Finally we can start to talk about “serious” full-frame rumors coming from trusted sources. First, our Japanese friend and administrator of DigitalCameraInfo (Click here) got an interesting info about the upcoming Nikon D800. The rumor confirms what we told you back in June: Sony developed a new 36 Megapixel sensor that is going to be used inside the next Nikon FF camera (Click here to read the original article).
And now the good news: I have been told by our sources that Sony will first share the sensor to Nikon and than use it on their own FF camera which will be announced early 2012! The exact release date has not been chosen yet but I have been told there are is a huge pressure to release it as soon as possible. Compared to the Nikon D800 the Sony (A99?) will have slightly different specs and a lower(!) price. The Nikon D800 can take 4 frames per second, records 1920 × 1080/30p and cost 300.000 Yen (3.000 Euro, or $4000). The major difference is that Nikon has an optical viewfinder while the Sony has SLT technology. Meanwhile the [shoplink 3028]Sony A900[/shoplink] has been discontinued and you will see some nice rebates soon. I will keep you updated with specs and news I am getting form my sources. It’s really an exciting time 😉
One more thing: New lenses will be released along the new Full Frame camera!
Reminder (SR = Sonyrumor):
SR1=probably fake rumor
SR2=rumor from unknown sources
SR3=50% chance it is correct
SR4=rumor from known sources
SR5=almost certainly correct!
217 Responses
This is beyond silly. The 21mp in 5D2 or 24 mp in the D3x is more than enough. Nikon would be better off just putting the D3x sensor in the D700x to make it a worthy competitor to the 5D2. The problem is that now, even 3 years after the 5D2 has been released, Nikon does not offer any competitive product to the 5D2. And IMHO Sony should not sell sensors to Nikon or they should behave like Apple or like they did with A77 – use sensors in their products first, and only after an important delay sell it to others. Apple does it with Intel’s Thunderbolt or some other chips and has done so with USB and Firewire in the past.
Look how slow thunderbolt products have been to roll out with Apple having the license exclusively for the first year. I have an iMac with Thunderbolt ports that sit idle. 🙁
Regarding the 5D2 I’m assuming you are referring to video and resolution, the D700 tops it in every other category.
Nikon smokes canon. canon focus problems with there exposure problems along with there hi noise at hi iso make there cameras just good enough for a beginner . Sony products Rock. I would take a Sony over a canon day in and day out. You get so much bang for the buck with a Sony. YOU CAN NEVER HAVE ENOUGH MEGA PIXELS! Pull a crop and you always want more! The Alpha 77 video BLOWS AWAY Nikon and canon video SLRs. Thank you Sony..!! Bobo
1. Who are you to say 24MP FF is more than enough? Just because you don’t know how to make use of the MP doesn’t mean that others are as incompetent as you.
2. D700 isn’t competitive enough for 5D2? Give me a break.
The D700 tops 5D2 AF-wise. That’s all IMHO. I love D700, make no mistake. I shot some commissions with that, but I put my trust with Canon gear only, especially now that more clients need videos. And I have a trusty shop nearby who sells 6 5D2s for 1 sold D700, because that’s what the customers want. Go figure. For my style of shooting I sometimes use sRAW mode in 5D2 because that’s enough resolution. The problem with the D700/D3 that i always had were color inconsistencies at any higher ISOs (but maybe that’s ACR). And also, my fav lenses – 24/1.4 and 35/1.4 are too expensive compared to Canon. Sure, they’re new, better designs, but that doesn’t justify the price difference imho.
And who am i to say 24MP is more than enough? A MSc in digital image processing and a digital printer as a first job, event photographer as a second job. Enough?
What is needed is quality of the pixels, not its amount. We should have stopped at 16mp for FF and just go in the direction of either higher-DR for portrait/landscape/fashion or higher-ISO for event/journalism. Because from the printing point of view – in real life good 16mp (like in 1Ds2, which is my all time favourite camera) is enough for 99.99% of people. The rest should go the MF way.
You may be right that 24MP FF is more then enough but you should take into account that 36MP does not mean worse ISO results or lower DR. Take a look at DxOmark comparison of A77 and A55. It shows almost the same ISO performance. So more megapixels is not bad for prints. And for marketing it is great ;-).
Oh so Mr MSc in image processing blah blah 1st and photographer 2nd, you probably should apply a job in Sony or Canon and show them the way sensors should be made. Sorry to break you but not just Sony/Nikon are going with this high MP way, Canon will follow suit as well. And you think this is purely for marketing only? Of course, all their R&D must be a bunch of idiots!
Keep this in mind, your style doesn’t need a lot of MP doesn’t mean that others’ don’t. It’ll probably make your days easier.
erm u have no idea how the 24mp of sony sensor really works, even the D3X struggle to get a clean iso3200 which the nikon12mp easily top it off with 6400iso. the 24mp sony sensor werent that ‘leading’ anyway. its pointless for nikon reuse the 24mp when it perform poorer then canon 21 and nikon’s 12mp.
and, 36, seriously, sony is just taunting others that they can lead in sensor size, nothing wrong. so what its 36mp? its not like its lock to 36mp… u have choice to shoot at smaller mp. whats the issue?
Pixel density wise, 16mp on APS-C made a BRILLIANT sensor. 36mp on FF is very similar density..
Plus the inherent full frame benefits
When film was still around, there were lens whore photogs who seem to do nothing but go around buying and collecting lenses that they deem as sharper and sharper. Now here come the MP collectors like yourself.
Give us all a break, mega pixel whore.
DK, Are you chasing after photos or megapixels?. give me a break man, you think the MP we get nowadays isn’t enough? go back to using high iso film and you’ll be running back crying to even the worst dslr sensor performing camera. I’m sure your pics look even better when you use a 50mp sensor someday and your photos can show every single pore on someones face. Camera makers today make stupid needless cameras and lenses because people ask for stupid things.Now we’re up to 12000 iso? come on, what the heck are people shooting , rats running around a dark pub?
I understand what you’re trying to say, by to make a camera to compete with something that’s been out on the market for a long time isn’t the best strategy…. Especially when those cameras are slated to be replaced.
Nikon’s refusal to give people proper video in a DSLR is laughable. I know Nikon are photography folk, but their heads are so up their butts it’s not funny. How long have their clients waited for FF? How long have their clients waited for usable video? How long have their clients waited for a good bright wide angle lens?
Now that 7D/1D4/600D/60D all have 720/60p and all new Sony digicams have 1080/60p, Nikon showing up with a 36mp sensor having a lot of noise and a 1080/30p (maybe finally with manual controls) is kinda childish. Too little too late Nikon, as usual. That 36mp sensor has one good thing that i hope they include – pixel binning to create a great 9mp image in sRAW mode. Now that’s a resolution i can work with for 99% of my work. Make it noise-free up to 6400 and you got yourself a winner Nikon.
You are being completely ridiculous. “Nikon showing up with a 36mp sensor having a lot of noise” ??? HOW DO YOU KNOW THIS??? Have you seen or shoot with the camera???
point is? i bet some iphone apps can get you 1080/60p. so what, should we start making movies with iphones?
will that be very expensive(the sony 36mp ff that one) and around how much?
Please make the 36MPx equivalent to the current 16Mpx sensor in the 5n. Wouldnt mind that sensor in a FF with A77 body and controls.
Same pixel density.
Actually, the pixel density of 36MP FF is lower than 24MP APS-C. In fact the 16MP APS-C matches with 36 MP FF.
They’re have to improve upon a77 controls for me.
Any news on FF NEX? Look forward for it 🙂
Only 36 megapixel? I was hoping for 40-50 instead. There is a great “high resolution/low ISO performance” market out there. So far, Sony has been keeping us happy out here with the A77 but its possible that this new FF 36mp sensor might not be noisy enough for my needs. 🙁
Release in two version please. DSLT and DSLR version…
make it three to include the NEX version. The Zeiss 24mm f/1.8 would be very nice here.
