Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 23, 2006, 9:18 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
zygh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 531
Default

tripple post, sorry. bad internet connection.
zygh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2006, 9:27 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

Actually the Sony A100 isn't bad at all. It is just a stop behind the Canon EOS 30D at high ISO performance. However, it has the improved AS feature to compensate for that high ISO noise issue.

The A100takes a veryconservative approach in noise reduction. (I prefer that over heavy handedNR that chops outimage details).
BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2006, 9:29 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Monza76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,095
Default

zygh wrote:
Quote:
Hmm, apparently the evidence stacks up against my earlier statements. I admit when I am wrong. Still, I would definetely want lower high ISO noise. There were some test shots on dpreview forums and from that it would appear that the D80 improves even more on the D50. It was better yet than the 20D. If you're interested I will look for the link and post it here.

Still, it's amazing to see the 7D doing so well and the A100 not being able to follow in its footsteps regarding noise. From what I've seen the A100 is pretty sucky in that department, pardon my french.

The A100 from Sony is another example of too many pixels, the pixel density effects the noise levels because smaller pixels get less light and therefore have a lower signal to noise ratio. I would rather a 7D myself.

One other important note, have you tried holding a Canon 350D? I can't hold one, the grip is made for very small hands, I would drop it (in fact I did drop one in Future Shop that was saved by the anti-theft tether that stopped it before it hit the floor). Canon dropped the ball on that design, the 300D was a little flimsy but at least you could hold it. All of the other cameras you mention are quite comfortable in my medium sized hands.

Ira
Monza76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2006, 9:37 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
zygh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 531
Default

Here's the link I mentioned earlier: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...0+iso&qf=m. It's test shots at high ISOs for the 30D and the D80. If the results there are corect, then the D80 is looking to be one awesome camera.

Ira, I totally agree. The 7D is anextraordinary camera.
zygh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2006, 11:10 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

I couldn't view the photos at all. Perhapes they have been removed? Just my thoughts.
BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2006, 11:23 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 183
Default

Hi Shooters,

I was just tempted to reply to this post.

I was under the same dilemma about a month ago. But after a lot
review hunting and comparisons ... I finally decided on getting the
Canon EOS350D. Just ordered it yesterday and waiting eagerly for
it now to arrive.

If you want the best bang for your (under 500£) buck ... Canon it
is.

Cheers,
--
Gaggu
gaggu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2006, 12:00 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Monza76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,095
Default

zygh wrote:
Quote:
Here's the link I mentioned earlier: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...0+iso&qf=m. It's test shots at high ISOs for the 30D and the D80. If the results there are corect, then the D80 is looking to be one awesome camera.

Ira, I totally agree. The 7D is anextraordinary camera.
Let's face it, Sony never seems to get the best results from their own sensors. The F828 is a prime example, Minolta, Olympus, Nikon and Canon all built cameras based on the same chip that produced better high ISO performance than the Sony. Now this 10mp range, the Nikon D200 and apparently the D80 both handily outperform the Sony R1 and A100 at high ISO. Sony needs to let the old Konica Minolta engineers work their photographic magic on these cameras so that Sony will truly have a contender.

Sony has been a market leader in so many areas of electronic media, including p&s digicams, but they are now in a market with very high standards indeed where their company logo will only attract the uninitiated. Canon and Nikon carry very big guns in this market and Olympus and Pentax get respect a segment of the market as well, because they are the traditional camera companies and they design cameras for photographers, not computer experts.

Sorry to hi-jack this thread, I do believe the Sony A100 is an excellent camera, and I would buy one if I still had Minolta Maxxum lenses but the fine line between very good and great has not been crossed yet. If Sony wants to set their sites on Nikon and Canon they'd better reload. The A100 is well built and shows the impact of K/M ergonomics but the processing engine that dwells within still needs to be "tweaked". Can't wait for round two.

Ira a Pentax owner BTW who also had a Minolta Maxxum system once.
Monza76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2006, 12:28 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

Code:
Let's face it, Sony never seems to get the best results from their own sensors. The F828 is a prime example, Minolta, Olympus, Nikon and Canon all built cameras based on the same chip that produced better high ISO performance than the Sony. Now this 10mp range, the Nikon D200 and apparently the D80 both handily outperform the Sony R1 and A100 at high ISO. Sony needs to let the old Konica Minolta engineers work their photographic magic on these cameras so that Sony will truly have a contender.
As a matter of fact, I disagree with you Monza;

The DSC-F828 was dramatically improved over by the DSC-R1; Take a look and read the whole review if you wish>>>

Code:
I'm glad to report as a prosumer / fixed lens digital the DSC-R1 is so much better than anything that came before it, it's really not worth comparing it to cameras like the DSC-F828, there's only so much you can do with a small sensor.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscr1/page27.asp

By the look of things, I can see that SONY certainly knows what are they doing. Their new R1 is CERTAINLY a huge improvement over the DSC-F828. In terms of purple fringings, try to find them on the R1. Sure. you can locate a few CAs at extremes, but you may find out that other cameras even the dSLRs might do just worse at the same focal lengths. (And so far this has always been the case simply because the lens of the R1 is so good in comparisons). Just read more R1 reviews at http://www.photobird.comif you need to.

