First sony DSLR announced. - DPChallenge Forums

06/14/2006 11:39:57 PM · #51

Originally posted by wavelength:

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.

Makes some sense... hmm, but Phil should at least mention it, no?
Isn't this like setting a dSLR to the highest sharpening and passing them off as normal sample shots? I find this inaccurate if used for an in-depth review.

Canon PowerShot Pro 90 IS

06/14/2006 11:44:41 PM · #52

Originally posted by crayon:

Perhaps he will when he finishes...

The A100 is a very interesting camera and I too want to know it all NOW!

I have a few friends who are considering buying a camera and this one just hit tops on the list.

Incidentally, I think he just uses the default settings for his test shots...

Older cameras and lower end cameras have their settings a bit higher in-camera than the higher ups for default.

Check the number of threads in hardware asking about softness in pictures straight from the camera from the 20D and 30D just after they bought it...

I almost posted one too!

coolhar

06/15/2006 12:22:54 AM · #53

Originally posted by crayon:

... Seriously, Phil is showing some bias finally? I've never seen such crappy "sample pics" from that site - especially not from a dSLR review.

The sample pictures are not great so you assume that the reviewer is biased. That's quite a leap isn't it?

wavelength

Nikon D300

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

06/15/2006 01:02:05 AM · #54

aaargh!!!! [kick, kick, kick]

okay, I'll stop now. I knew it once it was leaked tha Zeiss was making lenses, but man, the freaking price... so sweet

Count

Canon EOS-30D

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

06/15/2006 01:06:58 AM · #55

I'm still standing firm with my doubt that it'll stack up to the offerings from Nikon and Canon.

I do think it will compete with Olympus and the Panasonic products (when their dSLR makes it market) though.

I guess only time will tell...

Message edited by author 2006-06-15 01:07:20.

06/15/2006 02:55:12 AM · #56

Originally posted by eschelar:

And don't forget, the sensor is basically identical to the one in the D200... Expect very similar quality in actual production models.

It is different than the one in the D200.
The A100 sensor has two channel readout and the D200's has four channel readout. Four channel is much faster (fps/write to buffer) and less noisy. There are other small differences. The D200 sensor is more advanced.

Bodywise the A100 is not even close to the D200.

Tamron AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di II for Nikon

06/15/2006 03:19:36 AM · #57

Originally posted by Azrifel:

It was just speculation about the sensor of the A100 being identical to the D200's. As in DPREVIEW's review quoted below:

"10 megapixel APS-C CCD: Interestingly Sony has gone for CCD rather than CMOS with this camera, so it's not the same sensor as used in the DSC-R1. We've no official confirmation but it seems likely that this is the same 23.6 x 15.8 mm CCD used in the Nikon D200."

BTW, nobody is saying the A100 is on par with the D200 - they are in a completely difference league! By the way, where did you get the detailed information on the sensor readout and stuff? Thanks for sharing.

Message edited by author 2006-06-15 03:30:36.

obsidian

Nikon D80

06/15/2006 04:45:20 AM · #58

Oh b*gger! My SLR is a Minolta, my P&S is a Sony and a significant amount of my home entertainment systems are Sony. I really did not expect these guys to launch anything until end of the year/next year when I was hoping to have improved enough to consider buying a dSLR.

Then they launch the A100 and it *looks* as though it could be a well-priced and very commendable beastie.

I condemn the Sony marketing people to - well, something nasty I suppose - for introducing mouth-watering temptation into my sheltered existence!

06/15/2006 04:50:32 AM · #59

Originally posted by obsidian:

I condemn the Sony marketing people to - well, something nasty I suppose - for introducing mouth-watering temptation into my sheltered existence!

Yeah, the same for what they did with my worsening school results after they created the virus called PlayStation! :p

06/15/2006 11:46:03 AM · #60

First I've heard so far about the D200 having a different sensor from the A100... I'll have to keep my eyes open...

Incidentally, the benefit of four-channel readout seems to me that the primary difference would be in the 'more hands, less work' category, meaning that heat buildup would be less of an issue... This makes sense to a degree as far as keeping noise levels down (hotter operation is one of the major contributing factors to noise that gives CMOS the edge over CCD's right now), but aside from that, I can't see that there would really be many other major differences. I can only see that having a real impact on the performance if this is referring to per-pixel information read-out... if it's just at the controller chip for the sensor, I would say that it's likely this will have a rather minor impact... The real difference here would be read/write speed, which has already been mentioned as the D200 has double the speed (5.5FPS) of the Sony (3FPS). This still allows for the difference in information transfer to be at the photosites... Hence I would like to read more.

Having a nearly identical pixel pitch, and identical pixel count would STRONGLY suggest that the actual photo sensor itself is identical... It seems counterproductive that Sony would have chip manufacture for two subtly different products... Everyone knows that volume brings price down in manufacture... It simply wouldn't be worth their money to develop a different chip, and have two different production runs...

On the other hand, it's possible that they have crippled some functions...

Installing a slower controller chip for the sensor would be one possible way to cut costs...

