Sony a99 full frame SLT. Who's excited?

[james_f6]

<p>I hate to say this, but having thought long and hard. If Sony does not come up with the goods in the full frame market with these camera's. Then I think based on a couple of things. Popularity, lenses, accessories. I 'might' make the move to Canon.<br>

I have been a Minolta/Sony user all my life. But there is a time when being a sheep to simply get access to a larger community of users and more so support has to be given serious consideration rather than being in a minority group.<br>

That said I just bought the A65 and am currently happy, but I will want to move to full frame and have to be happy with that camera and not just wanting to simply go with the Sony flow even though it might no longer be want I want.<br>

Time will tell.</p>

[james_f6]

<p>That said, I should clarify my thought process. Around the same time Nikon is suppose to be releasing their full frame D700 which is going to use the same Sony sensor.<br>

Basically what it boils down too is if I read another camera review in which a brand other than Sony can take a Sony sensor and end up creating a camera that has low noise and a image quality better than the model that Sony brings out, then that will be the final straw.<br>

I am sick and tired of seeing Sony sensors producing better images in camera's other than Sony. It just is not right, and I won't stand for it any longer.</p>

[timb196]

<p>James:<br>

Are you unhappy with the A65 performance? I tend to look at what people are showing as opposed to dome web site tests and generally I don't see much of a difference. Just curious, I guess<br>

Yim</p>

[james_f6]

<p>I am more than happy with the A65, but I am wanting to upgrade to full frame soon, I am saving and waiting for the Sony A99.<br /> I used my mates Canon 5D mk3, and I am more than impressed.<br /> I am happy with my a65 images, I have posted in the past couple of Sony Sunday threads with images, and the results smash what my Konica Minolta 7D could ever do. And just about the same as what my A700 does. Except I do see the different in resolution when blown up due to the doubling of the MP count on the A65.<br /> For me it's just not about the work I currently produce, but about the maximum potential of the camera, and thus work I might be able to produce.<br /> I am the last person to say having the best camera on the planet is all you have to do is press a button and create masterpieces. But I believe I am getting to a level of photography where I am starting to pixel peep for that extra something. And those small bits of noise or image aberration which is not caused by lenses, but by the camera itself I am wanting to avoid.<br /> I want gear that can produce the goods, not be tied to a brand out of loyalty, and have to accept sub standard results because of that, when for a fact they can make great results for other brands.</p>

[timb196]

<p>James;<br>

As I mentioned earlier, I have an a900 and have been more than saitisfied. I think it is important to understand the fundamental differnces in the camera sensor. The controbution of microlenses and the strength of the AA filter cannot be underestimated. I've found that the noise in the a900 is well behaved and well controlled and thus lends itself to PP to the degree I want. To be honest most the sites on the web that I see reviews from rarely explore this behavior<br>

Depending on what your desires are in the finished product and subsequent control, then you most certainly have choices. While I have not shot with the 5dIII, I have experience with the EOS-Id(various) and frankly the color seperation did not fit my my idea of IQ. Nikon was much closer from what I have seen. But it was not enough to make me even consider changing. As I said before, I judge by the print and not by looking at 100% on the monitor. When Sony came out with the a900, there was a pretty big hullabaloo over noise at 100% and somebody had pointed since this was a much bigger sensor looking at 100% was actually incorrect, One should evaluate at 50%. That was before it was discovered that Adobe Raw converter was actuallt screwing up the image.<br>

In any case, there are choices but even looking at the Nikon 800 at the 100-800 range, still doesn't make me go "Oh wow" got to have it.<br>

Just my feelings, good luck to you in whatever choices you make. The key I think it is whatever is important to you.</p>

 

[scottelly]

<p>James, I came from Canon. I had a 5 D, but I wanted a fold-out screen. The A55 was not out yet, so I bought a Nikon D5000, thinking that I would some day get a D700, so I could take full advantage of the 14-24mm f2.8 lens (my favorite lens). I also love the Nikon AIS lenses and want a 50mm f1.2 AIS. When the A55 came out, I was blown away. I tried one and I was blown away again. I couldn't believe how quickly it could focus in "live view" compared to my Nikon. When Nikon came out with the D5100, they did not fix the problem they have with slow focus in live view mode, so I finally bought the Sony A55. That's what I shoot with now. I will be getting an A65 soon, hopefully. The speed, video, and fold-out screen are my main reasons to buy Sony. I LOVE the image quality of the new Nikon D800, and I hope to get one one day (with the Nikon 14-24mm). For now though, I plan to shoot with Sony. The image quality from my A55 is excellent, but I would like to have the ability to print very large, and I don't trust 16 megapixels for that. I shoot mostly at ISO 200 and ISO 400, so a full-frame is not a necessity for me, but if you shoot at higher ISO, I can see where you are coming from. I did notice that the Nikon D5000 and D5100 produce a lot of noise, and I believe that the A65 produces more noise than I would like in photos at ISO 400 and 800. The Nikon D800 is king for noise levels, in my opinion, though at ISO 3200 and above, the Canon just might have a slight advantage. I haven't analyzed that. I don't plan on going back to Canon. They lost my interest, since their dynamic range is pathetic, and they were too slow to introduce a camera with a fold-out screen. Now they have that (with some good cameras), but I don't think they can compete with Sony. Hopefully the new A99 will be all you hope it will be. I certainly hope Sony does not disappoint us by doing something stupid, like leaving out the fold-out screen feature or something like that. (Sony would be the only company with a fold-out screen on a full-frame camera.)</p>

