Sony A900 A Second Opinion

FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 end

Archive 2008 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

moire
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

Sony A900 Update One Month On
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/a900-one-month.shtml

Sony A900 A Second Opinion By Bill Caulfeild-Browne
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/A900-Second-Opinion.shtml

Dec 22, 2008 at 08:25 AM

edwardkaraa
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

As usual, the color quality of this camera never ceases to amaze me. In particular I find the reds, oranges, and all shades of blue that it produces to be much more pleasing than what I'm used to with my Canon Dslr and so film-like, whatever that means.

Dec 22, 2008 at 09:07 AM

veroman
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #3 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

Overview of the A900 vs. Canon 5D II vs. Nikon D700:

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2008/12/sony-vs-nikon-v.html

Dec 22, 2008 at 02:39 PM

wayne seltzer
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #4 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

Michael makes no sense to me in selecting the camera with the worst high iso performance to go to Antarctica. I went on his last trip a few years ago and we saw only 2 1/2 days of sunshine on a 3 week trip.
Of course he is the same fellow who:
1) recently tried to show that a G10 is as good as medium format back
2) turned his nose up to the 1ds3 as not having enough more pixels than his 1ds2 to make it worth his upgrade.
3) raved about the d3 as being the greatest camera since it was low noise and had great high iso performance, now he is willing to live with a camera only good at lower iso's.
4) Poo-poo'ed the high price of the new Nikon D3x as too expensive, but he has bought high-end phase medium format backs which depreciate faster than housing prices in the current econonmy.

He should be a politician with all his flip-flopping. I know he is doing some of this to drum up attention to his website but it is at the cost of taking him seriously in the future and becoming the next Ken Rockwell.
Someone needs to tell him that you can put Zeiss lenses on Canon and Nikon cameras as well.
Oh yeah, he is going to get such great 25mp IQ with the 500 mirror reflex lens and the sigma 50-500 lenses.
Someone needs to tell his friend Bill C. about diffraction with 25mp sensors and there is no need to shoot that duck picture at f11, f5.6 would be enough.As it also forced him to use a higher noisier iso 1600.

Dec 22, 2008 at 04:50 PM

you2
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #5 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

Is the following an accurate summary of the recent full frame cameras ?

a900 worse high iso (by wide margin) but good price and good auto focus - limited quality lenses (esp in the 24-35 range and beyond 135mm).Good colours; in body IS (that works) slow (relative term) but accurate auto focus.

d3 nikon - too expensive.

5dmk2 - few glitches likely to be worked out; and autofocus a bit weak (recent thread on photonet highlight false positives) usual issue with canon lenses.

I guess my needs a bit different than this crowd as I'm not really looking for ultimate but 'good enough'. The a900 is starting to look interesting (due to price/performance) but the lack of a solid 35 or 28 lens is a bit troublesome (maybe I missed something?). I'm not really into ultra-wides or tele and the 135 looks quite nice.

Dec 22, 2008 at 05:37 PM

CKrueger
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

I have to admit, the combination of FF and in-body IS is very tempting to me. A Tamron 28-75/2.8 and an A900 would be a dream combo for me. But dumbfounding price of Sony's 300/2.8 ($6000!?!?!? Can I possibly include enough exclamation marks?) prevents me from considering a system switch. I COULD get an A900 just to shoot on the short end, and keep my Canon gear for the long end, but I don't know that I want to add yet another system to my collection.

I'm watching Sony keenly. If they can fill out their lens lineup with a few good cheap SSM zooms and perhaps an 85mm portrait prime with SSM, I might switch. But they need to drop the cost of their 300/2.8 by at least $2000. (I can't believe I just wrote that. I apologize for my disbelief.

)

Dec 22, 2008 at 05:44 PM

mawz
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

CKrueger wrote:
I have to admit, the combination of FF and in-body IS is very tempting to me. A Tamron 28-75/2.8 and an A900 would be a dream combo for me. But dumbfounding price of Sony's 300/2.8 ($6000!?!?!? Can I possibly include enough exclamation marks?) prevents me from considering a system switch. I COULD get an A900 just to shoot on the short end, and keep my Canon gear for the long end, but I don't know that I want to add yet another system to my collection.

