This topic is in the 2012 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2012Sony A99
p.27 #1Sony A99
Jonas B wrote:
If you don't mind me being a bit a bit lazy; what exactly does that mean?
My memory may be failing me but I recall cRAW as a Canon (and perhaps others as well) thing were the resolution is decreased. Is that right? If so, are you saying the raw files from the A99 aren't 24Mbit 14-bit files? Or, is cRAW simply meaning compressed raw files?
They're just compressed.
douglasf13 wrote
FWIW, I believe that is because shooting raw on the A99 is like shooting cRAW on the A900.My memory may be failing me but I recall cRAW as a Canon (and perhaps others as well) thing were the resolution is decreased. Is that right? If so, are you saying the raw files from the A99 aren't 24Mbit 14-bit files? Or, is cRAW simply meaning compressed raw files?
They're just compressed.
Jan 26, 2013 at 12:19 PM
p.27 #3Sony A99
Resurrected thread alert, down on page 6 or 7, I think, truly the forgotten camera...
I am posting few a99 examples for people to see, more will appear on the regular Alpha thread.
I am posting few a99 examples for people to see, more will appear on the regular Alpha thread.
Mar 03, 2013 at 12:57 AM
p.27 #4Sony A99
Philip,
Please post more! I am thinking about one of these for some action work later this year. How is the AF performance?
Thanks
Andrew
Please post more! I am thinking about one of these for some action work later this year. How is the AF performance?
Thanks
Andrew
Mar 03, 2013 at 01:53 AM
p.27 #5Sony A99
Philip,
Thanks for posting your images. I'm also thinking about the a99, if I can find the funds for it and some lenses.
There must be more users out there? Would be great if they could share a few.
Brad
Thanks for posting your images. I'm also thinking about the a99, if I can find the funds for it and some lenses.
There must be more users out there? Would be great if they could share a few.
Brad
Mar 03, 2013 at 02:27 AM
p.27 #6Sony A99
Philip, the first one is great. I agree we need more samples from it to push more people off the edge. There are just no enough samples.
Mar 03, 2013 at 02:43 AM
p.27 #7Sony A99
Philip, you may have resurrected this thread but that car looks another story! 
And you got cut back on all that whiskey drinking. Lol!
If Sony came out with a A99 like camera with the higher rez D800 sensor, that would be very interesting.
And you got cut back on all that whiskey drinking. Lol!
If Sony came out with a A99 like camera with the higher rez D800 sensor, that would be very interesting.
Mar 03, 2013 at 04:54 AM
p.27 #8Sony A99
Re-resurrecting this thread to say that, while I don't regret waiting, I am thrilled to be a new a99 owner. My initial impressions....
The EVF... I really like a good optical VF. It was one of the things that drew me to the a900 in the first place, but even that suffered in comparison with finders built for MF camera systems. If that maximum transparency between your eye and your subject is critical to your enjoyment of photography, the a99 is probably not the best investment. I've had my reservations about EVFs in the past. The EVF-2 on the EP2 and now the GXR was and is usable, and the NEX-7 was a nice technological leap ahead from usable to more positive experience. While the EVF in the a99 doesn't make a comparable leap, it completely refines that experience to the point where it's a pleasure to use, even in tracking moving subjects. You never lose the feeling that you're looking at an electronic view, but it's a good enough screen to make me willingly give up that reflected view for its ease of use in low light situations and magnification with a couple of clicks to achieve critical focus. I'm not surprised that it's proved to be the best manual focus solution available, I'm just impressed that it's so well implemented.
Ergonomics... The a900 always looked like an ergonomic torture test to me, but in practice, it's very comfortable for my big hands. The a99 got smaller, but in all the right places. The grip remains comfortable enough for all-day shoot. There are plenty of customizable buttons to keep your most used functions in easy reach. I'm loving the front knob. I've got mine set to control ISO. The articulating back panel I find completely worth the extra bulk involved. It makes waist level and low angle shooting a pleasure, the screen's bright and crisp, and you can easily swivel it out of direct light without losing usability. The top LCD gives you all of your exposure information, so the rear screen can be completely clear of everything but the image. It's also nice to be able to turn the rear screen in on the body when it's not in use. Build quality is excellent. Light but very solid. I'm not sure how the mics on top of the EFV will fair in my use, but I'm hoping that would only matter to someone who cares about video. The included flash adapter is solid enough for extended use if you, like me, have the old style flashes.
