Site Sponsors
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 111

Thread: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

  1. #1
    Senior Member ryc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Or-Y-Gun
    Posts
    548
    Post Thanks / Like

    Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    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

  2. #2
    Registred Users MoJo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Santa Fe
    Posts
    213
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    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!
    My photoblog: http://josefskye.tumblr.com
    Friend me on Facebook: Josef Skye Tornick

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    180
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Yeah that impressive as it seems you have owned alot of the top end cameras. Thanks for the great input.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    280
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    62

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

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

  5. #5
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,872
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    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

  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by ryc View Post
    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.

    Just this guy you know

  7. #7
    Senior Member ryc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Or-Y-Gun
    Posts
    548
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    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

  8. #8
    Senior Member dhsimmonds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Hampshire, UK
    Posts
    904
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    20

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by ptomsu View Post
    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!
    Cheers, Dave
    www.simmondsphotography.com

  9. #9
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,872
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by dhsimmonds View Post
    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

  10. #10
    Senior Member ryc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Or-Y-Gun
    Posts
    548
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    when is the R10 expected or is it just a myth for now?

  11. #11
    Shelby Lewis
    Guest

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    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?

  12. #12
    Senior Member dhsimmonds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Hampshire, UK
    Posts
    904
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    20

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    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!
    Cheers, Dave
    www.simmondsphotography.com

  13. #13
    Senior Member bensonga's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,416
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    819

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    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

  14. #14
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by ryc View Post
    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.

    Speaking of 3D ...

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

    IOW, you guys are getting ridiculous IMO.

    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.

  15. #15
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post

    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.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado
    Posts
    2,077
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    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.

    Speaking of 3D ...

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

    IOW, you guys are getting ridiculous IMO.

    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

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado
    Posts
    2,077
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by ryc View Post
    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

  18. #18
    Senior Member ryc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Or-Y-Gun
    Posts
    548
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    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 by ryc; 10th June 2009 at 19:06.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    165
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by woodyspedden View Post
    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!

  20. #20
    Senior Member ryc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Or-Y-Gun
    Posts
    548
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Yes. It's all about the Glass!

  21. #21
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    While all three are produce great images, for me (and I would guess many other women), the 1D's and D3's are just too big to comfortably handle or tote around.


    terry

  22. #22
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,872
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by ryc View Post
    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.
    Could not agree more!

    I always viewed the Nikon as a kind of least problem camera replacement for a not available Leica R DSLR. And always in most cases superior to Canon. Having said that it is only true for their top Pro DSLRs. And these are heavy and come with a set of features which might be needed to sell such a camera in the Pro area, but definitely not in normal day to day shooting of a semi pro or demanding amateur as I would consider myself. In this regards the Leica R system fitted much better my needs, but as we all know without AF and without any decent DSLR solution - and now it is DEAD.

    The second system which came close to Leica and even was superior in many areas was Contax. Owned that as well, burned lot of money with it and can still remember the beautiful IQ results from the Zeiss lenses, although all analog.

    NOW we have the Sony Alpha and they have these wonderful Zeiss glass again! What can I say, I am almost in photographic heaven and very happy I did the move towards Sony.

    Is the A900 better than the D3X? This cannot be answered as such, because there are different philosophies for both. For my needs the A900 and all the Zeiss glass is better than a D3X with all Nikon glass and Zeiss glass for Nikon is a NO GO for me as I find it kind of sick - sorry to say that - to put MF lenses on an AF body. But there are folks around who love that but obviously I am not in this group

    One example why I love my A900 so much in addition to the perfect IQ: the AF system - a real relief from what the Nikons and Canons top models come up with today. 9 AF pints, easy and accurate to operate and not these 50 or so AF point fields where you never know what that bloody camera is doing or how it was programmed by a crowd of freaks to do some things automatically in a way which suits maybe 5% of all needs and neglects the rest. I spent far too much time fooling around with these advanced AF systems and finally finding I would get more accurate and faster results by using the central AF point. Maybe it's only me but this is what I feel - well I am coming from MF and used to be able to get things right and sharp even with non AF cameras as the R system and Contax RTS

  23. #23
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by ryc View Post
    Yes. It's all about the Glass!
    If it was just about the glass, then the Nikon with Leica R optics would be the answer. Unfortunately, there is more to it than that.

    BTW, no ruffled feathers because it's just your subjective opinion, not some imperial fact. It is clear then that we simply disagree, especially concerning the C/N 200mm lenses ... both of which I have used on FF, high meg bodies and have compared files ... the Canon lacks the snap of the Nikon and produced that typical Canon pastel feel ... which I subjectively do not favor. And there is no Sony 200/2.

