6 when focussed around the 2m mark, and 20cm to infinity at f/8 when focussed around the 1m mark. I find that although depth of field increases at f/8, diffraction leads to a slight softening compared to f/5.6.

Overall, if you are into panoramic photography this lens should be high on your list of lenses to consider. The price is right, optically it performs very well (colour shading not-withstanding), and it's a compact and light addition to your bag.

Student Evaluations: Campbell's Law in Action

"The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision-making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor" - Cambell's Law.

I am reminded of this and Goodhart's Law by an article reporting the results of psychology research into how students rated their lecturers and how they performed in their immediate and future exams. A summary of the results is, "We find that less experienced and less qualified professors produce students who perform significantly better in the contemporaneous course being taught, whereas more experienced and highly qualified professors produce students who perform better in the follow-on related curriculum." and "that
student evaluations reward professors who increase achievement in the contemporaneous course being taught, not those who increase deep learning."

One potential explanation mooted was, "the less experienced professors may adhere more strictly to the regimented curriculum being tested, whereas the more experienced professors broaden the curriculum and produce students with a deeper understanding of the material. This deeper understanding results in better achievement in the follow-on courses."

This is a demonstration of the folly of short term drivers and the law of unintended consequences. Teaching to the test becomes the optimum strategy for teachers to satisfy student evaluation scores, yet this is not optimal for long term performance. As a junior lecturer, one does not have the luxury of being idealistic and teaching what you think the students should learn but what will satisfy exam pass rates and evaluation forms.

Unfortunately, these same pressures have been at work throughout various education systems, from primary, secondary and through to tertiary levels. By subjecting schools and universities mercilessly to the drivers of tests scores and league tables, these become ends in themselves. It leads to a "culture of low expectations", where students are not pushed to fulfil their potential.

Education is not about passing exams, nor is it a popularity contest. It is about the betterment of the individual and consequently society.

Refreshing Honesty and Integrity

Here's a story which shows that one can retain dignity in failure. Short version is that a paper in Physical Review Letters has flaws pointed out to the author, twice. The first flaw isn't fatal but the second is uncorrectable, "I hereby retract my paper [1] due to a fatal error I explained in [2]. All my attempts to patch the error have failed."

Additionally, the author writes a completely new paper explaining why the approach in the original one fails, "Since the error from the original paper [1]—which makes the proposed setup unfeasible—proved to escape immediate recognition by the physicists who considered the details of the paper I think that it would be of service to the community to comment on the approaches that can and canot be taken in attempts to reach the aforementioned goal or to prove it unreachable."

Everyone makes mistakes, but not everyone has the integrity to properly own up to them and to go the extra mile to help others making the same ones. Science is about being honest, with each other and to oneself, but especially with Nature. Simply wishing something was so does not make it true, something which is lost on denialists and fundamentalists. Admitting you were wrong gracefully is a sign of strength, not one of weakness.

Science vs Libel

A rather peculiar case has just been ruled upon. The editor of the journal, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals (published by Elsevier of course), sued Nature for an unflattering article which called attention to the self-publishing and reviewing practices in the journal. One can read the ruling for a rather bizarre trail of events. It highlights just how out of date the current libel laws in the UK are, that such a costly and censorial suit could be allowed under the current system makes for a chilling effect for reporters, bloggers, and even ordinary scientists publishing papers. If you don't have the legal and finanacial resources of the Guardian or Macmillan, you face ruin even if you are commenting fairly and in the public interest. Reform is sorely needed, free and open exchange of information and ideas is the basis for a vibrant and thriving society. Join the effort to make the law work for the public and not for those few with the resources to squash dissent.

Why boycott Elsevier?

Widespread dissatisfaction amongst academic researchers about the state of academic publishing has come to a head with the move to boycott Elsevier. Tim Gowers ignited the move in his blog post here. There are many posts on the web where the misdeeds of Elsevier can be found so I won't repeat their specific sins. I've been holding my own private boycott of Elsevier for several years and it is a relief to see coordinated action on sending a message to exploitative publishers that their free ride is ending. The reasons for my boycott are:

• We, the researcher (by extension our institution and the public at large), do the research, paid for out of our own grants and funding
• To publish research we are often charged for the "privilege", and the publishers demand that they receive copyright of the paper, i.e. we pay them to donate our research to them
• We act as referees of papers, for free, to evaluate the soundness of the research. Editors of the journals also often work for free
• We, through our libraries, have to then buy back access to the papers, often at outrageous prices. Individuals have to pay ridiculous amounts for per article access

In my field, we produce the majority of the editing and typesetting, there is not much of an "improvement" between the drafts produced solely by the authors and those appearing in print.