Functionality... I'm not the best qualified to speak on this topic since my goal with any camera is to get the few functions I do use mapped to buttons I'll remember and then only have to go back into the menu to format a card. I don't bracket or use exposure comp or do in-camera panos or HDRs, but all of that seems fairly accessible and fine tunable given the amount of clutter... options they have in the menus. I'm more excited by the dual SD slots. I will happily say goodbye to compact flash. No hiccups or odd behavior yet, but it's only been a few days. I haven't test AF yet, but I doubt the Maxxum 50/1.7 is going to provide interesting results for anyone. I just need to make sure it works. Then the mirror goes. Auto WB accuracy is an improvement over the a900, but still tends to skew cool, particularly in mixed lighting. The WB-by-pictogram performance is the same.
IQ... sucks. Well, okay, it doesn't suck, but it loses a lot of omph above ISO 6400.
I've posted other shots from the Butterfly Pavilion in the Leica R thread, and that's where I'll be posting mostly as I go through all of my lenses to see how they do on the a99, but I'll update here if I come up with any problems or tips. Below are some shots I didn't post there, all with APO-Elmarit-R 100 Macro. I popped the color a little more on these than I normally would with the Mac, but they're butterflies. They deserve a little pop.
The EVF... I really like a good optical VF. It was one of the things that drew me to the a900 in the first place, but even that suffered in comparison with finders built for MF camera systems. If that maximum transparency between your eye and your subject is critical to your enjoyment of photography, the a99 is probably not the best investment. I've had my reservations about EVFs in the past. The EVF-2 on the EP2 and now the GXR was and is usable, and the NEX-7 was a nice technological leap ahead from usable to more positive experience. While the EVF in the a99 doesn't make a comparable leap, it completely refines that experience to the point where it's a pleasure to use, even in tracking moving subjects. You never lose the feeling that you're looking at an electronic view, but it's a good enough screen to make me willingly give up that reflected view for its ease of use in low light situations and magnification with a couple of clicks to achieve critical focus. I'm not surprised that it's proved to be the best manual focus solution available, I'm just impressed that it's so well implemented.
Ergonomics... The a900 always looked like an ergonomic torture test to me, but in practice, it's very comfortable for my big hands. The a99 got smaller, but in all the right places. The grip remains comfortable enough for all-day shoot. There are plenty of customizable buttons to keep your most used functions in easy reach. I'm loving the front knob. I've got mine set to control ISO. The articulating back panel I find completely worth the extra bulk involved. It makes waist level and low angle shooting a pleasure, the screen's bright and crisp, and you can easily swivel it out of direct light without losing usability. The top LCD gives you all of your exposure information, so the rear screen can be completely clear of everything but the image. It's also nice to be able to turn the rear screen in on the body when it's not in use. Build quality is excellent. Light but very solid. I'm not sure how the mics on top of the EFV will fair in my use, but I'm hoping that would only matter to someone who cares about video. The included flash adapter is solid enough for extended use if you, like me, have the old style flashes.
Functionality... I'm not the best qualified to speak on this topic since my goal with any camera is to get the few functions I do use mapped to buttons I'll remember and then only have to go back into the menu to format a card. I don't bracket or use exposure comp or do in-camera panos or HDRs, but all of that seems fairly accessible and fine tunable given the amount of clutter... options they have in the menus. I'm more excited by the dual SD slots. I will happily say goodbye to compact flash. No hiccups or odd behavior yet, but it's only been a few days. I haven't test AF yet, but I doubt the Maxxum 50/1.7 is going to provide interesting results for anyone. I just need to make sure it works. Then the mirror goes. Auto WB accuracy is an improvement over the a900, but still tends to skew cool, particularly in mixed lighting. The WB-by-pictogram performance is the same.
IQ... sucks. Well, okay, it doesn't suck, but it loses a lot of omph above ISO 6400.
I've posted other shots from the Butterfly Pavilion in the Leica R thread, and that's where I'll be posting mostly as I go through all of my lenses to see how they do on the a99, but I'll update here if I come up with any problems or tips. Below are some shots I didn't post there, all with APO-Elmarit-R 100 Macro. I popped the color a little more on these than I normally would with the Mac, but they're butterflies. They deserve a little pop.