    I also have used all the Nikon cameras you mention and most all of the ZFs. My migration to Nikon & ZFs was from Canon IDsMKIII with Contax optics like the 50/1.2, 85/1.2 and 21mm ... and Leica R APO optics ... all of which kill the ZAs but required slow stop down metering and shooting ... but in the end, even the slowness of Manual Focus for my work then led me to sell the ZFs and move to the Sony and AF ZA optics. There ARE practical considerations beside just the glass.

    Personally, I maintain only gear that consistently delivers the goods in the broad range of environments and conditions I shoot in to make a living ... which the Sony does okay in but is limited when compared to the Nikons. Chief among these is speed ... AF speed, shooting speed, ISO speed. There is no high ISO Sony to match the D3, and my previous Canon 1DMKIII was no match for the D3 either. When the price finally dropped on the D3X, it was a natural addition so I can record to two CFs at once, and have that critical operational speed.

    BTW, my Nikon 85/1.4 is razor sharp because I bothered to have Nikon service focus calibrated the body and then zeroed in the lens using Live View @ 10X (not available on the Sony).

    I like the Sony, 2 bodies, battery grip, and all the ZAs + 3 other Alpha mount lenses sort of proves that. I'm a Zeiss/Contax guy from way back. Nice price point also. But it's no Nikon D3/D3X in terms of versatility, use of flash, operational speed, security of image capture, proven ruggedness in adverse conditions (jury is still out on the Sony).

    Some people shoot in better conditions than I typically am forced to shoot in. Gun to head, and forced to choose between the two with my job on the line it would be the Nikon every single time. Pixel peeping isn't the criteria, getting the shots is.

    One thing we do agree on is the Leica M optics ... which will be more evident when they get a camera the equal to the lenses ... or someone else does

  24. #24
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,872
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    If it was just about the glass, then the Nikon with Leica R optics would be the answer. Unfortunately, there is more to it than that.

    BTW, no ruffled feathers because it's just your subjective opinion, not some imperial fact. It is clear then that we simply disagree, especially concerning the C/N 200mm lenses ... both of which I have used on FF, high meg bodies and have compared files ... the Canon lacks the snap of the Nikon and produced that typical Canon pastel feel ... which I subjectively do not favor. And there is no Sony 200/2.

    I also have used all the Nikon cameras you mention and most all of the ZFs. My migration to Nikon & ZFs was from Canon IDsMKIII with Contax optics like the 50/1.2, 85/1.2 and 21mm ... and Leica R APO optics ... all of which kill the ZAs but required slow stop down metering and shooting ... but in the end, even the slowness of Manual Focus for my work then led me to sell the ZFs and move to the Sony and AF ZA optics. There ARE practical considerations beside just the glass.

    Personally, I maintain only gear that consistently delivers the goods in the broad range of environments and conditions I shoot in to make a living ... which the Sony does okay in but is limited when compared to the Nikons. Chief among these is speed ... AF speed, shooting speed, ISO speed. There is no high ISO Sony to match the D3, and my previous Canon 1DMKIII was no match for the D3 either. When the price finally dropped on the D3X, it was a natural addition so I can record to two CFs at once, and have that critical operational speed.

    BTW, my Nikon 85/1.4 is razor sharp because I bothered to have Nikon service focus calibrated the body and then zeroed in the lens using Live View @ 10X (not available on the Sony).

    I like the Sony, 2 bodies, battery grip, and all the ZAs + 3 other Alpha mount lenses sort of proves that. I'm a Zeiss/Contax guy from way back. Nice price point also. But it's no Nikon D3/D3X in terms of versatility, use of flash, operational speed, security of image capture, proven ruggedness in adverse conditions (jury is still out on the Sony).

    Some people shoot in better conditions than I typically am forced to shoot in. Gun to head, and forced to choose between the two with my job on the line it would be the Nikon every single time. Pixel peeping isn't the criteria, getting the shots is.

    One thing we do agree on is the Leica M optics ... which will be more evident when they get a camera the equal to the lenses ... or someone else does
    Well -now I NEED to answer!

    Reading your posts one comes to the conclusion that nobody could do serious business before a Nikon D3 or D3X - at least this is the outcome for me!

    I cannot believe that you mean this seriously! Actually I find the magnitude of possibilities and functions, which you call versatility, rather disturbing than helping! Sorry to say, but this cannot be true. A good photographer will always be able to do some work around if a camera system does not support certain features and I dare to say, if you really know and control your equipment (which I no second doubt in any direction), you can achieve at least the same results or even better ones if you are not limited b all this wonderful functionality.

