Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: tkarlmann on October 04, 2012, 01:51:44 pm
-
I think this site has decided to perhaps slight the new Sony a99 in favor of some Sony fixed lens camera -- based on the Photokina report? Then, just today there was an a99 photo with a notably terse statement indicating an upcoming review that seemed to say: "Ok, well, I guess we'll have to review the a99, sigh."
Anyone else get this notion or is it just me? ???
-
You need to have a (better) look at the "what's New" section ;) ;)
-
I am very anxious to read Michael's review of the Sony a99 and suspect that he'll be a fan. He's a long time Sony a900 user and recently has done really good work with his Sony Nex7 camera in San Miguel de Allende. In fact, his series of reviews of the Nex 7 were instrumental in my move away from micro four thirds to the Nex world for my art cameras.
I've been using the a77 and a57 cameras for a while and find the EVFs very addicting and more efficient for professional work than traditional EVFs. If the sensor is everything it's cracked up to be (and Michael will be the more trustworthy source of information about that) I am sure the a99 will change some minds about what a pro camera can be, going forward.
The "What's New" page is typically understated. If you want fireworks you can always head over to DPreview and dive into the Sony SLT forum, it's always a wild ride..... I think I'll learn about this camera (the a99) here with the grown-ups.. :-)
-
Hi,
Michael is recovering after major surgery. It's nice to hear that he now can use serious weight DSLR stuff.
Michael has for a longer time used a Sony Alpha 900 kit. I'm much interested in his findings. I think you misinterpret his wording.
On the other hand, now that Nikon has the truly excellent D800E, the Sony Alpha 99 may have little to offer. Sony could of course make a 36MP camera, too, but I have the impression that they favored video over high resolution. Much interested in Michaels conclusions.
Best regards
Erik
I think this site has decided to perhaps slight the new Sony a99 in favor of some Sony fixed lens camera -- based on the Photokina report? Then, just today there was an a99 photo with a notably terse statement indicating an upcoming review that seemed to say: "Ok, well, I guess we'll have to review the a99, sigh."
Anyone else get this notion or is it just me? ???
-
I think this site has decided to perhaps slight the new Sony a99 in favor of some Sony fixed lens camera -- based on the Photokina report? Then, just today there was an a99 photo with a notably terse statement indicating an upcoming review that seemed to say: "Ok, well, I guess we'll have to review the a99, sigh."
Anyone else get this notion or is it just me? ???
It's just you.
-
I think this site has decided to perhaps slight...
If "this site" ever decides to slight anything or anyone, then it should be certain fanboys.
It used to be that reviewers get accused of favoritism of certain brands, but now the new "thing" seems to be accusing of favoritism within the same brand. What!?
-
I think this site has decided to perhaps slight the new Sony a99 in favor of some Sony fixed lens camera, ...
Anyone else get this notion or is it just me?
What other notions are you getting?
-
So now the preliminary review is up and it's pretty much what I thought it might be------great IQ. Some will like the EVF and some won't. I guess each of us need to try it out and make up our own minds. MR makes a good argument against but I think people that grew up with EVFs will probably see it differently. Bottom line seems to be that the camera is capable of making really good images.
-
+1
I'd say I would like a better EVF. In a couple years we will get there. But, is the mirror really needed at all?
Erik
So now the preliminary review is up and it's pretty much what I thought it might be------great IQ. Some will like the EVF and some won't. I guess each of us need to try it out and make up our own minds. MR makes a good argument against but I think people that grew up with EVFs will probably see it differently. Bottom line seems to be that the camera is capable of making really good images.
-
I think Nick Devlin's comment regarding the EVF sums up the situation very well. I'll elaborate on his views. Why would people who spend a lot of time and money trying to get the perfect shot, which is sharp and clear, spend a good proportion of their time looking at a degraded representation of the scenes they are trying to capture, through the EVF on their camera?
Why would anyone who is interested in image quality want to spend time watching interesting programs on a TV that is small and of poor quality?
Only if there's no alternative, I'd say.
My view is that there is nothing inherently good about EVFs. They are at best a necessary evil, chosen for the form-factor advantages they bring and the cameras they make possible. Sony clearly does not share this view, since they built this camera around an EVF simply for the sake of doing so. It offers no notable advantage of any sort, most notably not in price. I can see no reason to chose an EVF in any context where it does not significantly reduce the size, weight or price of the camera, or substantially enhance its usability. The case is simply not made out beyond, "It's cool new technology".
