Author Topic: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links  (Read 15259 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

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 #15 on: September 12, 2008, 07:57:15 PM »
I've not really paid a great deal of attention about the pros and cons of this new camera to the Alpha range but from what's been said here - and the good sense expressed by springtide - I'd agree with his take on this.

For what SONY have achieved this time round with their first FF camera and with built in stabilisation I feel they've done what they could... and quite well too. They can only get better [hopefully] and build on this... they've had/have a lot of competition out there and the other brands have a variety of bodies aimed at this or that genre.

NO brand makes a one fits all situation camera - 'though I'd like to think the a700 will do me well in as many areas as I try :)

It's not for every one but which camera ever was?

Take care lads ;)
Frank (aka Wires)
:)
The Dalai Lama said; “Know the rules well, so you can break them effectively”

middletonduff

  • Guest
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #16 on: September 12, 2008, 09:21:19 PM »
Look lets be honest, it is early days and perhaps we are all missing a point here. Sony have entered this market trying to flex a technical muscle. A "lets show the world that we are serious here" type of thing. We have to take notice, because all said and done, Sony have effectively picked up the Minolta/Konica baton, so to speak and (rightly) trying to take it to another level. Now, think it through for a moment, Springtide has already stated, that he would of been happier to have had a 12 MP without the noise issue, I absolutely agree. Why bother inventing a car that can do 300 miles an hour if the tyres will only handle 70 miles an hour? I just think that IF your going to pay this sort of money, IF the a900 is going to take your photo's to the next level, then you shouldn't be reading reviews about noise at 200 ISO, should we? really? This on a camera thats supposed to be the flagship. Early days as I said, but I feel more research should of been taken. For my money, the A700 still offers just as much, I don't even own one! just my A350! Ha Ha :-s
« Last Edit: September 12, 2008, 09:38:15 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 #17 on: September 12, 2008, 11:13:44 PM »
Look lets be honest, it is early days and perhaps we are all missing a point here. Sony have entered this market trying to flex a technical muscle. A "lets show the world that we are serious here" type of thing. We have to take notice, because all said and done, Sony have effectively picked up the Minolta/Konica baton, so to speak and (rightly) trying to take it to another level. Now, think it through for a moment, Springtide has already stated, that he would of been happier to have had a 12 MP without the noise issue, I absolutely agree. Why bother inventing a car that can do 300 miles an hour if the tyres will only handle 70 miles an hour? I just think that IF your going to pay this sort of money, IF the a900 is going to take your photo's to the next level, then you shouldn't be reading reviews about noise at 200 ISO, should we? really? This on a camera thats supposed to be the flagship. Early days as I said, but I feel more research should of been taken. For my money, the A700 still offers just as much, I don't even own one! just my A350! Ha Ha :-s

I think the problem is that people are comparing the noise levels compared to the Nikon 700 and Canon 5D because they are the same price range.  These are different beasts, FF but low MP count - hence low noise.

The noise levels of the A900 are not much different to what the only other 20+ MP FF DSLR gives, the Canon 1DSmark3, which is three times the price of the A900.

People haven't been complaining that the Canon 1DSmark3 only does 5fps or than it's noise levels are poor at high ISO levels, the 1DSmark3 is seen as a ground breaking high MP camera that rivals medium format digital backs in terms of raw quality at low ISO levels, but costing half the amount of a similar quality medium format digital back.  Same goes for Landscape photographers, that use 1DSmark3, that only ever use manual focus, never use flash and only use ISO100.
So for commercial, studio or Landscape work, the A900 is just so cheap for the performance that it gives in terms of quality in low ISO performance.

The 1DSmark3 (21MP) costs twice the price of the 1Dmark3 (10MP), and the cheaper camera will blow the higher priced camera out of the water in terms of High ISO performance, FPS & Dynamic Range, but that's not the point.  The cheaper camera is not a better camera, it's just for a different market.  If you always shoot at ISO 100 who cares about High ISO performance.  Buy yourself a Hasselblad medium format back and you'll only get options up to ISO800.

We all know that Sony is behind in advanced AF, so it's no surprise that their first entry into the FF market is based on the stuff that they are good at, producing high resolution sensors, processing data and dumping that data to storage.
As you said, there's no point in having a car that can do 300mph if it can't go around corners.  The fact is, to be in the D3/D700 market - you are in with the sports shooters so need fast AF, so there was no point in Sony trying bring a High ISO Monster to market if they didn't have the advanced AF.  There is no real market for this at the price point they need to sell to break even.