<p>James, I too am one of those photographers who thinks about what he COULD do with a camera as much as if not more than what he DOES do now with the equipment he has. I have been accused of thinking too much like that. Maybe we should both go out and shoot more, and not worry about the cutting edge stuff so much. After-all, does a little tiny bit more grain or noise really make much difference? I have printed 10 megapixel photos at 20x30. They looked great, with amazingly fine detail. Sometimes I wonder if I should just get the A65 and be done with it all, and just go shoot, concentrating much more on buying lenses and taking photo trips, rather than thinking about anything else.</p>

[james_f6]

<p>Well I can certainly recommend the A65, cause I use it. I am not sorry I did not dish out more money for the A77, yes I would love to have had it, but did not want to spend the extra cash at this stage. Not if I intend to hopefully get the A99.<br>

Due to my current personal circumstances I am able to get out everyday and take photo's.<br>

I did a test shooting the same location with my A700 and A65, and was simply blown away by how much better the A65 not only handles the same shots, but the detail in the A65 images compared to the A700 in raw files was simply daylights ahead.<br>

Because I want to hit landscapes more, my Cokin filters arrived today, and I intend on using them hopefully tomorrow. If they are up to my expectations I might post some of the examples in the next Sony Sunday thread.</p>

[scottelly]

<p>Cool. Thanks for the info. James. I think I'll be buying a 70-300mm lens and shooting some exotic birds and insects with it in the next few weeks. Then, eventually, I will be buying the 16-105 Sony lens or the Sigma 18-125mm OS for Sony. I like Sigma lenses, and that one is much less expensive, while including OS, which allows me to turn off steady shot, to conserve battery power. Then I plan to eventually get the Sigma 8-16mm. Then I'll get the A65. Then, when the Nikon D5200 comes out and I have had a chance to evaluate it, I may get that thing too, but I will probably get an adapter and a couple of Nikon mount lenses first. I'm thinking I will use a Nikon 50mm f1.8 AIS with my Nikon 28mm f2 AIS mounted backward on it, for shooting some macro photos and videos. I also want to try the Tokina 10-17mm fisheye on my Sony, even though it will probably be limited to maximum aperture. With it set to infinity focus, I think it will be amazing for shooting videos of sunrises and sunsets and maybe some regular landscapes. I just wish I could shoot at f16 with it, so I could shoot the insides of flowers.</p>

<p>Well, take it easy James. Let me know how the Cokin filters work out with the A65, o.k?</p>

[timb196]

<p>See:<br>

<a href="http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/">http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/</a><br>

If true and works as advertised, maybe the AF issues will be put to bed! Also might explain why 102 AF points.</p>

<p>Tim</p>

[timb196]

<p>More complete a99 and Nex 5r specs<br>

<a href="http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/">http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/</a><br>

But GPS is omitted, I hope not!<br>

Tim</p>

[scottelly]

<p>I hope not too Tim. That would be absurd. Start something, and then eliminate it. I LOVE the GPS function on my A55. I don't know why they did away with it in the A57. I will not buy the A57 now, because it lacks the GPS. In fact, they should be ENHANCING the GPS function, like Nikon has done on their new all-weather point-and-shoot, rather than eliminating it. Stupid Sony. Sometimes I wonder how a company can be so smart (as to make a camera like the A55) and then so dumb at the same time. It's like Apple, with their long-standing lack of products for the Thunderbolt port, and then whey they finally start introducing new (but expensive) products for Thunderbolt, they add USB 3.0 to their computers. Weird.</p>

[scottelly]

<p>http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-a99/sony-a99A.HTM</p>

<p>It has GPS! Yay! Too bad it doesn't shoot faster in manual mode. I've found that my Sony A55 allows me to control ISO and aperture anyway, so all it does is control the exposure with shutter speed, and I can use the compensation control to increase or decrease exposure. I guess that will just have to do. It's annoying, but I guess Sony doesn't want to step on Nikon's shoes.]</p>

<p>Now there is FINALLY a full-frame camera with a fold-out screen, for "live-view" shooting!</p>

<p>It will be interesting to see how the A99 performs in low light shooting situations (its main advantage over the A77).</p>