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!

Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

ryc

Member
I spent my lunch time today walking about with the A900 and Zeiss 135. Let me just say a few things. I have owned Leica, R9, DMR, M8, Canon 1DS2, Nikon D700, D3x and a few film cameras that I wont mention. Not any of the previously owned camera has yielded files like the A900! This camera is just simply amazing and I have never ever regretted switching to it. These pictures are nothing special but show how nice the files are. Here is one and the rest with larger images can be seen on my Zenfolio gallery located here:

http://www.jorgetorralba.com/p79293693



Your feedback is welcomed.

Thanks,

JT
 

MoJo

Registred Users
thanks for the encouraging words on the Sony. I am about to pull the trigger myself. BTW, your B&W people shots on your website are wonderful.... very rich!
 

Greg Seitz

New member
Jorge, curious to hear your thoughts on the A900 differences with the D3X in particular. Was the deciding factor the lenses, body, both?
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
For me just similar reasons to switch to the A900 and Zeiss lenses!

Owned R9/DMR, D2X, D3, D200 and never was happy with the files and the quality overall - DMR was an exception, but there were different issues I did not want to deal with.

So I am pretty sure the A900 is the best quality in high resolution DSLR you can get today - plus for a reasonable price - thinking forward to an eventual Leica R10 and Leica AF lenses ;)
 

jonoslack

Active member
I spent my lunch time today walking about with the A900 and Zeiss 135. Let me just say a few things. I have owned Leica, R9, DMR, M8, Canon 1DS2, Nikon D700, D3x and a few film cameras that I wont mention. Not any of the previously owned camera has yielded files like the A900! T
JT
HI Jorge
You said it - and so do your pictures, simply that the files are lovely - I've had mine for 8 months now, and I still get a hit every time I open new ones.
:thumbup:
 

ryc

Member
Greg,

In my opinion, the D3x was a more solid camera but at the same time much larger. I like the rubber feel of the skin on the D3x vs the A900. I think that for what I shoot, both cameras produce similar quality results but the A900 has a much more pleasing file that need much much less post processing. Plus for some reason the A900 noise is really nice to look at. It reminds me of film. Also the simplicity of the A900 makes it a joy to work with. trn a dial here push a button there and you are set. No body twisting 4 finger combos needed :)

As a former owner of all these great cameras, I can tell you that Nikon glass is just pitiful! And what good is a camera without good glass. The Zeiss autofocus was the deciding factor for me. The lenses are superb and combined with the A900 you could not ask for more besides a few extra primes :)

Anyway, today I may go out with the 85 or 16-35. Don't know yet. Maybe more with the 135 :)
 

dhsimmonds

New member
For me just similar reasons to switch to the A900 and Zeiss lenses!...............

...........So I am pretty sure the A900 is the best quality in high resolution DSLR you can get today - plus for a reasonable price - thinking forward to an eventual Leica R10 and Leica AF lenses ;)
Exactly right Peter. But the R10 will have to be one heck of a camera with a fully supporting range of very, very good lenses to tempt me away from my Sony/Zeiss combination back to Leica. There's the rub isn't it, with the S2 plus lenses in the pipeline for release in approximately September, how long will we have to wait for a small company such as Leica to produce a full range of AF R10 lenses?

There is always the danger that they will instead compromise to allow S2 lenses to fit the R10 instead..........with their inevitable bulk, weight and high costs!! As always, speculation is an amusing pastime but aren't we fortunate to have such a great cam and lenses to use regardless of whatever the L company decide to offer us in the future? Meanwhile Sony will not stand still and risk losing their user base after the great success of the 900 I am sure!
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Exactly right Peter. But the R10 will have to be one heck of a camera with a fully supporting range of very, very good lenses to tempt me away from my Sony/Zeiss combination back to Leica. There's the rub isn't it, with the S2 plus lenses in the pipeline for release in approximately September, how long will we have to wait for a small company such as Leica to produce a full range of AF R10 lenses?