Apr 20, 2013 at 12:35 AM
p.27 #9Sony A99
FLM, I just turn most of the Sony electro menu options off and they stay that way. It's good to hear from another regular about personal preferences too... I think they got a lot more right than wrong.
I am very keen to give ISO 50 a shot for tripod and high light level work after seeing DxO's graphs - you get much better SNR, tonal range, colour and especially a big jump in DR over the A900, which bottoms out early.
I kind of got into the habit of letting it float between ISO 100-400 but now realise much better IQ is waiting lower down. I'm happy - very happy - with ISO 3200 and At a pinch 5000, 6400 is Canon country. Oh, and the RX1. I do like the noise quality though, a quantum leap over the a900, will post more images soon.
Here is the generally well-regarded DxO sensor comparison of the three FF Sonys:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/833|0/%28brand%29/Sony/%28appareil2%29/831|0/%28brand2%29/Sony/%28appareil3%29/371|0/%28brand3%29/Sony
Where do you stand on colour? A few a900 users really like the older camera's palette, whereas I find the colour intensity much better, much better file quality (banding seems banished), ease of processing..these pix of yours look very good. Shutter's a bit different too eh. I'll visit the Leica thread more than now.
I am very keen to give ISO 50 a shot for tripod and high light level work after seeing DxO's graphs - you get much better SNR, tonal range, colour and especially a big jump in DR over the A900, which bottoms out early.
I kind of got into the habit of letting it float between ISO 100-400 but now realise much better IQ is waiting lower down. I'm happy - very happy - with ISO 3200 and At a pinch 5000, 6400 is Canon country. Oh, and the RX1. I do like the noise quality though, a quantum leap over the a900, will post more images soon.
Here is the generally well-regarded DxO sensor comparison of the three FF Sonys:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/833|0/%28brand%29/Sony/%28appareil2%29/831|0/%28brand2%29/Sony/%28appareil3%29/371|0/%28brand3%29/Sony
Where do you stand on colour? A few a900 users really like the older camera's palette, whereas I find the colour intensity much better, much better file quality (banding seems banished), ease of processing..these pix of yours look very good. Shutter's a bit different too eh. I'll visit the Leica thread more than now.
Apr 20, 2013 at 01:19 AM
p.27 #10Sony A99
Here are two images I would never have attempted with the a900, #1 is ISO 6400, second is ISO 5000 or so. They are nothing special but show that colour integrity stays at good levels. Shadow detail is also good considering the first was pitch black the second well into dusk, both handlheld - I think the nice shutter helps.
Apr 20, 2013 at 01:39 AM
p.27 #11Sony A99
Other issues: Andrew AF I have not used at all, but people really like it for the more commonly used Sony lenses, especially the very good 70-300G and even better 70-400II, just released and pepped up with asph elements from memory.
The WB sometimes needs quite a bit of post adjustment, I use Auto - could be my crazy conditions, but the files dial in immediately, it's a very 'clean' sensor, very responsive in post. It even copes with crazy monastery fluoros and churches etc.
Must say, FLM, do try the silent control dial, located bottom left front - a new idea that flat out works, I use it for ISO - just a quick spin for outdoor > indoor, but with a dwell you get it all, something like 16 functions.
Wayne, hick...you really don't want to get into Indian whisky if you value not just your liver but brain too! It's total rotgut.
The WB sometimes needs quite a bit of post adjustment, I use Auto - could be my crazy conditions, but the files dial in immediately, it's a very 'clean' sensor, very responsive in post. It even copes with crazy monastery fluoros and churches etc.
Must say, FLM, do try the silent control dial, located bottom left front - a new idea that flat out works, I use it for ISO - just a quick spin for outdoor > indoor, but with a dwell you get it all, something like 16 functions.
Wayne, hick...you really don't want to get into Indian whisky if you value not just your liver but brain too! It's total rotgut.
Apr 20, 2013 at 01:47 AM
p.27 #13Sony A99
Philip, that's how I have the dial set. Very handy. I find as long as I'm good on the exposure and don't need to bump it in post, up to ISO 1600 is perfectly usable. 3200's not bad. 6400's not great with color but in B&W conversions, the files take on a nice quality from the noise.