Is the new Zeiss full-frame ready? They need first to release FF-ready lenses before or at the same time as a possible FF NEX version.
Ugh … you’re right! My NEX-5N excellent performance made me forget that I am using an APS-C sensor! It makes me wish that Sony would put this sensor in a NEX-7 body.
The same 16mp sensor but in 36mp full-frame in a NEX-7 type body would be awesome. Sony would not have any full-frame E-mount lens for this but my Nikkor lenses would do just fine.
May be it’ll be “noisy” as a77. Nikon rumors claims “ISO range: 100 – 6400, ISO LO @ 50 and ISO HI-2 @ 25600.”… 36MP it’s almost 50% bigger than 24…may be same technology… in this case a77 it’s really enough for me
Andrea, can you say something about other models? …one with more ISO?
36Mpx equivalent to 16Mpx nex-5n sensor. So 36Mpx is not so bad after all. Although I can live with a even better 24Mpx FF performance.
I hope that´s a joke. Why don´t they make Low-Light FF-Cameras. The A77 body combined with a 12 or 16 megapixel-sensor with low-light performance like the Nikon D3s would be very great and something everyone is waiting for.
I think Sony wants professional photographers to use their cameras, but that´s not the customer base, which creates sales.
Please Mr. Sony, make just a FF version of the A580, 16MP is enough for not PRO, you will kill the amateur / advanced amateur market: super low light performance and FF, that’s all many of us are asking for, not rough MP.
I would prefer OVF over trannslucent, since I won’t need super fast AF in stills or video. Same specs of A580 is enough.
Why Sony doesn’t want to kill the market ??
FF sensor in a penta’mirror’ body? Wouldn’t that be a waste? Don’t you want a pentaprism instead?
OK, pentaprism !! but if Sony doesn’t want pentaprism, go with pentamirror ! I want the possibility to frame without switching on the Camera ? Why ?? because I’m still a film photographer (Minolta 800si, if we could see a digital versione, excellent pentaprism) and I want to see and think before shoot, Fuji Provia costs a lot of money !!
Sony, please do that or I’ll have to sell all my primes gear (Minolta lenses: 20/2.8 RS, 28/2 RS, 35/2 RS (you read right, 35/2 RS, here it is), 50/1.4 RS, 85/1.4 RS, 200/2.8 APO HS, 1.4x II, 2x II).
Sensitivity of CMOS chip is the same if it has 16Mpx or 36Mpx. If you downsize 36Mpx image properly to 16Mpx then you will get the same image. Well not exactly but very close. So only disadvantage of 36Mpx sensor over 16Mpx one is that it takes more processing power and more memory which may limit burst speed.
Please Sony, have translucent mirror lockup on the FF. Hinge it so it actually fits in the up position.
plz let this one have have built in flash!
Even if the only reason is to provide wireless flash sync.
/E
vary rarely if ever will you see a ff camera with a built in flash. Generally professionals and semi pro are going to purchase these sorts of cameras and generally speaking they are going to use off camera lighting. It would just be one more expense that very few would use. As for wireless sync I would rather they work with someone like PocketWizard to bring out pocket wizards that are specifically designed for the alpha line like the PW Flex system they created for Nikon and Canon.
Type Zeiss, it doesn’t hurt, and it expands the FF to the masses, for those willing to pay. I’m not arguing, the amateurs may not really need it for photos, but it may pull in some customers like me for casual family photos, plus I really the wireless control of my Sony HVL-F43AM. I could buy a A77, but I have all FF gear. Why should I be limited. The Dynax 9 had a flash. It adds value, even if you never use it. It differentiates the camera from the competition too.
+1, bcs you always have it with you when you have your camera. Life is bigger than a studio.
Thank you. I couldn’t put it more clearly.
@Aalpha100
I don’t know any serious working photographer who would use on camera flash. With the exception of maybe T. Richards but his style is controversial to say the least. For most semipro to pro photographers its useless in making a compelling image, it is what it is. You are going to use off camera lighting be that a flash gun on a bracket or strobes with off camera triggers. Go youtube any fashion shoot and see if while shooting on location if they are using a pop up flash on a camera. not going to happen. you would lug your lights with you or use reflectors and diffusion to manipulate the natural lighting. it is not something that a pro or semi pro would use and that’s what Sony has tried to aim this line at.
Yeah tough one. The only reason a pro would want an on camera flash is for wireless flash sync. Which may be important. I wanted to rebutt Type_Zeiss argument but it’d just lead to an endless circle.
I guess different market segments do have different needs. And as marketers & designers they have to pick & choose features to put in and leave out.
@P D it adds value AND cost. I say leave it out personally, but I guess that’s me being selfish because I use studio lighting and a triggering system. So I see your point *shrugs*. MAYBE on the a850 replacement add that? a900 make that a pros camera in my opinion, a850 should be along the lines of the 1d mark iv, not that it isn’t a pros camera but it is best suited for journalist and sports photographers. I think things like this is how they should differentiate the a8xx and the a9xx line.
It would be nice to have a built in way to trigger my Sony ‘speed lights’ without having to mount a $400 58am flash on it ONLY to control the other flashes.
That is why i would vote for including a built in pop-up flash on the camera.
@Robby: introducing HVL-F20AM.
j/k.
I’m bored again, waiting for a flight… “Type Zeiss,” I liked the concept behind the a850, only 97% of the a900 viewfinder, and slightly slower fps. That was fine by me. It missed a few other requirements I need. Both cameras lacked some other features I think belong on all cameras, which we will never agree upon. In the end of 2012, If Sony decided to only put out the A99 for Pros, with a OVF but no flash, I would jump ship. If they followed it up, or simultaneously released the A88 or whatever they call it, and it is pretty much the A99+SLT+built in flash, I’m sold. I’ll even go with the OVF, but I think the flash should be there, and so long as those were the only significant differences. I want the pro build. I want the FF Pro IQ, similar to the a77 IQ recently mentioned in Alphamountworld today (7OCT11). For those of you that need the choice, I hope you get it. Same for me. We’ll see what we get. If they really release “3” full-frame cameras in 2012 like SAR has previous speculated, I’m sure we are all going to get what we want.
Another commenter stated that many serious amateurs are willing to pay to use the pro grade cameras. I am in that category. I have a P&S for when I don’t care as much about IQ. In the last 8 years, I, like many others, have become comfortable enough with pro features and feel that I am fully capable of handling, and benefiting from A99 quality hardware. I am sure the A77 would suit me just fine, but I know the full-frame will perform better in low light, and other challenging situations. I want to be “capable” and think I’m close enough, that I can benefit. I planned this path all along by only ever purchasing the FF lenses. I’m not alone in that line of thinking.
I would estimate, more “serious amateurs” purchase the pro-grade cameras than “Professional Photographers.” I make this statement based on my own observations. I have seen a number of DSLR toting parents in my kids’ “Middle income” private school. Very rarely do I see any of them using the consumer grade cameras. Most have A850, D300, D700, Canon 5D, 7D cameras. Once in a while I’ll see the Nikon D90, and other more appropriate style of cameras. Also, it is a little shocking how many of them are Mothers of students. The other common theme is, they are learning the camera quality counts. I have watched many of them upgrade from the consumer grade DSLRs, as their children get older, and they get more proficient. The movement is spreading rapidly. It will be interesting to see if a deviation happens, with the new, smaller NEX style cameras. The NEX-7 early sales numbers are quite eye opening, compared to the A77 pre-orders, per this website. The camera seems to be one item that consumers are willing to pay for the better grade of hardware, as they consider the family photos priceless. Not to mention, Facebook is so much the place to show off your children, and it is the #1 website by quantity of photos alone. Next time you attend a private school high school graduation, look around at the DSLR hardware. You won’t believe your eyes when you realize what you see. I was very surprised.
