Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 24, 2006, 8:19 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 166
Default

After seeing no worthwhile threads on first 3 pages of this forum, I am inclined to believe that the camera is well below expectation for those who bought it;

However, I would like to ask them to post unedited full size pics if possible to compare in this thread....

Specially in low light conditions, to find out the exact effectiveness of antishake

And what you think of it comparing to the

NikonD80, Canon 400D, and the soon to be realease pentax k10d

Many thanks.................
Chesslanka is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 24, 2006, 8:32 PM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Posting full size images is not a good idea in a forum thread. That makes the entire thread wider so that you have to scroll left and right to see any text.

Also, it tends to upset dialup users.

So, we ask that forum members keep posted image sizes more manageable (downsizing to around 640x480 is a good idea).

See Steve's comments on it in this "Sticky" Thread at the top of our General Q&A Forum thread list here:

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...amp;forum_id=2

Posting links to full size images is fine. But, please do not embed larger images in your posts here.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 24, 2006, 8:47 PM   #3
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

As for the Sony DSLR-A100, I think that the biggest dissapointment for KM owners was noise and control layout.

Many 7D owners were hoping for a model that had the same control layout as their 7D. But, the new Sony's layout is much closer to the smaller KM 5D (which still has a pretty good control layout, it just doesn't offer all of the 7D's controls).

The other issue is noise (as expected when you stuff more pixels into the same size sensor).

From images I've looked at from the models you're discussing, Sony probably made some mistakes from a marketing perspective.

1. They decided not to smooth out the noise. If you look closely at images taken in controlled conditions from models like the Nikon D80 and Sony DSLR-A100 side by side, you'll see that the Sony is retaining more detail at higher ISO speeds. In other words, they decided not to use an aggresive noise reduction system in the camera's image processing pipeline. So, the images have more visible noise than competing models.

2. The camera is more sensitive than it's rated ISO speed. So, your effective ISO speed is higher than it's set to. But, in fairness, the same thing applies to the new Canon (but, not to the Nikon).

3. The camera's metering leans towards protecting the highlights. Since noise can be far worse in underexposed areas, visible noise is going to be higher if you use the default metering at higher ISO speeds.

This can be a rather dramatic difference in metering. For example, I saw a sequence of images a while back taken of the same subjects from a D80 and DSLR-A100, where the effective ISO speed from the Sony was almost 2 stops higher than from the Nikon due to metering and ISO senstivity differences with their default matrix metering in those conditions (lower light scenario).

IOW, the shutter speeds were almost as fast at ISO 400 from the Sony, as the Nikon was getting at ISO 1600 at the same aperture. So, to be fair, you would have needed to compare the Nikon's ISO 400 photos to the Sony's ISO 1600 images for that particular photo sequence.

This metering tendency can hurt you from a noise perspective. The Sony's metering system appears to weight the focus point much higher than metering systems from other models, too. So, you need to be aware of that tendency shooting with one.

4. The camera's processing appears to try and compress the Dynamic Range to reduce the probability of losing highlight and shadow detail. This leads to a flatter appearance that some KM owners don't like, since it's different than they're accustomed to with the 5D and 7D. There are pros and cons to both approaches.

If you exposed the images the same way (same aperture, shutter speed and effective ISO speed), shooting in raw and converting with the same raw converter, I think you'd find that the differences between these models would diminish considerably. A lot of the differences boils down to metering, ISO sensitivity and in camera image processing (with the Sony using less aggresive noise reduction).

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 24, 2006, 10:03 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 133
Default

JimC wrote:
Quote:
As for the Sony DSLR-A100, I think that the biggest dissapointment for KM owners was noise and control layout.

Many 7D owners were hoping for a model that had the same control layout as their 7D. But, the new Sony's layout is much closer to the smaller KM 5D (which still has a pretty good control layout, it just doesn't offer all of the 7D's controls).

The other issue is noise (as expected when you stuff more pixels into the same size sensor).

From images I've looked at from the models you're discussing, Sony probably made some mistakes from a marketing perspective.

1. They decided not to smooth out the noise. If you look closely at images taken in controlled conditions from models like the Nikon D80 and Sony DSLR-A100 side by side, you'll see that the Sony is retaining more detail at higher ISO speeds. In other words, they decided not to use an aggresive noise reduction system in the camera's image processing pipeline. So, the images have more visible noise than competing models.

2. The camera is more sensitive than it's rated ISO speed. So, your effective ISO speed is higher than it's set to. But, in fairness, the same thing applies to the new Canon (but, not to the Nikon).

3. The camera's metering leans towards protecting the highlights. Since noise can be far worse in underexposed areas, visible noise is going to be higher if you use the default metering at higher ISO speeds.

This can be a rather dramatic difference in metering. For example, I saw a sequence of images a while back taken of the same subjects from a D80 and DSLR-A100, where the effective ISO speed from the Sony was almost 2 stops higher than from the Nikon due to metering and ISO senstivity differences with their default matrix metering in those conditions (lower light scenario).

IOW, the shutter speeds were almost as fast at ISO 400 from the Sony, as the Nikon was getting at ISO 1600 at the same aperture. So, to be fair, you would have needed to compare the Nikon's ISO 400 photos to the Sony's ISO 1600 images for that particular photo sequence.