    I do fully agree, that sometimes it is convenient to have certain flexibility available, but also some 40 years ago one could get outstanding results without any AF and any fancy flash control etc etc etc .... I also agree that in daily business it might be good to have all this available, although I rather believe that less is more!

    This is why I like the A900 as it is today, just the right amount of control and flexibility and not too much. And I seriously hope that future generations of Alpha cameras will not go down the Nikon and Canon path and try to automate everything

    I also have to make a remark WRT Zeiss versus Leica glass: I have both I used both and I have done enough tests to know that certain (actually in my opinion many) Zeiss lenses draw better than their Leica counterparts. And not to speak about color, which is in my eyes in any case superior.

    Give you one example: 10 years ago I owned the Leica 2/180 APO - a wonderful lens. And I compared it extensively to the Zeiss 2/200 which turned out to be superior - I mean clearly superior in all disciplines.

    I could continue with such examples, not willing to bore people her.

    Just my view on this part of the world

  25. #25
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by Shelby Lewis View Post
    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?
    Hi Shelby
    I heard quite differently (but I may be out of date). Leica did stop making R lenses and announced it recently. However, their other announcements slated the S2 for this summer and the R10 for next (using the basic tech of the S2) - with AF lenses, hence the stop in manufacture of the old lenses.

    Just this guy you know

  26. #26
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,872
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hi Shelby
    I heard quite differently (but I may be out of date). Leica did stop making R lenses and announced it recently. However, their other announcements slated the S2 for this summer and the R10 for next (using the basic tech of the S2) - with AF lenses, hence the stop in manufacture of the old lenses.
    This is what they kind of communicated. Not sure if still true, but in my opinion this is suicide, they have to handle then 3 systems and are not even able to manage one system timely in my opinion. Having to develop another range of lenses, especially 35mm, is not easy, as competition is pretty tough there and they need to come up with a good lineup in order to be able to sell R10s.

    I am puzzled for the moment

  27. #27
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by ptomsu View Post
    This is what they kind of communicated. Not sure if still true, but in my opinion this is suicide, they have to handle then 3 systems and are not even able to manage one system timely in my opinion. Having to develop another range of lenses, especially 35mm, is not easy, as competition is pretty tough there and they need to come up with a good lineup in order to be able to sell R10s.

    I am puzzled for the moment
    Nothing wrong with coming up with autofocus versions of the old lenses I'd have thought (not too many complaints about them).

    Don't write them off yet!

    Just this guy you know

  28. #28
    Senior Member ryc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Or-Y-Gun
    Posts
    548
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Well, without taking this further all I can say is I am not a professional photographer who relies on his gear for a living so I cannot argue what works best for one photographer or the other. However, I can say what works best for me at this time is the Sony. That is not to demean any other system. It's just what I like for myself. Lets all enjoy what we have and get some good pictures. Preferably of nice curves on the beach No offense to the women here.

  29. #29
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by ryc View Post
    Well, without taking this further all I can say is I am not a professional photographer who relies on his gear for a living so I cannot argue what works best for one photographer or the other. However, I can say what works best for me at this time is the Sony. That is not to demean any other system. It's just what I like for myself. Lets all enjoy what we have and get some good pictures. Preferably of nice curves on the beach No offense to the women here.
    Hi there
    I'm in exactly the same position as you. I prefer the files from the A900, and I like the handling and ergonomics better as well, AND I like the lenses better too. It's a bit of a no-brainer really. If someone offered to give me a brand new D3x with the nikon equivalent lenses in exchange for my A900, then I wouldn't be able to say NO fast enough!

    However, I have done enough weddings to know that 'getting the shot' is the most important thing there, and if I were in Marc's position I'd be using those Nikons to get the shot.

    Just this guy you know

  30. #30
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by ptomsu View Post
    Well -now I NEED to answer!

    Reading your posts one comes to the conclusion that nobody could do serious business before a Nikon D3 or D3X - at least this is the outcome for me!

    I cannot believe that you mean this seriously! Actually I find the magnitude of possibilities and functions, which you call versatility, rather disturbing than helping! Sorry to say, but this cannot be true. A good photographer will always be able to do some work around if a camera system does not support certain features and I dare to say, if you really know and control your equipment (which I no second doubt in any direction), you can achieve at least the same results or even better ones if you are not limited b all this wonderful functionality.

    I do fully agree, that sometimes it is convenient to have certain flexibility available, but also some 40 years ago one could get outstanding results without any AF and any fancy flash control etc etc etc .... I also agree that in daily business it might be good to have all this available, although I rather believe that less is more!