I'm watching Sony keenly. If they can fill out their lens lineup with a few good cheap SSM zooms and perhaps an 85mm portrait prime with SSM, I might switch. But they need to drop the cost of their 300/2.8 by at least $2000. (I can't believe I just wrote that. I apologize for my disbelief.

)

Yeah, the f2.8 G's are ridiculously priced (the 70-200G needs to drop by $500 as well). Minolta 300/2.8G's can be had for reasonable money on the used market though.

Don't hold the lack of SSM against the 85, Sony's AF drive motors in the 700 and 900 are VERY powerful (To the point where stripping AF drives in some 3rd party lenses can be an issue) and can throw the ZA 85's focus around quite quickly, The lack of SSM in the primes is not an issue short of the 300, and that has SSM.

Dec 22, 2008 at 05:49 PM

shirozina
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

With the recent introduction of the D3x the A900 should be competing with this and the 1Ds3 where it suddenly seems a hell of a bargiin. If Nikon drop the 25mp sensor into the D700 to make a D700x then this will go head to head with the 5D11 and will really shake things up as they will have a great body with a high MP sensor AND the lens range to go with it including the Canon bashing 12-24, 24-70 and 24 shift. I'll definatley buy one and convert to Nikon for the 12-24 and 24shift alone. The D3x's price makes reconditioned 22mp MF backs look like an attractive option.

Dec 22, 2008 at 06:07 PM

douglasf13
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

you2 wrote:
Is the following an accurate summary of the recent full frame cameras ?

a900 worse high iso (by wide margin) but good price and good auto focus - limited quality lenses (esp in the 24-35 range and beyond 135mm).Good colours; in body IS (that works) slow (relative term) but accurate auto focus.

A900 has the least noise until ISO 800, where all the high MP cameras meet, and then the A900 begins falling behind a little at ISO 1600, and a lot at ISO 3200+. The thing about the A900 IQ that is so appealing is not just the high DR, but how the highlights roll-off, making it very "film-like." The AF is dependent of how you use it. The center AF point is the fastest, most accurate center AF of any make. The pro Nikon cameras take the lead when it comes outside AF points. Also, the screwdrive motor in the A900 is so powerful that SSM is more about sound than speed.

I guess my needs a bit different than this crowd as I'm not really looking for ultimate but 'good enough'. The a900 is starting to look interesting (due to price/performance) but the lack of a solid 35 or 28 lens is a bit troublesome (maybe I missed something?). I'm not really into ultra-wides or tele and the 135 looks quite nice.

There is a Sony 28 2.8 (average,) Sony 35G 1.4 (high end,) and also the Zeiss 24-70 2.8, which is very prime-like in sharpness, with a bokeh sacrifice in some scenarios. The thing about the Sony Zeiss lenses, that a poster above doesn't realize, is that, not only are they autofocus, but they are newer designs built for high MP, and I'm hearing more and more from owners of both ZF and ZA lenses that the ZA's are performing better. There are more Zeiss primes being announced soon, supposedly.

Dec 22, 2008 at 06:14 PM

mawz
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

shirozina wrote:
With the recent introduction of the D3x the A900 should be competing with this and the 1Ds3 where it suddenly seems a hell of a bargiin. If Nikon drop the 25mp sensor into the D700 to make a D700x then this will go head to head with the 5D11 and will really shake things up as they will have a great body with a high MP sensor AND the lens range to go with it including the Canon bashing 12-24, 24-70 and 24 shift. I'll definatley buy one and convert to Nikon for the 12-24 and 24shift alone. The D3x's price makes reconditioned 22mp MF backs look like an attractive option.

There's at least one 22MP back that's cheaper new than the D3x (the Mamiya ZD), not sure but I think the eMotion 54LV that foto-z uses so well is about the same price as the D3x too. No need to look at reconditioned 22MP backs.

Dec 22, 2008 at 06:33 PM

you2
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

I sort of ignored the 24-70 since it is a huge lens. Unfortunately it seems the only quality available in the wide range. I much rather have a 35f2 or 28f2.8 which is small but high quality.

I didn't realize the A900 iso was good until 1600 which to me seem more than adequate.

Dec 22, 2008 at 06:35 PM

douglasf13
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

All AF Minolta lenses work on the A900, and the Minolta 35mm f2 is a great option, and it is very sharp. The "Online Photographer" really liked this combo.

