D
Deleted member 7792
Guest
Deleted
Last edited by a moderator:
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!
V
Vivek
Guest
Why now? 
iiiNelson
Well-known member
Ehhh... why not?Why now?
I probably won't buy one but I could understand why those with thousands of dollars worth of lenses would. It seems to be a DSLR version of the A7RII with a possible menu revamp, some processing, dual SD card slots, video, and AF upgrades.
Solid camera... on paper.
V
Vivek
Guest
I hope it is not in any other state than solid!
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
Cool camera :thumbs:
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
Maybe because from January to July this year, 4,547,337 DSLR cameras were shipped worldwide (down 19.2% from last year), while only 1,503,178 mirrorless cameras were shipped (down down 17.4% from last year).Why now?
V
Vivek
Guest
Yes, the latest and the greatest are in E mount.
iiiNelson
Well-known member
Over the last year they've updated the 16-35/2.8, the 24-70/2.8, the 85/1.4, and the 70-300/4-5.6. The 70-200/2.8 was updated a couple of years ago as was the 35/1.4 and 70-400/4-5.6. The 50/1.4 was relatively new and the FE mount glass is mostly based off the A mount versions optically.
I have a long history of using A mount FF Sony DSLRs/SLTs.
My primary use was weddings from the A900 up to and including use of the A99.
When I began phasing out weddings while semi-retiring, I switched over to the A7R and then the A7R-II ... both of which proved to be slower and more difficult to use in fast changing wedding scenarios.
Had I continued with the A mount SLT, I would have upgraded the Zeiss A-24-70/2.8 and A-85/1.4 to the improved newer versions. I already had the Zeiss A-24/2 and A-50/1.4 as well as the fab Zeiss A-135/1.8.
IMO, the A99 SLT was a near pro-spec camera, and never let me down during intense duty as a primary wedding camera. If this A99-II is of the same quality build, it should be a terrific camera that is fast as hell, and well balanced with
fast zooms and large aperture primes like the 50/1.4 and longer optics like the 70-200/2.8 and 135/1.8.
Cudos to Sony!!!!
- Marc
My primary use was weddings from the A900 up to and including use of the A99.
When I began phasing out weddings while semi-retiring, I switched over to the A7R and then the A7R-II ... both of which proved to be slower and more difficult to use in fast changing wedding scenarios.
Had I continued with the A mount SLT, I would have upgraded the Zeiss A-24-70/2.8 and A-85/1.4 to the improved newer versions. I already had the Zeiss A-24/2 and A-50/1.4 as well as the fab Zeiss A-135/1.8.
IMO, the A99 SLT was a near pro-spec camera, and never let me down during intense duty as a primary wedding camera. If this A99-II is of the same quality build, it should be a terrific camera that is fast as hell, and well balanced with
fast zooms and large aperture primes like the 50/1.4 and longer optics like the 70-200/2.8 and 135/1.8.
Cudos to Sony!!!!
- Marc
ErikKaffehr
Well-known member
Hi,
I still have the SLT 99 and the ZA 24-70/2.8.
Nothing positive to say about either, compared to to the A7rII and the Canon lenses. Controls on the A7rII are much precise, the Canon lenses are well made and sharp. I actually got myself a Canon 24-105 instead of the 24-70/2.8 ZA.
For me, the great benefit with the A7rII is the short flange distance, allowing a lot of interesting lens choices.
The Canon lenses are nothing fancy, but well made. The best lens I have is the 16-35/4L, it clearly outperforms my Distagons on the P45+. I had all the Hasselblad Distagons except the 40/4 IF, so I have some experience with that.
It is nice that Sony makes a new SLT99 with 42MP, but I feel that the SLT line is not where the future is.
I also feel that Sony should start to make some very good lenses, like Fuji does. That said, there are some positive signs, like the G Master lenses being quite OK.
I would rather have a consistently high perfomance set of lenses than ZA, G, GM and plain Sony lenses of different and mostly questionable quality.
I have shot the A99 a couple of times since I switched to the A7rII and I just feel what a clumsy and boring quality camera it is. It may of course be that the A99 has seen a lot of usage and may have some wear.
On the other hand, I did like the A77 with the 16-80/3.5-4.5 lens. S nice street shooters camera.
The only Sony A-mount I will keep is the A900.
Just to say, I don't think the A7rII is the greatest camera on earth, but it does the job and it ticks almost all of my check boxes. Must say, I never really disliked any Sony model.
