The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Sony a900 ads leaked

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Here's another leak, a guy using the A900 with a Zeiss 16-35mm:

http://forum.xitek.com/showthread.php?threadid=557025

Let's see now...

Sony A900 with

Zeiss 16-35mm f/? (new)
Zeiss 24-70mm f/2.8
Zeiss 85mm f/1.4
Zeiss 135mm f/1.8
Sony 70-400mm f/4.5-5.6 G (new)
And a macro. And in-body IS. And 24MP.

The rest of the camera has to pretty awful to make this a bad proposition.

Now, where is that huge pile of cash? Never here when I need it :rolleyes:
 
D

ddk

Guest
The S5 is on hold, still waiting in the shop. I'm considering buying a D700 instead, or both, selling the D80. There's too much work to think right now.

I could use the D700 for its low-light capabilities, but it's a lot of money, and I keep thinking of all the lenses I can buy for the $2,000 price difference :rolleyes:

I will probably do a lot of jewelry photography the coming year, mostly silver. The S5 is perfect for dynamic range and colours. The last shoot was done with available light with three different light sources, perfect for the Fuji, S3 in this case, but I had to shoot RAW to be on the safe side... 3 images, and then full stop for 40 seconds :sleep006:
I guess you had auto bracket on, you wont have the same problem with the S5, it has a much deeper buffer.

The problem with the Fuji sensor is that it doesn't render enough detail sometimes. So I guess I need both, right?
I don't know, I find the S5 very capable, it has more resolution than the S3 and the files take well to sharpening, detail isn't going to be your problem with this one. Yes the D700 images look sharper on screen but in print I find Fuji has more resolution with its wider tonal range and DR. Personally I skipped the Nikons (D3/D700) in favor MF digital.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Very valuable feedback, David. Looks like I should pick up the S5 and take a wait-and-see approach to FX for now.

There's a rather interesting WA DX lens in the makings too: the new Tamron 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5. If it's good, it will be a very useful lens.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Here's another leak, a guy using the A900 with a Zeiss 16-35mm:

http://forum.xitek.com/showthread.php?threadid=557025

Let's see now...

Sony A900 with

Zeiss 16-35mm f/? (new)
Zeiss 24-70mm f/2.8
Zeiss 85mm f/1.4
Zeiss 135mm f/1.8
Sony 70-400mm f/4.5-5.6 G (new)
And a macro. And in-body IS. And 24MP.

The rest of the camera has to pretty awful to make this a bad proposition.

Now, where is that huge pile of cash? Never here when I need it :rolleyes:
The Photo of the guy shooting on that link isn't using a a900 or a 16-35 as far as I can see.

The lens is the Zeiss 135/1.8 ... and the camera doesn't look like the protype a900 that's been shown so far ... it looks like a a700.

If that is the real a900 and it's 24 meg anti-shake in a a700 sized camera ... then look out Canon and Nikon !

The 16-35 is a DX type lens only ... the a900 is supposed to have a full frame sensor.

BTW, the Zeiss 24-70/2.8 is awesome, but very hard to find anywhere.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
The Photo of the guy shooting on that link isn't using a a900 or a 16-35 as far as I can see.

The lens is the Zeiss 135/1.8 ... and the camera doesn't look like the protype a900 that's been shown so far ... it looks like a a700.

If that is the real a900 and it's 24 meg anti-shake in a a700 sized camera ... then look out Canon and Nikon !

The 16-35 is a DX type lens only ... the a900 is supposed to have a full frame sensor.

BTW, the Zeiss 24-70/2.8 is awesome, but very hard to find anywhere.
The lens is a zoom lens (two rings) and the numbers say 16 and up to 35. It's believed to be the new, not yet launched full frame WA zoom.

The camera is clearly not the A700. The A700 has a prism with a flat top, while this one has one with a pyramid shape, identical to previous prototypes of the A900. You can also see that there's black tape on the front of the prism to hide the Sony logo.
 

Steen

Senior Subscriber Member
Marc, look at the pentaprism box, it's definitely the new A900.
And on the zoom barrel of the lens you can see the digits 35 and behind that 28, so it has to be a new ultra wide angle 24x36 zoom lens - in the range of 16-35mm or 17-35mm I assume ... ?
/Steen
 

fotografz

Well-known member
The lens is a zoom lens (two rings) and the numbers say 16 and up to 35. It's believed to be the new, not yet launched full frame WA zoom.

The camera is clearly not the A700. The A700 has a prism with a flat top, while this one has one with a pyramid shape, identical to previous prototypes of the A900. You can also see that there's black tape on the front of the prism to hide the Sony logo.
Holy-Moly, you are right.

What is confusing is that the a900 photos show a larger camera with a base like a D3 or canon 1D series. This photo shows it as the size of a D700.

Maybe the base is an option.

This could be very exciting news.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Holy-Moly, you are right.

What is confusing is that the a900 photos show a larger camera with a base like a D3 or canon 1D series. This photo shows it as the size of a D700.

Maybe the base is an option.