Please note, I still believe in the “Pro Photographer.” I recently hired one for family photos this summer. I acknowledge that a pro can have a much better sense of the art, than a motivated parent.
Ah, my plane has just pulled up. I hope everyone gets what they want in 2012.
LOL @ on-camera flash
As for triggering wireless flashes, you can get $25 triggers from ebay if you’re desperate that will do that
In this perspective the a900/a850 made almost no sense.
why release a low-cost FF, cleary aimed at advanced amateurs,
and drop features that Pro’s doesn’t care about.
There seems to be some kind of fear for not being seen as serious if it has a flash.
But most Pro’s should be able to turn it off.
Some may argue that having a mic and not a flash is strange thing on a camera, but YMMV. 🙂
Also, when selling then camera off a few years a later, I think it can hit a larger target audience if it has a built in flash.
I would consider a (used) a850/900 if it wasn’t for the lack of flash.
low-cost doesn’t mean low-quality. Their budget is just smaller than Nikon’s.
What has T-mobile got better than AT&T & Verizon? Price. At least that was the situation when I got into a contract /w T-mobile 7 years ago. Think of it like that.
E, that’s terrible logic. You’d consider a used >$1500 camera if it had a popup flash? Get PT04 triggers off amazon or ebay. They cost $25, sit on hotshoe or plug into sync port and will trigger 58am or any other flash.
And triggering strobes with a popup flash is rubbish anyway. Unreliable, gets blocked by obstacles, doesn’t work at a distance.
As for using the popup to light subject.. no.. just no.
I don’t see it this way.
Used it will cost less than $1500.
And if this is the camera I have I would like to be able to carry it with me as a one piece kit at times.
It doesn’t mean that I wouldn’t bring my flashes in other occasions.
( And I have these triggers already)
But having to by a new flash just to be able to use these as wireless is a problem as it in the reality makes the camera $400 more expensive.
If you have triggers, why would you need to buy an extra flash? :-/
I’d rather have an in-built radio trigger like a pocketwizard built into Sony cameras and flashes. If it could do high speed sync that would be amazing and it would sell to all the strobist guys.
+1
If there’s one thing Sony needs to improves upon the A900/850, that’s the inclusion of built-in flash.
Buy a Sony flash, built in flashes have a tendency to be less then good.
Good or bad, depends on how you use it.
And built-in flash is for wireless triggering than anything.
Ah, I see what you’re talking about.
or just a wireless/infrared flash sync. I must say I do not miss the flash on my A900, except when using it off camera (wireless flash).
+1 more
Exactly my thought! Please, for the same reason, at a minimum! Wireless flash sync, and convenience would sell me completely. That is my biggest hang up on the A900. It makes having one detachable flash much more interesting.
/S
I may be wrong but AFAIK one of the reasons those top cameras don’t have flash is because it takes up too much space for the viewfinder.
Since it’s going to be an electronic one, I see no practical reason for Sony not adding an onboard flash for the A99.
that and the fact they are PRO cameras and you would not use flash on camera, it makes a image look flat and uncompelling.
The primary reason you want built-in flash on a Sony FF pro camera is for wireless flash control. It’s also got a use as a “fill-in” flash, or where you need to take informal photos quickly. Even serious photographers sometimes have top do that…
THAT!
Lol I think we agree on this. Seems like everything comes down to that point.
@Steve Jones again we are talking pro photographers, not some person shooting pictures at their kids birthday party. I am talking people who get paid to take photos i.e. professionals and they do not want or need pop up flash, other wise cameras that are marketed to professionals would have it. No professional is clamoring for that. As I said, the a9xx is geared toward a working pro, not a serious hobbiest. There is a difference, a huge one.
@Type Zeiss
I don’t think thing the A900 is targeted primarily at professional photographers. I would place a good bet that the number of sales to amateur photographers (by which I means people who do not make a significant income from photography) far outweighs sales to professionals. Among other things, there isn’t a full range of lenses or support services.
wow 36 is huuuuge resolution (honestly i think they would have been better off with GOOD 18 mpx…), 36 is more that i would ever need, if they’re able to maintain the great iso performance of the D700 or at least come close, it will be a winner, otherwise, i’m saving up for a used D3S probably the best digital workhorse camera ever made, huge sensor, high sensitivity and a relatively ‘low’ pixel count are hard to beat… even in the future imo…
That’s ridiculous, who needs 36Mpx ? for do what ? giant Photo print ?
keep 21Mpx is enough and do better noise reduction, and video quality, like 4k 5k video with 60 or 120 f/s.
where’s the evidence? show me the 10PM APS-C sensor that is better than nex-5N. Besides pixel density is a bit of a myth. as its easier to process large pixel density. so you get more noise in raw but can processes it more efficiently. So size is all that counts for noise. So FF 36 MP should be a lot better than nex-5n or D7000. So why less pixels. I have always said logical choice for FF is 2 sensors one 36MP and one up to 54MP.
where’s the evidence? show me the 10MP APS-C sensor with the today technology !, don’t compare a 5 year old Reflex with 2011 nex5N, see the new Sony F3 video camera, there is 2 Mpx only on APS-C sensor and see the picture a 30DB !!!! (24600iso)there is no noise ! and huge dynamic, No the pixel density is not a myth ! tell me when 36MP will be usefull ?
Why are you telling people that 36mp isn’t useful to THEM? Stick to what YOU want from a camera for YOUR photography needs.
You have no idea what you’re talking about. Please do yourself a favour and be quiet, don’t embarrass yourself.
+1
Evidence:
I have an A500 and an older A700.
Both have 12Mpix CMOS sensors.
Guess what?
The A500 has far less noise than the A700.
With the 500 I have no problem pushing the ISO to 1600 or 3200 in bad lighting – 3200 is a disaster on the A700 in case of dark/bad lighting.
It’s like the Nex-5N sensor is better than the A580/A55 one.
The fabrication method is improved.
If SONY were to make a FF 12Mpix today with the technology that they have, it would probably really have ISO in the hundreds of thousands.
If your A700 can’t handle 3200, you’re the disaster, not the camera itself.
Do you really think SONY engineers are so incompetent that they would not improve sensitivity of CMOS sensor per area if it was possible with real world constraints? I mean R&D budget, physics etc. Ha
“for do what ? giant Photo print ?”
Yes, and also for archival recording of paintings and other art work.
Industrial photography for big boardroom prints is another possibility. And all the jobs that medium format film cameras were used for.
But a NEX camera format would be more useful as it can be treated as a film back, for example with the Novoflex bellows to give a digital studio/architectural camera with movements.
http://www.novoflex.com/en/products/macro-accessories/bellows-systems/tilt-shift-bellows/
Thanks, Don Cox, I hadn’t seen the Novoflex T/S before. Looks like it could be very useful for table top/product shots.
I am more worried about the SLT tech in FF. People buy FF for the best IQ. You won’t get that with a light grabbing mirror in front of the sensor.
IMO Sony should have stuck with a traditional design at least for FF cameras.
I have no problems with a SLT mirror in APS-C cameras as for the majority of the people who use APS-C cameras they do not print huge where the IQ loss of the SLT mirror will cause any noticeable problem.
The Sony will be cheaper than the Nikon. The Sony is bringing FF into the mainstream by reducing costs such as those caused by OVF.
However, I agree with the IQ issue – Sony should allow a lockup mode, albeit with reduced FPS.
The actual effects SLT has on “IQ” shouldn’t effect “serious” shooters. It’s really just the lack of OVF that worries most shooters in this area.
http://thesybersite.com/sony/a55/index.htm#slt_mirror_image_quality
What are you talking about? The effects are clearly visible. And as resolution increases, the effects probably will get worse.
Resolution increase will not have negative impact on IQ. A77 proves it. See DxOmark results.
We’re looking at the same thing, you clearly have a different point of view. I don’t think the loss of detail is an issue personally, you can only see it when comparing 100% crops – which generally means nonesense. If that keeps you up at night, then I can’t help.