No wonder Elsevier has been able to make enormous profits where the authors pay to give them their research, work for free as referees and editors, and then pay massive amounts to get it all back. It doesn't really seem fair to me.

The academic publishing system, whether it is author pays or reader pays, has to be funded somehow so I don't expect everything to be free. However, to "extort" money at both ends does not seem to support assertions that they "expand access in sustainable ways, improve the research experience and enhance knowledge and discovery". I will only donate my time and effort to those organisations which do work towards these goals rather than line their pockets.

Electronic First Curtain

One of the nifty features of the A77 (and other cameras like the NEX-5n, A65 and NEX-7) is the option of using Electronic First Curtain (EFC) shutter mode. This eliminates the need to use a mechanical shutter to cover the sensor prior to exposure. In a live view camera, usually the sensor needs to be covered so that the pixels can be reset to zero before the exposure. EFC can accomplish this without requiring the sensor be covered. This has been available in some previous consumer DSLRs but the A77 is the first to really capitalise on its advantages due to the SLT design.

To see how EFC works, we should first understand how a normal shutter works. The purpose of the shutter is to allow light to fall onto the sensor for a specified period of time. In a traditional (non-liveview) camera, the sensor starts off covered by the first curtain, typically a set of interleaved metal blades. As the sensor is not exposed to light in this mode, it is a simple matter to reset it to accept the exposure and record the image. At the beginning of the exposure, the first curtain begins to slide down, exposing one edge of the sensor. As it uncovers the sensor, light falls on the pixels and creates charge. The edge of the first curtain continues to draw across the sensor until the whole sensor is uncovered. After the first exposed pixels have received the proper exposure, the second curtain now starts to move in the same direction as the first curtain to cover the sensor. The charges accumulated in each of the pixels are readout and converted into a digital image. Both first and second curtain then return to their original starting positions keeping the sensor covered, ready for another exposure to be taken.

For even exposure, the first and second curtains should traverse the sensor at the same speed. The delay between the motion of the first and second curtain determines the exposure time. On a professional camera, it take roughly 1/250th of second for the curtains to travel across the height of the sensor. This is called the flash-sync speed as this is the fastest shutter speed you can use for even flash exposure. The whole sensor must be uncovered at the point at which the flash is fired. At higher shutter speeds than flash sync, the region of the sensor which is exposed at any one moment is a slit between the edges of the first and second curtains. Faster sync speeds are difficult as this would require accelerating and decelerating the mechanical blades of the curtains beyond what is easily accomplished given the engineering constraints. Here's a link to a video explaining this.

In a liveview camera, the sensor starts off exposed to light. When the shutter is depressed, normally the first curtain rises from its stowed position to cover the sensor, the sensor is then reset (all the charges in the pixels are drained), and then the sequence as described above is triggered except that at the end, only the second curtain retracts so that the sensor is again exposed for liveview.

EFC eliminates the need for the first curtain to rise to cover the sensor before pixel reset. The pixels are design so that they can be reset without having to be in darkness. When the shutter is depressed and exposure initiated, rows of pixels of the sensor are reset beginning from the top. This line of reset pixels travels down the height of the sensor, just as a first curtain traversing the sensor reveals successive rows. As soon as a pixel is reset, it starts accumulating photocharge. After the proper exposure time, the second (mechanical) curtain then begins its journey across the sensor to shut off light and the image can be read out.The second curtain now returns to the top exposing the sensor for liveview.

The key point is that the start of exposure for any pixel can be electronically and independently controlled, and only the end of the exposure is controlled by a mechanically moving shutter blade. There are particular advantages to this, especially in a pellicle mirror (SLT) camera. Eliminating the moving mirror improves sharpness by avoiding mirror slap, but the first curtain would then be the dominant source of vibration. EFC eliminates this source of unsharpness as well. The sound of the shutter is quieter as there are less moving parts. And the time between the shutter button being depressed and the start of exposure can be shortened as well.

