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: First Impressions

fotografz

Well-known member
Just got the A900, and two lenses: Zeiss 85/1.4 and 135/1.8 with the Zeiss 24-70/2.8 on it's way. Waiting for availability of the Zeiss 16-35/2.8.

Primary reason for the Sony selection is the Zeiss AF optics. Wouldn't even consider Sony without them.

A900 camera itself is better than I had expected. Quite easy to use, and I really like the WB controls more than any other camera I've used to date ... something that is important to me when shooting weddings in ever changing or mixed light temps.

In-camera image stabilization is brilliant, and makes the camera worth the price alone when using these longer Zeiss lenses in low ambient light. With some of these lenses it helps make up for really high ISO performance that's lacking compared to the Nikon D3 and D700.

IQ is also better than I had expected in the mid-high ISO range from 800 to 2000. So far, I feel 6400 is not desirable for what I shoot, except for B&W conversions where it looks pretty good. However, the most important ISOs for me are 200 to 500 and 800 to 2000 ... and in those cases, this camera barks with the best of them.

One mitigating factor that shows up almost immediately is the visibly higher contrast from the Zeiss lenses. When using higher ISOs with micro-contrast type optics like this, I've found there is less need to increase contrast or sharpen in post ... which in turn assists in suppressing noise at higher ISOs. Also, what I do not know for a fact, but suspect, is that the AA filter on this A900 camera is not as aggressive as was on my Canon 1DMKIII & 1DsMKIII.

AF appears to be on Par or slightly slower than my Nikons but these lenses have large glass to move around. The Zeiss 85/1.4 is quicker than the Nikon 85/1.4 for sure, and a jack Rabbit compared to my now sold Canon 85/1.2 MKII.

I have a ton to absorb yet concerning tweaking all the camera settings to my tastes, and the proof of the pudding will come at my next wedding shoot.

The Zeiss lenses do not disappoint. Build quality is one of the best I've held in hand. Even the shade is metal. Beautiful industrial design.

Oh, but the Bokeh is so dreamy on both lenses. Like the R80 ... but in-focus areas are sharper. The immediate impression is 3D ... where you swear you could shift to the side and see behind the in-focus object.

More to come.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Hey Marc
I'm so glad you jumped on board. I'm really enjoying mine, I don't have the two Zeiss primes you mention (yet) but I do have the 24-70 (which also has a metal lens hood).
I find it really nice to use - so very un-Sony like - almost analogue feeling. I also find the back panel very easy and convenient to use. Someone has definitely thought hard about the ergonomics. I also really like the 3 user settings on the mode dial, and the ease of setting / understanding them (I don't believe I have a particularly small brain, but I found that the plethora of different settings and banks on the Nikon ended up just confusing).

ISO up to 2000 is okay - it's really important to keep the exposure to the right . . . I know this is stating the obvious, but it seems to be much more necessary with this camera.

If you want a cheap(ish) and convenient telephoto zoom, then the sony 70-300G lens is a good performer, a step up from the Nikon equivalent. I've had less luck with the legacy lenses, and with the sony primes (although the 50 1.4 is okay).
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Yeah, can't wait to set up the 3 custom user settings ... they will be perfect for fast paced weddings where I switch back and forth between "A" outside at lower ISOs, then inside where I go to manual at higher ISOs. I'll probably set the third one for full auto/program.

I'm not going to flesh out the lens selection beyond the Zeiss zooms and primes. They are all I need for the job at hand. But of note for you, Irakly said the old Minolta 300/4 was stellar.

First shot with the Zeiss 135/1.8 once the battery was charged ... long suffering Schnuffy that my wife tortures with goofy costumes :rolleyes:
 
K

karrphoto

Guest
I loved my Minolta gear and it killed me to have to give up my Maxxum 9 and Maxxum 7 when I went digital. I moved to Canon because Nikon was (and still is) backwards. lol. But I wish I would had kept my stuff... I think a lot of the engineers from Minolta did stay on at Sony from what I recall, it was just an acquiring, not buying the tech, so really it's Minolta with Sony's name, or I'm pretty sure.

The one thing I'm unsure of is the in camera stabilization. Chuck Westfall from Canon (yeah, you could say he's biased...) says that while in camera can be nice, when you get into the longer length lenses, 150mm+ the sensor would have to move so much to really be equal to what the in lens does, it wouldn't be possible. He's talking 2-4mm of movement. I don't know if he's talking out his a$$ or it's true, but Chuck pretty damn knowledgeable when it comes to cameras.

Love the Chihuahua. We have 3.. lol! My sister brought over a santa hat with beard, the old lady (14 years old) had no problem with wearing it.. lol, gotta love it. :)
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Jeeze, I wouldn't know. Haven't seen any disclaimers from Sony to that effect ... but that doesn't mean anything. It's not revelant for me as 135mm is as long as I need.

However, I previously had heard that image stabilization for full frame wouldn't be possible either ... but here it is :thumbup:
 
A

asabet

Guest
The Olympus users I've asked report that the sensor stabilization in the E-3 does a nice job with the Oly superteles.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Yes - quite a few knowledgeable people did say that:
1. image stabilisation wouldn't be possible with FF
2. even if it was, then it wouldn't be possible to have a 100% viewfinder

I haven't used it with anything over 300mm, but it definitely works with that. I guess it's not quite as good as in lens stabilisation . . . . . but other tech people seem to have the same things to say about that affecting quality.

Whatever, it's nice to be able to put on the old 50mm f1.4 and have stabilisation.

