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!

600 shots into a new A900...some observations

benroy

Subscriber Member
I've had the A900 and lenses for a bit less than a week...about 600 shots.

The build quality on the A900 is not as solid as that of the 5D, D300, and the D200.My particular favorite is the D200: solid, compact, fits my hand real well.First reaction when I took it out of the box: too plasticky.

The on-off switch is in the wrong place (for me)...I'm used to the Canon and Nikon locations. The switch is not very sturdy, either.

The CF card door is flimsy...every time I open it I have trepidations that it was the last time. The slot for the card seems more confined than on other cameras I have owned...I have trouble getting my pudgy fingers onto the release button.

The viewfinder is really great...large and bright..no complaints here. The diopter wheel off to the side is another story. Again, too small for my pudgy fingers.

The in-body vibration reductions works really well. Compensates very nicely for my shaky, 77 year old hands.

The in-body dust reducer sounds and feels real nice...but...I picked up two dust spots the first time I switched lenses...and can't get rid of them.

I have other observations that I would like to make (especially about the 24 MP sensor), but I'm afraid I will use up too much posting space, so I will defer for another time.

Roy Benson ([email protected])
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Roy you have all the space you need , we love trying to kill the servers. Trust me you can't kill our servers there HUGE. LOL
 

LJL

New member
Roy,
Be careful with those new "dust specs" on the sensor (cover glass). They may be residual oil/lubricant from the mirror assembly. The sensor shaking will never dislodge them. Most cameras take a thousand or so actuations to "settle" all the dust and stuff, so you may be there with the A900. At this point, it might be worth trying to get a look at those dust specs and see if they are just dust or some residual lubricant specs. If the latter, one good wet cleaning should do the trick....maybe for as long as you use the camera. Once the sensor cover slip is thoroughly cleaned, the shake mechanisms seem to work really well at fending off new dust particles.....but they cannot dislodge anything really sticky. Just a thought.

LJ
 

benroy

Subscriber Member
Thanks for the input, LJ. I agree with the oil residue idea...the dust spots would have vibrated off by now. The two spots (very small) only appear in a bald sky and are quickly and easily removed with the healing tool in PS Elements. So I'll live with the spots for now...but when they get to the salt and pepper skies that I get with my M8, I'll clean the sensor.
Roy Benson
 

benroy

Subscriber Member
I was going to wait until tomorrow to make another post, but this issue has been nagging me since I started using the A900. The large files that are produced have really slowed computer functions down...and eaten up hard drive storage space. I have the early version of the Mac Mini which is perfectly adequate for processing files from the 10, 12 MP cameras...processing zips along pretty well in PS. But since I have been processing the larger A900 files, things have really slowed down. So...upgrade the Mac Mini? Go back to the 10-12 MP cameras? The M8 images, in my opinion, stand up to anything that I have gotten, so far, with the A900. I only print 11x17s and it's hard to tell the difference when comparing prints at arm's length.

More later on the 24 MP sensor.

Roy Benson
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Roy be it in C1 or LR you can down res at the time of processing so you can make your files smaller. Now another trick and fair warning with it you don't want to edit the jpeg and than keep saving it, this will degenerate the file. But here is what you can do output the full 16 bit Tif file and do all your edits to it and get everything completely done. Now the file will be big and such but you will have to flatten any layers . Now from here you can save this as a jpeg and store it and it will be much smaller. Now here comes the warning again you simply don't want to keep playing with it at this stage and keep saving it as a jpeg at some point the file will go down.

Now the real way out is get a bigger box with off line storage . I know not something you wanted to here but hard cold facts as you move forward in the digital era.


Now if you can tell us what program you are using to process and what you have in the mini we might have some upgrade suggestions for you.
 

benroy

Subscriber Member
Thanks for the input, Guy...and I appreciate the availability of more posting space. I'm using the LaCie Porsche 250 gb external hard drive(s). I don't save everything I shoot...only the stuff that will hang in the Louvre...but I store them as fully processed Tiffs and they do take up quite a bit of room. I'm using Photoshop Elements 6 to process...works fine...quick and easy with 10-12 MP output, but very slow with 24 MP output. I've been 8 bit processing, rather than 16 bit. I'm not really interested in downsizing using jpegs, for the very reason you bring up, which is the degradation of the image.

I think upgrading my Mac would be the simplest and most beneficial first step...and I will look into that this week.

Roy Benson
 

robmac

Well-known member
One other trick is doing the work in stages, renaming as you go ; save w/layers as name 1, flattening when fairly sure you are done, re-name, add more layers, save, flatten rename -etc., so you can always go back to the last stage if needed. That and purging histories as you clear a stage to free up memory.

Other than the lower RAM and processor of the Mini, the other issue will be the graphics card - which is typically a little on the weak side in the mini. If thinking of upgrading, you can get nice-priced refurb machines from Apple directly. Latter copies of the iMac (if looking for a budget machine), for example can be stretched to 6GB RAM for (now with dropping RAM prices) very little coin using after-market kits. Check www.digilloyd.com's Apple performance section for some good info.
 
Last edited:

LJL

New member
Roy,
If you have the time, interest and an espresso machine, here is a link to some performance ideas for Macs, and how to wring the most out of what you may have or plan to use. A lot of the stuff listed in this compilation has been discussed in various ways on this forum, but this is a good starting place to get up to speed.

http://macperformanceguide.com/

LJ
 

benroy

Subscriber Member
Thanks to robmac and LJ for their computer input...much appreciated... 6 gb of RAM recommended? Oh, boy...what have I got myself into?

