Re: a850 vs a900, 1 stop better noise performance?
Interesting thread. I think there are simply too many variables to make a on-the-spot decision of what is best, and for what.
I may have come down a bit hard on Canon the last few years and I have tried to soften the critique a little as I do think they have a few things going for them.
As for all those measurements and benchmark testing that is floating around the internet I don\'t know what to think or believe or how trustworthy they are.
For me it was quite simple; my transition into digital lead me into Canon. This was back at the time when Nikon was trailing behind. I stuck with Canon as the alternative systems were not quite where I was aiming at. Neither was Canon but it was the \"least-worst\" alternative. But, I have never been happy with the output of Canon straight out of the box and it has cost me a lot of time on post pro. After seeing what could be done on the other side of the fence (in the other camps) I decided to ditch Canon, but there was still no viable alternative that provided both better imaging and same or better noise/resolution.
The Sony transition sort of happened by chance and when comparing the A900 to my old 5D and a colleagues 1DmkIII we both agreed the Sony files were better looking out of the box. Even my less than enthusiastic girlfriend much preferred the output of the Sony when presented with the results (she did not know which was which) and could easily sort them out. She said the Sony were more life-like.
As for noise the Sony is trailing behind Canon but it is still good enough for my shooting style by a decent margin. The ISO3200+ results from Canon that I have seen on this forum and elsewhere all look kind of poor to me and I would not want to present images with severe banding and a flat and dull look to my clients but hey - to each his/her own.
Sony A900 for me is the \"perfect compromise\" with a responsive body, good AF (for my one and only AF lens ), superior viewfinder and solid build. Resolution is all I need, noise levels are as good as I need and the resulting files are great material to work with in post pro. And, require less work for me than with Canon. I get that \"I was there\" feeling with the Sony files where as with the Canon files I was feeling more \"did it really look like this?\" feeling. I feel there is more clarity to the Sony files and Sony handles highlights better with a more forgiving recovery and roll off. Shadow noise on Sony is worse but manageable and in printing the shadows look great unless one tries to \"recover\" them too much, which looks unnatural to me.
I haven\'t researched Nikon for a long time and haven\'t looked into their latest offerings as I have found what I am looking for to house my alt glass. I cannot comment on how well Nikon stack up against Sony/Canon as I haven\'t tried them under the same circumstances and as stated; I haven\'t a clue to what Nikon\'s are like today. The press photos I have seen at high ISO have looked great in regards to noise but crap in color but considering the circumstances of those photo sessions I don\'t hold it against the camera.
As for high end monitors I had a good look at the NEC monitors on the Photo Fair here in Stockholm a month ago. It turned out an old colleague of mine sells them and I have to admit they looked great.
Dec 19, 2009 at 07:32 AM
Previous versions of kosmoskatten's message #7907297 « a850 vs a900, 1 stop better noise performance? »
), superior viewfinder and solid build. Resolution is all I need, noise levels are as good as I need and the resulting files are great material to work with in post pro. And, require less work for me than with Canon. I get that \"I was there\" feeling with the Sony files where as with the Canon files I was feeling more \"did it really look like this?\" feeling. I feel there is more clarity to the Sony files and Sony handles highlights better with a more forgiving recovery and roll off. Shadow noise on Sony is worse but manageable and in printing the shadows look great unless one tries to \"recover\" them too much, which looks unnatural to me.