Chuck Westfall may know a lot, but his prognostications are unlikely to be entirely even handed!

I bought the Sony, because I really did want a higher mp small body for landscape and walking - I wasn't expecting the earth, but I've found:

1. the camera is MUCH nicer to use than I'd expected . . . the manual really is pretty redundant, and that is a tribute. It seems to have everything you need, and very little you don't
2. the image quality is better than I'd expected - it's nothing like as good as the D3 at high ISO, but 100% crops up to 400 ISO seem much cleaner, clearer and sharper (and of course, 100% crops on the Sony is a much smaller area of the frame).
Lenses are the same old FF conundrum . . .I shouldn't lament the passing of your minolta gear (I had it too) - the minolta lenses I've tried on it haven't really given of their best. . . . . . the new Zeiss lenses on the other hand !
3. it's much better for portrait and close up work than I expected, and it's quick as well. Focusing not as fast as Nikon, but it seems more accurate and sure footed.
 

Brian Mosley

New member
Hi Jono, since you have the G1 and the A900 - can you tell us how the G1's EVF compares sizewise with the OVF in the A900? is it much smaller?

Kind Regards

Brian
 

jonoslack

Active member
Hi Jono, since you have the G1 and the A900 - can you tell us how the G1's EVF compares sizewise with the OVF in the A900? is it much smaller?

Kind Regards

Brian
What an interesting question.
It's dark now, which is a two way street - the gain in the G1 viewfinder is useful . ..
I'd say that the A900 viewfinder seems a little larger (but really not much). However, looking at my 24 monitor so that it fills the screen, the writing is completely readable on the A900, and a struggle on the G1 (that also goes for a piece of well lit white paper).

It's actually a no-brainer (but the G1 certainly doesn't disgrace itself).
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Zeiss 24-70/2.8 for the A900 arrived today. What a beautifully made lens, just like the 85/1.4 and 135/1.8.

I am absolutely thrilled with this lens also. Beautiful Bokeh, simply beautiful. The big surprise was how close it focuses, amazing!
 

jonoslack

Active member
Zeiss 24-70/2.8 for the A900 arrived today. What a beautifully made lens, just like the 85/1.4 and 135/1.8.

I am absolutely thrilled with this lens also. Beautiful Bokeh, simply beautiful. The big surprise was how close it focuses, amazing!
Hi Marc
you warm the cockles of my heart :ROTFL:
I thought I was the lone voice in the wilderness :)

Now there is the wait for the 16-35 . . . . dare one hope for a t/s lens?
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Hi Marc
you warm the cockles of my heart :ROTFL:
I thought I was the lone voice in the wilderness :)

Now there is the wait for the 16-35 . . . . dare one hope for a t/s lens?
Yep, just waiting for the Zeiss 16-35/2.8 and I'm done .... unless Zeiss comes with a 300/4 :rolleyes:

It seems this camera is really hiding it's light under a bushel basket. :wtf:
 
Z

Zeiss

Guest
Marc,

thanks for the report. Very informative and tempting.
Any system that lets me use Zeiss glass is interesting to me. I have previously seen images taken with the 135/1.8 - amazing. Just wish they would make it for nikon.

I won't switch though simply for the fact that I love film too much and there is no F5/6 equivalent with the sony mount - or is there?
 

jonoslack

Active member
I won't switch though simply for the fact that I love film too much and there is no F5/6 equivalent with the sony mount - or is there?
Hi There
I'm not sure about that - but remember that the Sony mount is only the old Minolta mount - so there is a huge number of legacy lenses, many of which are supposed to be excellent.
 

jonoslack

Active member
I collect my A900 / Zeiss 24-70 f/2.8 tomorrow, work permitting. Zeiss glass is a prime driver for me, too.

Quentin
Congratulations
All the way from Devon!

I think you're nipping in just in time . . . seems to me that they might suddenly be a bump in demand.
 

Quentin_Bargate

Well-known member
Congratulations
All the way from Devon!

I think you're nipping in just in time . . . seems to me that they might suddenly be a bump in demand.
Absolutely, Jono, particularly as the A900 is being priced quite keenly now. Note also the Michael Reichmann review of the A900 published today is very positive. I have never owned a Walkman before :LOL:

Quentin
 

douglasf13

New member
Congratulations
All the way from Devon!

I think you're nipping in just in time . . . seems to me that they might suddenly be a bump in demand.

I just received my A900 to go with the Zeiss 24-70 and 85mm! Jono, thanks for all of your feedback on the system, as it was instrumental in my decision.

Zeiss, there isn't an F5/6 equivalent per se, but the Maxxum 9 and 7 film cameras were quite nice and available at good prices. The 9 is the more professional, but it needs an upgrade if you want to use the newer SSM (equivalent to USM) lenses.
 
A

asabet

Guest
Got a nice core of A900 users here now. The Zeiss 135/1.8 is a very tempting lens. I wish Zeiss made AF lenses for Nikon!
 

jonoslack

Active member
Got a nice core of A900 users here now. The Zeiss 135/1.8 is a very tempting lens. I wish Zeiss made AF lenses for Nikon!
Hi Amin
There is lots of scope for more Zeiss lenses afaik the 85 f1.4 and 135 f1.8 still have old fashioned motors (unlike the 24-70).

As for A900 users - I guess that there will be quite a few around now.

I don't think I can remember another time when one manufacturer's announcement set everybody off buying a camera from another manufacturer!

Douglas - I hope you're very happy with your new tool :) especially if I had anything to do with the decision!
 
Top