Roy Benson
 

douglasf13

New member
I'm surprised that you feel that way about the A900 build. It's got a magnesium frame internally, and a full magnesium shell, so maybe it's light weight is throwin you off??
 

edwardkaraa

New member
Ben,

I agree with you about the CF card door which doesn't open enough and it is a bit awkward to remove the card. But that's about all what I agree with in your post :grin:
 

jonoslack

Active member
Hi Roy
I'm with Douglas on this one. If it feels flimsy, it's because it's lighter than the D700, but I don't think there is any evidence that it's less tough (D700 card door isn't great either). Personally, in 10 years of digital cameras, I've only once broken a card door, and that was on an Olympus E1, which certainly had the toughest of all I've had (metal). I think that if you give them a good bang when they're open, they're all going to fail at the hinge, however solid the door might feel.

Actually, I do agree with you about the on/off switch, but it's a small thing and doesn't take long to get used to.

As for the processing - why not try Aperture or lightroom? it means that you don't have to save ANY tiff files, as your modifications are saved in a datafile and reapplied when you look at the image. It allows you to have any number of versions of a file without using more space. You could also convert the files to .DNG files, which are considerably smaller.

But you are going to need a new computer - I use one of the new iMAC 24", and with 4gb of RAM it sings along with the A900 files in Aperture - added to which it is a joy to have around.

I hope this helps
 

benroy

Subscriber Member
Thanks, Jono, for the tips on Aperture and Lightroom...also for the info on the iMac. I'll look into these things today. I really enjoy your photos...especially the black and white ones.

I'm sure I got off on the wrong foot with my A900 observations...initial remarks appear to be carping and petty (on-off switch, CF door, plasticky).
I should have completed what I had to say rather than leave it as I did. The A900 is a fine camera...great viewfinder, handles well, easy to get at adjustments with the Fn button. I still have some issues with the 24 MP sensor...and the size and quality of the resultant files.

I'm a 77 year old retiree who used to be in the business, but am now just a hobbyist who takes his camera with him on his daily South Florida walks. I enjoy the nice images that the A900 and the great Zeiss lenses produce, but my career doesn't depend upon my work output and I have other things I have to do other than process large files each day. Another thing: it takes twice as long to get the file from the computer to the printer.

Thanks again to all for the advice, suggestions, and also some deserved criticism for my "sweating the small stuff" as my students used to remind me.

Roy Benson
 

robmac

Well-known member
6GB RAM isn't recommended/necessary per se, but many of the newer imacs (last gen included), if a viable upgrade for you, can be stretched as high as 6GB (again see the Llloyd Chambers site) if so desired.
 

etrigan63

Active member
Hey Roy, are you down Miami-way? If so I can give you hand picking out an iMac for your needs. I don't own a Sony, but I do own a D700 and a Mac Pro (which is quite beastly @ 8-cores + 12GB of RAM) and Aperture/LR2/C1-4 all sing on this system. Heck, I gave Hasselblad's Phocus a whirl this weekend with 50 Mpx images and it handled them quite nicely.
 

beamon

New member
Hi Roy,

[hijack] Though I'm 4 years your junior, we have the same initials and are in some respects 'kindred spirits".

I was sorta in the business when in the late 60s and early 70s I did weddings on weekends for 'pin money'. (Got so I could remove the spent roll of 220 film and insert another in the Graflex XL in 15 secs flat!) Only now has my interest in digital been kindled so my learning curve is very steep.

I purposely stayed away from the MP kings and bought the D700 and, fortunately, my dual core Dell with 4GB RAM is handling my modest requirements with NX2 pretty well. No big numbers of pics to deal with, so this computer may work past when I'm working well! ;)

Let's keep on truckin', Roy. Ain't it a blast trying to stay with these talented young bucks and does? [/Hijack]
 

LJL

New member
Roy,
While I would advocate something like a Mac Pro or MacBook Pro, that may actually be more than you may want and need. As Jono mentioned, the iMac is a decent machine also, and at a much more reasonable cost. There are a flurry of usual rumors about it being upgraded, possibly this month. The speculations are that it may be getting some of the newer, faster processors, and going with the dual video cards that are working rather nicely in the newer MacBook Pros. Those two features alone may make the iMac a whole lot closer to an entry point Mac Pro or even the higher end MacBook Pro, but at quite a bit less cost. Worth waiting to see what gets announced there. There is also talk of a Mac Mini refresh, but honestly, an iMac would run circles around the Mini. Stay tuned and watch for the Apple announcements.

LJ
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
From Mac Rumors


Hardmac posts what it claims are the product numbers and rough descriptions of the iMac and Mac mini which are expected to be released tomorrow:
The new iMac models and their corresponding references:
- MB417: Entry level model
- MB418: "Mass market" model
- MB419: high-end model
- MB420: ultimate model
The entry level model should come with a 20" display, while the three other models will feature a 24" panel.

For the Mac mini, the references are the following:
- MB463: entry-level model
- MB464 high-end model

They cite a "reliable" source that has told them that both models will become available tomorrow. HardMac.com is the english counterpart to MacBidouille and are generally considered trustworthy.

Earlier today a photo of the Mac mini packaging was leaked and is increasingly looking to be legitimate.

Update: OneMoreThing.nl also "confirms" that the iMac and Mac mini will be released tomorrow and provides the following specs:
Mac mini
- 5x USB
- 1x FireWire 800
- 1x mini DVI
- 1x Display poort
- Nvidia chipset (net als de nieuwe MacBooks)
- vanaf 2.0 Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo
- 1 of 2 GB DDR3 ram geheugen (max 4 GB)
- 120 GB harde schijf (max 320 GB)

iMac
- 1x 20" model, 3x 24" modellen
- Intel Core 2 Duo (géén quad core dus): 2.66 Ghz, 2.93 Ghz en 3.06 Ghz
- 1x Display poort
- 20" 2 GB DDR3 ram geheugen, 24" 4 GB DDR3 ram geheugen (max 8 GB)
 
Top