Author Topic: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links  (Read 15254 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline fother

  • Past Moderator
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 7846
  • Gender: Male
  • Michael
    • MichaelFoth
    • au.linkedin.com/in/fother
    • fother
    • MichaelFoth
    • my index site

Offline Idene

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 65
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #1 on: September 10, 2008, 04:53:50 PM »
I got this:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/AA900/AA900A.HTM

The one thing that I think has put me off is this portion of the review in the Pro's and Con's part of the review:

Quote
# Some image noise even at ISO 200
# At anything above ISO 200, noise limits maximum print size before resolution becomes an issue.

The noise thing is becoming a bit of a burden for me at the minute as I want to shoot in ISO800 for night shots but the noise is ruining all my pictures. Makes me wish I went with Canon.




middletonduff

  • Guest
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #2 on: September 12, 2008, 08:07:50 AM »
So, all the rumours and hype has been said. Sony have now released its new monster. Having read the reviews, the verdict is, well, not exactly sparkling. It does have a lot of good features, the brightness, the 10 x focus sensor. But its all very well having a 24 Mp sensor, but the serious issue is still the noise. Even down as low as 200 ISO . Its bigger, heavier, but ( and Doc Theo will love this), it does come in a sealed body.

Personally,  a lot of the features leaked to me have been Bourne out, however the surprising thing is no "Live View", and no tilting screen has made it to the final model. Considering how professional journo photographers use their cameras,i.e. over the head mode, I would of thought this feature would of been more than useful.

 Canon and Nikon can breathe a huge sigh of relief, this time. That is a shame, this camera should of given these guys a real run for their money. This camera I feel will appeal to the serious amateur photographer, who has money to burn without the knowledge of what else you can get for a similar amount of money.. No built in flash... Strange! ::(

Offline Simon [aka springtide]

  • Article Contributor
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 2445
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #3 on: September 12, 2008, 09:22:05 AM »
I read (from dyxum) that Chasseur d'Images have given the A900 straight 5 stars (out of five), apart from Landscapes where they gave it six!

Sounds like it's going to be a blinding camera for Landscapes and Commercial work.  I guess Sony decided (wisely) that there was no point in trying to go after the pro sports market where Canon and Nikon seem to have the edge at the moment with all of the fancy AF.

I guess that’s why Sony opted for the Mega Pixel’s rather than the High ISO performance
NEX-7

flickr

Offline fother

  • Past Moderator
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 7846
  • Gender: Male
  • Michael
    • MichaelFoth
    • au.linkedin.com/in/fother
    • fother
    • MichaelFoth
    • my index site
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #4 on: September 12, 2008, 09:53:17 AM »
So, all the rumours and hype has been said. Sony have now released its new monster. Having read the reviews, the verdict is, well, not exactly sparkling. It does have a lot of good features, the brightness, the 10 x focus sensor. But its all very well having a 24 Mp sensor, but the serious issue is still the noise. Even down as low as 200 ISO . Its bigger, heavier, but ( and Doc Theo will love this), it does come in a sealed body.

Personally,  a lot of the features leaked to me have been Bourne out, however the surprising thing is no "Live View", and no tilting screen has made it to the final model. Considering how professional journo photographers use their cameras,i.e. over the head mode, I would of thought this feature would of been more than useful.

 Canon and Nikon can breathe a huge sigh of relief, this time. That is a shame, this camera should of given these guys a real run for their money. This camera I feel will appeal to the serious amateur photographer, who has money to burn without the knowledge of what else you can get for a similar amount of money.. No built in flash... Strange! ::(

Everyone can make their own judgement, and of course you're entitled to that perspective, but I'm not really sure what you're basing it on.

All the sample photos available at this stage are from pre-production models, not the final deal. These won't even have the equivalent of the a700 V4 firmware, but production models will.

Heavier? It's only slightly heavier than the a700, and actually lighter than the 7D

I don't think the only buyers will have no knowledge of the field, I think they'll be a mixture of existing a-mount users, and thos who look for the feature set and price this offers.

I think springtide is right - this will have more appeal for landscape and commercial work than for sports photog pros - who would be using, say, Canon 1D IIIs, rather than Canon 5Ds... the pricing is also not competing with 1Ds...