There is always the danger that they will instead compromise to allow S2 lenses to fit the R10 instead..........with their inevitable bulk, weight and high costs!! As always, speculation is an amusing pastime but aren't we fortunate to have such a great cam and lenses to use regardless of whatever the L company decide to offer us in the future? Meanwhile Sony will not stand still and risk losing their user base after the great success of the 900 I am sure!
Same from my side!

It would need the R10 and system be so much better than Sony, that I would do another change myself.

As long as I was playing around with Nikon and Canon (which are great systems per se but obviously not for me) the possible switch back was not so much a deal. But with the quality I see now from the A900 and the Zeiss lenses I simply cannot think about getting anytime ready to switch to an R10 system.

And you are absolutely right, Sony will not stand still and the next big FF DSLR they will bring will for sure offer same resolution as the A900 but also fully usable ISO 6400 and maybe even 12800. And I think they will further increase IQ, because in combination with the excellent Zeiss glass they actually do no longer need an AA filter. So as soon as this one gets away or at least is made much weaker, there will be in fact no more benefit from a R10 which I think will again come without AA filter (as all the Leica DSLRs do).

So very interesting times ahead of us Alpha System users ;)
 
S

Shelby Lewis

Guest
From everything I've heard... the R system is now dead and the s2 (and subsequent models) are going to be THE dslr for leica. I thought leica actually publicly announced that no further r-system cameras would be developed.

Anyone heard differently?
 

dhsimmonds

New member
Jorge, typically Leica as far as I know have not released a date for the R10 but have hinted at early summer 2010..........so make that Photokina 2010 with a fair wind behind them!
 

bensonga

Well-known member
Building up my collection of Leica R lenses now, so I hope the R10 is not a disappointment and arrives next year....at a price mere mortals can afford. Under $5k perhaps?

Gary
Alaska
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Greg,

In my opinion, the D3x was a more solid camera but at the same time much larger. I like the rubber feel of the skin on the D3x vs the A900. I think that for what I shoot, both cameras produce similar quality results but the A900 has a much more pleasing file that need much much less post processing. Plus for some reason the A900 noise is really nice to look at. It reminds me of film. Also the simplicity of the A900 makes it a joy to work with. trn a dial here push a button there and you are set. No body twisting 4 finger combos needed :)

As a former owner of all these great cameras, I can tell you that Nikon glass is just pitiful! And what good is a camera without good glass. The Zeiss autofocus was the deciding factor for me. The lenses are superb and combined with the A900 you could not ask for more besides a few extra primes :)

Anyway, today I may go out with the 85 or 16-35. Don't know yet. Maybe more with the 135 :)
Well, I wouldn't call the Nikon 14-24/2.8 and new 24-70/2.8 "pitiful". Heck, I would even put the 100 VR Macro in the un-pitiful catagory .... and nothing from Sony matches the 200/2 VR. :thumbs:

Speaking of 3D ...

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8001

IOW, you guys are getting ridiculous IMO. :rolleyes:

Besides, until Sony makes a weather sealed camera that shoots to two cards, it'll never be my central camera for jobs where there is no second chance. Been there done that.

Just adding some balance here.
 

douglasf13

New member
Besides, until Sony makes a weather sealed camera that shoots to two cards, it'll never be my central camera for jobs where there is no second chance. Been there done that.

Just adding some balance here.
I feel pretty good about using the A900 in all conditions, but I hear you on the two card thing. After all of the complaints about the A700 not taking advantage of the two card setup, I can't believe that Sony didn't add more multi-card capabilities to the A900. :wtf:
 

woodyspedden

New member
Well, I wouldn't call the Nikon 14-24/2.8 and new 24-70/2.8 "pitiful". Heck, I would even put the 100 VR Macro in the un-pitiful catagory .... and nothing from Sony matches the 200/2 VR. :thumbs:

Speaking of 3D ...