Dec 22, 2008 at 06:38 PM

mawz
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

douglasf13 wrote:
All AF Minolta lenses work on the A900, and the Minolta 35mm f2 is a great option, and it is very sharp. The "Online Photographer" really liked this combo.

I've heard much good about the (rarish) Minolta 28/2 as well. It's got a better rep than the f2.8 version.

Dec 22, 2008 at 06:46 PM

douglasf13
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

That is true, mawz. The Minolta f2 series is supposedly very good across the range (the 100mm f2 is as sharp as they come.)

Dec 22, 2008 at 06:53 PM

fourfa
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

shirozina wrote:
... including the Canon bashing 12-24, 24-70 and 24 shift. I'll definatley buy one and convert to Nikon for the 12-24 and 24shift alone.

you mean 14-24, not 12-24.

Dec 22, 2008 at 06:53 PM

ichiro17
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

wayne seltzer wrote:
Michael makes no sense to me in selecting the camera with the worst high iso performance to go to Antarctica. I went on his last trip a few years ago and we saw only 2 1/2 days of sunshine on a 3 week trip.
Of course he is the same fellow who:
1) recently tried to show that a G10 is as good as medium format back
2) turned his nose up to the 1ds3 as not having enough more pixels than his 1ds2 to make it worth his upgrade.
3) raved about the d3 as being the greatest camera since it was low noise and had great high iso performance, now he is willing to live with a camera only good at lower iso's.
4) Poo-poo'ed the high price of the new Nikon D3x as too expensive, but he has bought high-end phase medium format backs which depreciate faster than housing prices in the current econonmy.

He should be a politician with all his flip-flopping. I know he is doing some of this to drum up attention to his website but it is at the cost of taking him seriously in the future and becoming the next Ken Rockwell.
Someone needs to tell him that you can put Zeiss lenses on Canon and Nikon cameras as well.
Oh yeah, he is going to get such great 25mp IQ with the 500 mirror reflex lens and the sigma 50-500 lenses.
Someone needs to tell his friend Bill C. about diffraction with 25mp sensors and there is no need to shoot that duck picture at f11, f5.6 would be enough.As it also forced him to use a higher noisier iso 1600.

I agree with the statements above. I read his website because he's offering a point of view, but its becoming more radical than informative. Just my opinion, may not mean much to many people though ...

Dec 22, 2008 at 07:03 PM

ovredal73
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

you2 wrote:
5dmk2 - and autofocus a bit weak (recent thread on photonet highlight false positives)

No, the 5D2 AF is not weak. It is way better than 5D, which must be the main point of reference. It might not be 1D standard (never used one) but it never fails me even shooting a black dog in dark interiors @ 3200 or above. I am stunned as to its accuracy and ability to grab a hold of just about anything near the center focus point.

Dec 22, 2008 at 08:43 PM

you2
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #18 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

The specific complaints I've seen (I do not own the camera) has been with the side sensors. A couple of independent report talk about studio sessions (fashion) in which the camera has a large number of miss focus (not exactly fast motion). It is possible that these users are not familiar with the camera though the description of the problem suggest otherwise.

ovredal73 wrote:
you2 wrote:
5dmk2 - and autofocus a bit weak (recent thread on photonet highlight false positives)

No, the 5D2 AF is not weak. It is way better than 5D, which must be the main point of reference. It might not be 1D standard (never used one) but it never fails me even shooting a black dog in dark interiors @ 3200 or above. I am stunned as to its accuracy and ability to grab a hold of just about anything near the center focus point.

Dec 22, 2008 at 09:15 PM

Tariq Gibran
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #19 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

The a900 Af is extremely good. If you look at Pop Photo's test of the 5DII, the a900 just kills the 5DII Af which they found unreliable in low light whereas the a900 was found to be competitive with the Nikon D700 AF(though I'm sure that would not include tracking from sensor to sensor). The first thing in fact I noticed with the a900's performance when I got mine back in October was just how fast and accurate the AF is compared to what my Canon 5D was like...and that is with the older, screw drive Minolta lenses.