I think the color pallet is closer to the depth of the NEX-7 than the a900, which I don't mind. Everything I loved about my lenses on the a900 remains true about them on a99, but with increased tonal depth. I'm not seeing that as a downside.
I am certainly not missing the shutter and mirror slap sounds from the a900. It's such an attention getter, the ambient noise would have to be deafening for people not to notice.
I do hate making the a900 sound like such a dog, because it's not. It's a fantastic camera. This was just a fantastic upgrade.
For the first time while out shooting, I actually met another person with a Sony SLT (a77). He was a kid, maybe sixteen or seventeen, and had the 70-400 (silver, so I assume that's the first version). He asked me a lot of questions about my lenses and what could be adapted. He got really excited when I mentioned Nikon. Apparently his dad has a lot of AI and AIS lenses he never uses anymore. So another alt user is inducted.
I think the color pallet is closer to the depth of the NEX-7 than the a900, which I don't mind. Everything I loved about my lenses on the a900 remains true about them on a99, but with increased tonal depth. I'm not seeing that as a downside.
I am certainly not missing the shutter and mirror slap sounds from the a900. It's such an attention getter, the ambient noise would have to be deafening for people not to notice.
I do hate making the a900 sound like such a dog, because it's not. It's a fantastic camera. This was just a fantastic upgrade.
For the first time while out shooting, I actually met another person with a Sony SLT (a77). He was a kid, maybe sixteen or seventeen, and had the 70-400 (silver, so I assume that's the first version). He asked me a lot of questions about my lenses and what could be adapted. He got really excited when I mentioned Nikon. Apparently his dad has a lot of AI and AIS lenses he never uses anymore. So another alt user is inducted.
Apr 20, 2013 at 09:00 PM
p.27 #14Sony A99
And one that I didn't post in the R-thread, a two shot vertical pano.
Apr 20, 2013 at 09:02 PM
p.27 #15Sony A99
I noticed today on DXO that the SLT causes a clear drop not just SNR but even Color Response and Tonal Range compared to the RX1 or D600 (and presumably VG900).
It's not enough that I can see it in photos, so I was surprised to see how visible it is on charts. Guess that shows you what really matters.
Not that that stops me from wanting a FF NEX for this and many other reasons.
It's not enough that I can see it in photos, so I was surprised to see how visible it is on charts. Guess that shows you what really matters.
Not that that stops me from wanting a FF NEX for this and many other reasons.
Apr 20, 2013 at 09:15 PM
p.27 #16Sony A99
Many pages back I remember comments regarding removing the mirror in the a99. Has anyone done comparison shots to see if there is discernible IQ difference? Has anyone tried this (removing the mirror) and shot video?
Apr 21, 2013 at 11:43 AM
p.27 #17Sony A99
A couple with my new Sigma 70-200 OS, nothing special, SOOC jpeg.
 |
||
| http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8240/8607078034_1c833f95c3_c.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8539/8605974535_fe54c68ff1_b.jpg | ||
|
Apr 21, 2013 at 12:36 PM
p.27 #18Sony A99
Nice, Vario. Is the OS on the Sigma better than Steady Shot on the a99?
Apr 21, 2013 at 03:34 PM
p.27 #19Sony A99
miguel_13 wrote:
Many pages back I remember comments regarding removing the mirror in the a99. Has anyone done comparison shots to see if there is discernible IQ difference? Has anyone tried this (removing the mirror) and shot video?
Here's the before and after shots I took while removing it today. Identical processing for both and I used the Camera Neutral profile in LR4.
With Mirror
Without Mirror
Many pages back I remember comments regarding removing the mirror in the a99. Has anyone done comparison shots to see if there is discernible IQ difference? Has anyone tried this (removing the mirror) and shot video?
Here's the before and after shots I took while removing it today. Identical processing for both and I used the Camera Neutral profile in LR4.
With Mirror
Without Mirror
Apr 21, 2013 at 03:37 PM
p.27 #20Sony A99
Would you say that the difference is in the bokeh? Is there a perceived difference in the plane of focus?
Apr 21, 2013 at 03:42 PM