If that is the case, I fail to see how it would negatively impact the image quality coming off the sensor... If you were to shoot RAW and keep all your settings low, the controller chip would have even less impact on your image quality difference between the two cameras...

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

06/15/2006 12:20:41 PM · #61

Originally posted by obsidian:

Oh b*gger! My SLR is a Minolta, my P&S is a Sony

..and your Panasonic is??? ;^)

Tamron AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di II for Nikon

06/15/2006 12:48:45 PM · #62

Originally posted by crayon:

By the way, where did you get the detailed information on the sensor readout and stuff? Thanks for sharing.

In a discussion with Thom Hogan //www.bythom.com

obsidian

Nikon D80

06/15/2006 03:03:08 PM · #63

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by obsidian:
Oh b*gger! My SLR is a Minolta, my P&S is a Sony

..and your Panasonic is??? ;^)

Still too much camera for me as I am the limitation!

Sigh... the joy of virtual choice - not!

06/15/2006 10:30:27 PM · #64

Azrifel ?

I can't find anything on the Alpha A100 on thom's site...

I spent 20 minutes looking...

I like his breakdown of the PMA show... guys totally on the ball by the look of things...

06/15/2006 10:46:15 PM · #65

Originally posted by eschelar:

I can't find anything on the Alpha A100 on thom's site...
I spent 20 minutes looking...

I cant find it too, but did read a little on his other reviews.
BTW, he looks like a Nikon guy... that may explain a little on things.

06/15/2006 10:51:34 PM · #66

Yeah, he's a Nikon guy. But don't forget that the Sony/Nikon relationship is pretty close... Nikon guys ought to know a fair bit about Nikon and Sony tech...

I'm willing to trust what he says is accurate if he's talking tech specs after reading some of the stuff on his site...

But I can't find that discussion.

06/20/2006 01:17:24 AM · #67

This A100 review stated that the sensor is indeed the same one as used on the D200. Hmm, any other sites pointing this thing out in their reviews?

06/20/2006 04:30:10 AM · #68

I only referenced to bythom.com because some might not know who Tom is.
The discussion was at dpreview.com, but as there are so many there I cannot easily find it back. His statement was based on detailed sensor specs (sony releases technical data about all their sensors) and more detailed camera specs. It is like (for example, no real numbers) the D200 uses sensor LA89010 and the A100 uses LA89010a, once you know those numbers you can look them up. He probably also has knowledge of exclusive rights for Nikon.

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

06/21/2006 05:31:41 AM · #69

hey, found this website that compares sample shots between the following 3 cameras:
- canon eos 30D
- nikon d200
- sony alpha a100
here is the link

.

SamDoe1

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

06/22/2006 10:30:53 AM · #70

Although the A100 body is great and at a very good price, doesn't it seem like the lenses are way too expensive? The Sony 70-200mm f/2.8 is going for $2400, and that's not a Zeiss lens and also without IS or VR.

Bugzeye

Fisher Price Kid-Tough Digital

06/22/2006 10:38:00 AM · #71

Sony is ok. But I think they should stick to what they do best. Video and Audio. Leave the still photography to the real camera companies.

I Do like the CZ Lens option though very nice glass.

SamDoe1

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

06/22/2006 10:43:01 AM · #72

Originally posted by Bugzeye:

Leave the still photography to the real camera companies.

The Sony dSLR is basically a reworked Minolta, which was a very good camera company until Sony bought them out. Also, many of the sensors, including the ones on all (or most) Nikon cameras, are made by Sony. LCDs on many cameras are also made by Sony as well as many of the internal parts.

- Off topic -
Sony audio sucks by the way, well for anything that's not electronic. Sony speakers are terrible, although their recievers aren't bad but nothing compared to a Yamaha or Denon. Sony car audio is even worse than home audio.
- Back on topic -

Bugzeye

Fisher Price Kid-Tough Digital

06/22/2006 10:43:30 AM · #73

Originally posted by SamDoe1:

Sony is always the first to screw you silly with accessories. For my video business I have two Sony HDR FX1 HD Cameras.

So far i have spent the cost of one camera on accessories. A wide angle adaptor $500 bucks. a Shoulder bracket 400 dollars 90% plastic too... spare batteries 200 each. Various filters etc... Nothing is cheap or even fair priced for that matter.

Bugzeye

Fisher Price Kid-Tough Digital

06/22/2006 10:45:11 AM · #74

on the consumer level Sony is average in audio but on the professional level. They make some very nice equipment. But not at consumer prices.

Originally posted by SamDoe1:

Originally posted by Bugzeye:
Leave the still photography to the real camera companies.

The Sony dSLR is basically a reworked Minolta, which was a very good camera company until Sony bought them out. Also, many of the sensors, including the ones on all (or most) Nikon cameras, are made by Sony. LCDs on many cameras are also made by Sony as well as many of the internal parts.

- Off topic -
Sony audio sucks by the way, well for anything that's not electronic. Sony speakers are terrible, although their recievers aren't bad but nothing compared to a Yamaha or Denon. Sony car audio is even worse than home audio.
- Back on topic -