However, there are further potential benefits which could be exploited in future models. Flash sync speed could be effectively halved. EFC could start row initialisation from both sides of the sensor simultaneously, meeting in the middle, at which the whole sensor is exposed and the flash could be triggered. Then both mechanical curtains could move so that they also meet at the middle. Since they have to only travel half as far, the time it takes to cover the sensor is also half leading to a shorter flash sync time. The exposures of the top and bottom halves would have to be matched quite accurately (making sure the traversal speeds were the same), and the overlap region in the centre of the frame would also have to be designed to give even exposure.

A more extensive use of EFC is to do per-pixel exposure control. If each pixel can be reset independently, then the time it accumulates photocharge can be also be controlled individually. Let x be the distance from the top edge of the sensor (where the second curtain starts to cover the sensor) and v be the second curtsin traversal velocity. If at time t_0 the second curtain starts to move, the pixel will be covered at time t_x=t_0 + x/v. To obtain an exposure time of t_e, the pixel needs to be reset at time t_x-t_e. This choice of exposure can be done independently for all pixels.

In a liveview camera, since the camera has a realtime high resolution exposure map of the scene, it can calculate suitable per-pixel exposure times in order to compress the dynamic range of a scene, for instance using a short exposure time to capture the sky and a longer exposure for areas in shadow. This will require specific pixel reset capabilities of the sensor, current ones may only be able to reset pixels on a row by row basis. However, even row by row exposure compensation could give you an in-camera neutral grad filter (albeit only for landscape orientation).

A77 Does Street

I had my first proper outing with the A77 to test it as a street camera together with the 16-50mm/2.8 and 35mm/2. I'm still getting to grips with the A77, and the weather was pretty miserable today, lots of damp Glasgwegians. Lighting was gloomy and flat. I just wanted to test the responsiveness of the A77 in rapid and spontaneous street/candid shooting rather than testing noise performance, dynamic range or resolution. Those can come later when I shoot some landscapes and panoramas.

My general impressions (coming from the A700 and A580):

• The weather sealing of the A77 and the 16-50mm came in handy, no worries about shooting in the rain. The 35mm/2 also withstood the odd shower or two.
• The A77 autofocus is fast and accurate, especially with the 16-50mm. Much better than the A580 and at least as good as, if not better than the A700. I can quickly point the camera in the direction of the action and squeeze off shots and most of them will be in focus, even at f/2.8 or f/2. Zone AF was very handy, especially when shooting from the hip. It's a nice intermediate between spot AF and wide AF.
• The AF finetune was invaluable in resurrecting the use of one of my 35mm/2 which horribly front-focusses on both the A700 and A580 (my other 35mm/2 RS if anything backfocuses slightly). This is my "beater" 35mm/2, old style lens which I picked up cheap ages ago. The 16-50mm seems to be very accurate out of the box.
• I took most of the shots from the hip, no framing at all. The 16mm end of the zoom came in handy, though you have to get close to your subject to fill a reasonable portion of the frame.
• The exposure is excellent, hardly any blown highlights, conversely not much underexposure due to the sky either. This is much better than the OVF metering from the A700 and A580. The LiveView mode of the A580 gets close. I don't miss the AE pattern switch on the A700.
• I'll need to get faster SD cards. My Transcend 16GB Class 10 cards work fine, just that review and deletion could do with being faster. I'll be ordering some UHS-I 95MB/s cards soon I think.
• For waist-level shooting, the A580 LCD hinge design may be better. I'll have to get used to the A77 mechanism. With the LCD in the usual outward facing position, it's more fiddly to get it into a position for waist-level shooting. You have to lift it out and up over the viewfinder cup and flash shoe. It's easier to have the LCD in the closed position (facing the body) and then flip it down for waist-level shooting instead. I do like the ability to protect the LCD by having it face inwards. It also reduces the temptation to "chimp" .
• I generally did not find the EVF switching time a problem. It was fast enough for the times I did use it to frame. Priming the camera with a shutter half press as you bring the camera up helps.
• The large 100% view of the EVF was much better in use than the A580 OVF for exact framing. I'll have to shoot back to back with the A700 to make a definitive conclusion but I suspect the A77 EVF will also prove to be better for composition as well.
• The EVF brightness is still behind that of the OVF in daylight. It's still perfectly usable though. As light levels fall, the EVF gain makes it easier to see the scene and compose the frame.
• The shutter is so much quieter than both the A700 and A580. It is so much less noticeable, even at close range. In contrast I could hear my shooting partner's K20 shutter from several metres away even on a busy street. Coupled with the quick AF, it was very easy to take several quick shots even as people passed right by without them noticing.
• The controls are just what I am used to with the A700. I missed the second wheel on the A580, mainly to set exposure compensation. It makes a welcome return on the A77, however ironically I didn't have to touch it once since the exposure on the A77 is so good.
• Having the buttons mostly on the right hand side of the body actually makes sense to me as I don't have to take my left hand away from supporting the lens. It's easier to use my right thumb to press the display, play, and delete buttons than it was to have to switch left hand grip. With a big lens like a 70-200mm/2.8 zoom, not having to change left hand position will be a boon.
• The grip feels solid and comfortable. I have small to medium hands. The A77 was perfectly usable one handed with the 16-50mm attached, great for candid shooting where you want to look as if you are taking photos.
• The shutter press on A700 to my fingers might just have the edge on the A77. The A700 shutter has slightly more distinction between a half and full press I feel.
• I'm getting used to the layout. Last night on a short test run, I accidentally activated the movie button several times. Today, I managed to avoid this at all. It would ocassionally happen with the A580 but the added controls on the A77 makes it more likely to hit a wrong button when getting used to it.
• I hardly ever looked at the top LCD. Perhaps it's because I'm so used to the A700 and A580 but I don't think it makes that much of a difference. Maybe I'll make more use of it when I get used to it
  