Hinged SLT will result in manufacturing costs the same as the normal SLR. I prefer the cheaper SLT with little loss of light. There’s a reason why flash was invented.
Brendon,
Ease your mind. I was suspicious too. You should try it out when it arrives. I just bought an A33, which has much less EVF resolution than the A77. It is pretty impressive. Don’t judge the A99 based on your understanding of physics, especially before it is even released. The A77 is reviewed as being much better. Read the PopPhoto review of the A77. About the only argument against it was that occasionally it wasn’t ready when they brought the camera up to their eye. That can be fixed. Their opinion of the EVF was complimentary. The added features they can lay on top of the EVF really sold me after I realized it was acceptable, and quite workable, especially if they made more improvements, which will be inevitable on the A99.
I used my SLT-A33 at a sporting event for kids this weekend. It can more than do the job. The A99, can only be better, or it will get destroyed by consumers/professionals alike.
just curious that if D800 is with 36MP, then how many MP is with D4? and will Sony share that sensor and use it in their FF models as well? then is there a new flagship over A9x?
as long sony can make a new good full frame camera with high dynamite range, low noise ability and good detail, internal pop up flash, tilt way and live view LCD and large buffer i will be happy ^^
Any idea about its price??
Did I see the words “new lenses”? I think I did. Rad.
Nope, that was all in your head. Sony and new lenses? I don’t think so! 😀
+1 . Sony is usually on the ‘One-new-lens-a-year plan.’ I guess they splashed-out and made TWO new lenses for 2012. Wow, Sony, you sure you can handle this lens release speed ?! 😉
So they’ve actually decided on SLT for the next full-frame model? Very sad indeed 🙁
Why is that sad? If they can improve the viewfinder and SLT technology as Sony did from the A55 to the A77 to a new A?? I think it would be a pretty nice camera.
If you want an OVF, you’ll have to get the Nikon. Sony have abandoned DSLR’s in favour of DSLT.
True, but switching brands is a lot of hassle. I’ve only ever used a-mount, so would prefer Sony to just give us “choice”, like they do with the lower models. The last I heard, Sony was waiting for feedback on the A77 before making a decision on SLT for FF or not.
I hope they don’t copy the A77 ergonomics (ala a700~a900), that would be awful. One would hope they would step up ergonomics for a newer 9 series, ie improve upon the a900 rather than break it down further (like they did with the a700-a77).
The only problem is that offering choice isn’t always good. It increases costs, plus it adds confusion. People will end up unhappy.
“Oh but the EVF model has a faster burst rate
But the OVF model has extra 1/3 stop of light
I’ll just buy neither.”
That’s what often happens with too many models. Production cost higher too. Asking price even higher!
If Nikon will get only 4 FPS and Sony will have a SLT mirror, there would be a distinct advantage to the Sony for those pros wanting some decent FPS speed.
+1 I agree.
Maybe they have a deal about this.
I would love to see a FF 16MPx with low noise up to ISO 3200 rather than 36MPx that can’t be used above ISO 800. I shoot a lot of low-light events and for my shooting I need high ISO,great IQ FF camera. One day SLT will be the norm, but today the technology isn’t matured enough for me to buy a FF with it. If that is all Sony is offering, our relationship will becoming to a quick end.
Have to say mate, I don’t think SLT will be the future, hopefully one day they can integrate AF on the sensor and do away with all that flappy bullshit altogether, I mean come on Nikon it’s 2012 look at all of our other technological innovations and you still have mechanical bits in your cameras that wear out! Until they do that I’m happy with the 1/3 stop tradeoff of SLT, I just hope they can make this 36MP sensor is nearly as good as the D700 at high ISO and if it’s not good at 36MP then I hope it offers pixel binning to 12MP with low light high ISO performance eclipsing the D3S. Even with my fast sharp 1.4 Zeiss primes shooting at over ISO800 loses me far too much detail on the A55!
Nikon did just that on the Nikon V1. By integrating PDAF with the sensor, the V1 with the proper lens can be very fast focusing. Someone in Nikon has even claimed that it is faster than the D3s despite the slow lenses now available.
Sony should get out of SLT – or provide a mirror-up option for its pellicle mirror.
Good to know stone thanks, maybe on sensor PDAF for Sony is Andreas suprise!! We can only hope!
“I would love to see a FF 16MPx with low noise up to ISO 3200 rather than 36MPx that can’t be used above ISO 800. ”
I am just the opposite. I could use a full frame camera with 36 Mpix (or preferably more)giving a high definition image at low ISO in good light.
If I wanted to shoot in low light, I would prefer a small camera, something like a 10Mpix P&S but with a few years worth of technical improvement in high ISO performance over the best current small-sensor models.
What about 36 MP and pixel binning option?
+1 – Don’t give up resolution for high ISO.
I am just praying there are two models SLT and SLR I’ll buy OVF one!
Even if the A99 EVF turns out to be better than an OVF?
An EVF better that the A900 OVF??? That’s a very high target to achieve IMHO… Let’s see…
You are missing the point. People are dismissing the EVF before having even read about it, never mind reading a review.
No. You misunderstood me. I am not dismissing it at all. I am just saying that the A900 OVF was so good & critically acclaimed, that it will be a hard target to beat. That’s all…
I would love to see an IMAX (Relative) size EVF on the new A99.
I didn’t say YOU were dismissing it, it was aimed at people like “@900 wedding potag”. For all we know the A99 could far exceed an OVF, yet it is already being dismissed as crap!
“An EVF better that the A900 OVF???”
I hope their goal is to best the A900 OVF. In fact, I’m counting on it. If not, what is the point? Sony must do this to silence the critics, and show Nikon and Canon, they are not innovating.
I love the A900 OVF. Four years after it was released there is still nothing better than it. Just because it is the current “Best” doesn’t mean it cannot be bested. They have had 4 years to figure it out. That is an eternity in the electronic world. Plus they have had several iterations to work out the kinks. SLT A33/55, SLT A35, NEXes, and SLT A77 (the best yet).
The future A99 must unseat the A900 to win over CaNikon pros/consumers. Think about Sony’s goals. They want professionals to use their equipment as their primary. To do that, they know they need to offer something significantly better. The viewfinder is their best asset. It is in their best interest to WOW us all.
Last thought, the lack of a prism and mirror, means Sony has a lot more physical room to fit some fantastic technology in the viewfinder.
I want options “sonyA77” REAL Pro’s who make their living off this camera cant afford to lose light through SLT or have any lag through a oled viewfinder. Anti shake and ziess brought me over to sony. I like most real pros need a bullet proof body and better ISO/ D-range improvements. I could care less about live view or a pop up flash!?
@900 wedding potag
You are so far up your own arse with the “real pros” bullshit. If the 36mp sensor performs as well as the 24mp in the A900 you lose NOTHING but gain more MP and the advantages that SLT brings.
It’s unbelievable that you are already criticising a camera that DOES NOT EXIST YET!
Stop with the pro crap, it just makes you look an idiot.
To back up Gimp in his response to @900 wedding potag, you should really consider the PopPhoto review.
The Canon 7D is arguably a semi-pro camera. Same for the D300S. PopPhoto compared the A77 to them. It performed very competitively, and bested them both in several of the technical performance specs. That is to be expected in a next Gen model. The next Nikon or Canon, may or may not best the A77, but know they will have time to work on it, until their versions come out. The A77 it is arguably better, per PopPhoto.
You State “…this camera can’t afford to lose light through SLT or have any lag through a oled viewfinder”
Well if you read the review the A77 was equal to, or faster than the above two in shutter lag. And they were unable to discern any significant light loss due to the pellicle mirror.