    This is why I like the A900 as it is today, just the right amount of control and flexibility and not too much. And I seriously hope that future generations of Alpha cameras will not go down the Nikon and Canon path and try to automate everything

    I also have to make a remark WRT Zeiss versus Leica glass: I have both I used both and I have done enough tests to know that certain (actually in my opinion many) Zeiss lenses draw better than their Leica counterparts. And not to speak about color, which is in my eyes in any case superior.

    Give you one example: 10 years ago I owned the Leica 2/180 APO - a wonderful lens. And I compared it extensively to the Zeiss 2/200 which turned out to be superior - I mean clearly superior in all disciplines.

    I could continue with such examples, not willing to bore people her.

    Just my view on this part of the world
    Sure people did "serious business" before the latest crop of cameras. I did quite nicely with a Contax RX, Leica M4 and a Hasselblad 500 series camera.

    That was when weddings were shot pretty much static with a few journalistic snaps thrown in. Mostly using film with excellent labs backing you.

    That was then, this is now. I'm not shooting flowers in my backyard, nor mountains that just stand there. I'm shooting black cats in a coal mine at midnight ... and the cat isn't just standing there

    Frankly, my clients are oblivious to all the elitist ramblings about pixel peeping nano differences from one optic to another. Sure, it has to deliver in the upper strata, and anyone making their living from photography wants to give themselves any edge they can.

    In my case its GET THE SHOT ... no focus hunting in cave like venues, no card failure that eats 4 gigs of once in a lifetime memories, no missed opportunities for available light creative options @ ISO 2000+ ... it's a brave new world, and the competition is absolutely ferocious. Publish or perish.

    If you felt compelled to make the Nikon complex that is your approach. For me it is no more complex than the A900 ... when I want it to be that way. Sometimes I want more, and it's there.

    So, it comes down to different criteria and priorities.

    Fortunately, I am in a position to select and use either or both. It's just business. For pleasure I use the M and 203FE, and for commercial work a MFD system. If not for wedding work, I wouldn't even own a 35mm DSLR ... Canon, Nikon ... or Sony. Those pieces of gear earn their keep, or they are out of here. If, and when, the Leica R10 stands and delivers on all fronts based on my criteria, the Nikon and Sony will go bye-bye in a New York heart beat.

  31. #31
    Shelby Lewis
    Guest

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    If it was just about the glass, then the Nikon with Leica R optics would be the answer. Unfortunately, there is more to it than that.

    Some people shoot in better conditions than I typically am forced to shoot in. Gun to head, and forced to choose between the two with my job on the line it would be the Nikon every single time. Pixel peeping isn't the criteria, getting the shots is.
    I have to agree with Marc on this one. The a900 is a camera whose output, under ideal conditions, is unrivaled IMO... especially with regards to bang-for-buck.

    But to be honest, it really falls on it's face in any circumstance that involves either action, low "ugly" light, or a combination of these. It also has a flash system that, although really consistently good as far as exposure, can't be "hammered" without going to pieces. I shoot with a lot of bounced flash in intensive lowlight situations and the 58 has overheated on me several times... sometimes at inopportune moments.

    And don't get me started on the af-servo performance. Essentially, you can't expect the a900 to track objects moving either toward or away from you with any consistency... which takes me back to my canon days, ie shooting double or triple frames to ensure one is good as opposed to just trusting the camera to perform in the critical moment.

    All that aside... I'm not primarily a wedding photographer... and outside that venue it is the perfect camera for me. For portraits and commercial work, the combination of color response, zeiss glass, and resolution are absolutely delightful.

    ... but in the face of the competition with regards to utility, it's not the greatest cam out there by a long shot.

    Still... it's the only system I currently own, lol.

  32. #32
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Agreed, Jono. I wouldn't trade my A900 setup for any other 35mm setup, but, for Marc, it makes sense to add the D3x. Not only does it have better AF and dual card functionality, but its RAWs are handled better by Lightroom as well, and I believe that Marc uses that program. If anything, I'm envious that he gets to use all of this sweet gear

  33. #33
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hi there
    I'm in exactly the same position as you. I prefer the files from the A900, and I like the handling and ergonomics better as well, AND I like the lenses better too. It's a bit of a no-brainer really. If someone offered to give me a brand new D3x with the nikon equivalent lenses in exchange for my A900, then I wouldn't be able to say NO fast enough!

    However, I have done enough weddings to know that 'getting the shot' is the most important thing there, and if I were in Marc's position I'd be using those Nikons to get the shot.
    That's exactly the point.

