Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Sony A900 Announced  (Read 35305 times)
mbridgers
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 156


« on: September 09, 2008, 08:22:31 AM »
ReplyReply

DPReview has the details:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08090902sonyalpha900.asp
Logged
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #1 on: September 09, 2008, 08:25:35 AM »
ReplyReply

And a sample gallery.  Not real sure how to judge a 24.6mp camera's output but it looks pretty noisy to me.
Logged
Tony Beach
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 452


WWW
« Reply #2 on: September 09, 2008, 09:57:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
And a sample gallery.  Not real sure how to judge a 24.6mp camera's output but it looks pretty noisy to me.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Sample galleries are perhaps the worse way to judge a camera's potential output.  Here's a DPR gallery sample of the 1Ds MkIII at ISO 200:  [a href=\"http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/canoneos1dsmkiii_samples/originals/0t7h0942_acr.jpg]http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/canoneos...t7h0942_acr.jpg[/url]  I didn't see any A900 samples at DPR that looked that noisy at ISO 400 or lower
Logged
geesbert
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 554



WWW
« Reply #3 on: September 09, 2008, 10:06:50 AM »
ReplyReply

MAN! what an ugly camera!!! can't belive it. is this designed by Lada?


http://www.akvarij.net/forum/uploads/ZEC/Lada.jpg
« Last Edit: September 09, 2008, 10:09:37 AM by geesbert » Logged

-------------------------
WWW.RANDLKOFER.COM
mbridgers
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 156


« Reply #4 on: September 09, 2008, 10:17:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Nick Rains has a hands-on report under the "What's New" section here on L-L.
Logged
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #5 on: September 09, 2008, 10:17:37 AM »
ReplyReply

I was just looking at chroma noise.

Anywho, here's my question - how do they print?  I've never printed a file that gigantic.  How big do you have to go before any of that stuff shows up in a print?
Logged
Christopher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 944


WWW
« Reply #6 on: September 09, 2008, 12:05:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Now I only hope Canon has the guts to answer with a 5D/3D/7D (or whatever the name will be) offering us the full 21Mp for a price around 3k.
Logged

lbalbinot
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 70


WWW
« Reply #7 on: September 09, 2008, 12:13:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
MAN! what an ugly camera!!! can't belive it. is this designed by Lada?
http://www.akvarij.net/forum/uploads/ZEC/Lada.jpg
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=220345\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ahahahahaha, good one :-) I didn't like the design either. What's the deal with the pyramid top? Maybe some sort of Zen device to calm down the electrons and reduce noise?

Luis
« Last Edit: September 09, 2008, 12:13:58 PM by lbalbinot » Logged

Luis F Balbinot
luisbalbinot.com
schrodingerscat
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 370


« Reply #8 on: September 09, 2008, 01:17:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Ahahahahaha, good one :-) I didn't like the design either. What's the deal with the pyramid top? Maybe some sort of Zen device to calm down the electrons and reduce noise?

Luis
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=220379\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It's the shape of a solid glass penta-prism, which gives you the full-field bright view found in SLR's before they turned into plastic blobs with mirror assembly finders. Form follows function.

It works well but may not impress the neighbors.
Logged
macgyver
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« Reply #9 on: September 09, 2008, 03:28:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Now I only hope Canon has the guts to answer with a 5D/3D/7D (or whatever the name will be) offering us the full 21Mp for a price around 3k.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=220378\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I only hope they don't! I want my ef mount d700.
Logged
kers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 797


WWW
« Reply #10 on: September 09, 2008, 06:25:01 PM »
ReplyReply

If this camera will cost only 3000$ it will shake up the market-

Wonder how much a Nikon D3x will cost with the same 24mp chip...
Logged

Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu
cricketer 1
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 32


WWW
« Reply #11 on: September 09, 2008, 07:06:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: kers,Sep 9 2008, 06:25 PM
If this camera will cost only 3000$ it will shake up the market-

I agree, and would not underestimate Sony's ability to continue it's penetration of the DSLR market, based on an ability to manufacture high quality imaging products with many innovative features.  As far as the new Sony being an ugly camera, I don't recall the Nikon F3 and F4 SLR's, with their large high eye-point viewfinders being so named.  If it performs as well as the specifications suggest, it may give the Nikon D700 and Canon equivalent a run for their money.
Logged
Christopher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 944


WWW
« Reply #12 on: September 09, 2008, 07:09:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: cricketer 1,Sep 9 2008, 07:06 PM
Quote from: kers,Sep 9 2008, 06:25 PM
If this camera will cost only 3000$ it will shake up the market-

I agree, and would not underestimate Sony's ability to continue it's penetration of the DSLR market, based on an ability to manufacture high quality imaging products with many innovative features.  As far as the new Sony being an ugly camera, I don't recall the Nikon F3 and F4 SLR's, with their large high eye-point viewfinders being so named.  If it performs as well as the specifications suggest, it may give the Nikon D700 and Canon equivalent a run for their money.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=220458\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Well it will sell under 3k, street price.
Logged

kevin2i
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« Reply #13 on: September 09, 2008, 07:24:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks LL for the timely review.

The DP'ers are going nuts reviewing sample jpg's - and forming some rather strong opinions!

I'll wait for more raw files and processing options . . . .