I certainly DISAGREE that the Nikon D200 out performs the A100 at higher ISOs. I might be more graceful than Philip Askeyto say that they are the same. :roll:

Read this yourself>>>

Code:
Between the DSLR-A100 and D200 at these high sensitivities the A100 appears to maintain more detail.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra100/page28.asp

The A100 is only a stop behind the EOS 30D>>> And don't forget thatit still have the improved AS feature advantage. (And it's ISO is overstated as well)

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra100/page20.asp

You can see the great detailretaintion on the Alpha A100 crops unlike from the output of some other cameras.

Finally, take a look at the resolution:

The A100 even beats the D200 at the resolution charts. Look at the image details at RAW mode. Exackly identical at the JPEGs.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra100/page29.asp

__________________________________________________ __________________

The R1 is not much different from the A100 in the high ISO performance (It has ISO 3200)and it has it's own set of advantages over the rest of the competitions and entry level dSLRs. You cannot overlook it's strong advantages.

How do you know about the D80's high ISO performance??? Is there any proper results out yet other than some useless claims here and there??? If I follow what people say at the forums, I might also have to believe that the D200 performs better than the D80 at higher ISOs. :roll:

SONY had already improved upon Minolta's last offerings and I can believe that by reading more what the professional says. Ofcouse, if you want to pixel peep the high ISOs, then the 6 MP chip will have certain advantages there, otherwise; the Sony A100 improves in most of the areas that could be improved with current technology.

The A100 review>>>

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra100/

Ofcouse, the review is there for you to read if you don't believe me. :roll:































BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2006, 1:02 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Monza76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,095
Default

Benjamin, I am not comparing the F828 and the R1, there is no comparison, the R1 is undeniably the best EVF camera out there for image quality. What I am saying is that the R1 cannot match the high ISO performance of the Nikon D200 which uses a very similar Sony sensor.

As for the D200 over A100, my information is second hand, from Popular Photography magazine's test of the A100. They found noise to be excessive beyond ISO400. As you can see different reviewers find different results, although a gap this wide is hard to explain. I withdraw my previous comments, however I must make it very clear again that I did not compare the Sony DSC-F828 with the DSC-R1. My exact quote was "The F828 is a prime example, Minolta, Olympus, Nikon and Canon all built cameras based on the same chip that produced better high ISO performance than the Sony.". I was of course referring to the Sony vs the Nikon 8800, Canon Pro1, Olympus 8080 and K/M A200. I then compared the Sony R1 to the Nikon D200, an unfair comparison given the price difference but both cameras use sensors from the same "family".

As for this statement which you made:
"By the look of things, I can see that SONY certainly knows what are they doing. Their new R1 is CERTAINLY a huge improvement over the DSC-F828. In terms of purple fringings, try to find them on the R1. Sure. you can locate a few CAs at extremes, but you may find out that other cameras even the dSLRs might do just worse at the same focal lengths. (And so far this has always been the case simply because the lens of the R1 is so good in comparisons). Just read more R1 reviews at http://www.photobird.comif you need to." I agree completely, the R1 is a masterpiece which far exceeds any EVF digicam that has come before (or since). I never said the R1 and the F828 were equals. In fact I compared the R1 to a far more expensive Nikon semi-pro model, a complement I thought.

I will edit my previous post to remove the references that caused issue since my findings were also second hand.

Respectfully

Ira

Monza76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2006, 1:13 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

Code:
Benjamin, I am not comparing the F828 and the R1, there is no comparison, the R1 is undeniably the best EVF camera out there for image quality. What I am saying is that the R1 cannot match the high ISO performance of the Nikon D200 which uses a very similar Sony sensor.

As for the D200 over A100, my information is second hand, from Popular Photography magazine's test of the A100. They found noise to be excessive beyond ISO400. As you can see different reviewers find different results, although a gap this wide is hard to explain. I withdraw my previous comments, however I must make it very clear again that I did not compare the Sony DSC-F828 with the DSC-R1. My exact quote was "The F828 is a prime example, Minolta, Olympus, Nikon and Canon all built cameras based on the same chip that produced better high ISO performance than the Sony.". I was of course referring to the Sony vs the Nikon 8800, Canon Pro1, Olympus 8080 and K/M A200. I then compared the Sony R1 to the Nikon D200, an unfair comparison given the price difference but both cameras use sensors from the same "family".

As for this statement which you made:
"By the look of things, I can see that SONY certainly knows what are they doing. Their new R1 is CERTAINLY a huge improvement over the DSC-F828. In terms of purple fringings, try to find them on the R1. Sure. you can locate a few CAs at extremes, but you may find out that other cameras even the dSLRs might do just worse at the same focal lengths. (And so far this has always been the case simply because the lens of the R1 is so good in comparisons). Just read more R1 reviews at http://www.photobird.comif you need to." I agree completely, the R1 is a masterpiece which far exceeds any EVF digicam that has come before (or since). I never said the R1 and the F828 were equals. In fact I compared the R1 to a far more expensive Nikon semi-pro model, a complement I thought.

I will edit my previous post to remove the references that caused issue since my findings were also second hand.

Respectfully

Ira
Monza7, I am very sorry if I had misunderstood your original post.

I had mistaken your post and thought that you had based your impression on Sony from the DSC-F828 (purple fringing master camera). That was why I quickly reminded you that the R1 was so much different.

IMHO, the Nikon D200, Sony A100, and the Sony R1shares the same high ISO performance at ISO 800 and ISO 1600. There might be differences, but I honestly cannot see them or they might be too minute to be noticeble (by me).

Regards. (I hope I am not wearing a pair of R1 tinted glasses :G). Please save me if you think I am. :-)



BenjaminXYZ 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 10:43 AM.