Light loss? In fact, the color was better (7.2) than the D300s (6.8), and the Canon 7D(7.0). Which they even downplayed the A77 as within the noise of such a test, meaning they are pretty much equal. I’m just not hearing any substance to your concern about the light loss. They seem to have figured this out pretty well.
Alright, lag you say? Or focusing in the dark maybe? They answer that too, with a quote: “The EOS 7D was able to focus at EV -2, but at all other light levels in our test, it was slower than the Sony. Nikon’s D300s was able to focus in 0.93 sec at EV -1, but as with the Canon, Sony’s A77 proved faster at all other light levels.”
From this report, there is no evidence that the Pellicle-mirror design is flawed in technical performance when used in a D-SLR. My engineering background tells me that since it is an EVF, Sony does not need to divert as much light as an OVF (Canon lost ~2/3 with their EOS-1NR), would have required, since they can amplify the slight amount of diverted EVF video, and very easily regain any portion of lost stop with Anti-Shake, and a little digital image processing in camera.
You also care about D-Range. Don’t you find it funny that Nikon, Canon, and all others omit control of this feature? I bet your A900 having it really helps reduce your “Missed Shots” for your Wedding photographer business. It just keeps getting better too!
If none of the above is helpful, just consider this: When the camera comes out, wait and see how it compares to the competition. No one is forcing your to give up your @900 and jumping to Nikon. If it works for you, stick to it. Odds are, the A99 will best it, provide you much more value/$ and give you features that expand your photo options for increased sales revenue. Seeing has how the photography business is less about the camera, and more about the photographer, it is unlikely that the A99 will hold you back in any way.
Sure, now comes the “Shut up Fanboy.” To be honest, I don’t actually care who makes my camera. I stuck with Sony because I got pretty good with a few of their FF lenses. It gets me where I want to go. I took a long look at, but passed on buying a Nikon D700 earlier this year, in favor of seeing what Sony offers up in the FF arena. Out of necessity, I bought a SLT-A33 for the wife, and I now see where Sony is going with this stuff. It has a future. They are really onto something. They are also pulling out all the stops to close the gap on Canon and Nikon, and it shows in the “Feature per dollar” department. So I’m willing to wait. I have a working camera, I’m not in a hurry. If Nikon makes a better product for my usage scenario, I won’t blink an eye. I read their rumors sight too. But haven’t posted yet, since I’m a Sony user. Either way, yes, I am excited to see what Sony puts out in January. No I’m not a pro photographer. I take lots of family photos, and sports photos, for my own fun.
In your case, I think you will find great success in your Sony/Nikon wedding career. I think you are just anxious over the stress of switching camps, if you deem it “Must” happen. Your A900 is such a tank, it will probably out live you, so I don’t think you need to worry. It will forever be popular on ebay, due to that amazing “one of a kind” viewfinder. Used ones currently sell for ~$2100 on ebay. I think you are good! I need to get a life…
Thanks for the post SAR! This one made my day.
Well said P D and gimp
And a lot of pros use total crap gear, because to them it’s just a tool, and any purchase is a business expense. So they get by on budget stuff.
For years Zack Arias was shooting a mix of Canon and Nikon because he couldn’t afford to fully invest in either system. He was using cheap stuff too – consumer lenses, Nikon D70 etc.
Even now he’s still not using top stuff like a D3X.. it’s not worth the money.
If the IQ on an A99 EVF is absolutely superb, I would be willing to get it, but I have my doubts that it will be. 36MPx is wonderful, but for me IQ is the critical criteria, not MPx or EVF. I think like most of us, bells and whistles are great, but the end product is a picture that looks beautiful. I don’t care of technologically advance a camera is, if it takes horrible pictures, it’s a horrible camera.
Think for a moment if it’s a horrible camera, or it’s the photographer that is horrible?
i believe what phantasm86 trying to say is, “even if the one behind the camera is a good photographer who knows how to properly take pictures, if the picture rolls out bad in quality wise (not photography wise(angle,exposure etc.)) its not something anyone could use”
who knows… i could be getting the wrong meaning, but for all i care, you all just talk mostly about its 36 mpix, how its not useful or useful…
just get out and take picture… let the company do the tech war… we’re the one getting the benefit anyway
Gimp
@900 wedding potag is right! and your post doesn’t even make sense.
Maybe you should let the grown up’s talk. What are you really upset with “real pros” posting their thoughts and values or the fact that you still live in your parents basement.
It doesn’t make sense to you. Makes perfect sense to me.
Want mirror lock up.
Entered in the record 😀 Me too
Me 3. SLT in the day, manual-focus +peaking at night.
Me 3. SLT in the day, manual-focus + peaking at night.
Double post, whelp;
Sorry.
Seriously? What mirror do you want to lock up? After the A77 do you really think the A99 will be a traditional mirror?
The Pellicle style mirror doesn’t move. That is the advantage. No mirror slap, highest possible FPS, less sensor dust, constant focusing in between shots, easy video focusing, and viewfinder screen swaps are put out into the pasture. Those are the selling points. I don’t think you will ever need MLU again…
OK perfect this is exactly what I was hoping for! FF SLT at hopefully a good price (~$2000) with same pixel density as NEX5n for great iso handling. Pair that with a Zeiss 85 and 135 and a good zoom and I am good to go!
Now the question is, do I wait for the FF, or go ahead and get the a77 and ebay it later??? Probably won’t depreciate that much within a few months. Or maybe I should get the NEX-7 instead, I wonder which would hold its value better, any ideas???
The new Nikon sounds like a nice camera.
All three, Nikon, Canon and Sony have made little real improvements in IQ for several years now, so I for one can’t wait to see what the new level of professional cameras can do.
So Canon, what are you planning?
Look, if the big three (yes, I include Sony) can develop 35mm format camera bodies that produce images equaling the mid format digital back studio camera that costs 30k plus that has the ease of use we have come to expect and see in the new a77, and if necessary has ISO no better than my current a850 I’m ready today to spend $3,000 to $5,000 USD.
Mpix isnt everything. Whats separating MF and 35mm cameras is sensor size (and thats why it cost so much). You wont get MF look from any 35mm camera, unless you stitch few photos together.
Well, Im curious how it will work in real world. Sony should do new kit lens for that A99, cause only Zeiss will match 36 mpix now (maybe some macro lens too).
Owning the 5D Mark II, I can tell you that I would love the additional ~15 Megapixels for Portraits, Landscapes, and Commercial Jobs. Sometimes I need to Pano things, and/or crop and both would benefit from higher resolution. Especially hardcore editing in Photoshop etc..
That being said, I wish Sony had another FF SLR camera on the market in the $2500 dollar range besides the a900. Make the new 36mp camera in the $4500 range if you have to Sony, but Please Pro’s need a Competitive FF SLR for the Studio Now!!
Question for Sony: If I were to Upgrade from the Canon 5D Mark II, what would you recommend in your product line??
Please don’t tell me I’d be better off sticking with Canon or Nikon for another year or 2?? Come on Sony?
Perhaps they just don’t think the market is there due to a900 sales or something?
Just my .02 cents 😉
Jay
On Full Frame you’d be better off sticking with Canon or Nikon, the Sony lens line-up alone should tell you that. 😀
If you need general lenses, Sony is better than Canon. If you want long tele or specialistic lenses go to Canon. Range from 16mm-200mm is covered by the current lenses.
Not including after market don’t forget. Sigma makes a few awesome Telephotos for the A-mount – Sigma 300mm F2.8 EX APO DG HSM etc… Not L-glass quality but still really good.
But, like you say, it’s not L glass. 😀
I know I know 😉 There is enough lenses to do the job though, not as many, but enough!! The 70-200 f/2.8 can cover a lot. Add a few primes and a wide angle and I’m there! I really am ready to jump ship, but I just can’t yet.
Jay
I don’t believe that Sony will ever get “there” with pro lenses, they will focus on NEX lenses. If I wasn’t an amateur APS-C shooter I would have a canikon full frame in a heart-beat, I would not heavily invest in Sony full frame and lenses.