To me, the experience of viewing the natural world through an EVF is like crashing at a cheap motel, closing the blinds, and turning on the small, fuzzy old cathode-ray tube TV on the dresser. It's a shame, because this is otherwise a cracker of a camera, really nice to hold and behold. – Nick
-
Looks like a very nice camera, but if Sony wants to sell it in today's market, it would need to be priced at least $1,000 lower that the announced $2800 list price. As Ray says, only if there is no alternative. But with D800,5DIII,D600,6D, discounted D700 and 5DII, even Sony's own RX1, and to some degree Sigma Merill DP2M, there are plenty of alternatives.
If Sony won't reduce the selling price, A99 will met similar fate to Sigma SD1. Sell a few units, and disappear from the sight. What would be a pity.
Now, once Hasselblad puts their label and some red lipstick on it, they may sell more units that Sony (even if they price it higher than Sony, since they would target it at a different clientele).
-
Looks like a very nice camera, but if Sony wants to sell it in today's market, it would need to be priced at least $1,000 lower that the announced $2800 list price. As Ray says, only if there is no alternative. But with D800,5DIII,D600,6D, discounted D700 and 5DII, even Sony's own RX1, and to some degree Sigma Merill DP2M, there are plenty of alternatives.
If Sony won't reduce the selling price, A99 will met similar fate to Sigma SD1. Sell a few units, and disappear from the sight. What would be a pity.
Now, once Hasselblad puts their label and some red lipstick on it, they may sell more units that Sony (even if they price it higher than Sony, since they would target it at a different clientele).
I'm not sure, Les, that small reductions in price are the answer. I think anyone would be ill advised to buy a camera body on the basis it was a few dollars cheaper than another brand. One should always consider the lenses one already owns and the lenses that one would like, that are available for the new camera. Always bear in mind that a camera without a lens is a totally useless piece of equipment.
-
That's exactly my point. With the $2,800 price tag, Sony won't get any Nikon or Canon converts.
Now, if they offered a FF camera with a reasonably good kit lens, or a 35 / 50mm prime under $2,000, that might get attention of some Canikon users. And more and more photographers with their existing lens collections are open to add a lens adapter ring, and use their lenses with an "alternative system".
A good example is Sony NEX-7 platform. If you peruse the Alternative Forum on FredMiranda.com, it seems that many people bought NEX-7 just as a universal platform for trying out all kinds of lenses. BTW, most of these guys were eagerly awaiting a FF NEX-9.
-
That's exactly my point. With the $2,800 price tag, Sony won't get any Nikon or Canon converts.
Now, if they offered a FF camera with a reasonably good kit lens, or a 35 / 50mm prime under $2,000, that might get attention of some Canikon users. And more and more photographers with their existing lens collections are open to add a lens adapter ring, and use their lenses with an "alternative system".
A good example is Sony NEX-7 platform. If you peruse the Alternative Forum on FredMiranda.com, it seems that many people bought NEX-7 just as a universal platform for trying out all kinds of lenses. BTW, most of these guys were eagerly awaiting a FF NEX-9.
Well, they certainly won't get any Nikon converts. Who would opt for a Sony 24mp sensor when they can get, or already have, a Nikon 36mp camera?
I doubt also that they will get any Canon converts because those who would be open to switching formats for the sake of a better sensor have already done so, switching to Nikon.
This camera is for existing owners of Sony equipment who wish to upgrade, or for newcomers who are thinking of buying a full-frame camera for the first time.
As regards using other lenses with an adapter, Les, isn't there always a trade-off with regard to full functionality of the foreign lens, such as lack of autofocussing, or a lack of full EXIF information in the RAW converter?
-
Ray,
I have never used a lens converter, but from what I've read, many people with "alternative systems" do own them and use them regularly.
Even some Canon guys who own Nikon lenses.
Les
-
Ray,
I have never used a lens converter, but from what I've read, many people with "alternative systems" do own them and use them regularly.
Even some Canon guys who own Nikon lenses.