I agree with some of the comments made on Dyxum, that people expected too much from the A900.  People seemed to want a 25MP FF camera, with noise levels and frame rates of a 12MP D3, advanced AF to rival the best of the two major brands, for around $2000 USD. Oh, yes... we also want 100% viewfinder AND a pop-up flash - note that AFAIK there is no FF DSLR that as both, the D700 has 95%.

The basic problem is that Sony are rapidly advancing in their technology, but the hard fact of life is that Nikon and Canon were ahead, and they are also rapidly advancing in their technology.  Also, Sony's primary market is currently the entry level consumer. Th A900 is their first step outside of that, and in my opinion until they gain more market share in the lower end market, then the FF market is just their Flagship that will appeal to the few due to a more limited investment (and hence return in investment).  They have to have a FF camera to show a path into the Pro market and thats where they want to be, but the truth is that 'Rome wasn't built in a day' - and Nikon have been working for years on their FF entry into the market.

Anyway, I think a lot of people are both happy with the A900 as well as being disappointed.  Personally I'm glad the A900 is all what I wanted... it means that I'm not tempted to upgrade at the moment.  But, hopefully we'll see more FF models from Sony in a years time - giving us more choice.  We can't complain about choice in the lower end market, we just have to wait longer for the rest of the FF range.

Anyway, I'm rambling now...  :)
NEX-7

flickr

middletonduff

  • Guest
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #18 on: September 13, 2008, 08:58:45 AM »
It has turned out to be a hot potato.. Good thing about forums, very differing points of view, all of which have valid points. we argue but in a constructive way. I take on board all what you say, guess I was just expecting a little more, maybe this time next year more FF models could come along. We should be happy that Sony are at least, in this time of credit crunch and financial doom and gloom, attempting to produce an plausable, affordable product, aimed at a specific part of the professional market. I guess we shall just have to wait and see. Thanks for the discussion. :)

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 #19 on: September 18, 2008, 12:37:37 AM »
Don't know if others have seen this;

http://masterchong.com/v2/sony-alpha/sony-alpha-dslr-a900-indoor-portrait-with-100-cropped.html

Some shots taken with the a900 + 100% crops.
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 #20 on: September 18, 2008, 02:17:55 AM »
Quite a thought, using your a700 as a back up
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 Clive

  • Past Moderator
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 11976
  • Gender: Male
    • My galleries
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #21 on: September 18, 2008, 08:57:55 PM »
Galleries
============================================
Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted, counts. Albert Einstein

Offline Idene

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 65
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #22 on: September 29, 2008, 02:13:24 PM »
As someone who shoots mainly low light, high ISO photographs, I find myself unable to feel any exitement for this camera.

Its a shame as I know the costs of changing over to another manufacturer will be enormous but it needs to be done.

Thats why I will be getting the 5D Mark 2 once it hits.

Offline Simon [aka springtide]

  • Article Contributor
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 2445
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #23 on: September 29, 2008, 02:33:36 PM »

I would say that that there have been no reviews of the 5Dmark2 as of yet, so it's unknown how this compares to the A900 for High ISO performance.  The Canon is also 20+MP, so might not compare well to the D700.

IMO - One of the missing parts of the puzzle at the moment with the A900 is a decent RAW converter.

I think the pixel binning technology is interesting, and it will be interesting to see how the A900, 5Dmark2 and D700 stack up in a head to head test with common RAW convertors.

Until then, I'd hold tight.  I'm not saying the A900 will be better at High ISO, but we've yet to see anything other than video from the 5Dmark2 (from what I've been reading)
NEX-7

flickr

Offline winjeel

  • Past Moderator
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 5413
  • Gender: Male
  • Gelight
    • japanesephotos
    • JapanesePhotos
    • JapanesePhotos.Asia
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #24 on: September 29, 2008, 02:41:36 PM »
I heard somewhere, though I can't remember right now, that noise at iso1600 levels isn't an issue, especially compared to the KM digitals. It might've been DPReview actually, I think they said that the A900 may be on par with Canon and Nikon, and the Nikon will be using a Sony made sensor (but Nikon designed is what they taut.)
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 Idene

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 65
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #25 on: September 29, 2008, 03:44:55 PM »
I heard somewhere, though I can't remember right now, that noise at iso1600 levels isn't an issue, especially compared to the KM digitals. It might've been DPReview actually, I think they said that the A900 may be on par with Canon and Nikon, and the Nikon will be using a Sony made sensor (but Nikon designed is what they taut.)