Offline Frank [aka Wires]

  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
  • Gender: Male
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/wirehawker/
    • uk.linkedin.com/pub/frank-etchells/53/319/784
    • Frank Etchells Falconry and More
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #5 on: September 12, 2008, 12:18:10 PM »
Got this link in a ThinkCamera newsletter post;

http://www.thinkcamera.com/news/article/mps/uan/841/v/1/?source=weeklyemail&attr=highlight1

Mentions a price of £2,200
Frank (aka Wires)
:)
The Dalai Lama said; “Know the rules well, so you can break them effectively”

Offline Dr.Theo

  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 1196
  • Your Vietnam Connection
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #6 on: September 12, 2008, 12:26:42 PM »
I think both sides have valid points, and just to throw my thoughts in--

From what i read on DP review this a900 and the a700 have the same enviormental seals
I am still confused as to what that means? does it mean dust and humidity, does it mean i can take it out in the rain no problem, or does it mean i can take it in the shower?

and on top of that i thought that the a700 did not have any sealing.........

on to topic number 2
who is this camera meant for?
Price= pros to serious well healed ametures
features= studio photografers, wedding photographers, landscape and fine art.

In all honesty a market that may have been over looked- hi res camera with inbody stabilization, without alot of bells and whistles that can be added on from out side, keeping the price low
If you need live view you can get a zig view for when you need it
if you need a flash you can put one on it

this is deffinately not designed to be the best for sports shooters, journalists, people who will be in the dark with out sufficient lighting abilities and in hectic crowded situations that the paperatzi would be in.

now are there things i would have done differently?
yes
what are those?

serious weather sealing like for monsoons and sandstorms --- yes most may not need it and some may only need it once but it would still be nice to have even if as a security blanket

Live view / tilting screen

Its not that big a deal to me as i dont see myself holding my camera up over my head trying to make shots
but it may be handy when an angle finder is a pain

Pop up flash
I hate carrying a flash gun unless i know i will need it, and the pop ups have saved me plenty of headaches

NOISE
this is a hard one as perhaps we are at the peak of current technology for this sensor density
perhaps there would be huge improvements with a 20mp sensor or an 18 but then we are loosing resolutoion
personaly i am not really interested in a 10 or 12 mp FF camera at 3000 dollars
maybe we just need to wait for new processing technology or some such to take care of the issues, or perhaps we need to wait for the new XXXXXXX sensor

all in all it is alot of camera for 3000 but like every one has noted it is missing some features thay may have made it a 3500 dollar camera that more people would have bought

oh well just my 2 cents
The first step is admitting you have a problem.
A700/7d/A100 sony 50/1.4|70-200 ssm|70-300G|CZ 16-80|Min 17-35G|
28-70G|28/2|35/2|85/1.4GD|100/2|100/2.8D|135/2.8|200/2.8HSG|300/2.8G|Sigma 10-20

Offline winjeel

  • Past Moderator
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 5413
  • Gender: Male
  • Gelight
    • japanesephotos
    • JapanesePhotos
    • JapanesePhotos.Asia
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #7 on: September 12, 2008, 01:56:58 PM »
I've had noise, even at iso100, and in well lit conditions. I think these cases, it's where there's a smooth flat colour, where there's little variation, and so this must be the wrench in the mathematical post processing noise reduction works.

6 stars out of 5? That must be one awesome camera... but hang on, usually to be of one star, two stars and so on, you must meet certain criteria to be of a certain 'star value'; but what are the criteria for 6? Who paid for that review?
JapanesePhotos.Asia; Some basic photographic how to's.
Sony the200, Minolta 28mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4, 70-300mm Gregarious, 100mm 2.8 macro.

Offline Simon [aka springtide]

  • Article Contributor
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 2445
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #8 on: September 12, 2008, 02:33:43 PM »
I've had noise, even at iso100, and in well lit conditions. I think these cases, it's where there's a smooth flat colour, where there's little variation, and so this must be the wrench in the mathematical post processing noise reduction works.

6 stars out of 5? That must be one awesome camera... but hang on, usually to be of one star, two stars and so on, you must meet certain criteria to be of a certain 'star value'; but what are the criteria for 6? Who paid for that review?

I think the 6th star came from the fact that the A900 was ahead of the 1DSmark3 for Landscapes due to the resolution (and equalled noise at low ISO's), but for £2000 rather than £6000.  As far as I know, there currently are no other High Resolution FF (20+ MP) cameras apart from the 1DSmark3 and A900.

But, all that will change very very soon (next week) with the new stuff from Canon.  i.e.  the Canon 5Dmark2 and/or 7D and/or 1DSmark3.  The current Canon 5D really holds it own for a 3 year camera compared to even the new D700 with High ISO performance.  I would say it's replacement should be equally as good, but is rumoured to be 21 or 25MP.  If Canon manage to produce a low noise at High ISO camera with 20+ MP resolution, this might shake the whole FF market.  i.e.  'you can have your cake and eat it'.  The 5Dmark2 is rumoured to be about the same price as the A900 (£2000 UKP or $3000 USD).

Interesting times, and hopefully compertition will drive the price down.