    Here's one from last weekend. The church was an absolute cave, lit by a few candles along the aisle. I cannot miss a single shot of the procession ... and more importantly, it has to be defining shots not just a snap shot that any guest could get with their P&S or digital Rebel. I can't blow out the wedding dress, or in this case satin dress of the flower girl or the white satin pillows of the ring bearers.
    It's shots like this that sell ... maybe not up to the elitist POV, but most certainly endearing to the clients who could give a crap what I used to get it as long as I got it. BTW, I tried using the A900 to shoot the bouquet toss and missed it while the AF was hunting in the dark. A guest got it with her $800. Nikon. Last time I try that, trust me.

  34. #34
    Senior Member ryc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Or-Y-Gun
    Posts
    548
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    No arguing the AF capabilities of the Nikon. It is the best on the market. For the most part my subjects are pretty easy to follow and focus on and the mountains in my landscapes move very slowly, I think they know I am trying to photograph them Anyway lets see what tomorrow brings. But for now it's the A900 for me.

  35. #35
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    etrigan63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Earth, Sol System (near Miami, FL)
    Posts
    2,501
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Sadly, the A900 lacks the lowlight capabilities I need for my photo work (stagecraft/dance), the rumored A800 may be more useful to me, but I am awaiting the D3 refresh as well.
    Carlos Echenique | Carlos Echenique Photography |Olympus OM-D E-M1 MK II | Olympus Pen-F - M.Zuiko 17mm f/1.8, M.Zuiko 25mm f/1.8, M.Zuiko 45mm f/1.8, Rokinon 12mm f/2 NCS, M.Zuiko 75mm f/1.8, M.Zuiko 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO, M.Zuiko 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO

  36. #36
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Aye, the D3 sounds like the ultimate camera for your uses, Carlos. I wouldn't imagine there being a replacement for at least another year for that fine camera. FWIW, I wouldn't hold out for an A800. IMO, I don't think Sony is planning a lowlight, high fps shooter yet. If they are, then it will require them to both change their CMOS ADC design and change the way they deal with color in order to compete in lowlight to the D3. I hope that I'm wrong

  37. #37
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,872
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by douglasf13 View Post
    Aye, the D3 sounds like the ultimate camera for your uses, Carlos. I wouldn't imagine there being a replacement for at least another year for that fine camera. FWIW, I wouldn't hold out for an A800. IMO, I don't think Sony is planning a lowlight, high fps shooter yet. If they are, then it will require them to both change their CMOS ADC design and change the way they deal with color in order to compete in lowlight to the D3. I hope that I'm wrong
    Why should this be so difficult for Sony? If any company pout there can do that it is Sony. Do not forget it is their sensor and Nikon is just using and fine tuning the Sony sensor in the D3.

    So why should Sony not be able to do this better with their own product?

  38. #38
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,872
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by ryc View Post
    No arguing the AF capabilities of the Nikon. It is the best on the market. For the most part my subjects are pretty easy to follow and focus on and the mountains in my landscapes move very slowly, I think they know I am trying to photograph them Anyway lets see what tomorrow brings. But for now it's the A900 for me.
    While I agree that the D3 / D3X AF is better than the A900 AF, I only can say I simply could bring the D3 AF to not perform correctly during good light studio portrait shots. It was simply not fast enough to follow the model's eyes and keep them sharp when I told her to move and turn around just in order to get away from these static and boring portraits.

    I could get the shots doe by using MF, with some experience in focusing of course.

    So this is what I mean by "over designed" AF solutions, they will for sure deliver in some certain areas where they were designed for but never can deliver everywhere - nobody could prove that so far to me - not with Canon and not with Nikon

  39. #39
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    D3 is not a Sony sensor. It is believed to be made by Renesas. D3x sensor is made by Sony. The D3 sensor, like Canon sensors, is optimized for low read noise at ISO 1600+. This comes at a cost to low ISO, although most reviews fail to show the low ISO differences, and choose to focus on high ISO. Sony's "EXMOR" sensor design, with it's numerous, column ADCs provides very low read noise at low ISO, but does not perform as well when gained up. It's two different sensor design philosophies, and Nikon was wise to incorporate both into two cameras with different focuses (no pun intended. )

    Until Sony makes a non "EXMOR" CMOS sensor that uses more traditional, off-chip ADCs, or drastically improves the quality of the very numerous ADCs on the EXMOR chip (or brings some new tech,) then a 14MP "A800" wouldn't have better noise characteristics than the A900 sized to match the A800 file. The other issue is color filtration, since Sony is using a more "MFDB-like" CFA when compared to Nikon and Canon's current cameras. While advantageous at low ISO, this requires more amplification for higher ISO, and that's why Sony's cameras across the whole line tend to be a touch noisier than the competition. Trade offs.

    All of this being said, I'm hoping that I'm wrong, and Sony makes a high ISO oriented camera with great AF, so great shooters like Marc have more options. I just haven't seen any evidence that it is happening soon. We'll see.