YMMV of course. The A77 has addressed most of the shortcomings of the A580 compared with the A700, mainly in terms of controls and AF responsiveness. There are issues which Sony should aim to address in firmware updates or the next generation:

• Shutdown time is way too long. This is an issue when changing lenses and cards. The wake-up time from sleep seems to be quick enough that I have no worries setting the sleep timer for 10s to conserve power so this reduces the need to switch the camera on and off. I do hope they can reduce the shutdown time considerably.
• Responsiveness could be improved. It's by no means unusable, but taking some of the remaining lag when changing settings would greatly improve the experience.
• Iron out some remaining bugs. Last night, the camera started to refuse to AF unless I used DMF and approximately focused. I had to do a camera reset to get it back to normal.
• Put an AF/MF indication in the finder like on the A700
• Allow a setting for autoreview on the LCD only. In normal shooting, the EVF would be uninterupted but you could then check your shots on the LCD automatically. Bring back the zoom into the AF point in autoreview.
• The ability to shut off the rear LCD LiveView by pressing the Disp button. Sometimes I'd like to turn it off quickly and shoot from the hip. Saves having to flip it around to face the body, or else dive into the menu and change the auto-switching from EVF to LCD.
• Option to disable the Movie Button. Prevents accidental movies.
• Add CDAF (at least for SAM/SSM lenses). This could be coupled with the AF finetune function for automatic adjustment of the PDAF system for different lenses.
• A second card slot. The A580 has two. I find the second slot handy as a backup (even if it is MS).
• I still miss the SteadyShot switch.

Street shooting with the A77 is fun and quite doable. It's not as inconspicuous as a small rangefinder to be sure, but since everyone seems to have a DSLR these days, it's not too difficult to fit in and take candids.

A77 First Thoughts

I've just received my A77+16-50mm and have been playing around with it to get a feel for its handling and preliminary image quality. So far so good, the focussing seems to be reasonably accurate, especially under the terrible fluorescent lighting in my office which was a cause of considerable back-focus on the A580. I will have to test all my lenses and perhaps take a look at the AF Fine-Tuning.

