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 12, 2012, 8:32 AM   #1
Member
 
bella's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 62
Default SLT vs SLR

Hi, I havnt been on here in forever!
I have been watching all the SONY updates with interest! Im needing to invest in a new Sony full frame camera body.

The reading and comparisons I have looked at, nothing tells me if SLT is as good as SLR, for a professional camera body, will the full frame A99 step up????

If someone could please give me their opinion, that would be greatly appreciated, Im trying to work out if I need to jump ship, or stick with what I have invested in

Thanks so much
Claire

Last edited by bella; Sep 12, 2012 at 8:36 AM.
bella is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 12, 2012, 9:27 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

For most things there isn't much difference. For some things the electronic viewfinder in the SLTs works better, like in low available light, and for better continuous focus performance. Unfortunately, however, the EVF doesn't have quite the resolution of an optical viewfinder (for someone with normal, or better than normal, visual accuity.) The exact specs for the EVF in the new 'Full Frame' A99 aren't available yet, but the resolution of the OLED EVF in the A77 & A65 is just short of what you might see in an OVF, and the resolution of the LCD EVF in the A57 & A37 is less than that.

There are a few reasons why someone might be better off with a 'Full Frame' body instead of an APS-C body. Some of which are a more shallow depth of field, and a more accurate phase detection AF system. But APS-C systems are smaller, lighter and cost a lot less.

Do you have a specific application in mind that would benefit from a 'Full Frame sensor?
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2012, 9:39 AM   #3
Member
 
bella's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 62
Default

Righteo, specific application - pro photography. Ive managed fine so far with a crop sensor, and do wonder if a FF will give me what I want.
Something i have been torn over for ages

Rather than the usual answer i get.. that i need a FF, what are the actual benefits, bar the lens working as they should
bella is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2012, 10:06 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

Actually, APS-C dSLRs benefit from using 'Full Frame' lenses by extracting the 'sweet spot' from the center of the image they project. That means that an APS-C body won't get the vignetting, rectilinear distortion, and lateral chromatic aberration that appears when the same lens is used on a 'Full Frame' body.

Now, you would not use the same lens on the two types of bodies for the same composition, but, for instance, an 85mm f/1.4 Zeiss lens will produce a better image on an APS-C body than a 135mm f/1.8 Zeiss lens produces on a 'Full Frame' body. And that 135/1.8 on an APS-C body will be the equivalent of a 200/1.8 lens on a 'Full Frame' body. Try finding one of those.

Plus, there are APS-C only lenses (Sony's 'DT', Sigma's 'DC', and Tamron's 'Di-II') that are every bit as good as equivalent 'Full Frame' lenses, and they're smaller, lighter, and cheaper.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2012, 10:52 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

There are absolutely some very good reasons to get a 'Full Frame' dSLR, but if all you're going to do with it is take photos that you'll end up cropping off the bad parts anyway, why not save the time, effort and money, and get an APS-C body to start with?
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2012, 3:40 PM   #6
Member
 
bella's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 62
Default

I know the bonuses of the extra focal length of the lens

I crop in camera normally. Currently i have a A550 and an A100 as my backup, am wanting to upgrade so my A550 is my backup and my assistant can use the A100 (its still a great camera)
bella is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2012, 3:43 PM   #7
Member
 
bella's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 62
Default

Love that my 50mm acts as an 85 without the expense
bella 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 6:29 AM.