Image of the fake A95 entry
I see there is some buzz on the web because the Chinese Site PConline added a Sony A95 camera into their database.
Just to be clear. That site always creates such fake entries to be promoted. It’s years now they are doing so. Sometimes they have been right on the camera names but just because they read rumors or because it’s easy to guess the name of a possible camera successor.
0 Responses
FPS in movie makes an impression. Pity that this fake 🙂
That really sucks!!!
Andrea do you have any further info on a FF A-Mount cameras being released in 2014.
Don’t worry Andrea, you are the one!
I don’t think those idiots know what they’re talking about, those specs are for a high end broadcast camera not a DSLR.
They’re saying the a95 has 120fps in full HD and 240 FPS in 720, that’s ridiculous. Only the FS700 can do that and that’s an $8000 video camera.
And it can shoot 4:2:2 and 4:2:0?
If they’re going to spread rumours spread plausible rumours.
Andrea for ever, no one else so accurately and true to his readers as him. We love you and keep on taking down fake info!
PD: We need AMount FF SR5 rumors tomorrow! 😛
I would love if my A77 would do 120fps. Even for a short while or in 720p only. I would even be ready to pay for a firmware update which would allow it.
This is totally off topic but I thought you guys may be able to help to answer a photo tech question of mine. So, this is spurred by the new A7 cameras as I was wildly impressed by the quality of the image I was seeing as I played with them at the PhotoPlus Expo last year. Mind you, this was looking off of the EVF to view these images so I have no doubt processing my RAWs at home would be more impressive.
So, I have been considering if I should make the jump to FF or not. I’ve been very pleased with my 5n due to its super portable size and I feel with the prime lenses I have I can achieve a good-enough control of DOF when I want it. I am interested in FF though for the low light capabilities and supposed bump in overall image quality and I guess the colors and tones are supposed to show smoother transitions too?
So that’s the background, my question is, if everything were shot at equivalent focal lengths, DOF, and pixel density, would there still be the much talked about FF advantage? Sure, something like the new A7 would give you cleaner images through the ISO range than say, an NEX6 or my 5, but isn’t that only because the pixel density is less on the FF sensor? And if you shot the same image using a 35mm F2.8 on the FF and a 50mm F1.8 (obviously these aren’t the exact value conversions) would you still be able to see a large enough difference in image quality to justify a heavy camera setup and price??
I am totally infatuated with the A7 but the practical side of me says that my 5n (or really just any APSC camera at that)is more than good enough.
Thanks in advance to anyone that can help me out!
I sold my nex-6 and my fuji x-e1 to help get a A7 and while I don’t regret the A7 purchase I have to say that the main benefit I see with full frame is useing legacy lenses how they were meant to be used.The fuji Af compared to the nex-6 even after update sucks but is about the same in day light but I shoot in low light when I am working. The image quality is better on the A7 but it is nothing that blows the fuji or the nex out of the water. The A7 with 35mm 2.8 is very comparable to a nex-6 with a 24mm 1.8. You can save a lot of money getting a nex-6 now that the price has fallen even lower. The 24mm has been going for 700 and less lately on ebay as well. I have not tried the fuji x-e2 but they have some fine lenses for that camera that I wish sony had. I suggest you try out the nex-6 or fuji x-e2 before you make the A7 leap because in all honesty I could have just kept my nex-6 and got a 24mm 1.8 and the fuji and got a 35mm 1.4 and it would cost about the same as the A7 with the 35mm 2.8. In the end it all depends on what you do and what you need but I have seen many samples from sony A7 owners that really have no business with such a camera, a complete waste of money just because they can afford it. The high iso is better but not that much the jpegs are better but not that much and I shoot raw. the menu is way better as well that about it for me.
Well, FF is the perceived culmination in terms of IQ (after that prices really go into orbit). So, if you have never used one, you might as well give it a try and see if it is for you or you will always be wondering. In reality though, you won’t be seeing some astounding improvements in IQ and they will be highly depend on your skills (both shooting and processing).
About noise (and any other things about equivalence; it is a long, tedious and very good article):
http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/#8
Hey Ben,
How much of a difference depends on 2 factors, the actual difference there is and what you perceive is enough or not enough.
I of Sony’s camera’s I’ve shot with an a200, a77, nex-6 and I currently own an a99.
There’s a big difference to my eye in detail, tonal range, dynamic range etc. Especially going to higher ISO’s like 800+. My a77 needed a lot of noise reduction at 800 for my to feel it’s usable, where as with my a99 I’ll do 1600 and don’t feel the need to do noise reduction.
That said if you were shooting at reasonable ISO’s, all else being equal the difference isn’t much. It’s there, but it’s not much. And when you factor in the price increase in lenses and body, a lot of people will feel the difference is not worth the value change.
I should mention I’ve worked in several studios and know many photographers, and I’ve yet to meet one that’s said after going full-frame that they’ll go back to APS-C.
Likewise I’ve also shot medium format and If I can afford that for myself, you’ll never see me pick up a 35mm again.
Ultimately, I think where people get disappointed is that they want to go full-frame, but the price is just within reach or slightly out of reach. So they rationalize the purchase by thinking if the quality is “that” much better, then the price is certainly worth it. I think this is were some people will find disappointment after making the switch because IMO the difference is hit or miss relative to expectations.
So I would concentrate on the other things outside of image quality. Features, battery life, style(it matters), aftermarket accessories, tactile feel. You’ll be using the camera and you should enjoy every aspect of it, from the image quality, to features you like/need, to how it feels in your hand.
If those things are an improvement over the NEX-5 then I think you’ll thoroughly enjoy the upgrade.