I don't think it is meaningful to talk a lot about pro cameras. Lots of professionals use Canon's 5D in different versions. It is not a 'pro' camera, but it does the job and who cares about the rest?
Best regards
Erik
I still have the SLT 99 and the ZA 24-70/2.8.
Nothing positive to say about either, compared to to the A7rII and the Canon lenses. Controls on the A7rII are much precise, the Canon lenses are well made and sharp. I actually got myself a Canon 24-105 instead of the 24-70/2.8 ZA.
For me, the great benefit with the A7rII is the short flange distance, allowing a lot of interesting lens choices.
The Canon lenses are nothing fancy, but well made. The best lens I have is the 16-35/4L, it clearly outperforms my Distagons on the P45+. I had all the Hasselblad Distagons except the 40/4 IF, so I have some experience with that.
It is nice that Sony makes a new SLT99 with 42MP, but I feel that the SLT line is not where the future is.
I also feel that Sony should start to make some very good lenses, like Fuji does. That said, there are some positive signs, like the G Master lenses being quite OK.
I would rather have a consistently high perfomance set of lenses than ZA, G, GM and plain Sony lenses of different and mostly questionable quality.
I have shot the A99 a couple of times since I switched to the A7rII and I just feel what a clumsy and boring quality camera it is. It may of course be that the A99 has seen a lot of usage and may have some wear.
On the other hand, I did like the A77 with the 16-80/3.5-4.5 lens. S nice street shooters camera.
The only Sony A-mount I will keep is the A900.
Just to say, I don't think the A7rII is the greatest camera on earth, but it does the job and it ticks almost all of my check boxes. Must say, I never really disliked any Sony model.
I don't think it is meaningful to talk a lot about pro cameras. Lots of professionals use Canon's 5D in different versions. It is not a 'pro' camera, but it does the job and who cares about the rest?
Best regards
Erik
Last edited:
Dear Friends: I need to remind you that there is a wealth of superb Minolta lenses available for Sony A mount. I have the A99 and the following Minolta lenses:
28/2, 35/2, 50/2.8 macro, 100/2.8 macro, 100/2, 135/2.8, 28-135/4, 80-200/2.8, and the amazing 200/2.8. They are all AF and well constructed. AF may be slow and noisy, but image quality is remarkable.
Some of these lenses are in the legendary category: especially the 100/2 and the 200/2.8.
Check them out on eBay.
Roy Benson
28/2, 35/2, 50/2.8 macro, 100/2.8 macro, 100/2, 135/2.8, 28-135/4, 80-200/2.8, and the amazing 200/2.8. They are all AF and well constructed. AF may be slow and noisy, but image quality is remarkable.
Some of these lenses are in the legendary category: especially the 100/2 and the 200/2.8.
Check them out on eBay.
Roy Benson
ErikKaffehr
Well-known member
Hi,
Technically, the A99 is not a DSLR as the viewfinder is electronic and the translucent mirror just feeds the AF. Modern sensors have on sensor PDAF, so the translucent mirror is not needed.
Still, AF on the A99 may be better. Sony has an SLT based adapter for older lenses.
It is probably true that shipment of DSLRs is three times mirrorless shipments but Sony's share of that market is very small.
Clearly good that Sony keeps the A-mount alive, with two new bodies announced this year.
Best regards
Erik
Technically, the A99 is not a DSLR as the viewfinder is electronic and the translucent mirror just feeds the AF. Modern sensors have on sensor PDAF, so the translucent mirror is not needed.
Still, AF on the A99 may be better. Sony has an SLT based adapter for older lenses.
It is probably true that shipment of DSLRs is three times mirrorless shipments but Sony's share of that market is very small.
Clearly good that Sony keeps the A-mount alive, with two new bodies announced this year.
Best regards
Erik
To add to that ... my photo buddy Ed Richter has a number of these lenses including some so called "Secret Handshake" lenses that were collaborations between Leica and Minolta. Outstanding characteristics!
One such "handshake" lens of possible interest is the A Mount Sony 500/8 Mirror lens ... (renamed from the Minolta branded one). I once had the Leica R version, but preferred this one because it is Auto-Focus! Plus, on the Sony cameras with IBIS it is also very well stabilized ... making it far more usable than any other mirror, (see hand-held pic below from this lens).
- Marc
V
Vivek
Guest
That says it all. Nostalgic value can not be underestimated.
Guy and Chad and others have bought/sold the legend 200/2.8 and have moved on.
V
Vivek
Guest
You got me there!