Your annoying, you don’t have a clue what your talking about. I left canon so that I could have the amazing line of zeiss primes and zooms 16-35 f2.8 24-70 f2.8 85 f1.4 and 135 f1.8 hands down the best primes not to mention the absurdity good 70-200 2.8G all PRO lens.
Keep dreaming @900
@ @ 900 Wedding Photog, don’t waste your breath buddy. Clearly a couple of these wnkers don’t have a clue why ppl like us wedding pros came to Sony. SLTA77 clearly has no idea what it feels like to capture that perfect moment with that dreamy 3d bokeh and “Zeiss” effect. Or the fact that you can shoot STABALISED @f1.4 which NO other system offers!
@SLTPro
You need the stabilisation because you can’t boost the ISO as you can on a Nikon.
Rubbish. The noise performance isn’t *THAT* different between Sony and Nikon
The stabilising gives you 2-4 stops advantage in shutter speed, which I totally agree with from the three Sony cameras I have. ISO improvements with a Nikon are nowhere near four whole stops.
@SLTA77 Yes, partly true but the stabalisation gives you a far bigger advantage (2-3 stops) than the 1 stop improvement in noise Nikon has over Sony, one of the reasons I switched. In fact if you look at fair comparison A900 and D3X or A55 and D7000 it’s more like 1/2 to 3/4 of a stop. It’s always better to shoot at the lowest possible ISO to give you appropriate shutter regardless of how well your camera shoots high iso!
I would think that it would be in Sony’s best interest to introduce a set of new high quality optics and freshen up the Zeiss product to take best advantage of 36mp and better sensors and include the same moisture resistant technologies developed for the a77.
I think most of us really use only use 4 or 5 favorite lenses, so a company the size of Sony/Zeiss should not have a problem releasing maybe 7 or 8 new lenses that replace as many in the current catalog that have all of the modern coatings, motors, build quality and optical performance equaling the best from Nikon and Canon.
And Sony, decide on one color for your telephoto lenses and stick with it.
White, silver, black………don’t care but please decide 😉
Quality not quantity my friend. I still make my fellow Canikon buddies speechless with the results I get from my Zeiss and Minolta lenses on the A850 and A55, I have tried the entire range of equivalent Nikkor primes and they just do not have that magical Zeiss quality (in fact they don’t come close to Zeiss) or that dreamy Minolta look I get with my 50 and 35. These are all full frame lenses. What they are truly missing (and I speak only as wedding tog and not a journalist) is amongst the pro prime lens category They HAVE TO BRING OUT that mind blowing 35mm Zeiss in AF format, also a 24mm 1.4 and a 50mm 1.2 would be great.
+1
I thought that’s what I said
I use Zeiss 85/f1.4, 135/f1.8, 16-35/f2.8 and 24-70/f2.8
I think that’s quality and not quantity
I was saying that Sony needs to fressen up the 85 and 135 with new motors and coatings and make them all moisture resistant
And add the three or for new optics like the ones you listed
I don’t think that is too many, do you?
I’m a corporate and contract photographer….don’t do weddings, kids or pets unless the client tells me to, so I do a great deal of stuff on the street so build and moisture is important.
Sony/Zeiss are cheaper than Canon or Nikon and as good if not better and so i’m happy to pay for the quality.
I’m still using Minolta glass I got in 1986 so I see good lenses as an investment.
Hey SRL, sorry man we double posted. Agree with you 100percent, i’d love the combo of weatger sealed ssm and the sonar/planar optics. Once Sony start taking us pros seriously with a new FF then hopefully these upgrades will come!
Guys, Zeiss in MF is available for CaNikon. And not all Zeiss lenses are exceptional vis-a-vis the competition.
Consider that the Samyang 35mm f/1.4 in Nikon and Canon mount has less CA than the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 in the same mount when shooting wide-open. Zeiss has some good lenses like the 100mm f/2.0 but the new Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 for CaNikon is a miss. A friend bought the Nikon 35mm f/1.4 and the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4. He retained his Nikon, and returned the Zeiss and got a Samyang 35mm f/1.4 for video use.
I think that barely 2% of Sonys customers need SUCH a high end camera. Really… youd better stick with canon…
Sony needs to differ from the competition! Thats why they wont use OVF anymore. Just because Canon and Nikon, especially Nikon, will have nearly the same products.
Sony has a very smart concept i have to admit. They try to differ. Thats why DSLTs are on the run.
My bet is the A99 or 95 or whatever, will cost around $2000-2500.
Sony will try to “kill” Canons and Nikons FF cameras with low price and high FPS rates. But they will NOT try to gain pro consumers at all.
They will try to catch those: i always wanted to go FF but geez, its too expensive and you always have to make shortcommings (5DMkII: high res, high IQ but very crappy AF; D700: nice cam but simply “out of date” with its 12MPix). I know that the D700 is still on one level, but to be honest, i did not buy one because i thought, it IS pretty old fashioned and there will come new models soon.
Agree. SLT can reduce cost, so finally an affordable FF! Again!
Thomas.. get an a850. It’s the cheapest full frame out there. It’s high MP, the AF is simple but far better than 5d2. It’s very reliable and accurate. The center focus point will lock anything at all.
850 also has higher dynamic range than a 5d2, so that’s good for landscapes etc
Maybe you’ll say “out of date” but I bought one 6 months ago and haven’t missed a thing. No live view or video, but damn the images it produces are stunning. And the viewfinder is so massive (bigger than a 5d2 too) that shooting it is an absolute pleasure.
Jay
There are pros using the a900 who submit work to the likes of Elle, Vogue, L’homme and many other publications so I don’t see why you could not use the a900.
Matthew Jordan Smith fashion/editorial/beauty photographer shoots with the a900 http://mjs-exp.com/
Brian Smith Editorial Photographer shoots with the a900 http://briansmith.com/
Nigel Barker shoots with the a900
Grant Thomas fashion photographer shoots with the a850 http://www.jedroot.com/photogr/gt1/thomas-bio.php
There is a amazing sports photog whose name escapes me right now, he is shooting with the a900. If I remember his name I will post it up.
There are many others, just do a google search. The only complaint I have with the a900 is the high iso performance. There was one photographer from Italy, fashion photographer, he was shooting with the a900 and actually switched to the 5d Mark II because of the poor ISO performance. So here is to hoping they sort that out
RDOE said it well. For general lenses Sony probably is better.. a lot of them are new designs by Zeiss. If you need specialist stuff like ultra-tele, stick with Canon.
Honestly, the 24-70 is much better than the Canon L equivalent
16-35 also much better than the L equivalent
The 135 1.8 is one of the sharpest lenses around too, and 1/3 stop faster than the L
84 1.4 is good too, though is without a focus motor still better than Canon 1.2 at focusing.
70-200 is very good too – probably on a par with the Canon version
24mm is “only” f2, not 1.4 like Canon
We are still lacking a really good 50 though.. hopefully one of the upcoming lenses.
And don’t forget that ALL images are stabilised. So that’s stabilised 1.4 prime lens, stabilised zooms.. everything.
The top end stuff is amazingly good. And there’s entry level stuff too. What’s lacking is mid-range.. 16-35/f4, 70-200/f4, 35/f2 etc.
But if you’re going straight for the good stuff, you’re golden!
D800 4fps. SERIOUSLY???
Still RUMOR.
What’s wrong with “only” 4fps on full frame at 36mp?
Numbers sell. Sadly.
If a 2 year old a900 could do 5fps at 24 megapixels, why a newer body which technically should have better technology shoot at such slow rates?? Not forgetting to mention the hefty price tag…
But what’s wrong with “only” 4fps?
Probably because the D4 will be 8fps or something. I’m sure the D800 will be prosumer that doesn’t use the fps a lot and the D4 will be more for actual pros. Can’t make them too similar.
what kind of computer do i need to run 36mpix RAW file?
or batch processing full size Jpeg?
need to budget myself for a computer upgrade too : )
at first, i think it’s a little bit too much, but if it has the same density as 16mpix on a APSC, then that sounds better; i could just shoot with lower size 24mpix? if my computer can’t handle it, lol
yeah, Sony, please make a 24-105L or 24-120 F4 VR equivalent please.
can’t wait to shoot FF video with full time Phase detection AF
“what kind of computer do i need to run 36mpix RAW file?”
I have an old G3 that is used with a scanner. It can happily handle 50 or 60 Mpix files.
Almost any recent computer will do fine. You might want a network storage drive.
Yeah, but what’s the wait time on your G3? Can you still edit photos of that scale on that computer? I have a C2D iMac and even 16MP lags in Lightroom or Photoshop. Even with HD storage at $50/TB, not a lot of people want to invest in more harddrive space. It’s just more crap to hook up, network, plug in, clean up, backup, etc…
It’s the way of the world.
I bet people bitched when floppy drives went
And again when they stopped putting DVD drives in laptops
Don’t limit progress with such silly little restrictions like hard drive space at $50/tb!
This is wholly believable, if only because it’s utterly logical. Take the 16MP sensor, scale it to FF (2.25x the area), you get 36MP. Now take the A77 body (which surely has been designed from the start with space for FF) and fit the new sensor. Put in an FF shutter and some warmed over electronics and you’ve got yourself a 6 FPS FF camera for minimal engineering effort.
The AF will, of course, cover only the central part of the frame, but that’s no different to the A900.
Compared to the A77 this will give you about a stop improvement in performance. It will beat the A900/A850/D3x and come in at price about 50% above the A77. What is called a no-brainer.
Full-frame is heating up again. But now the competition is coming strong from the medium format world, or at least it’s starting to with Pentax and a supposedly now price aware Hasselblad.
I have full confidence in Sony right now. Their break into MILC/DSLR/SLT shows they have some cojones. At the start they didn’t know which market to focus in but I believe a strong lineup is forming and will mature. The whole lens lineup for their two mounts will need some work though.
I would wait for Photokina 2012, but I’m sure to be purchasing a Sony FF, along with a NEX-7 and the Ricoh GXR M Module. This will be my biggest system purchase in years, and it’s something I’ve been mulling over for quite a while. Don’t let me down Sony.
Now your talking!!
Really, if Sony reps did read this site they’d tell the “big guys”: HEY, STOP that megapixel race, already!
What does Sony want? Compete with MF cameras? Kodak is about to go bankrupt, just buy their stuff and start producing real MF cameras, then!
Question to Andrea: does the A99 will offer any significant changes/improvements over the A77 *cough cough… better high ISO… *cough cough* or will it be simply an A77 on megapixel steroids? (much like the A900 was compared to the A700)
Didn’t your sources make ANY comments about that “ISO of hundreds of thousands” thing? I think many people would like to know where did Sony go wrong :p
I don’t suppose that you know that the A900/850 has better high ISO performance than ALL currently produced APS-C cameras?
/facepalm
We will never actually know since neither the A900 nor the D3x go beyond ISO 6400.
But it is to be expected that a FF sensor performs better than an APS-C sensor, after all.
It’s like comparing an APS-C to a m4/3.
+1! “This camera is two times better than that one, because it has two times more MPs”… :))
It seems never ending discussions about Mpix.
On Bayer 36 Mpix is only 9Mpix after all. Other pixels are interpolated. Another thing is APS-C and FF area difference is 2 times (not 1.5) and therefore 36Mpix on FF is equivalent to 18 Mpix on APS-C, which is practically the same as Nex5n with DPR Gold award.
36 MPix on FF is actually equivalent to 16MP on APS-C. That’s because the area difference is 1.5 x 1.5 = 2.25 for a 1.5 x crop factor sensor.
So basically this is the same pixel density as the best performing APS-C sensor at high ISO. That is the Sony 16MP sensor.
AFAIK about sensors a 36MP bayer sensor has 36*4=144 million RGBG photosites and not 36/4=9 million effective pixels. interpolation takes place on foveons not bayers.
eb 164, The raw output of Bayer-filter cameras is referred to as a Bayer pattern image. Since each pixel is filtered to record only one of three colors, the data from each pixel cannot fully determine color on its own. To obtain a full-color image, various demosaicing algorithms can be used to interpolate a set of complete red, green, and blue values for each point.
NEX-5n APS-C 23.4 x 15.6 mm = 365mm2
Sony A900 FF 36 x 24 mm = 864mm2
Have to agree difference is larger 2.37 then FF 36Mpix is 15.2Mpix on APS-C.
“pixel is filtered to record only one of three colors”
each pixel has 4 photosites a red-filtered, a blue-filtered and 2 green-filtered.
a 36 mp image is the combination of 3 36mp b&w images. not 4 9mp images
Wouldn’t it be nice if Sony offers the sensor to Nikon and as a trade Nikon provides the On-Sensor AF technology.
That would give us a mirrorless FF SLT…
Then, surely, the MLU disussions would end 🙂
seriously …36mpx 4fps….
im gonna need frekkiing SKYNET to edit these files…
ffs…stop with this idiotic MP Race…give us more FPS more BUFFER …more IQ per the already MP we have …a 200K iso would be all i need in life.
You need the surprise element first. (36MP) The rest, work it out later.
D800 ~$4199 A99 ~$4299 😀
Admin,
Possible to get spec for all FF and price like what you hve did the good job for A77 on last year 🙂
Um, that’s what this whole article is about. Don’t you think if he had more specs and price he would post it?
a99 with pixel binning to yield clean 8mp high iso images would rock.
as for slt lockup, it occurs to me that sony could have the mirror slide up and back to avoid hitting the lens elements… or better yet, slide sideways out of the way, though both methods use up valuable space…
maybe replacement slt mirrors that change the light ratio… or future slt mirror upgrades to back port slt improvements to older slt cameras..
This WOULD be awesome.
Satisfy BOTH the iso junkies and the megapixel junkies
Advertise it as 36mp, but if you could produce a very clean 8mp file at high iso.. that would be incredible.
I hope it has a mirror lock up function even if it’s slower to use. It would be great for studio and landscape shots. I’m ready to buy.
A new FF camera sooner is good news (and a new 50mm f1.4 please!) – I am happy with 36mp, but hope there is a seriously good half-size RAW file option (18mp), since the amount of data is already an issue at 24mp.
If it’s going to be SLT, I would also ask for smaller and lighter.
It will be very interesting to see how the Nikon imaging pipeline and the Sony imaging pipeline compare. (Sony SLT will be worst at higher ISO, but there’s no getting around that with SLT).
Sony tries innovation. They fall down hard now and then, so it doesn’t have to follow Canikon’s imaging pipeline. And it’s hard for people to understand, because they think camera A is made the same way as camera B.
People complain but don’t appreciate..
On the SLT comment, yeah, if you [not you, readers] don’t like SLT, do us a favor and troll somewhere else. Sony’s going the SLT route. If you don’t like it, move on to other brands. If you don’t mind, let’s talk.
+1
+1
I really hate the idea that it’s going to be 36MP !
There are three reasons:
a) the sensor will be noisier than a 24MP.
b) only the very best FF lenses will resolve this sensor.
c) the files are huge. Even high-end hardware will slow down with these. And I can forget about my netbook.
I hope Sony reconsiders and gives us an 16-24 MP FF camera. Heck, I would even buy a 12 MP over the 36MP.
It may not be noisier than ‘the’ 24MP.
Not all sensors with the same MP are built the same.
And the 36MP sensor is an FF, not an APS-C sensor.
The equation that APS-C lenses only can resolve so much of FF sensor does not apply to the MP. It doesn’t mean that lens A that usually works well in a 12MP FF would work worse in a 36MP FF. After all, lenses are optics, glass. They convert the data, intensity, luminosity, etc. to bits, and that’s how much the sensor is able to resolve.
