| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/07/2006 06:23:12 AM · #26 |
| I only wish Sony had followed Kodak way i.e. have DSLR with mounts for Canon and Nikon, if not for Canon atleast for Nikon. |
|
|
|
06/07/2006 06:33:56 AM · #27 |
But sony owns KM. No royalties. That was surely part of their long term plan ever since they started working more closely with KM.
As far as Nikon being in trouble... Well, considering the only thing that they really have going for them at this point is the really low price on the D50, which is readily countered by the high prices of their lenses, the D200 which really only holds it's FPS rate against the Sony A100, for 800 dollars more, and their quality glass, which is significantly more expensive than equivalent offerings by Canon (although generally on par with the KM mount stuff... which all gets in-camera Anti-Shake)...
I don't generally recommend the Nikon product line to anyone currently. It's an expensive road to walk for basically a Sony camera without the anti-shake...
Zeiss lenses will likely be able to hold their own against Nikon glass without breaking a sweat.
Paddles, regarding the 50mm f/1.7 being compatible, I realize that, but I've helped various different people to buy the last of those from the shelves here in Taipei. I have checked over 30 stores. I can't imagine that there are too many kicking around anywhere else either. It's a seriously sweet lens for the price. Even beginners get that one. |
|
|
|
06/07/2006 09:34:12 AM · #28 |
Do you think photographers, as camera buyers, will be better off if Sony becomes a major player and Nikon declines?
|
|
|
|
06/07/2006 10:00:18 AM · #29 |
Problem with SONY is reliability.
Their products always crap out due to cheap quality. |
|
|
|
06/07/2006 10:31:40 AM · #30 |
Makes you wonder if the designers actually use the products. Putting the ISO settings in menu and removing the button was certainly a bad move. The anti-dust feature sounds interesting...wonder if that really works?
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
There are a lot of great looking features, especially the hardware based dynamic range optimisation. But the absence of an ISO button would seriously put me off the camera. When I shoot gigs, I change ISO to match the lighting and I think having to change this setting in a menu would be a deal-breaker. Looks like I might have to wait for the next camera in the range. |
|
|
|
|
06/07/2006 10:32:29 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
Originally posted by yido:
If this is a midrange level camera, which it seems to be with a magnesium body and 10MP, it will undercut the Canon 30D and the Nikon D200. It's spec's look similar to the upcoming Pentax, so I'm wondering if they are sharing technology as well.
Looks like good times for those getting into midrange dslrs. |
dpreview.com says it has a plastic body. |
Sony Alpha DSLR-A100
Steve's Digicam says it has a "Lightweight and durable magnesium alloy body" see Steve's write up here: Sony Alpha 100
So someone is wrong and I'm confused.
|
|
|
|
06/07/2006 12:55:39 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
Do you think photographers, as camera buyers, will be better off if Sony becomes a major player and Nikon declines? |
I am not sure if you were asking me or just anyone in general, but I would have to say that it's somewhat immaterial what I think about Sony VS Nikon... Plenty of crappy stuff happens out there.
I think it would be good if Nikon would work on their pricing for their lenses. I understand that it is generally believed that they do produce slightly better quality lenses than Canon, but I have a hard time believing that this is actually reflected in the pricing differences.
Nikon with Anti-shake might be good, but like Canon, they aren't likely to go this route because they already make good cash from anti-shake type lenses.
Nikon isn't bringing much else to the table outside of their quality glass though... At least Canon is actively researching and developing a technology. Nikon is just using Sony's handiwork to make cameras based on technology that is already firmly in place.
TheSaj. That may be true that many Sony products are unreliable. I don't personally use them (although I may be buying a k750i this week).
But don't forget that the mechanicals of this camera are mostly Konica Minolta, built in the same factories as other KM cameras and they are decent quality. The electronics of the camera (from the sensor to the LCD) are largely Sony, and identical to Pentax/Nikon offerings. Even Canon uses Sony LCD screens on the back of their cameras.
I don't hear any complaints about longevity with these technologies...
Glad2Badad... the anti-dust feature sounds like it's almost identical to the Oly system. That seems to work. Having it at camera shutdown might be an issue, where some owners will have to turn the camera off and on again if dust is an issue. On the other hand, regular maintenance can eliminate problems in the long run. I can see an issue where in an Oly camera, the camera is usually in normal orienation (with the lens parallel with the ground) when the dust is shaken loose, but with the camera being shut off, it seems likely that the camera will be facing downwards, shaking the dust on to the rear element or something... It will be interesting to see how it works, but I would guess that it will probably work pretty durned well.
Also, I think someone else already commented that ISO is on a selection wheel which suggests that it may be possible to jump from ISO setting to ISO setting by repeatedly pressing the button on the top... I'd be willing to bet that it still ticks people off because you can't switch backwards and forwards, but at least it still does seem that the menu isn't the only way...
Yeek, I am starting to sound like a salesman. Do forgive me!
I wouldn't make any quick conclusions until Phil Askey finishes his complete review... Then we will have room to niggle the details like body material construction. This is still in it's infancy.
|
|
|
|
06/07/2006 01:42:19 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
Problem with SONY is reliability.