I should mention I can not say enough good things about the files my a99 produces. My site is being redesigned but you can see some examples here:
http://www.david-liang.ca
very good explanation. I tend to shoot at 800 iso or lower and I use bounce flash very often so for me I don’t see a big difference. I think it all boils down to the photographer,lens and there knowledge of light, processing etc. I have seen excellent and crappy work from apsc and full frame. I have seen work from apsc that looks as good as any I have seen from full frame. I shoot raw so more is always better to work with but I think full frame is more hype than reality and a lot of people jumping to full frame have no need to unless they really have the ability to uncover the full potential of a full frame so that they and others can actually see it in the real world.I am very happy so far with the A7 and plan to get a A99 just for the 135mm 1.8 and I do miss my a900 and a700 both died and then I found e-mount.
“the difference is hit or miss relative to expectations.”
Nicely put.
Thanks a lot guys! After reading your comments and thinking about it some, I’ll stick with APSC for now. The type of photography I do is some street, architecture, and landscape, and at least for those cases, you really wouldn’t be too concerned with shallow DOF anyways. Also just to throw it in there since I agree, something being “good enough” is wholly relative to the person’s expectations, to me, I often still get impressed from time to time when I’m processing my RAW files in Lightroom using the 24mm Zeiss prime. That and the 50mm (though not wide open for that lens) are plenty sharp for me.
If the updated NEX7 is appealing, I may just consider that now versus pining for the A7. Thanks again guys! I’ll check out those links as well 😉
the 24 and 50 are both excellent and hard to beat. I sold them a while back. I got a canon fd ssc concave 35mm f2 that is very good but I am getting the sony 35mm 2.8 for events. I am selling the very good rokinon 35mm 1.4 because It is super big and I actually like the canon better but the rokinon has better bokeh.I love the canon fd 50mm 1.4 so I will use that while I save up for the sony 55mm 1.8. I think you made a good decision in sticking to apsc and when you do change your mind full frame will only be cheaper. I got my A7 barley used with warranty for 1500.
A95? Easy to guess new Sony camera names? I expect the a95 will be a new E mount PSP device. Or some sort of semi translucent 3D glasses.
Anything else except an A mount camera, really….
I have another off-topic post (like Ben’s). I bought the A7 zoom kit lens from Cameta (see deal posted here on SAR the other day).
Now I need to buy my A7r. On Cameta’s site they have several kit deals bundled with the A7r:
http://www.cameta.com/Sony-Alpha-A7R-Digital-Camera-Body-Black-79018-kits.cfm
Can someone please explain to me how the base body is US $2,298.00 but these 3 kits that bundle in 10 extra things are only $1.95 more?!? ($2,299.95)
I don’t get it … does this mean that their wholesale cost on the camera is such that they can get full markup if someone is ‘dumb’ enough to buy the camera body (only) but still be able to toss in a few hundred dollars’ worth of accessories at essentially the same price?
I’m wary of kits in general as an “up-sell” tool to get you to buy something you don’t want/need – and especially when it seems too good to be true.
(Also, I don’t see these same sort of bundle kits on the B&H Photo site.)
Halp?
It could be a mistake. I have seen things like this before and when I purchase it I get a email later saying it was a error. It can also be grey market merchandise so make sure sony will honor the warranty.It can also just be then bating you by showing how much more you are getting if you get the bundle and if you don’t they still win. If they are authorized sellers of sony products and you don’t see these deals anywhere else I would jump on it.
Thanks Wayne. When the kit lens was available separately it was announced here on SAR, and Cameta Camera was specifically listed (with link) as a vendor who carried it, so I assumed it was legitimate and I purchased the lens via the link. They are also not located in Brooklyn, which helped 😉
Sony lists them as an authorized Sony retailer:
http://store.sony.com/-cms-page.sony.authorized.retailer.network
So I think it’s legit – I just don’t understand it.
I think that this is because Sony has a minimum price requirement. The only way to “sell” below this is by providing “free” or almost “free” items.
That’s an interesting angle, James. I hope you’re right! I’d love to get hundreds of dollars in accessories for $1.95!
I have the same question, I bought my A7 will arrive in 2-3 weeks, but it comes with lots of free stuff at the same price of Body Online, im just worried its a trick, but oh well, same thing happens with lenses, you sometimes purchase them with filters and cleaning products at lower price, those are called BUNDLES. I believe they are done to entice purchase of that product,
body only*
After you bring the bonus items price to what the seller pays for it and perhaps factor in a discount that the seller can provide. They probably even out or make a small profit but get more people to buy the camera because the buyer is looking at the full/retail price. So they even out or make small profit on extra items but end up selling more cameras.
Interesting. Is Sony probing the market actually? If the market is positive to the rumors, then they may release it in the coming season. Otherwise, Sony may postpone the product in the next season or so. I always wonder that slow motion is an all-time favorite for the videographer and movie makers. 60fps can be stretched for 2.5 times slower in 24fps. If 120fps is available, it is certainly an impact because all the wedding or low budget commercial production can step into the professional area. Canon should take it seriously because the EOS system still just provides 30fps maximum. In fact, after the rumors of FS960 is floating around, I have a feeling that it may not be a coincident but a possible strategy.
Since Canon has emerging into the film industry aggressively (you may find it on the nominated list of Oscar in cinematography), Sony just cannot stay idle to let the users slip away. What Sony should do that is not just maintaining the loyalty but to grab the potential users from Canon to prevent further shrinking of the user base. Luckily, the dual pixel AF of 70D does not heating up the market as expected. Otherwise, Sony might have noting to strike back at the meanwhile whatever the AF or fps on the video side. No joking, this reason is really a critical period of Sony to conquer the market by the video hype. I just hope they can push FHD slow-motion and 4K(normal speed) in same pace. It can prevent total lost if one of the either side unsalable.