As of the technicality of noise, I’ll grab my tail from that.
On filesize, it’s something hard to avoid. The best you can do is to use smaller MP (small, medium, large). Having a lot of MP doesn’t mean you have to use them all. Although that is what sells.
Wrong on all three points barri – good job! 😀
1) No it won’t. Newer tech, plus it’s the same pixel density as 16.2mp on APS-C. The very thing every SAR has been complaining that the a77 should have had
2) Myth. And it doesn’t even make sense. You maximise your lens performance. It’s not like your images would be worse quality at 36mp than they would at 24mp. You’re still projecting the same image.
3) So what? Hard drives are cheap. Computers are more powerful every day. A netbook in 1yr will handle them just fine. Did you complain when we switched to DVD instead of VHS?
Unfortunatly not my price range.
Hope there will be affordable FF in some years.
Yup, used and discontinued A850 and A900. 😉
New A850 are still going for S$2000 in Singapore.
Yes NOW, but not for much longer.
limiting MP because of file size is short-sighted to say the least. If we had limited our hardware to match file sizes instead of developing new hardware in the 80s 320×200 in 16 colours would be all we could see on our screens so we would have no choice but dunk things in chemicals fumble about in dark rooms and carry our photo albums around on paper prints with no backups. If that is we hadn’t already burned all the city’s down a few decades earlier with celluloid fires.
F/4 version of their premium lenses (both primes and zooms) and 2012 will be a very good year for Sony consumers/prosumers.
Admin, got a question…actually 2.
so after this cheap FF, there will be a higher spec FF from Sony? It’s definite the decision about going full throttle on EVF only?
Here in Montreal, we had an event on photography equipement. The Sony Senior from Sony Canada told me that they planned to release an EVF AND OVF versions of the next FF.
By the way, I’m totally disappointed by the a77: EVF-eyestarter lag and not as expected from the OLED EVF…
(Sorry for my poor english)
This IS NOT good news for professionals who DO NOT WANT AN SLT FF camera. Sony was able to get pros like myself to come over from Nikon or Canon for the great sensor and Zeiss optics. The last thing a pro wants is to look though these fine Zeiss optics with an electronic viewfinder. BIG MISTAKE SONY.
Oh look, people are still going on about SLR/SLT
It is highly likely that Sony will now only be focusing on SLT for the near future
If they do release a 36 Megapixel A99, I’ll be first in line for it. That’s about the same pixel pitch as the NEX-5N, C3, and the A580. (~4.8µm)
For what it’s worth, if Sony were to produce a FF with the same pixel pitch as the A77, (~3.9µm), that would produce a whopping ~57 Megapixel sensor. Zikes!
My SWAG: 36 MPixel announced in early 2012 (as stated above) then test the market to see viability of 57 MPixel for late 2012 announcement. …. hmmm …. Gosh, I don’t know what I would do with 57M Pixels – but I’m sure I could think of something.
Only 36MP? Disappointing because to make any real noticeable difference the size must increase exponentially.
This is like going from an 8MP to 12MP camera. Sure there’s a difference, but a very small gain.
It’s not like going from 12MP FF Canon 5D to 21MP FF 5DII, or an a700 to a900. Real improvements are only important with +50% current rez. This is only 30% increase. I was hoping for much more… and they could do it too simply by doubling the a77’s sensor and slapping it in.
Ahh but the pixel peepers will be pleased it’s not a noisy 48MP camera… As if that would matter with such large files. Perhaps the 48MP model will be released at end of year as expected. This rush rush for releasing the 36MP doesn’t quite build my confidence.
I have a sony a580 and a a850 shouldi replace the 580 with the a77. I was looking in to MF Phaseone cameras, it says they have 12 stops of dynmic range. When I looked uo the DxO mark it had the same dynmic range as the a580. I thought dslr shoot 6 stops and mybe 9 in raw mode.
Dynamic range aside, MF gives much much more resolution and details.
You thought an SLR only has 6-9 stops of dynamic range?
The exposure compensation on an a850/900 goes +/-5.. that would mean either end would be pure black or white :-/
Sony you can build an SLT FF camera but please give us a non SLT option as well. The A900’s viewfinder was great and no EVF will come close.
OVF alone cost a lot of money. Making 2 production lines cost even more. but, it’s not wrong to wish for something, no?
If you think about it, if A77 can do with 24MP@12FPS, it should also be able to deal with 36MP@8FPS. And you can also think that a FF sensor would fit that body. That means, in order to come up with a FF camera, they just have to put that sensor into the already existing A77 body.
How much more would it cost? 1800$? The CPU should be able to deal with it as 8FPS, which we don’t even expect at a sub-2000$ price range.
The only downside would be the EVF, a FF OVF is probably better than the EVF on A77. I’d pay premium for a OVF, but I’d also be happy with a A77 w/FF sensor, but only if costs less than 2000$.
To me this reminds me of the Mhz war/race between INTEL/AMD who can get to 1000Mhz first. I can’t image within the next few years a 50 or even a 100 MP camera. A 30+ MP camera sounds great but can SD cards keep up with writing such a large RAW/JPG file. Don’t get me wrong I’m all for bigger is better but can this camera be “that much” better than the A77 that is about to come out.
i am an amateur i shoot street on mymlumix G3 – lve it!
I shoot my children and landscapes on a DSLR. i bought a D700 on the back of all the reviews my observations were : dust on the sensor all the time. Images were soft I spent ages micro adjusting for individual lenses and looking for the best sharpening techniques. But 12mp is no where near enough the minute you start cropping a landscape. It was a thourough disappointment but i could appreciate it as a good journalistic tool.
I bought an a850 and zeiss 24-70mm and HVL58 flash. This combo is a revered possesion i am fearful of damaging it or wasting those 150k actuations! When properly exposed the images are breathtaking. Skin tones and colours are beautiful. I think at least some of the bad press around noise arises due to poor RAW support in the early days.
As stated above the focusing is so accurate. I have a picture of my son as the desktop on my mac. On a 27″ screen it is a lifesize image – the quality is such you could reach out and touch
him.
I dont care what the viewfinder is. I dont care about video frame rates. All i need is iso, shutter speed and exposure compensation controls with spot metering. If the MP goes up with no reduction in noise (hopefully an improvement for those that need it) I will be buying it no matter what and selling my nikon glass to get more zeiss.
Предлагаю выпустить Nex 9 FF с байонетом А, дизайном как Mamiya 7 и размерами, примерно, 140/90/65. Если к ней выпустите еще объективы 16-40/4, 40-140/4(2.8) и 18/3.4, 21/3.4, 24/2.8, 28/2, 35/2, 50/1.7, 85/2, 135/2.4, то мы вас, Sony, на руках носить будем!
‘…early 2012’ Really? If this were even remotely accurate then why is the current A900 still selling for 2700-bucks?
God, I would be over the moon if Sony would make an A or NEX full frame with just 6 MP. But knowing what ‘certain’ people seem to cry for all the time,ie- more and more MP and full frame.The chance of getting an affordable FF camera is nowhere in the distant future. I don’t even think that the ones who scream for FF cameras can even afford them should they come out. I can’t blame the manufacturers totally because practically most camera sites and forums, there’s at least one dude who’s crying for 24 mp full frame camera with Zeiss 1.4 lenses too boot. The old saying goes” be careful of what you ask for, you just might get it.” INCLUDING THE PRICE TAG! So let me put this out there to Sony. I don’t care if you make a FF with over 100mp, just if you could..make an affordable FF camera that takes A lenses, even if it’s only 6 mp…I think most ppl would gladly take it.
Couldn’t agree more!
Hope Sony release a new FF camera soon. I really want them to try to gain market share!…
If Sony going to make dslr with 50mb/s bitrate, there will be good