This could be very exciting news.
HI Marc
I've always understood that the A900 would be a 'small' camera with an add on grip - it's one of the reasons I wonder whether Nikon won't bring out a D800 (to compete with Sony) rather than a D3x or D4 (to compete with existing Canons).

That camera also has no popup flash as far as one can tell.

Aren't those sony/zeiss zoom's pretty!

On the other hand, my local dealer (who is selling a lot of Sony kit) reports of terrible backup service from Sony, and real difficulty in getting hold of the lenses.

We shall see.
 
D

ddk

Guest
Very valuable feedback, David. Looks like I should pick up the S5 and take a wait-and-see approach to FX for now.
I would but then I always liked the Fujis, I went for the S3 after buying and hating the D2x followed by a short romance with a 1dsmk2. The S5 was just what I was hoping it would be, a capable body and improved IQ even if its still DX, for the moment I still prefer it to any new offering on the market. The S5 is your camera if you value tonal depth close to film, and the Fuji colors, well you know about that already.

There's a rather interesting WA DX lens in the makings too: the new Tamron 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5. If it's good, it will be a very useful lens.
Yes, I've been looking at that too, it looks quite interesting but for now its the Zeiss glass that I really love on the S5. My only reason to be interested in the Sony is because of the Zeiss glass, otherwise I haven't outgrown the Fuji yet.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I would but then I always liked the Fujis, I went for the S3 after buying and hating the D2x followed by a short romance with a 1dsmk2. The S5 was just what I was hoping it would be, a capable body and improved IQ even if its still DX, for the moment I still prefer it to any new offering on the market. The S5 is your camera if you value tonal depth close to film, and the Fuji colors, well you know about that already.



Yes, I've been looking at that too, it looks quite interesting but for now its the Zeiss glass that I really love on the S5. My only reason to be interested in the Sony is because of the Zeiss glass, otherwise I haven't outgrown the Fuji yet.
The only way to make the Fujis shine is with good glass. No compromises there. I agree on the tonal depth, and in difficult lighting, there's no competition whatsoever, possibly except for the Olympus E-1, but in my case, that's history. It's interesting that Fuji and Kodak, the two film conglomerates, make sensors with a similar "look".
 
D

ddk

Guest
The only way to make the Fujis shine is with good glass. No compromises there. I agree on the tonal depth, and in difficult lighting, there's no competition whatsoever, possibly except for the Olympus E-1, but in my case, that's history. It's interesting that Fuji and Kodak, the two film conglomerates, make sensors with a similar "look".
Yes, it is interesting, I guess the same design criteria that they had for developing their emulsions carried through to their sensor design.

I find the Kodak and Fuji look similar except that both have very wide tonal range with exceptional color depth and like quality glass. But that's to be expected of sensors with high resolving power. Fujis have the upper hand on DR and noise while the Kodaks seem to have slightly more clarity.

I'll take your word for the E-1, never had one but I know that Zuiko glass is up there.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
This may be the ideal DSLR solution for me... Glad I waited out the rush to Nikon after clearing out my Canon gear. Need to see what Canon has up their sleeve though before i decide. Did I hear correctly on the price at $3000 for the body?
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
This is unique

After pressing the depth of field preview button, the camera “grabs” a RAW preview image which is processed and displayed on the LCD screen. You can then fine tune white balance, determine the best level and effect of dynamic range optimization, adjust exposure compensation and check histogram data, all before you actually take the picture. Preview images are not recorded on the camera’s memory card, thus saving capacity.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I'll stay and dance with those who brung me, Canon and Leica.
Normally I'd agree John, but in the case of Nikon it's been too little, too late, and in the case of Canon it's been their undeniable arrogance at totally ignoring what we -- real photographers -- have been asking them to do for years. You know, simple things like an external MLU button. Finally the Leica R never got AF and I need AF in my DSLR...

So my current attitude is to move on if they don't deliver. I am not a brand loyalist, instead I will be putting my money on the systems that best solve my shooting needs. Right now I need a DSLR for fast frame rates, high ISO and long lens work, and frankly not much else.

I could have kept the 5D in service, but wanted better high ISO and a bit better frame rate (and a true MLU button). The D3/D700 added a stop of ISO and framerate over the 5D, but unfortunately deliver (IMO) the same 'plasticy' looking file. Yes I can process a lot of that look out, but it takes time. So now I was left waiting to see what the 5D replacement(s) will be and this new Sony full-frame 22MP wonder shows up. Bottom line will be what Canon releases and how well the Sony does at ISO 3200 (its 5FPS is just adequate for my needs), but this new Sony using Zeiss glass is a real big plus point in its column, so it's wait and see for me...

Oh, and the Leica M fits my philosophy even with all of its warts: giving me a true digital RF camera with a large-enough sensor and great glass, so I still dance with it :)

Cheers,
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Just have to love this comment from dpreview: "I can only presume the DSLR team has never met the guys behind the current range of Cyber-shot cameras... and I hope they never do."

This looks like a truly great camera in every way. If the image quality lives up to the rest, I need to go back into my box and do some thinking :confused:
 
Top