Les
Les, I'm one such guy. I bought the Nikkor 14-24/F2.8 to use with my Canon 5D via the best adapter which was available at the time. There were too many oddities so I eventually grabbed a D700 to use with it. One completely unexpected oddity was my 5D would not completely switch off when the lens was attached. I either had to remove the lens or remove the battery after finishing using the camera for a while. If I didn't, the battery would go flat within a couple of days.
-
I think Nick Devlin's comment regarding the EVF sums up the situation very well. I'll elaborate on his views. Why would people who spend a lot of time and money trying to get the perfect shot, which is sharp and clear, spend a good proportion of their time looking at a degraded representation of the scenes they are trying to capture, through the EVF on their camera?
Why would anyone who is interested in image quality want to spend time watching interesting programs on a TV that is small and of poor quality?
Only if there's no alternative, I'd say.
EVF haters....
Nick comments made me laugh!
I never had the EVF on an SLT camera, impeding me of taking the photo I wanted.
Even in an OVF the scene is somewhat degraded from reality, whatever is an Hassy or an A900 OVF.
But a part from that fact, the images that I take, they will look different from reality anyway and, what I see on the OVF, is nothing like what I have in my mind while taking the photo, which is the closer representation of the final result.
So, EVF or OVF.... use what you like, but don't dismiss what does not suit you.
-
Les, I'm one such guy. I bought the Nikkor 14-24/F2.8 to use with my Canon 5D via the best adapter which was available at the time. There were too many oddities so I eventually grabbed a D700 to use with it. One completely unexpected oddity was my 5D would not completely switch off when the lens was attached. I either had to remove the lens or remove the battery after finishing using the camera for a while. If I didn't, the battery would go flat within a couple of days.
A recent DSLR is never completely shutted Off unless you remove the battery.
Old EOS 300D (Rebel) was really shutted Off, but when you turned On it took 2 or 3 seconds to load the firmware.
That's why more recent DSLR are not completely Off, but the consumption is extremely low as you shut Off the Power switch.
Have a Nice Day.
Thierry
-
I think Nick Devlin's comment regarding the EVF sums up the situation very well. I'll elaborate on his views. Why would people who spend a lot of time and money trying to get the perfect shot, which is sharp and clear, spend a good proportion of their time looking at a degraded representation of the scenes they are trying to capture, through the EVF on their camera?
Why would anyone who is interested in image quality want to spend time watching interesting programs on a TV that is small and of poor quality?
Only if there's no alternative, I'd say.
1) Because the EVF tells you instantly, without chimping, if your exposure is correct.
2) Because the EVF completely removes sharpness-destroying mirror slap (especially in conjunction with electronic first curtain shutter)
3) Video. Nuff said.
4) Because the EVF allows information overlays like focus peaking, electronic level, grid lines, and anything else
5) Because the EVF (given correct camera settings) lets you know where exposure values lie on the sensor.
6) Because the EVF allows 10-12FPS cameras for $1000 instead of $6000+
And, bonus question:
Do you never use the LCD to compose on a tripod? Really?
-
EVF haters....
Nick comments made me laugh!
I never had the EVF on an SLT camera, impeding me of taking the photo I wanted.
Even in an OVF the scene is somewhat degraded from reality, whatever is an Hassy or an A900 OVF. But a part from that fact, the images that I take, they will look different from reality anyway and, what I see on the OVF, is nothing like what I have in my mind while taking the photo, which is the closer representation of the final result.
So, EVF or OVF.... use what you like, but don't dismiss what does not suit you.
Yeah, I am kind of an EVF hater. But it's not about the idea of the EVF but rather the present-day state of the technology. Perhaps in 3 or 5 years the EVF experience will match or better the OVF. I'd embrace that. But there is a long way to go for that. Refresh rates have to rise, resolution has to rise, DR has to rise. Long way to go to my eye. Today, they are a worthwhile compromise for smaller cameras.
I also quite agree that a high degree of pre-visualization of the finished image should take place in the minds eye. But does what takes place in the VF not play a part in that?
Hey, if you like EVFs, you'll love the A99.
- N.
-
6) Because the EVF allows 10-12FPS cameras for $1000 instead of $6000+
That 10-12 fps is useless when EVF can not keep up with the action, or AF can not track.
Viewfinder is a big deal for photographers. They are the whole reason that SLRs took over rangefinders in the first place. I have been shooting only last five years, but I still do not like EVFs. For my m 4/3rd camera I have bought and returned EVF.
Would you like to drive your car looking through windscreen or looking at a TV monitor?
-
I have a very, very brief experience with EVF. I was at a trade show and tried one of the new Fujis. What bothered me is that every time I half-press the shutter to focus, the whole image freezes for a second. For static (read: dead) subjects, no problem. For portraits and moving subjects, big, big problem.
-
A recent DSLR is never completely shutted Off unless you remove the battery.
Old EOS 300D (Rebel) was really shutted Off, but when you turned On it took 2 or 3 seconds to load the firmware.
That's why more recent DSLR are not completely Off, but the consumption is extremely low as you shut Off the Power switch.
Have a Nice Day.
Thierry
That may well be the case, Thierry. However, from my experience, when a Canon DSLR is switched off with the button, as opposed to being in sleep mode, there is no indication that the camera is not completely off. There's no light or LCD that may appear to be still drawing battery power, however slight.
One thing I noticed that was different about Nikon cameras when I got my D700 is that the top LCD continues to show some basic details when the camera was apparently completely switched off, such as the number of shots remaining on the memory card, or 'E' for empty if there were no card in the camera.
However, with both models, the 5D or the D700, and all other Canon DSLRs I've owned, when the cameras are switch off, the battery drain is so slight that the battery will retain its charge for several weeks or longer.
This was not the case when the Nikkor 14-24 was attached to my 5D with adapter. The battery would go flat within a couple of days if it wasn't removed. There were other oddities such as incomplete EXIF data and no reference to the F stop, which as I recall caused some problems in Photoshop when attempting to merge images to HDR, and other oddities which I now can't remember clearly.
Now I'm not sure if the sort of problems I've mentioned above are typical for most cameras that are attached to 'foreign' lenses via an adapter, but I understand there will often be at least some degree of loss of functionality.
When people are considering the purchase of a new system, I would strongly recommend they investigate the type of lenses that are available and the degree of functionality of such lenses when an adapter is required.
-
Hi Slobodan,
That is no problem with the Alpha 77 at least, as it does use phase detect AF normally.
I have used the Alpha 77 for about a year, and I essentially feel I can live with EVF. It has benefits but also disadvantages.
+ More control
- Worse visibility
Best regards
Erik
I have a very, very brief experience with EVF. I was at a trade show and tried one of the new Fujis. What bothered me is that every time I half-press the shutter to focus, the whole image freezes for a second. For static (read: dead) subjects, no problem. For portraits and moving subjects, big, big problem.
-
Hi,
I'm pretty sure that Sony has done some market research. I don't think prices really matter that much. Sony is much more expensive than Canon and Nikon if you look at lenses, anyway.
I sort of don't think that a potential buyer of an advanced camera says: Hi, A costs 2000 and B costs 3000.
Canon and Nikon have the market positions they deserve, which they built up by long time commitment to professionals. Minolta/Sony was always haphazard in that sense. Sometimes they have a pro camera sometimes not. No professional services. Lens sortiment weak with just a few highlights, no go road maps. Lens line expensive.
Best regards
Erik
Looks like a very nice camera, but if Sony wants to sell it in today's market, it would need to be priced at least $1,000 lower that the announced $2800 list price. As Ray says, only if there is no alternative. But with D800,5DIII,D600,6D, discounted D700 and 5DII, even Sony's own RX1, and to some degree Sigma Merill DP2M, there are plenty of alternatives.
If Sony won't reduce the selling price, A99 will met similar fate to Sigma SD1. Sell a few units, and disappear from the sight. What would be a pity.
Now, once Hasselblad puts their label and some red lipstick on it, they may sell more units that Sony (even if they price it higher than Sony, since they would target it at a different clientele).
-
Not a particularly glowing report here. http://www.eoshd.com/content/9102/johnnie-behiri-shoots-professional-work-on-sony-a99-sample-videos-and-review
-
I have a very, very brief experience with EVF. I was at a trade show and tried one of the new Fujis. What bothered me is that every time I half-press the shutter to focus, the whole image freezes for a second. For static (read: dead) subjects, no problem. For portraits and moving subjects, big, big problem.
That's a problem with the Fujis, not a problem with EVFs in general.
