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!

Any DMR users now shooting the Sony A900?

Doug,
Great move picking up Bill's DMR! For what I do (hummingbirds) nothing comes close. MF digital isn't an option as I'm shooting with the 400 APO with and without the 1.4 APO converter, and there is nothing in the MF world that can touch that. What I'd personally like to see will never happen: a cropped sensor update of the DMR with 50% more pixels.

I need the additional depth of field the cropped sensor provides. A full frame sensor would only mean having to shoot at higher ISOs to enable stopping down to get what the DMR provides at wider apertures. The DMR is cleaner than the Sony at 100 ISO so I'd really be gaining nothing but a larger file with less quality.

For wave shots that I need to print big I'll just shoot them on the Pentax 67 with the 500 5.6 and 1.4 TC. The film in the freezer certainly isn't getting any fresher!

Lawrence
 

douglasf13

New member
Is the DMR cleaner than the a Sony file resized to 10 megapixels? It really all just depends on how big you're printing, no?
 
Is the DMR cleaner than the a Sony file resized to 10 megapixels? It really all just depends on how big you're printing, no?
Not sure, particularly because I was usually uprezing the DMR to print at 16x24, but the tonality is smoother and cleaner than the Sony. I'm a big believer in horses for courses and the DMR, not unlike the M8, is a superior image making machine compared to anything currently on the market so long as you can work within its constraints, which are numerous and well documented. I much prefer the Sony in nearly every way, but have to concede that I prefer the ISO 100 image quality to the Sony at any ISO.

When Leica comes out with a digital camera that uses the R lenses on a body the size of the R9, with 24+ MP (or equivalent actual resolution), reasonably low noise to ISO 1600 and can do long exposures, I will be there in heartbeat. Until then, for me the Sony wins the day because there is a lot more to a camera than just ISO 100 image quality.
 

dhsimmonds

New member
Well said Bill, you have just summed it up very accurately.

As a club and exhibition photographer myself I find that the Sony a900 is a much more creative tool than the DMR........but the file quality of the DMR if you want to "pixel peep" is much better than the Sony. However by the time I print, 19x13 or larger, or have a need to crop heavily, the a900 wins hands down in my opinion and it is such a joy to use.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Not sure, particularly because I was usually uprezing the DMR to print at 16x24, but the tonality is smoother and cleaner than the Sony. I'm a big believer in horses for courses and the DMR, not unlike the M8, is a superior image making machine compared to anything currently on the market so long as you can work within its constraints, which are numerous and well documented. I much prefer the Sony in nearly every way, but have to concede that I prefer the ISO 100 image quality to the Sony at any ISO.

When Leica comes out with a digital camera that uses the R lenses on a body the size of the R9, with 24+ MP (or equivalent actual resolution), reasonably low noise to ISO 1600 and can do long exposures, I will be there in heartbeat. Until then, for me the Sony wins the day because there is a lot more to a camera than just ISO 100 image quality.
Quite frankly, if one has been successfully shooting with the manual focus DMR, yet was looking for a higher resolution alternative, especially employing the not-to-be-matched Leica APO long lenses (for which there is no Zeiss optical counter part in the Sony line-up) I would investigate the Nikon D3X using converted R lens mounts. The D3X matches the Sony's 25 meg resolution, but is a 14 bit machine natively exhibiting greater DR, and when needed much better mid to slightly high ISO performance (500 to 800) than the DMR or the A900. It also has live view up to 10X, which once mastered is a blessing for manual focus use especially for critical focus and DOF control. For swift and accurate general AF shooting add the new Nikon 24-70/2.8 and it's the best of both worlds.

I say this as an enthusastic owner of both the A900 and D3X ... and a former user of the R system for decades including the DMR. I am on the hunt for a Leica 180/2.8 APO to convert for use on the D3X. In the meantime I've been using a Zeiss V 180/4 which produces fab images on the D3X ... but I need/want the faster f stops and APO.

Just a thought.
 

cmb_

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Marc & others - just a reminder about this thread devoted to R lenses on Nikon which may be worth reviewing:
http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5584

There are some examples of the 180/2.8 APO (I think with the D3 if I remember).
Also shots with the 80 Lux (Marc, did you see those? I know you like this lens) and 100 macro plus some others as well.
 

surfotog

New member
I think Lawrence is looking at the A900 because he wants the in-body stabilization for his 800/5.6 APO.
It will be interesting to see what Sony does with their "Pro" body. They seem to have gained some traction with the A900. A few more Zeiss primes, a 16 bit sensor, and in-body stabilization would turn a lot of heads.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I think Lawrence is looking at the A900 because he wants the in-body stabilization for his 800/5.6 APO.
It will be interesting to see what Sony does with their "Pro" body. They seem to have gained some traction with the A900. A few more Zeiss primes, a 16 bit sensor, and in-body stabilization would turn a lot of heads.
It would "spin" some heads ...:ROTFL:

From your lips to God's ears concerning some Zeiss primes ... preferably ones without the CA Zeiss is becoming infamous for :rolleyes:
 
"I think Lawrence is looking at the A900 because he wants the in-body stabilization for his 800/5.6 APO."

Well put, Scott. That is exactly why the Sony makes more sense than the Nikon (at least for my immediate needs). You wouldn't see all of those wildlife photographers getting stellar images of birds with their 600-800mm lenses with and without teleconverters were it not for IS and VR. Stabilization makes all the difference in the world with big glass. As good as the D3X is... better IQ is diminished if shutter or mirror vibration softens the image.

The new pro Sony will be of interest to me as it "might" show improvement in areas where the A900 is currently lacking. One can only speculate as to what those improvements might be, but I'm certainly anxious to see what the long APO glass can do with a 20+ megapixel sensor.

Here's one taken with the DMR + 800 APO 5.6 + 1.4 APO TC, 5 lb bag of rice on the lens, custom camera/lens rail, Gitzo Series 5 CF with Arca B1 head (in camera SSS on the Sony will insure that I get more keepers like this):
 

fotografz

Well-known member
SSS works on a tripod? That is something I had not thought about.

Also, I don't think the shake indicator shows in the A900 viewfinder when the camera is set to manual exposure control ... I believe it has to be a setting where the camera controls the shutter speed.

It also doesn't optimally work immediately, you have to press the shutter button half way and wait for the SSS indicator scale in the viewfinder to "settle down" then complete the shot. I've made that mistake a few times so far.

But I understand the need with a 800mm lens.
 

doug

Well-known member
Also, I don't think the shake indicator shows in the A900 viewfinder when the camera is set to manual exposure control ... I believe it has to be a setting where the camera controls the shutter speed.

It also doesn't optimally work immediately, you have to press the shutter button half way and wait for the SSS indicator scale in the viewfinder to "settle down" then complete the shot.
Hmmm.... this wouldn't be too useful for me.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotografz
Also, I don't think the shake indicator shows in the A900 viewfinder when the camera is set to manual exposure control ... I believe it has to be a setting where the camera controls the shutter speed.

It also doesn't optimally work immediately, you have to press the shutter button half way and wait for the SSS indicator scale in the viewfinder to "settle down" then complete the shot.


Quote:
Hmmm.... this wouldn't be too useful for me.
__________________
Doug Herr http://www.wildlightphoto.com



Nor for me... if that is how it works. Haven't heard that before. It would certainly be worth the minimal investment to rent an A900 and buy one mount adaptor that is chipped to see if this procedure renders the A900's SSS less than useful.
Lawrence
 
Top