I will note that the sony looks good in the comparison of the building under construction.  (look at the 95 sign and lettering)

The major drawback I see is the close spacing of the focus points - my main criticism of the 5d.  Curious how accurate and usable the screen is for manual focusing.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2008, 07:27:58 PM by kevin2i » Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8944


« Reply #14 on: September 09, 2008, 08:24:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
MAN! what an ugly camera!!! can't belive it. is this designed by Lada?
http://www.akvarij.net/forum/uploads/ZEC/Lada.jpg
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=220345\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This is of major concern to those who like to wear fine jewelery. It could be quite upsetting to feel compelled to wear an ugly necklace in the interests of fine art   .
Logged
Derryck
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 170



WWW
« Reply #15 on: September 09, 2008, 08:37:29 PM »
ReplyReply

The camera might be a bit on the ugly side but those sexy Zeiss lenses make up for it. Going to see if we can get a copy of the camera in the studio this week to make my own comparisons as we are supplying the studio lighting for the launch in Shanghai today.
Logged

Tony Beach
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 452


WWW
« Reply #16 on: September 09, 2008, 10:01:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Wonder how much a Nikon D3x will cost with the same 24mp chip...
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It would cost more, same as the D3 costs more than the D700 (think features and performance).  However, a D3x (or whatever Nikon calls it) may not use the same sensor, it might use a better one.

Quote
  If it performs as well as the specifications suggest, it may give the Nikon D700 and Canon equivalent a run for their money.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=220458\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Sony DSLR-A900                   
-2 to +2 EV in 1/3 EV steps    
5 fps                                  
100-1600, (up to 6400)                                             
24.6 million pixels = 2.9 MP/cm²                                

Nikon D700
-5 to +5 EV in 1/2 or 1/3 EV steps
8 fps (with battery pack)
200-6400 (100 - 25600 with boost)
12.1 million pixels = 1.4 MP/cm²

I like oranges better than apples; I have never considered if I could get more apples for my money.

Quote
This [the "ugliness factor"] is of major concern to those who like to wear fine jewelery. It could be quite upsetting to feel compelled to wear an ugly necklace in the interests of fine art   .
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=220468\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It could be an ergonomics issue for some:

[a href=\"http://a.img-dpreview.com/previews/nikond700/images/inhand2.jpg]http://a.img-dpreview.com/previews/nikond7...ges/inhand2.jpg[/url]

http://a.img-dpreview.com/previews/SonyDSL...ges/inhand2.jpg
Logged
Dennishh
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 153


« Reply #17 on: September 09, 2008, 10:05:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Sony is using some major noise reduction at all ISO's, reminds me of the Kodak 14n. They might as well put those Zeiss lenses on a holga for all the good they are going to do for this ugly thing.
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8944


« Reply #18 on: September 09, 2008, 10:06:33 PM »
ReplyReply

There are 3 slightly worrying issues about this camera that spring to mind.

(1) No Live View for ultra accurate manual focussing. However, I can see the reason for this. Without image stabilisation in the lens, Live View is not as useful unless the camera is on a tripod. That's one disadvantage of the anti-shake sensor compared to the lens image stabilisation.

(2) The f stop latitude due to the anti-shake sensor is described as 2.4 to 4 stops.

What do they mean by this? What causes such a variation in latitude? It is assumed that, whether or not anti-shake is activated, the final result will depend in part on the amount of camera shake present at the time the shutter is pressed, whether or not that degree of shake is due to a Parkinsons disorder or the motion of a moving vehicle along a bumpy road.

If the IS specification refers to a latitude, then that implies it is in relation to whatever camera-shake conditions apply at the time. If Sony means that the variation of 2.4 to 4 stops is dependent upon the focal length used, then they should say so. Perhaps at either 16mm or 400mm one can't expect better than a 2.4 stop latitude, whereas at 100mm or 150mm one might expect as much as 4 stops latitude.

(3) The noise at high ISO in the images I've seen so far, do not look impressively clean, even aty well below 100% magnification on the monitor.

I'm reminded from previous dpreview comparisons between the Sony A700, A200 and A350 that high ISO noise is not as good as the equivalent Canons. At ISO 1600 and 3200, if noise in the Sonys is as low as the Canon equivalent, it's usually at the expense of detail, and vice versa. If detail is on a par, then the Sony images are noisier.

This worries me a bit. First impression tend to confirm that this trend is continued in the A900. Nikon has already set the benchmark for low noise from a full frame sensor. It is expected (by me, at least) that the soon-to-be-announced successor to the 5D will match the high-ISO low noise performance of the D3 and D700.
Logged
aaykay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 359


« Reply #19 on: September 09, 2008, 10:13:07 PM »
ReplyReply

I noticed that the A900 has the second largest viewfinder in a DSLR, EVER !

At 100% with 0.74x magnification, the viewfinder is larger than that in a Nikon D3 or D700.  It is also larger than the Canon 1DSMKII or 5D.

Only the 1DSMKIII at 100% and 0.76x magnification is a bit larger.

Also, at 5FPS at its full 24.6MP resolution, the data pipeline architecture is SOLID and is a dimension apart from a camera with say a 12-14MP sensor at 5FPS.  The sensor would be generating around 300MB per Second, if shot RAW+JPEG.  That is very impressive for ANY price !

Also, since the camera comes with body-IS, all the 35mm primes, the 50mm primes, the 85mm primes, the 135mm primes are all stabilized.  Also stabilized are the 24-70 f/2.8, the 16-35 f/2.8 and all other lenses in the range.  The specs state between 2.5-4 stops of handholdability....applicable to all lenses.

I think this is a very competitive product and at the price, is a literal steal.

I noticed that Nick (who reviewed it here in LL), mentioned that there are no dedicated macros in the lens range.  Actually, there are 2 macros: 50mm f/2.8 Macro and 100mm f/2.8 Macro - both dedicated macro lenses.

I also understand that there are a few other lenses going to be announced shortly.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad