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

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Well 3k for a D700 and 3k for this new sony. That will make anyone think. Than what is canon bringing. Hold on to your boots folks this is getting interesting. This camera has a lot of firsts also. First IS body
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
From the samples I've seen so far, anything above ISO400 seem to be unusable for commercial purposes. ISO100 and 200 on the other hand are just stunning. And the viewfinder appears to be over and above all the competition.

I'm seeing a very nice studio camera here. I could absolutely use one for product photography, jewelry in particular, but I guess it's a good idea to see what Nikon can get out of that sensor, if that is what they are planning.
 

johnastovall

Deceased, but remembered fondly here...
One big question for Sony why not DNG for their raw files?

At least on the brightside no Sony Memory Stick.
 

Lars

Active member
Looking forward to seeing how the competition responds. Sony certainly changes the high-end price point.
This will be an interesting next 12 months, with Canon ready to release new models in the fall, and various strange rumors based on oversized IC on new Nikon lenses.
 

mazor

New member
Had a look at the image samples on DPreview. As others have stated anything over ISO 400 seems to exhibit a bit too much chroma noise. Also not impressed with the water colour like effect at ISO200, as if someone has already applied noise reduction to the image!

What is impressive with that camera is it is the first DSLR to have 100% viewfinder in a smaller body, ie, not 1 series, or D3 sized camera with built in vertical grip.

MAzor
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
The jpegs out of the camera seem to be the problem. I've seen some samples of high ISO files taken in RAW that look much better, with a finer grain noise and much smaller amounts of it as well.
 
Just saw in my local newspaper that it will be demo-ed at the Sony center in Stockholm today. Expect to drop in there about 2 hrs from now...:thumbup:

For those of you living in the time zones behind: just :sleep006: for some more hours....
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Any link to those files?
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1037&thread=29256050

Here are some results from someone using Therappe (never heard about it, but it apparently works):



Here's another one. This one is down-sampled to 12MP, to match the resolution of the D700. Apparently, the reds had to suffer to obtain the noise-free image, but this is starting to look good:



From this thread:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=29263876
 
Last edited:

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
One thing to remember when studying high-ISO capabilities, is that the Sony has IS that works with all lenses, including any fast prime. That obviously makes taking photos of slow-moving subjects in low light possible at lower ISO than with a Canon or Nikon, since none of those two have lenses with IS/VR shorter than 200mm that are faster than f/2.8.
 

mazor

New member
Thanks Jorgen. it does seem that the high mega pixel from the A900 is not really doing justice at ISO1600. The d700 is by far achieving much better pixel quality.

Guess we wont be using the A900 for low light indoor action. It does not matter how much built in image stabilization there is if the subject is moving, higher ISOs will be called for.

MAzor
 

fotografz

Well-known member
The ONLY interest I have in this camera is the AF Zeiss lenses. I see it as a contender for replacing my now sold Leica DMR/9 and lenses, and now sold Canon's with 85/1.2L and 135/2L.

I'm not necessarily seeing it as a system replacement, but more a supplement to the Nikon system in my wedding roller... and a nice portrait set.

If Nikon were to offer a 85/1.4VR and 135/2VR is the same manner as the more recent 100/2.8VR Macro ... this Sony consideration would be tabled in a heartbeat.

I have three concerns about buying into this proposition ...

Lack of fast Zeiss primes below 85mm ... which hopefully would NOT include their 50/1.4 which in every iteration (C/Y, ZF, and N) exhibits the worst Bokeh of any 50/1.4 I've ever used. The expensive Sony 35/1.4G is not on the list after seeing shots at f/1.4 that are unacceptably soft. So a Zeiss AF28/2 or AF35/1.4 would make it more attractive.

Any mention what-so-ever of crappy noise performance ... something that has plagued the Alpha series to date. Clean ISO 1600 is a must ... which is something a D3/D700 can do standing on it's head. I also personally could care less about this being 24 meg. and would have actually been more interested in FF 12 to 16 meg. with larger pixel sites.

Service ... perhaps the most important of the 3 by far. IMO from other experiences and looking at their history, Sony's corporate culture is a model of arrogance that Canon can only stand back and admire. I can say that I KNOW for a fact that Nikon's service system is excellent ... even though I've not yet joined the Professional version. I will NOT subject myself to anything even remotely akin to the nightmare of Leica service ever again. IMO, Sony will need to provide a Pro level service experience for this camera.

Other remote concerns: the modo stupid proprietary flash system that requires an adapter to use a PW or any radio system ... and lack of rental gear.
 
D

ddk

Guest
From the samples I've seen so far, anything above ISO400 seem to be unusable for commercial purposes. ISO100 and 200 on the other hand are just stunning. And the viewfinder appears to be over and above all the competition.
I have to agree with you on the samples, they leave quite a bit to be desired, jpg or not. I really don't see what's so special about lower iso images either, I guess you haven't picked up your S5 yet.

I'm seeing a very nice studio camera here. I could absolutely use one for product photography, jewelry in particular, but I guess it's a good idea to see what Nikon can get out of that sensor, if that is what they are planning.
As far as a studio camera goes why bother with this, you can pick up a Kodak slr/n for a lot less money with much better IQ for your jewelry shoots. But and this is a big but, I'm not so sure if you want all that sharpness for silver products that are riddled with casting and finishing problems. My other question is if your style of shooting is the classic, sharp, detailed look then 35mm isn't going to cut it with its shallow dof and full frame is even shallower...
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I see this as a great backup to my MF system and having at least one DSLR to shoot some stuff. But I would like a clean 1600. So far i guess i am still leaning the Nikon way. My only real reason would be high ISO stuff since i have my 800 limit on my Phase back. Okay Canon show me. LOL
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I will probably buy the best ISO 1600 camera, and if I need a tie-breaker, look at ISO 3200. Unfortunately, I suspect that will leave this Sony and its Zeiss AF glass out.

One thing on the above 1600 frames, it appears the D700 shot is maybe half a stop brighter, and this could be affecting the reds. Could also be a bad camera profile since this is such a new camera...
 
Top