-
That 10-12 fps is useless when EVF can not keep up with the action, or AF can not track.
I don't know what you are talking about here.
Viewfinder is a big deal for photographers. They are the whole reason that SLRs took over rangefinders in the first place. I have been shooting only last five years, but I still do not like EVFs. For my m 4/3rd camera I have bought and returned EVF.
Would you like to drive your car looking through windscreen or looking at a TV monitor?
Do you ever use the LCD to compose an image?
I do all the time.
-
I have a very, very brief experience with EVF. I was at a trade show and tried one of the new Fujis. What bothered me is that every time I half-press the shutter to focus, the whole image freezes for a second.
For a change, I'll take the opportunity to join a chorus -- I've just powered up my obsoleted entry-level SLT-A35 and confirmed that the EVF continues to up-date without any delay, as I pan the camera and "half-press the shutter to focus".
-
Hi Slobodan,
That is no problem with the Alpha 77 at least, as it does use phase detect AF normally.
I have used the Alpha 77 for about a year, and I essentially feel I can live with EVF. It has benefits but also disadvantages.
+ More control
- Worse visibility
Best regards
Erik
By and large, I like the EVF on my Sony A65 except (and this is a fairly big except) when shooting in bright sunlight. It's not really the VF's fault; I am plagued by being definitively left-eyed with fairly intrusive glasses (no, I can't wear contacts and my uncorrected vision is too poor for VF diopter adjustment). The sun literally floods the VF with light. It's been a long time since I shot with an optical finder, but I don't remember this being much of a problem, nor was it a problem with my earlier Panasonic FZs.
-
By and large, I like the EVF on my Sony A65 except (and this is a fairly big except) when shooting in bright sunlight. It's not really the VF's fault; I am plagued by being definitively left-eyed with fairly intrusive glasses (no, I can't wear contacts and my uncorrected vision is too poor for VF diopter adjustment). The sun literally floods the VF with light. It's been a long time since I shot with an optical finder, but I don't remember this being much of a problem, nor was it a problem with my earlier Panasonic FZs.
Yes, this is annoying with the sunlight shining at a certain angle. I just mash the eyepiece against my glasses tight. I hear wearing a baseball cap helps a lot too.
-
Nick:
Please forgive me as I am a newbie here. I have lurked on LL for a long time and think you guys run a nice site. With regard to the a99 (on my possible list) I get that you don't like the EVF and that's fine! From my standpoint as an a900 user, I was looking more along the lines of improved IQ, faster AF and improved FPS s critical features. I get that my FPS rate is not going to be much over the a900 except for the cropped 10FPS mode. I sense from the article that you thought these things were improved but unlike the EVF, I did not get a sense, I guess, of how much?
The issue of techology to me is somewhat irrelevant as I think cameras 10 years from now will be way beyond what we see as possible today as techology avenues. I agree the EVF will be much faster, PDAF may be on-sensor but you may also see things like adaptive optics as well hooking two cameras( or more) togther to form a baseline inferometer system. Sensors could very weel be the 80-100 Mp range for full frame and smaller. The simple fact is any camera out today is based on technology that is two years or more older so I guess I lost your point about techology advancement.
Withy regard to OVFs, I have shot with Hassie's and two of the finest Prisms ever made the a900 and the Maxxum 9 but when I go from the Hassie screen to the Minolta/Sony screens there is simply no comparison IMO. I am somewhat of zone shooter which is , I suppose, why I keep my EOS-1V hanging around because of multi-spot but I must admit when I first started to use it I was more fascinated by those 45 Focus spots then what the image was. In general, except in cases where you have good light, the 35mm 100% optical VFs have limitations as has been noted elsewhere. Can I live with an EVF, probably at least based on my current experiomentation. I do agree that oth would have been nice but as an engineer, I can see why Sony believes that having a mirror flip up and down is a detraction to "overall" system performance. Anyway, I am digressing!!
Would you care to comment on the AF performance and specifically the coverage area. One of the things I like to do is focus on the edges which is not a strong point of the a900.
Anyway, Thanks
Tim
-
Hi Tim,
You're totally asking the right questions as a potential upgrader. I'm unfortunately the wrong guy to ask because Michael is the Sony shooter (and the author of the review but-for my smart ass quote). The AF seems plenty fast to me. Certainly comparable to anything else out there in its league, but I think you should go and play with the camera a bit yourself before you commit. Both in terms of the EVF style of work and these other very important questions. Overall, my (brief) sense is that the A99 is a very competent camera.