The 16-50mm lens is solid, fast focussing, and quite sharp. Comparing it with my well-worn Tamron 17-50mm shows that the Sony lens has better across the frame sharpness, possibly due to better control of curvature of field. It's the first SSM lens I've owned and I am quite impressed with how smoothly it focusses. Whether it is actually faster than the Tamron is something to test.

The OLED XGA viewfinder is a delight to use. The resolution is such that I do not see any noticeable pixelation. I cannot say that the A580 viewfinder is better. The A77 has a larger, brighter, and much more useful viewfinder, especially in low light where the auto gain means you can actually see what you are taking. One can adjust all the settings on the camera without taking your eye away from it. The refresh rate seems to be pretty fast, even in indoor lighting. Seeing the previewed shot will doubtless be very useful when controlling exposure together with the histogram. I wear glasses and it is not problem to see the whole viewfinder image.

The controls on the A77 remind me of what I missed from the A700 when I cross-graded to the A580. I was able to customise the wheels and buttons in the menu without having to open the manual. I've been able to set it up just as I did my A77. I still have to fine-tune the extra customisations, such as the cycling of the finder information, peaking sensitivity etc.

The rear AF/MF button has made a comeback. This is so much more convenient to use than toggling the sliding switch on the A580. Together with the peaking function and the magnified view, using manual focus will be much quicker.

The joystick is so much nicer to use than the pad on the A580, and similar to the one on the A700.

The shutter sound is so much quieter than the A580. There is no thunk of the mirror. It is quieter than the A700 as well, though pitched similarly. The reduced shutter sound should help with taking photos in concerts.

The body feels solid without being overly heavy. The size is similar to the A700 and A580 and the grip is well fitted to my hand. I welcome the return of the red AF illuminator

Minor gripes

The camera takes what seems to be an eternity to switch off. Hopefully a further firmware upgrade can reduce this.

Being left-eyed, my nose gets a bit close to the joystick. This was the same with the A700.

Lack of dedicated SSS button. I do miss this from the A700. Sometimes it is nice to be able to glance down to check whether SSS is one or off. Also, sometimes I will try shots with and without SSS if I'm not sure if the shot will benefit from it, so a switch certainly increases efficiency here. I also switch SSS on when taking a hand-held nadir shot. I've gotten used to the menu driven SSS control on the A580 so it's only a minor gripe but it would have been nice to see it return.

Only one card slot. Even the A580 had two slots. It's useful having a spare card in the camera for emergencies. I use the second card in the A580 for taking storing non-critical photos which I don't want in my main archive. Saves having to sort out test shots.

Things I'll get used to

The button layout on the lower right hand side will take a bit of practice to get used to. The AF/MF  and AEL buttons are where I am used to them being on the A700. The joystick is similarly placed. However the DISP, Play, Fn and delete keys are situated differently so they will require some adjustment.

Playback on the EVF. Instead of taking my eyes from the viewfinder, I am trying to review shots on the EVF. This also means I can keep the LCD turned into the body keeping it protected. I'd only bring it out for taking high/low/awkward shots where I need to hold the camera away from my eye.

Features to try

Peaking. This looks to be a great feature for MF, and touching up focus using DMF. It makes the STF 135mm very usable.

AF Fine Tune. I've managed to get my 50mm/1.4 accurately focussed for the first time in 4 DSLRs (KM7D, A700, and A580 previously). I'll have to try it out with my tremendously front focussing 35mm/2.

Object tracking. Could be good for sports.

Face tracking. You can set the camera to recognise registered faces.

Movies. Not really my cup of tea but I might as well see how this functions in case I need to do a spot of video.

Preliminary Conclusion

The A77 is a worthwhile successor to the A700. The pellicle PDAF mirror may be at an emotional level not completely satisfactory but in terms of implementation, the A77 has made good use in showing the advantages of the concept in giving a solid, responsive camera capable of serious photographic work.

The sensor does deliver increased resolution over the A580, and with careful post-processing it should give comparable results in low light at the same output resolution. I'm not looking to blow up ISO6400 shots to A2, if they can print at A4 respectably then that's good enough for me.

The handling of the body is great, certainly for someone coming from the A700. It's not too large or heavy yet feels solid enough to balance a 70-200mm/2.8 zoom. The return of the second control wheel, extra buttons and the joystick have made the A77 as much a joy to use as the A700.