Their products always crap out due to cheap quality. |
Not exactly sure where you come up with this.. Every Sony product that I can think of has been known for long-life and durability.
The Playstation (original), was known for occasionally having to be flipped upside down to play it, but I know of original machines that are still running fine *today*. I've rarely heard of Playstation 2 machines failing, the PSP is a remarkably solid little performer, most Sony digicams have outlasted the competition (look at the F-828 or F-717.. among many others).
Sony sensors in both Nikon and Pentax are widely known for being amazingly long-lived and reliable, and Sony Trinitron and Wega TVs are top quality and extremely long lived. I know Trinitrons from the late 70s that look great. (My aunt has one).
So really, what do you base your information on? |
|
|
|
06/07/2006 01:53:57 PM · #34 |
fwiw, I have had my SONY Playstation 2 fail on me. and my best friend had another one fail 4 times. Here is the rub. They have one of the best help desks I have ever heard of. I bought mine at launch, and the first time it went dead was 4 years later. I called and asked if they knew where I could take it to get it fixed and they told me to ship it in, they will fix it and even pay for return shipping. So for about $20, I got a new PS2, after owning mine for 4 years. After that level of service, do you think I bought the XBOX 360? OH, NO! I am waiting for that PS3. And I LOVED my sony F828, even if it was a little noisy. hmm... Can't wait to hold one. I love the idea of the anti-shake.
Is there anyone online who has one of those OLY's with the automatic sensor cleaning? how well does it work? I am in oklahoma and the wind is aweful here, always blowing dust on my sensor. I would be VERY tempted to get the SONY for that... If a piece of dirt gets lodged, can you still use copper hill method?
drake |
|
|
|
06/07/2006 10:06:55 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
Also, I think someone else already commented that ISO is on a selection wheel which suggests that it may be possible to jump from ISO setting to ISO setting by repeatedly pressing the button on the top... I'd be willing to bet that it still ticks people off because you can't switch backwards and forwards, but at least it still does seem that the menu isn't the only way... |
How do the other dSLR let you change the ISO by the way?
Do you press the ISO button and it switch directly to another ISO without having to use the screen/menu system? Dont we all have to press repeatedly to switch the ISO? Not targeting at you, Eschelar, just a little peeved as to why the ISO button is even an issue on the Sony? lol
and on the Sony build-quality as stated by someone, I have some really old Sony walkmans, CD players and audio systems (and 2 old TV sets) that have lasted more than 10 years, some 15. They are still working fine albeit outdated :p
Message edited by author 2006-06-07 22:07:53. |
|
|
|
06/07/2006 10:12:36 PM · #36 |
On my sony R1 (not dSLR though), there is a cool button you press that and change the ISO. This is one good feature since I do not have to go through the menu to do so.
About sony systems, yes i have one we bought in 80s that still works fine. Not only it works fine, its sound quality in unparalled. I have hardly heard such good quality systems, not even in new Sony.
Originally posted by crayon:
Originally posted by eschelar:
Also, I think someone else already commented that ISO is on a selection wheel which suggests that it may be possible to jump from ISO setting to ISO setting by repeatedly pressing the button on the top... I'd be willing to bet that it still ticks people off because you can't switch backwards and forwards, but at least it still does seem that the menu isn't the only way... |
How do the other dSLR let you change the ISO by the way?
Do you press the ISO button and it switch directly to another ISO without having to use the screen/menu system? Dont we all have to press repeatedly to switch the ISO? Not targeting at you, Eschelar, just a little peeved as to why the ISO button is even an issue on the Sony? lol
and on the Sony build-quality as stated by someone, I have some really old Sony walkmans, CD players and audio systems (and 2 old TV sets) that have lasted more than 10 years, some 15. They are still working fine albeit outdated :p |
|
|
|
|
06/08/2006 03:05:10 AM · #37 |
I have an S2 IS which has a custom button that I have set up to be ISO. I don't switch too much as only ISO 50, 100, and 200 are actually useful.
My 30D has a button press then a dial to rotate on the back of the camera.
My first guess would be that if you have your A100 with the left top dial set to ISO, you can just press the button in the center to kick over the ISO.
Just so long as it stays the HECK out of menus.. that's a royal PITA.
There's also the Special area based dynamic range feature of the A100 that to my eyes appears to be some sort of variable ISO which compensates for broad light variances... The Sony A100 website tells a bit about it and it looks flipping amazing... Might help reduce the need for fill flash, which could have major implications for all kinds of situations... if it's predictable in the way it works. |
|
|
|
06/08/2006 03:36:11 AM · #38 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
There's also the Special area based dynamic range feature of the A100 that to my eyes appears to be some sort of variable ISO which compensates for broad light variances... The Sony A100 website tells a bit about it and it looks flipping amazing... Might help reduce the need for fill flash, which could have major implications for all kinds of situations... if it's predictable in the way it works. |
Maybe it's a hardware HDR feature 0_0 who knows? |
|
|
|
06/08/2006 05:13:59 AM · #39 |
Talking about build quality, you'll find a bunch of people who have long lived Sony products and a bunch of people who bought Sony lemons. I fall into the second group.