  40. #40
    Senior Member ryc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Or-Y-Gun
    Posts
    548
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    What I would like to see next from Sony is some more Zeiss primes like a 25, 35 and a 50

    What are the chances of that happening?

  41. #41
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by ryc View Post
    What I would like to see next from Sony is some more Zeiss primes like a 25, 35 and a 50

    What are the chances of that happening?
    So would I!
    and as far as the Sony / Nikon autofocus is concerned, of course, the Nikon is much faster, and the Sony may hunt in low light and it's slow :sleep006::sleep006: however, I get less out of focus shots than I used to with the D3 . . . but that doesn't alter Marc's point that under stress, the Nikon is more likely to get that crucial shot. What it does mean is that if your photographing that mountain / flower / sleeping dog, the A900 (it seems to me) is less likely to make some smart *** (apparently I'm not allowed to use a word denoting bottom) decision and focus on something quite different.

    Just this guy you know

  42. #42
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Sony had been showing these two prototypes up until last August, so I'm HOPING that they spring them on us this year. Who knows? The first one is definitely Zeiss, the second may or may not be, because the focus hold button looks more like a "G" lens.





  43. #43
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    A couple of fast aperture Sony primes would be most welcome to join this photographer's roller bag. Chief among those would be a Zeiss 28/2 and/or 35/1.4 ASPH with a floating element. A refreshed 85/1.4 IF APO would be most welcome also (the Leica R90/2 APO is sorely missed every time I shoot the current 85/1.4 against back light). A Zeiss 180/2.8 APO wouldn't hurt either.

    Personally, I would pay almost any amount of money for a Zeiss 55/1.2 and 85/1.2 in AF versions. Those lenses are the ONLY reason I miss Canon at all.

    I never saw the A900 as a replacement for the Nikons. To some degree, it was the camera Leica should have delivered (with added Leica design touches and AF) ... frankly, that was exactly how I saw it ... so I sold my DMR/9 and all those fine but manual focus Leica optics. (The DMR also delivered at lower ISOs and struggled with higher ISOs.) That is a decision I do not regret in the least. Nor do I regret off-loading the ZF collection, since that was just a stop gap prior to the Sony/Zeiss solution.

    BTW, I do not have any issue with miss focused D3 files. I had the camera calibrated by Nikon service which took 4 days door-to-door, and then zeroed in each lens individually. As far as selection of what to focus on, all I can say is practice makes perfect. Shooting 1000 images in 8 hours every single weekend tends to make for fast hands and a sure eye as to exactly where and how to place the focus point. Just because there is automation doesn't mean it does ALL of the thinking

    I've used the D3 AF in studio with the Profoto high speed strobes for fashion stuff and had zero misses, so missing shots there makes no sense to me.

    I'm not into trashing one system to engrandize another. Each has it's place and ways to earn its keep. I have a couple of high-end outdoor weddings coming up where I will have a second primary shooter as back-up, and will be most delighted to carry the A900s to those. But, trust me, the Nikons WILL be in the Volvo just in case the sun goes down

  44. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado
    Posts
    2,077
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    A couple of fast aperture Sony primes would be most welcome to join this photographer's roller bag. Chief among those would be a Zeiss 28/2 and/or 35/1.4 ASPH with a floating element. A refreshed 85/1.4 IF APO would be most welcome also (the Leica R90/2 APO is sorely missed every time I shoot the current 85/1.4 against back light). A Zeiss 180/2.8 APO wouldn't hurt either.

    Personally, I would pay almost any amount of money for a Zeiss 55/1.2 and 85/1.2 in AF versions. Those lenses are the ONLY reason I miss Canon at all.

    I never saw the A900 as a replacement for the Nikons. To some degree, it was the camera Leica should have delivered (with added Leica design touches and AF) ... frankly, that was exactly how I saw it ... so I sold my DMR/9 and all those fine but manual focus Leica optics. (The DMR also delivered at lower ISOs and struggled with higher ISOs.) That is a decision I do not regret in the least. Nor do I regret off-loading the ZF collection, since that was just a stop gap prior to the Sony/Zeiss solution.

    BTW, I do not have any issue with miss focused D3 files. I had the camera calibrated by Nikon service which took 4 days door-to-door, and then zeroed in each lens individually. As far as selection of what to focus on, all I can say is practice makes perfect. Shooting 1000 images in 8 hours every single weekend tends to make for fast hands and a sure eye as to exactly where and how to place the focus point. Just because there is automation doesn't mean it does ALL of the thinking

    I've used the D3 AF in studio with the Profoto high speed strobes for fashion stuff and had zero misses, so missing shots there makes no sense to me.