Maybe Michael will chime in to this thread if he's up to it.
Cheers,
- N.
-
On the other hand, now that Nikon has the truly excellent D800E, the Sony Alpha 99 may have little to offer.
Just the auto focus Zeiss lenses that won't be available for any other camera for a couple of years. They have that look that I loved with Leica R for years.
An A99 will work wonderfully next to my A850. Outstanding optical viewfinder and great sensor on the A850 and all the features of an EVF and another great sensor on the A99. Both with image stabilization on any lens I mount.
I'll also have a D800E with the Horseman VCC for tabletop work. But will wait for Nikon to catch up with their lenses.
It's all a matter of preference.
-
Just the auto focus Zeiss lenses that won't be available for any other camera for a couple of years. They have that look that I loved with Leica R for years.
An A99 will work wonderfully next to my A850. Outstanding optical viewfinder and great sensor on the A850 and all the features of an EVF and another great sensor on the A99. Both with image stabilization on any lens I mount.
I'll also have a D800E with the Horseman VCC for tabletop work. But will wait for Nikon to catch up with their lenses.
It's all a matter of preference.
Are you saying that Nikon needs to catch up with Sony in terms of lenses? It's really the complete opposite. Sony has huge gaps in their lens lineup. Yeah they have the AF CZ stuff which I and most other people use in MF anyway (I own the 24-70 & 85). But overall they are well short of Nikon and Canon in both selection and pricing on comparative glass. Sony has no OEM ultra wide Zoom, no tilt-shift, and everything reasonably fast over 300MM is either absent, outdated or completely overpriced. The STF is nice and not matched by either Nikon or Canon but that's really an esoteric lens and the exception. Some of the G glass is OK. I have the 70-400G but I think it's a little overpriced for a f5.6.
-
That 10-12 fps is useless when EVF can not keep up with the action, or AF can not track.
If the EVF lags and is not refreshing fast enough, then you really can not shoot sports, and therefore the 10-12 fps advantage is negated. Same goes with AF-tracking, but I think this is not an issue on A77/A99.
Viewfinder is a big deal for photographers. They are the whole reason that SLRs took over rangefinders in the first place. I have been shooting only last five years, but I still do not like EVFs. For my m 4/3rd camera I have bought and returned EVF.
Would you like to drive your car looking through windscreen or looking at a TV monitor?
Do you ever use the LCD to compose an image?
I do all the time.
Yes, I use LCD screen when I can not use viewfinder. That does not mean that I am willing to give up viewfinder. I think that in any situation, given the option, most people will choose direct viewing experience vs. a television screen. It goes for theater, sports, meetings, etc.
-
Yes, I use LCD screen when I can not use viewfinder. That does not mean that I am willing to give up viewfinder.
Actually, the LCD screen is the best way to do social photography, when you have a camera that is actually able to focus quickly that way. You can get the damn camera off your face and stop looking like a cyborg in the middle of the party, wedding, etc. And it's absolutely the way to photograph children and small animals at eye level.
I think that in any situation, given the option, most people will choose direct viewing experience vs. a television screen. It goes for theater, sports, meetings, etc.
Yes, I use my eyes for direct viewing experience. I don't walk around with a camera stuck on my head when I want to look at things. Viewfinders and LCDs are for composing, focusing and reviewing pictures and changing camera settings to me. What matters most to me is results, not looking at the world through a (wide open f/2.0) narrow DOF view of the world.
-
If the EVF lags and is not refreshing fast enough, then you really can not shoot sports, and therefore the 10-12 fps advantage is negated. Same goes with AF-tracking, but I think this is not an issue on A77/A99.
The EVF doesn't lag noticeably in any kind of light where you could possibly photograph sports. In 3fps mode the camera uses a live video feed from between frames and it's easy to keep the camera on your subject. In 10/12FPS (really 12-14fps in most situations) mode the camera shows the last picture taken but it's taking them so quickly it's pretty easy to track motion. In 8fps it is a bit more of a challenge. This is for the Alpha 77/65/57 -- things may be a bit different with the Alpha 99.