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!

Just in case you haven't noticed: A850

edwardkaraa

New member
It's only a matter of days. The announcement is due this week. Hopefully a couple Zeiss lenses will be announced as well.
 

bavanor

Member
you can check out the stats at dpr.
For $2000 you only really loose 2% on the view find and are limited to 3fps. That seems like a great deal to me.

Aaron
 
R

Ranger 9

Guest
Drat, all this Sony action is making me wish more than ever that I had hung onto my Minolta lenses when I gave up on film. The 85/1.4 and 200/2.8 were stellar, and the 100/2 was a real sleeper -- it had fabulous "microcontrast" back before the photoblog geeks even knew what microcontrast was.

There's no real reason for me to switch back from Nikon, since APS-C works better for me than 36x24, and I'm sure the 850's high-ISO noise is no better than the 900's as they use the same sensor. But I always liked the clear-cut control logic and handling of Minolta SLRs, and Sony seems to have inherited their design approach. I still haven't gotten over the feeling that all the controls on my D300 are "backwards" and in the wrong place...
 

douglasf13

New member
Don't forget, Ranger 9, that your net high ISO performance of the A850/A900 is still gonna be easily a stop better than your D300, and cropping the APS-C portion of the frame out will still get you a similar magnification/pixel number as the D300...FWIW. :)
 
R

Ranger 9

Guest
Don't forget, Ranger 9, that your net high ISO performance of the A850/A900 is still gonna be easily a stop better than your D300
Not sure about that one; DxOMark has them pretty much in a dead heat (although I suppose the Sony would pick up an advantage once I downsampled the images to a size that I realistically use.)

and cropping the APS-C portion of the frame out will still get you a similar magnification/pixel number as the D300...FWIW. :)
Good point. If I still had all my old Minolta glass, and/or if I didn't need to shoot at high ISOs so often, I'd be all over it... especially if I hadn't already invested in a different system.

That seems to be the recurring problem for Sony, though. They're building out a good product line at highly competitive pricing, and they ought to be very attractive to the first-time DSLR buyer. But they still haven't gone quite far enough to tempt someone like me to go through the trauma of changing systems (again.)
 

douglasf13

New member
Ranger 9, you've got to click that "print" tab on the Dxo Mark graph to see the real difference. I own the A700, which is in the same noise ballpark as the D300 (after the v4 firmware,) and the A900 kills it at like viewing/print size.
 
Ranger, I'm curious as to whether the JPEG in-camera was important to you, and whether you tried UniWB at all? My initial UniWB experiments indicate that this approach kills off the red splotchiness in shadows.
 
R

Ranger 9

Guest
I'm sure there are ways around all the specific issues I mentioned. The big hangup for me personally is that unless there's an absolutely paramount world-beating advantage, it's just too much of a headache -- and expense -- to switch. (Don't forget it's not just lenses you have to replace, it's also dedicated flash and all the little accessories.)

If I were starting from scratch, Sony definitely would be a top contender, especially with the range of cameras and price points they have now.
 

jonoslack

Active member
That seems to be the recurring problem for Sony, though. They're building out a good product line at highly competitive pricing, and they ought to be very attractive to the first-time DSLR buyer. But they still haven't gone quite far enough to tempt someone like me to go through the trauma of changing systems (again.)
Hi There
I turned on a coin - my dealer forced me to take away an A900 with the 24-70 for the afternoon . . 24 hours later the D3 / D700 / 12-24 / 24-70 / 70-200 and some Zeiss ZF lenses had all gone.

That was last October and I've regretted it for . . . erm . . . not at all.
 

douglasf13

New member
I'm gonna go ahead and say that the difference that IR is seeing in the A850 and A900 IQ is more than likely attributed to sample variation and IR's less than perfect testing setups, rather than any real difference between the cameras.
 

Quentin_Bargate

Well-known member
I was wondering if in fact the A850 and A900 are the same cameras - with the A850 having a little masking to cut the viewfinder to 98% and a firmware change to lower the max frame rate to 3fps. After all, why redesign these points when you are already tooled up for the A900?

Just a thought.

Quentin
 

douglasf13

New member
The A850's parts list was leaked by Sony a few weeks back, and the A850's replacement prism housing was more than $100 US less than the A900's. Same with the PC board.
 
Top