This metering tendency can hurt you from a noise perspective. The Sony's metering system appears to weight the focus point much higher than metering systems from other models, too. So, you need to be aware of that tendency shooting with one.

4. The camera's processing appears to try and compress the Dynamic Range to reduce the probability of losing highlight and shadow detail. This leads to a flatter appearance that some KM owners don't like, since it's different than they're accustomed to with the 5D and 7D. There are pros and cons to both approaches.

If you exposed the images the same way (same aperture, shutter speed and effective ISO speed), shooting in raw and converting with the same raw converter, I think you'd find that the differences between these models would diminish considerably. A lot of the differences boils down to metering, ISO sensitivity and in camera image processing (with the Sony using less aggresive noise reduction).

Well put Jim.

Despite someshort comings, I think the Alpha still has possiblities. I'm not sure I understand their marketing approach entirely, but I think what we have in theAlpha is a contradiction of sorts. Most of usbelieve thatthe Alpha is aimed at the entry level consumer, but the camera is probably more suitablefor someone who understands post processing. I'm not sure this was by design and probablywas more of aby-product of 10MP marketing.

If the Alpha doesn't sell, I'm sure Sony will drop the price and take steps toimprove subsequentmodels. In the meantime, maybe they do something with firmware to enhance the in-camera processing so that providesmore desirable results out of the box.
Gozinta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 24, 2006, 10:52 PM   #5
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Apparently, it was selling quite well at product launch.

Sony Digital SLR is Third Best Seller, Takes Share from Canon

Yes, it was only for one month and only for Japan. It was also a new model (which tend to do well anyway). But, it looks like it was well received in Japan given the market share they obtained (and the other manufacturers had multiple DSLR models to Sony's one). So, this probably applies to other markets, too. I doubt it's sustainable though.

We'll have to wait and see if Sony has some more "tricks up it's sleeve" to keep KM owners happy. They're the ones that seem the least satifisied with what this model offers (since KM owners seem to voice that they want a better upgrade path than Sony offered with this model).

Marketing is a big part of the game, and Sony already has a huge distribution network in place with lots of shelf space. So, I wouldn't underestimate them.

But, given that the competition is heating up, I think that a slightly different approach to the in camera processing may have been a better idea for this model's target market. Of course, then we'd see people complaining about noise reduction being too aggresive, images looking overprocessed, etc. You can't please everyone. lol


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2006, 6:03 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
cope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 718
Default

If you look on the Sony SLR forum at DPReview, there are a lot of happy A-100 owners, including some who kept their 5D or 7D. As mentioned, it doesn't bring anything to the table for most 5D/7D owners.
cope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2006, 8:37 AM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 18
Default

hello Jim



Ifi had to make yourmy choicebetween the KM 5d and Pentax k10d

to day Jim I'am not sure if i would still buy the 5D, considering that

my choice was the AS option and the high iso performance of the 5d.

But Pentax do not have internal flash and the km5d ergonomy so i would

like to read your observations on this reflex that seems to have all the

bells and whistles wishedby minoltians for the 5d.

regards

Andy




andychen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 25, 2006, 8:52 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 166
Default

Thanks All (specially Jim-Sorry, I meant links of full sizes....My apologies)

However so, with the flouting of antishake, the noise will always be discouraging.....

And we cant wait forever until sony figures out this.....

I will surely await for any pleasant surprises at photokina, but will not keep my fingers crossed....

Right now the Pentax k10D does seem to beat all the other 10mp's in worth for product AND capability....

The A100 showed so promise when announced.....
Chesslanka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 28, 2006, 12:13 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

andychen wrote:
Quote:
hello Jim



Ifi had to make yourmy choicebetween the KM 5d and Pentax k10d

to day Jim I'am not sure if i would still buy the 5D, considering that

my choice was the AS option and the high iso performance of the 5d.

But Pentax do not have internal flash and the km5d ergonomy so i would

like to read your observations on this reflex that seems to have all the

bells and whistles wishedby minoltians for the 5d.

regards

Andy



If I were buying all over again, I would still buy the 7D, especially assuming you could get one around the recent clearance price that was offered by Walmart at 599.00. You can't buy anything with features comparable to a 7D anywhere near that price.

The first time I bought a 7D, I really wanted a 5D but new ones were hard to find It was running about 650.00 newand then the 7D was only running about 250-300 more. What clinched it for me was my dealcame with the 28-75mm 2.8 lens for 50 dollars more than the body only price. At the time I paid 950 and that was a great deal for a 7D. Recently the deal for 599 with the kit lens made a bunch of existing 7Ders buy a second camera or third camera.

A5D is still worth considering if you can get one with a warranty one. Thelast one I purchased at Circuit City was brand new in the box for about 470.00 with the kit lens.


meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2006, 5:04 AM   #10
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 18
Default

We don't have this kind of offer here in Canada (7d for599.00)

Nevertheless i hope Sony is preparing with Minolta ingeneers

aworthy replacement for the 7d.

During my waiting i'll try to find at a good pricea good prime

for interior shooting.

For what it is worth Popular Photography and Imaging named

the Sony alpha a100 the camera of the year at Photokina.



Andy
andychen is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:24 AM.