But the hands on report in the link I posted says that the A900 struggles with noise at ISO200. My A350 is very noisy at ISO800 which is what I would like to use but dont.

Offline Simon [aka springtide]

  • Article Contributor
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 2445
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #26 on: September 29, 2008, 04:33:54 PM »

But the hands on report in the link I posted says that the A900 struggles with noise at ISO200. My A350 is very noisy at ISO800 which is what I would like to use but dont.


I don't think they are saying noise is an issue, just that at 25MP it will limit the size of the print before resolution will be an issue.  Better RAW converters will imprive this, as well as pixel binning to reduce noise.
Remember this article: http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2007/10/22/alpha-700-as-a-6-megapixel-dslr/

The A900 has larger photo sites than the A700 and hence we should expect improved noise.  I'll print at A3 size with my A700 @ ISO1600 without thinking.

There is nothing to say the 5Dmark2 will be much different at High ISO IQ - we know that the A900 is very close to the 1DSmark3 in IQ (but has more MP), and the 5Dmark3 uses a very similar sensor. I would guess that the different size RAW files from the Canon is the way they will tackle High ISO noise.

We'll have to wait for the reviews to see, but you would have thought if it was such a leap in performance that Canon would have been posting sample images of the High ISO performance rather than the video performance.  Don't get me wrong I don't think it will be poor - just that Canon don't want pixel peepers commenting on how the files look at 1:1 as this is just half the story.
NEX-7

flickr

Offline Stef.

  • Past Moderator
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 11520
    • Stef's photographs
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #27 on: September 29, 2008, 05:41:00 PM »
Quote
As someone who shoots mainly low light, high ISO photographs, I find myself unable to feel any excitement for this camera.

Its a shame as I know the costs of changing over to another manufacturer will be enormous but it needs to be done.

Thats why I will be getting the 5D Mark 2 once it hits.

Idene- not so sure about the problem with the costs. I think one problem all manufacturers face when bringing out these enormously high pixel cameras is that they outperform the lenses. As a consequence you can only use the best lenses of that particular brand available and if you don't have them yet you are not only buying a new camera but also have to buy new lenses. Once you have to buy new lenses you might as well change the whole camera system... and yes i am aware that there are also all the other accessories but at the end of the day one fantastic camera plus one fantastic lens can get you a long way... so in a nutshell what I am trying to say is that these days where we are facing the dilemma to having to replace quite a few of our lenses this is the "right" moment of rethinking which camera brand you are sticking with...

For me who shoots with all three market leader cameras it will be Sony as it is a) the camera that prefer the handling of (I hate the menu system of Canon!) b) Sony as a company has the most resources in terms of money and can put a lot of money into bringing out new models- and they have profen this by bringing out soo many very good models in no time and finally c) I like staying on this forum ;)

Stef. :P
Stef.'s photographs

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/15931938@N05/]flickr


"Dream as if you'll live forever- live as if you'll die today"

Offline Idene

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 65
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #28 on: September 30, 2008, 03:32:42 PM »
I've been thinking about this more and I think I will stick with my A350 for now.

I will wait until all the reviews are in before proceeding with the change over.

My A350 is not a bad camera by any stretch of the mile. The noise is a bit of an issue but I guess thats what Noise Reduction Software is for eh haha

Offline Clive

  • Past Moderator
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 11976
  • Gender: Male
    • My galleries
Re: Sony a900 Reviews and information - links
« Reply #29 on: September 30, 2008, 03:43:57 PM »
Clive's little ranty editorial ... :P :D

We've gone around and around on the A900 before. One day I'll be getting a 24MP or 48 MP camera, but for now our 10 and 12 MP rigs are suitable for what MOST of us need and do. The A900 has several drawbacks: HUGE file sizes, need for mega RAM, ONLY the every best glass will do to take advantage of the 24MP FF. Stuff like that. In the meantime we can make pretty decent A3 or A4 prints off our 12MP cameras with decent glass and decent technique. 

IMHO. ;)

Cheers!

Clive
Galleries
============================================
Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted, counts. Albert Einstein