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8001

IOW, you guys are getting ridiculous IMO. :rolleyes:

Besides, until Sony makes a weather sealed camera that shoots to two cards, it'll never be my central camera for jobs where there is no second chance. Been there done that.

Just adding some balance here.
Quite honestly, both the reviews and my own personal experiences, show that the three primary zooms for nikon, e.g. 14-24 nano, 24-70 Nano and the older but still great 70-200 are fine optics indeed. I still prefer to shoot my bevy of Zeiss ZF primes but I doubt I would lose any business based on the IQ from these new Nano zooms. JMHO and YMMV

Woody
 

woodyspedden

New member
I spent my lunch time today walking about with the A900 and Zeiss 135. Let me just say a few things. I have owned Leica, R9, DMR, M8, Canon 1DS2, Nikon D700, D3x and a few film cameras that I wont mention. Not any of the previously owned camera has yielded files like the A900! This camera is just simply amazing and I have never ever regretted switching to it. These pictures are nothing special but show how nice the files are. Here is one and the rest with larger images can be seen on my Zenfolio gallery located here:

http://www.jorgetorralba.com/p79293693



Your feedback is welcomed.

Thanks,

JT
Jorge

You are undoubtedly correct about the quality of files from the A900 and the Zeiss optics (which I lean toward no matter the system upon which the lenses rest!)

However the D3X which I own and use with the Zeiss primes and the Canon 1DsMkIII are at least up to the level of quality of the A900. Better weather sealing and other pro features make those two choices a reality compared to the A900. The truth is that all three of these systems represent IQ which was to put it mildly unimaginable just a few years ago.

Aren't we lucky.......Thanks Sony, Nikon and Canon for giving us the best tools we could have imagined only a short time ago

Best

Woody
 

ryc

Member
Yes, As I mentioned before, the D3x is a much more rugged camera and has additional features. Thus as a mechanical beast I would definitely class it better than the A900. However, the A900 build is very very good and offers weather sealing at a fraction the cost of a d3x. We have all been there and seen this argument so I wont revive it.

As far nikon pitiful lenses go :) the 14-24 and 24-70 are indeed good lenses and i have owned both. In fact, I have owned evey single Zeiss ZF lens made and used them on my d3, d3x, d700 and F6 because all the other primes by Nikon were just rubbish. even the highly regarded 84 1.4 was worthless when compared to the zeiss 85 or anyother 85 in its class. I tried 3 nikon 85's and never achieved good color or contrast and for the most part fairly soft. Some will argue that the lens is tac sharp but the 3 I had never performed. In fact when people would post their nikon 85 images that looked sharp the minute you saw a decent crop of an area you would see how soft it was. So, all said, I gave up all my Zeiss ZF glass cause I wanted AF and managed to get some pretty nice Sony mount Zeiss. Oh, yes I had the 200 f2 and loved it but it did not come close to the Canon 200 f2. The images out of the Nikon look great but when you put them side by side with the Canon version you can see the lens is not as good as the Canon.

I hope I have not ruffled too many feathers here but so far the Sony meets my needs and at a very attractive price.

The one exception is my Leica M glass just blows anything out of the water. :) But we all knew that already.

Yes. Thank you Nikon Canon and Sony. You all make wonderful cameras and each one has its unique advantage over the other.

Just a few more ...





This one below was with the ZF 100

 
Last edited:

wayne_s

New member
Jorge

You are undoubtedly correct about the quality of files from the A900 and the Zeiss optics (which I lean toward no matter the system upon which the lenses rest!)

However the D3X which I own and use with the Zeiss primes and the Canon 1DsMkIII are at least up to the level of quality of the A900. Better weather sealing and other pro features make those two choices a reality compared to the A900. The truth is that all three of these systems represent IQ which was to put it mildly unimaginable just a few years ago.

Aren't we lucky.......Thanks Sony, Nikon and Canon for giving us the best tools we could have imagined only a short time ago

Best

Woody
+1

Well said Woody.
Put a nice Leica or Zeiss lens on any of the 3 and your in for a nice treat!
 
Top