For me, I look at Sony products, in general, as being disposable. I've had three Sony VCR's of two different models that all failed within two weeks. One was DOA, the second recorded mostly static, the third hissed and squeaked so loudly that it was difficult to watch a recorded program. I had a Walkman, lasted about four months before the door fell off. My first TV was a Sony. Had it for less than a month before it developed a green cast to the picture that couldn't be removed. Exchanged it for a less expensive Sharp TV which I thought of as a cheap brand that would never last but is still in use 15 years later. Never owned a Sony branded computer but almost invariably when somebody tells me they are having problems they are either talking about an HP or a VAIO. On the other hand I had a Mavica that took crappy photos but was built like a tank. In fact it is still pulling duty with a relative who uses it selling items on Ebay and Craigslist.
It's expected that there will be a percentage of lemons in manufacturing, just seems I've had more than my fair share. |
|
|
|
06/14/2006 10:35:26 PM · #40 |
I was checking out the sample pics from the A100 on dpreview (link here) and I smell something fishy going on. I noticed 2 things rather quickly:
1. most photos are blurry
2. small apertures are used in conjunction with slow shutter for even brightly lit scenes
Is the site/reviewer bought? |
|
|
|
06/14/2006 10:42:14 PM · #41 |
| OMG, Carl Zeiss 16-80 with dual glass molded asperics.... drool. I knew I would want to switch back to Minolta... err Sony. |
|
|
|
06/14/2006 10:45:03 PM · #42 |
Sample photos are almost always shot in extremely bright light.. It represents the best possible situation for a camera.
The slight blurriness could be virtually anything, from a pre-production sample with imperfect lens sync, old version firmware, low settings, right up to diffraction effects from a narrow aperture.
The site/reviewer probably didn't put a lot of work and time into this review because it's actually a preview, not a finished review.
He will probably be redoing the whole thing within a month...
Phil will come through for ya!
And don't forget, the sensor is basically identical to the one in the D200... Expect very similar quality in actual production models. |
|
|
|
06/14/2006 10:46:46 PM · #43 |
I agree the sample pics lookk like crap, I hope the post-production samples are better..
|
|
|
|
06/14/2006 11:03:03 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by buzzrock:
I agree the sample pics lookk like crap, I hope the post-production samples are better.. |
I would not have pointed it out if they were pre-production shots, but if you read here, it states clearly by DPREVIEW that the samples are from a production set! Quoted below:
"Note that these images were taken with a production camera (apologies for most of these shots being in the portrait orientation, it wasn't a conscious decision)."
Seriously, Phil is showing some bias finally? I've never seen such crappy "sample pics" from that site - especially not from a dSLR review.
Message edited by author 2006-06-14 23:04:07. |
|
|
|
06/14/2006 11:08:32 PM · #45 |
Good eye. I missed that one....
I will say though that the higher up cameras do produce softer images out of the camera than some of the lower down ones... This is because of a filter over the sensor that has some other benefits...
The shots from the 20D and 30D are quite similar in softness to that straight out of camera... This is also partly due to the request by many of the users of this level of camera to leave the post processing to the post processing and keep the in-camera sharpening out...
I believe by default this is the standard now...
Hard to say from my limited POV.
You will know better when he does his full review and posts a full set of samples regarding the in-camera functions like hue, saturation, and sharpness. |
|
|
|
06/14/2006 11:13:02 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
You will know better when he does his full review and posts a full set of samples regarding the in-camera functions like hue, saturation, and sharpness. |
I can't wait. I usually scroll right to the "photo comparison" section on the reviews.
Message edited by author 2006-06-14 23:15:19. |
|
|
|
06/14/2006 11:21:25 PM · #47 |
| Dude, the D200 is barely a blip on my radar at this point. [kicks self for not sticking with Minolta] |
|
|
|
06/14/2006 11:31:44 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
Good eye. I missed that one....
I will say though that the higher up cameras do produce softer images out of the camera than some of the lower down ones... This is because of a filter over the sensor that has some other benefits...
The shots from the 20D and 30D are quite similar in softness to that straight out of camera... This is also partly due to the request by many of the users of this level of camera to leave the post processing to the post processing and keep the in-camera sharpening out...
I believe by default this is the standard now...
Hard to say from my limited POV.
You will know better when he does his full review and posts a full set of samples regarding the in-camera functions like hue, saturation, and sharpness. |
I'll bet you anything what you all are seeing was Phil trying to push the Advanced Dynamic Range processing to it's limit. Note many of the pics have very shaded areas with VERY bright (even blown out) skies. |
|
|
|
06/14/2006 11:36:12 PM · #49 |
| Yep, look at the pictures of the statue and the tomatoes especially. The Zeiss lenses, three different ISO setting, slight differences in noise... |
|
|
|
06/14/2006 11:38:14 PM · #50 |
Very good point...
But I don't think the Dynamic Range trick in the camera will affect sharpness. I think it's more likely that it's low in-camera sharpness and the anti-aliasing filter...
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/19/2025 07:48:11 PM EDT.