The Minolta 100 F2 is one of the best lenses I have ever used. The main issue with that lens as well as the other Minolta F2 lenses is that they are very difficult to track down and when you do find one, they are expensive. The 2.8 wide Minolta lenses do not have a great reputation, particularly on the a900.

Dec 22, 2008 at 09:52 PM

you2
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #20 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

Any chance sony will reintroduce the 35mmf2? $550 seems a bit steep for a used copy (though the zeiss 35f2 is not exactly cheap).

Last post of this nature

seems a bit off topic. The a900 looks interesting but the lens selection needs a bit of work

I guess most people would favor the 24-70f2.8 zoom - i just prefer something a bit smaller and faster.

Bit surprise the 5d is being put to shame by both the D700 and A900 with regards to auto focus (again this is pure hersey as I do not own any of these cameras but i've been reading up on them and it seems that the spread of users (to this point) has been consistent with this comment and this is ignorning issues like tracking; vertical lines (which give some cameras issues; ...)

Dec 22, 2008 at 10:37 PM

dcmiller
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #21 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

CKrueger wrote:
I have to admit, the combination of FF and in-body IS is very tempting to me. ..........................

Digllloyd did sharpness testing (on his subscription site I think) and found for critical sharpness Lens IS was not a substitute for shutter speed. If this is true for camera IS, trading high ISO performance for image stabilization is a not a beneficial choice.

Dec 22, 2008 at 10:48 PM

Tamerlin
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #22 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

ichiro17 wrote:
I agree with the statements above. I read his website because he's offering a point of view, but its becoming more radical than informative. Just my opinion, may not mean much to many people though ...

I agree also.

It probably doesn't mean that much to most people, but apparently it's quite popular. I suppose that means that his following buy a lot of new toys, but odds are they spend a lot of time at his site debating new toys rather than using their toys.

In the end, the best camera is the one you use.

The best content on his site is from the 3rd party authors, IMO -- Alain Briot in particularly for me.

Dec 22, 2008 at 11:20 PM

pascal03
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #23 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

Noticing a couple of posts about how big the Sony/Zeiss 24-70mm f2.8 is. Exactly how big/heavy is this lens compared to the monster from Nikon or the brick of a lens in the Canon L flavor.
These 24-70mm f2.8 lenses aren't exactly light - they don't balance well on SLR's without a grip - they seem to be made for the 1-series or the D3 type body. The Canon L, which is by no means a small lens is probably the smallest of the 3. I have not seen the Minolta 24-70mm f2.8 G, but I am presuming it's the same size. Even the Olympus ZD 14-35mm f2.0 is not a light or small lens - but it is smaller than the Nikon or Canon versions.
So why the complaints against the lens size of an f2.8 zoom - really... who was expecting a lightweight lens

It appears sony has a killer camera on it's hands. Even if ISO 1600 and 3200 is not on par with the Nikon or Canon's, it is still some serious resolution in a pro grade body at a very reasonable price.... something all consumers (amatuer or professional photographers) might favor.

Dec 22, 2008 at 11:41 PM

Tariq Gibran
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #24 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

pascal03 wrote:
Even if ISO 1600 and 3200 is not on par with the Nikon or Canon's, it is still some serious resolution in a pro grade body at a very reasonable price.... something all consumers (amatuer or professional photographers) might favor.

Well, its not a pro grade body in the sense of a Nikon D3 or Canon 1 series.

Dec 22, 2008 at 11:51 PM

Lotusm50
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #25 · Sony A900 A Second Opinion

dcmiller wrote
Digllloyd did sharpness testing (on his subscription site I think) and found for critical sharpness Lens IS was not a substitute for shutter speed. If this is true for camera IS, trading high ISO performance for image stabilization is a not a beneficial choice. {emphasis added}

I think that is too strong a conclusion. Perhaps not for all, but for many uses it could indeed be a beneficial choice. Not all uses require "critical" sharpness.

This is similar to hand-held vs. tripod issues. Hand-held images are rarely "critically" sharp, yet are certainly sharp enough for many uses. If you truly require critical sharpness, your camera will never leave a tripod.

Everything is a matter of degree. IS may not be a (complete) substitute for shutter speed, but that does not mean it provides no benefits, or that it won't provide quality, sell-able images in a wide variety of situations.

Dec 23, 2008 at 12:59 AM


FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end