    I'm not into trashing one system to engrandize another. Each has it's place and ways to earn its keep. I have a couple of high-end outdoor weddings coming up where I will have a second primary shooter as back-up, and will be most delighted to carry the A900s to those. But, trust me, the Nikons WILL be in the Volvo just in case the sun goes down
    Marc

    If you loved the Canon 55 and 85 1.2's you should have seen results from the same pairing from Contax! Add the 21 2.8 to this pair and you have a system for life. I still have the 55 and 85 1.2's and the RTS III body. Long sold the 21 because I just wasn't going to get the use from it that it deserved! But man these three lenses covered 90% of my shots! For weddings it was killer. Only the telephoto stuff was missing and the 200 2.0 could cover all of those! Surely Contax, in the right business hands (certainly not Kyocera!! LOL) could have done very nicely in the 21st century world.

    Very sad to see some of the best optical technology ever go down the drain because of lack of vision. DAMN!!

    Just my lost thoughts perishing in the hell of a photographer's needs

    Best

    Woody

  45. #45
    Senior Member edwardkaraa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Bangkok
    Posts
    1,470
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    So would I!
    and as far as the Sony / Nikon autofocus is concerned, of course, the Nikon is much faster, and the Sony may hunt in low light and it's slow :sleep006::sleep006: however, I get less out of focus shots than I used to with the D3 . . . but that doesn't alter Marc's point that under stress, the Nikon is more likely to get that crucial shot. What it does mean is that if your photographing that mountain / flower / sleeping dog, the A900 (it seems to me) is less likely to make some smart *** (apparently I'm not allowed to use a word denoting bottom) decision and focus on something quite different.
    Totally agreed. I have actually done tests with the old 1Ds where I specifically selected the center point to focus on a high contrast subject (camera on tripod), and the camera invariably used some adjacent AF point to focus on the background. I found this inacceptable at the time that even when I override the AF point selection and force the camera to use the center point, it was still cheating, probably because it thought I didn't know what I was doing

    I'm sure that 9 AF points cannot compete with speed to pro bodies with 20-40++ AF sensors. But it is much more accurate than comparable bodies with similar AF point numbers.

    I don't believe that the fact that an 800$ Nikon got 1 shot while the A900 didn't is meaningful here. It could have been the other way around.
    M262 ZM 25/2.8 35/1.4 50/2 85/2

  46. #46
    Shelby Lewis
    Guest

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by edwardkaraa View Post
    I don't believe that the fact that an 800$ Nikon got 1 shot while the A900 didn't is meaningful here. It could have been the other way around.
    Let me preface this by saying I'm a huge fan of the a900.

    That out of the way... from my experience marc's remark is meaningful in that it has over time been born out as a truism in my experience. Hitting a moving target that is coming toward or away from you, especially in lower light... even with af focus assist takes just luck with the a900... ESPECIALLY if you are using the fine zeiss optics @ or near wide open. Add to that the fact the SSS tends to lull us into using slower shutter speeds and you have a wedding disaster in the making. Bad af, thin DoF, slow shutter speed. arggg...

    I've never used a camera... in my life... with more accurate af on still subjects in good light. I can shoot the 135 @ 1.8 at any distance using any af point and get fantastic results. Keeper rates are very, very high.

    Once targets are moving... terrible. Like it's a different camera. Even my old canon rebel xti, canon 10D, canon 5d, nikon d300, and nikon d100 had better servo-af performance. Now THAT is disappointing.

    Still love it though... although I sure could use a d3x by the end of the summer when weddings start getting dark again... or a new sony sports camera like the d3 (ain't gonna happen).

  47. #47
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by edwardkaraa View Post
    Totally agreed. I have actually done tests with the old 1Ds where I specifically selected the center point to focus on a high contrast subject (camera on tripod), and the camera invariably used some adjacent AF point to focus on the background. I found this inacceptable at the time that even when I override the AF point selection and force the camera to use the center point, it was still cheating, probably because it thought I didn't know what I was doing

    I'm sure that 9 AF points cannot compete with speed to pro bodies with 20-40++ AF sensors. But it is much more accurate than comparable bodies with similar AF point numbers.

    I don't believe that the fact that an 800$ Nikon got 1 shot while the A900 didn't is meaningful here. It could have been the other way around.
    Sounds like you had the wrong AF selector choice set in the Canon menu. Most Pro bodies provide a selection of amount and use of the AF points to match the specific job or conditions. That was NOT my experience with the 1Ds, 1DsMKII, and 1DsMKIII. Very reliable, extremely fast AF.