NEX-7

flickr

Offline Frank [aka Wires]

  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
  • Gender: Male
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/wirehawker/
    • uk.linkedin.com/pub/frank-etchells/53/319/784
    • Frank Etchells Falconry and More
Frank (aka Wires)
:)
The Dalai Lama said; “Know the rules well, so you can break them effectively”

Offline Simon [aka springtide]

  • Article Contributor
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 2445
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #10 on: September 12, 2008, 05:48:19 PM »
NEX-7

flickr

Offline Dr.Theo

  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 1196
  • Your Vietnam Connection
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #11 on: September 12, 2008, 06:13:56 PM »
some one whas doing preorders at 1680 pounds
The first step is admitting you have a problem.
A700/7d/A100 sony 50/1.4|70-200 ssm|70-300G|CZ 16-80|Min 17-35G|
28-70G|28/2|35/2|85/1.4GD|100/2|100/2.8D|135/2.8|200/2.8HSG|300/2.8G|Sigma 10-20

Offline Simon [aka springtide]

  • Article Contributor
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 2445
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #12 on: September 12, 2008, 06:24:16 PM »
some one whas doing preorders at 1680 pounds

That was Warehouseexpress and it lasted about 2 hrs!  They have changed their prices to £1999, as they said it was a mistake.
NEX-7

flickr

middletonduff

  • Guest
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #13 on: September 12, 2008, 07:01:54 PM »
With respect, the photo's were taken from the Official Sony website. The weight issue IS a valid one. The weight specified was the body only, when you consider the lens needed (DS Type), because of extra size of the sensor, we then have to put the flash unit on as well, It IS heavy. I do agree that from a professional view, Landscape and commercial applications probably will suffice. But in a portrait/Wedding situation, I'm not so sure. Sometimes the speed can be an issue as we all know in capturing that moment. Given all of the above aren't you just a little bit disappointed? On a final note giving marks out of 5 doesn't really give you a proper indicator, merely an excuse not to upset manufacturers too much when reviewing. 6 out of 5? thats just plain stupid!:(
« Last Edit: September 12, 2008, 09:37:09 PM by minolta mad »

Offline Simon [aka springtide]

  • Article Contributor
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 2445
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #14 on: September 12, 2008, 07:19:56 PM »
With respect, the photo's were taken from the Official Sony website. The weight issue IS a valid one. The weight specified was the body only, when you consider the lens needed (DS Type), because of extra size of the sensor, we then have to put the flash unit on as well, It IS heavy. I do agree that from a professional view, Landscape and commercial applications probably will suffice. But in a portrait/Wedding situation, I'm not so sure. Sometimes the speed can be an issue as we all know in capturing that moment. Given all of the above aren't you just a little bit disappointed? On a final note giving marks out of 5 doesn't really give you a proper indicator, merely an excuse not to upset manufacturers too much when reviewing. 6 out of 5? thats just plain stupid!:(

I would agree with you with regards it's limited uses, but some of the points about weight and size are no different to Canon and Nikon.  Lenses are roughly the same weight and the body is lighter.
I would rule out wedding for this camera, a lot of wedding photographers are switching to the D3/D700 and ditching flash.  But for portrait/studio work this camera is idea.
Speed wise it is still (currently) class leading for a 20+ MP camera.  5fps is all you get out of the 1DSmark3 which is close to three times the price.

Built-in flash, well the only FF DSLR that has that is the D700.  Even the old Canon 5D doesn't have built-in flash, and similarly needs a full blown flash unit to act as a wireless trigger just like the A900.  Looking at the design of the A900, I think the decision was between having a 100% viewfinder and a Pop-up flash.  Whether you like it or not (I think it sucks), the intended audiance would want the 100% viewfinder everytime.

And as for the six stars for Landscapes, I guess for ultimate IQ they are are saying it's better than the 1DSmark3, but costs 1/3 of the price.  I would guess that the 1DSmark3 has got five stars for Landscapes as there was nothing close to it until the A900 came out.  Obviously it's not going to show six stars, but what it's saying is that all previous five star ratings in the area will now be dropped to four.

I think the A900 body does have it's faults, but also huge progress has been made to produce a FF body.  Just look at SSS (sorry, SS) on FF.  How many times has this been discussed on the web saying that this was impossible?  I think we need to give Sony a break and now let them expand on what they have.  Improvements in AF are needed to match the top models from Canon and Nikon.

I would have liked a low noise 12MP FF camera from Sony this time around, but without the AF where would this camera sit in the market and who would be their customers?

I think Sony made the right choice, but those choices were not what I was personally looking for.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2008, 09:37:35 PM by minolta mad »
NEX-7

flickr