    In the case like you describe with a static subject and current Nikon or Canon camera on a tripod, I'd manual focus using live view @ 10X for dead on focus.

    As far as what camera got the shot or not at the wedding ... it IS meaningful when it's MY camera not doing the AF. The A900 hunts in low light and does it with all lenses ... and when it hunts it moves through the whole focus range absolutely assuring a missed shot unless I take over manually. Besides, it's no more antidotal than your example of the Canon focus experience, so that is also "meaningless here".

    Again, this is ridiculous. I am a full blown owner of the A900 system. Understanding its strengths (there are many), and weaknesses (there are some) is part and parcel of sharing experiences. Someone else made the comparison to Nikon which has its own set of strengths and weakneses ... among which isn't the AF.

  48. #48
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by woodyspedden View Post
    Marc

    If you loved the Canon 55 and 85 1.2's you should have seen results from the same pairing from Contax! Add the 21 2.8 to this pair and you have a system for life. I still have the 55 and 85 1.2's and the RTS III body. Long sold the 21 because I just wasn't going to get the use from it that it deserved! But man these three lenses covered 90% of my shots! For weddings it was killer. Only the telephoto stuff was missing and the 200 2.0 could cover all of those! Surely Contax, in the right business hands (certainly not Kyocera!! LOL) could have done very nicely in the 21st century world.

    Very sad to see some of the best optical technology ever go down the drain because of lack of vision. DAMN!!

    Just my lost thoughts perishing in the hell of a photographer's needs

    Best

    Woody
    I owned those Contax lenses Woody. Wish I would have kept the 55/1.2. I wonder if the new ZF 21 is the same lens as the Contax version?

  49. #49
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by Shelby Lewis View Post
    Let me preface this by saying I'm a huge fan of the a900.

    That out of the way... from my experience marc's remark is meaningful in that it has over time been born out as a truism in my experience. Hitting a moving target that is coming toward or away from you, especially in lower light... even with af focus assist takes just luck with the a900... ESPECIALLY if you are using the fine zeiss optics @ or near wide open. Add to that the fact the SSS tends to lull us into using slower shutter speeds and you have a wedding disaster in the making. Bad af, thin DoF, slow shutter speed. arggg...

    I've never used a camera... in my life... with more accurate af on still subjects in good light. I can shoot the 135 @ 1.8 at any distance using any af point and get fantastic results. Keeper rates are very, very high.

    Once targets are moving... terrible. Like it's a different camera. Even my old canon rebel xti, canon 10D, canon 5d, nikon d300, and nikon d100 had better servo-af performance. Now THAT is disappointing.

    Still love it though... although I sure could use a d3x by the end of the summer when weddings start getting dark again... or a new sony sports camera like the d3 (ain't gonna happen).
    Good to see a balanced POV. It's important to share all experiences good and bad for those considering different alternatives. Know what a tool can and cannot do well ... then use it's strengths while avoiding it's weakneses.

    One AF technique I'm employing with the A900 is use of the single shot on moving subjects rather than servo ... I manually focus track by tapping the AF as the subject moves toward me so the AF doesn't have far to go when I actually take the shot. It's a technique I used sucessfully with the Contax N cameras which were similar to the A900. Not a perfect solution, but it does deliver a better success rate.

    When I used to shoot the Canon 85/1.2 that is known for slower AF in lower ambient light, I used the STE-2 transmitter alone which significantly increased the speed and hit ratio with that lens. The STE-2 provided a much better focus assist than the assist of the flash units themselves.

    I wonder if there's a way to get something like that to work with the A900? Even if you could use the assist on the Sony flash with the flash itself turned off. (????).

  50. #50
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Lunchtime with the A900 and Zeiss 135

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    BTW, I do not have any issue with miss focused D3 files. I had the camera calibrated by Nikon service which took 4 days door-to-door, and then zeroed in each lens individually. As far as selection of what to focus on, all I can say is practice makes perfect. Shooting 1000 images in 8 hours every single weekend tends to make for fast hands and a sure eye as to exactly where and how to place the focus point. Just because there is automation doesn't mean it does ALL of the thinking
    Perhaps I should have done that too (sent it in for calibration)- I'm only reporting my experience, and sophisticated AF is not my sphere of expertise.

    However, the fact that I DID get missed focus in simple situations (usually focusing on something behind the point in high contrast situations), Although it reflects my lack of skill in setting up the AF properly (I left it at defaults) is not necessarily simply my fault.

    Perhaps (like many other cameras) the autofocus should be foolproof out of the box, left at defaults; saying that you need to shoot 1000 images per weekend to learn to get it right doesn't actually prove me wrong.

    Just this guy you know

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •