[shoplink 8461]
[/shoplink]
There is a new full A77 review at Popphoto (Click here): “The [shoplink 8461]A77[/shoplink] now reigns supreme over APS-C format DSLRs. Neither Canon’s EOS 7D nor Nikon’s D300s can match the A77’s AF speed or resolution. While the Canon 7D does beat the A77 in its noise performance and holds more resolution at the highest ISOs, the A77 ultimately beats it for the overall package, including the video-shooting experience and the versatility of the articulated LCD.”
The Chinese website Sheya (Click here) compared the A77 resolution with other top ASP-C models (via RiceHigh).
Sony A77 image samples at Lenstip (Click here).
The Sony A77 manual is available for download at Sony Store (Click here).
One more thing: Please send me your reports or links to posts where people talks about the current A77 issues. I am collecting everything to write an appropriate post. It sounds like Sony will have two cameras to fix, the [shoplink 8452]Sony NEX-5n[/shoplink] and now the [shoplink 8461]Sony A77[/shoplink] too!
P.S.: Those are all the links to preorder the new Sony cameras and lenses:
A77 at [shopcountry 8461].
A65 at [shopcountry 8459].
Sony NEX-7 [shopcountry 8454].
Sony NEX-5n [shopcountry 8452].
Zeiss 24mm f/1.8 [shopcountry 8450].
Sony 50mm f/1.8 [shopcountry 8448].
Sony 55-210mm [shopcountry 8444].
NEX-5n viewfinder [shopcountry 9110].
83 Responses
…..still waiting for the dpreview test
DPR studio comparison samples are available now:
Click here
There’s a marked difference in color rendition between the A77 and the D7000 at ISO 6400. It also looks like Sony chose greater noise suppression over fine detail preservation, vs. Nikon’s typical approach. I think Nikon will be able to do very well in all tests if they use this sensor in the D400.
How well does the Nikon’s autofocus work while recording videos?
Clarification: all photographic image quality tests. 🙂
We’re here to discuss Pop Photo’s evaluation of the A77 – all features considered, Pop Photo seems to like the camera A LOT.
“Sony’s A77 Is The New King of APS-C DSLRs”
Love the title by POP!
The A77 should be great for many shooters. Unfortunately, two very important features for me are high ISO and low noise, and “the Canon 7D does beat the A77 in its noise performance and holds more resolution at the highest ISOs”. Maybe the upcoming full frames…? I will meanwhile wait with anticipation for the NEX-7 high ISO/noise details.
Aren’t high ISO and low noise the same thing? It seems A77 performs superb for noise in low ISO.
If you write it as:
– high
– ISO
– low
– noise
then you can even claim 4 issues instead of 2 🙂
lol, +1
– I
– S
– O
Ummm… No.
You still get noise at lower iso, you just don’t notice it as much. Of course, as the iso goes up the noise becomes more & more noticable – its probably quite exponential but the camera can deal with a certain amount. Beyond that limit is where it gets ‘noisy’.
I’m usually a ‘high iso or the world will end’ type person basher, but the other night was shooting at 1.4 1/25 iso 3200 & was getting really frustrated by the noise…. So now am going do decamp to the other side of the fence 😉
There is a celing to high iso real world needs though – i can see no need to go beyond clean to 6400 – the rare occasion you need more then becomes far too rare to sacrifice any other features of a sensor/camera.
Sony you have a way to go, but the end is in sight…. 🙂
sorry for any bad spelling or if i don’t make sense… Typing on a phone when you should be doing other things is never good;)
Making perfect sense. And when you’re in a situation where you need higher ISO or lower noise (or both!), that’s what you need.
I will disagree with you on the ceiling to high iso real world needs though. 400 used to be fast and 1600 was wonderful! and now 6400 could be a new nirvana. What I’ve been able to do over the years is take photos I couldn’t have previously taken in less and less well lit situations without external flash or lights, and there is no real world limit (before dark) to how dim the light can be.
Does anyone know what percentage of the photons are currently being captured? When we start to approach 100% (with low noise), the high ISO limit will be reached.
+1 LOLOLOL
It has only one disadvantage… 1/3-2/3 ev? loss…
Except on DOXmark’s measurements the Canon EOS 7D & A77 are neck and neck on noise and dynamic range. Now if it had been a Nikon D7000 they might have had a better case.
Obviously Pentax K-5 has better resolution than Sony A77?!
But doesn’t dxomark only record the quality of the sensor? This doesn’t take into account, any light lost with the fixed mirror, or Sony’s noise reduction.
ie, Sony A55, pentax k-5 and nikon d7000 all had the same sensor, but Pentax was the better high iso perfomer, with the A55 bringing up the rear…
DXOmark measure the SLT sensor’s performance with the mirror in place. If they could flip the mirror out of the way (I don’t know if their test methodology requires a lens in place) then measured ISO sensitivity would suddenly be about 50% higher and all the curves would move.
It’s clear if you read their review of the A77 this is what they do, so it’s slightly incorrect of them to refer to these as sensor measurements. However, they will have chosen the terminology before SLT cameras existed, so they are probably stuck with it.
You should be able to remove the mirror like in A55 for the test purpose (which is a great feature for astro-photographers)
Dismissing high ISO performance is dismissing a substantial chunk of overall performance. It’s weak circular rhetoric and not a real compelling argument. You can’t dismiss the problems and then say it’s excels. The A77 high ISO problems are real problems.
I hope Sony can address them. If the megapixel count is too dense then the A77 can never be a true high end semi-pro camera. That would be sad and a gross error by Sony. No amount of delusion or cheerleading will change that. The results thus far speak for themselves and it’s obvious. A77 is a seriously flawed camera.
Are you serious?
Blah blah blah. You know a lot of photographers rarely go over 1600 anyway. If you shoot a lot at high ISO, look elsewhere. If you like the other features, get an a77. Nobody said it would be perfect for everyone
Most of runners can’t beat 100m in below 12 second, a lot of swimmers can’t swim more than 1000m…
Yes, David your right blah blah.
Only Sony fan boys welcome at this website
Sony can do no wrong here
I am a professional photographer and a Minolta/Sony shooter for many many years and a owner of two a850’s and most of the Zeiss lenses and I shoot a great deal of f/1.4, f/1.8 hight ISO (3200+) photos and ISO performance is important to me
You many not need ISO performance but others might and who are you to say that they don’t?
You may be right that Sony will never equal Canon and Nikon for many professionals and we should dump our investment in the A-mount and move.
But I for one, hope I don’t need to
Do you actually print your photos you so called professional?
/yawn at the noise issue
Lol, nobody said you can’t need high ISO. What’s ridiculous is statements like “A77 is a seriously flawed camera”, it’s a “sad and a gross error by Sony”, etc. How much worse is it than the competition? Half a stop less than the D7000! Big deal.
No, its about having the gear that works for you. I didn’t say that nobody needs high ISO, or that there is no value in it. But if you spend most of your time above ISO3200, you can do better than Sony. It’s quite simple and fanboyism has nothing to do with it.
I am not expecting perfection. I am expecting improved performance and quality with new releases. There is absolutely no reason why the NEX-5n should be outperforming the A77 on ANYTHING! This is supposed to be the flagship camera for Sony. So I don’t apologize for having more than bottom feeder expectations for a $1400 camera. And no I won’t be buying this camera unless there’s firmware improvement (if possible) for the high ISO issues.
Good for those who don’t shoot over ISO 1600. A lot of photographers would like to have the option to shoot high ISO without their photos looking like mud. I think that is the right of any consumer spending good money to have high demands and expectations for their money.
That’s all.
Have you ever thought about using a flash?
How large are the prints you make that a850 at 3200 iso is bothersome to you?
I’m not jumping your case here Steve. I’m being serious and I know you feel like you’re being attacked. I want better ISO performance too. But I’ve yet to find a situation where the current ISO performance has affected my publishing.
I’ve never had a client complain about noise. I’ve never had an art director reject an image because of noise. A few years ago was 40″ prints from 8mp camera, magazine covers and fashion editorials with 3mp camera, and poorly lit high school gymnasiums and dark church weddings with 1600tx film… Never a complaint.
How good does it have to get before pixel peepers stop thinking every shot will be viewed at 100% in the far corners on computer monitors?
Who said there wasn’t improvement? Certainly, there will be improved (some estimate by 50%)resolution over the A55. All that, plus actual autofocus that works with video!
@Steve G: Did you really expect the A77 to beat the 5N (or any other non-SLT APS-C camera for that matters) in high ISO performance? Please, don’t tell me you’re that DUMB.
Haha, Yup.. that’s where you’re wrong. It’s not your right for anything. SAR seems full of this pathetic entitled attitude recently. If Sony is choosing to improve other things at the cost of high ISO, bad luck for you I guess. But they don’t owe you a thing.
I never go to high isos given the option. However, I’d much rather have a shot that’s clean at high iso’s than no shot at all. I feel like that much is obvious.
Some of you sound like its bad at high iso. If you ignore D7000 its comparable with the rest. and most tests are unfair as they do things real photographers (using a77) would not do. such as making up for mirror by changing iso instead of moving from say f4.5 to f4. They also often test iso by closing aperture down (when in low light you would normally do the opposite) instead of using actual lower light to test. This is an advantage to other cameras that may have a sweet spot as high as f11 where the A77 is F5.6 with around F4 for standard lens. So with diffraction cutting in most bench tests are unfair to A77 anyway. but results I have seen suggest its pretty good at high iso. Not best but I would get so many more good pic with its speed that even in low light (you always have multishot modes never tested) it would be as good as anything and in normal light its colour sensitivity dynamic range and pure resolution would give better results than all but best FF.
The issue I have with the high ISO cameras (Nikon D3x & D700, Canon 7D) is that they have flaws that largely offset the advantages. The D3x does not resolve as well as the a900 at low ISOs (or have as good a dynamic range). The D700 has a very bad dynamic range at high ISO. The Canon 7D has serious problems with pattern (banding) noise. In my experience with Sony cameras (the a900, which is great, the NEX 5, which is good, the a33, which is not good), noise alone is the issue, and in the a900 and NEX5 it is well controlled, and is very natural – it doesn’t ruin an image (I only shoot RAW, and recognize that a900 JPEGs are awful). I have not used the a77 yet, so I can’t comment on it specifically – my comment is more a general one. Engineers face trade-offs – to get clean high ISO, it seems something else has to give. I would rather have “good” high ISO, and great everything-else, but I recognize that there are many who would take great high ISO above all.
I believe you’re referring to the D3s, not D3x.
D3x shares the same senor as a900 – meant to point out that Nikon’s “tweak”, or whatever it is they did to the sensor, made for lower-noise high ISO performance, but worse performance at low ISO.
The Pop photo review says that the A77 sensor stabilisation gives 2.5 stops for hand held.
I dont believe its as high as that, but perhaps it would overcome the 1/3 stop lost by the translucent mirror in real use vs the NEX-7.
Interesting thought, and something that synthetic tests Such as DXO would not show up.
I’m also looking forward to some tests that clearly show mirrorless to have better micro contrast acutance than vibration prone mirrored cameras. As far as I know, most tests done on high end DSLR’s are with mirror lockup to give best results. But that does not reflect the vibrations of normal flapping mirror shooting.
I want to see test between mirror camera with mirror flapping against mirrorless with SLT. I’d bet it all evens out. Vibrations are killer for every shutter speed except the very extreme highest.
You don’t believe? Who ARE you? Is your opinion worth much against Pop Photos? I thought not.
So what is the fastest available prime we can use with the A77? I have heard of others converting the Minolta Rokkor 58 f1.2 to work on the alpha mount, chipped and working with sensor stabilisation. This would be a great lens for the A77! Complete with high rez EVF and focus peaking to make manual focusing a breeze!
What about faster lenses. Everyone has been discussing this for the Nex-7, but what about adapting and using some manual focus fast primes on the A77???
It’s easily that high. 2-4 stops really.
The pophoto conclusion is oversimplified and wrong. I do appreciate the work here, but this is useless post, like “DxOmark sensor test” few days back – either you understand the stuff and offer some insight and comment/correct the external info or skip it completely – republishing bits and pieces from other sites imho does not fit this web and seems like filler in the end, lowering the overall credibility..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvN13V-mb1g
faulty a77
User in HK Reported as follows:
(1) A77 was hanged during shooting
(2) A77 was hanged using the Sigma Lens
(3) A77 need 4s to be turned off.
(4) Dial operation is very slow (compared to A55 and previous model)
The A77 has lots of bugs and the 5n has the audio issue. Hopefully the bad reputation helps to bring the prices down.
oh yeah!
I had some fun with A77 prototype and asked about slow dials operation – they told me that it was a fault of prototype and final cameras should work flawlessly – I’m bit disappointed seeing people reports that it wasn’t.
The hysteria created by High ISO performance is silly, maybe one day all cameras will reach a ceiling and will all have exactly the same ISO performance. How on earth will we compare cameras?
The A77 isn’t the best camera for high ISO, no argument there but there’s only a handful of cameras that beat it and most of those are at least double the price. If you want high ISO, take a look at the D3s, if you compare that with the holy D7000, suddenly the D7000 becomes a useless, noisy monster of a camera.
As i see it now, I am in a position where I can either forget the whole thing and wait for either a significant FW update for the A77 before i buy or the next prosumer camera that sony releases, which should be another 2 years, or, I could jump ship to nikon at a cost of about $3000, and what would I get for this? A few extra stops of light?
People needing the high ISO’s should wait for the FF plain and simple. Every camera is flawed and some more than others. Why guys get offended I don’t know, if you like the camera then good for you. Just buy what suits you.
What are the effects of diffraction at f5.6? What does it entail and how bad will it be? Worried about this because I’m going for the Nex7
Effects of diffraction at f5.6 are low. The sensor has 256 pixels per mm, the theoretical diffraction limit at f5.6 is around 268 line pairs per mm. It is really going to depend on the final print size and other effects. See http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm for a calculator of diffraction limits.
Anyone with a tiny amount of intelligence would know that a SLT design will never beat a SLR design with regard to high ISO performance due to obvious reasons. If you’re so obsessed with high ISO performance and dis all the benefits that a SLT design can offer, I’d suggest you to dump your A-mount gear and get that oh so great Canon/Nikon/Pentax that you’ve always wanted.
Peace.
That’s like saying that anybody who wants fast autofocus while shooting videos should drop their Canon and Nikon SLRs.
Exactly my point. Suggest you to take a step back and think before posting anything.
I never planned on buy an a77 but have budgeted to purchase replacements for my a850’s when Sony ships a replacement for the a900.
ISO performance is important to me for the type of photography I do and I almost purchase the Nikon D3 for the ISO but decided to wait and see if Sony lived up to the rumor of incredibly high ISO usabilityn the a77, so I was disappointed like others to discover the truth.
I’m willing to pay for performance, so if Sony’s next top of the line costs 5k to 7k and delivers both high ISO and resolution I’m ready to pay for it.
Same here Steve – I purchased my 850 over a year ago, and then started saving for the next big upgrade then ($1400 in the kitty so far…). In the meantime, I’m having a great time with my 850, Zeiss 24-70 F2.8 and 70-200 G F2.8 (also, a sigma macro).
Is A77 iso performance really shitty ? Or it just didnt meet expectations ? ,,, shrugs
I thought it renders a lot of details and has very good dynamic range. Some bit of noise can be handled through Lightroom or a raw converter.
It’s not shitty, it’s just not better than last years APS-C bodies.
Indeed, I would be very interested to see what can be achieved with RAW + a good converter + a good denoise algorithm.
Yeah – Steve’s just overreacting. Let’s see how things pan out, and see what actual performance is like. I bet an image from the A77 with some luminance smoothing would beat a lot of the low light performers.
Again, I feel like Sony being first to market means they’ve had less time to fine tune this sensor both in hardware and software. I don’t really care for in-camera JPEG conversion, so here’s to hoping the hardware sensor noise is manageable.
Don’t worry people, I believe that Sony already has the RGB+W sensor tech that will exceeds both ISO and DR performance of current sensor. The only reason this has not happened yet is the pixelcount of this type of sensor is still not big enough(I roughly calculated that with a55’s sensor pixel density, only 4mp can be achieved.)
BTW, a77 sample pictures look very good at ISO 50, 100.
People forget that the a77 has 24 megapixels….
A fair comparison would be a 16mp nex 5n image against 16mp a77 files.. Same goes for the comparison with d7000 and 7D and maybe d3s(12 mp)..
But then you would bash Sony for dishing out 24mp…
I rest my case. 🙂
And a fine case it is Zstan!
BTW – here’s a low light image I took last week (hand held, ISO 200). I guess people need (or think they need) cameras capable of far far higher iso?
https://picasaweb.google.com/107065820868863793866/WeekendWineTouring#5654585868457502610
Good example Rob. Sometimes I think that there are photographers that don’t even attempt or realize that this can be done. They think that a scene like this must be taken at 1/8000th of a second just in case a mouse suddenly runs across the floor.
Something else should be considered here…
DSLR’s are typically tested with mirror lockup to improve the results beyond what they would normally have with mirror flapping vibrations. This is appropriate for it shows the best quality that a camera can possibly produce.
But the test results don’t necessarily translate to real world shooting because people normally shoot their DSLR with mirror in operation. Whereas the SLT Sony’s test results are a true indicator of real world shooting because they don’t need mirror lockup to achieve best results.
This is not to be taken lightly. Cameras wouldn’t have mirror lockup if it didn’t matter. There are lazer tests that prove the difference is a huge one shooting mirror lockup vs mirror flapping. And flapping mirrors affect micro vibrations at much faster shutter speeds than one would typically think.
Throughout all of photography, the most discerning shooters have used cameras without mirrors to capture the most critically sharp photographs. I’d like to see some tests between SLT technology against DSLR’s with their mirrors in full swing… as they are typically shot. My mind wants to believe it makes a difference. Otherwise why would landscape togs shoot their best work with mirrors up… even when shutter speeds are typically adequate for normal shooting?
I propose that any quality lost by SLT mirrors will be evened out in the end against traditional DLSR’s with flapping mirrors producing extra micro vibrations at all but the very highest shutter speeds.
DSLR camera who has amazing sophisticated, but i just worried about slowly cameras development
I found a MR mode issue which is not discussed yet on the web:
The F-number value will be recalled but other setting remains once you click the Playback button in MR mode.
Here are the detail reproduce steps:
1. Dial to MR mode
2. Apply one profile (Aperture Prior setting)
3. Dial the F-number from 3.5 to 6.3
4. Switch AF area from zone to wide by Fn button
5. Play back images and exit by Playback button
6. F-number will be recalled to 3.5 but AF area remains on wide
Here is the video clip link to explain this issue:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqkaEAE7y1c
I also got a total malfunction of memory recall during MR mode testing.(can be fixed by Reset Default on system menu)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_pC8e6Gr6Y
No one would complain if A77 had better high ISO.
I understand and sympathize with people who really need it. And it is natural for them to react, because being in Alpha mount with existing lens investment is like a commitment. It is like getting married and couple of years later your partner wants do go a different way than you want to. 🙂 When you are locked to a system, you pretty much are limited to whatever the company decides to offer. And in this case, what is offered seems to be lacking in a very important aspect.
However, I don’t think the situation is as bad as it looks now:
– Most tests are in JPEG and RAW could introduce better processing options.
– The noise pattern seems to be very ‘nice’ and especially for printing is probably not that big of an issue.
– The dynamic range of the sensor is very very good.
– The steadyshot should give you at least one stop leverage, at least in certain situations (where the objects are not moving fast)
Personally, if I had a choice, I also would probably get a 16MP version of A77 over this 24MP one. Better high ISO when needed and still enough resolution for me, smaller files is another plus. But there are also people who are really looking forward to the higher resolution, better crop, larger prints, wonderful studio shots, etc.
So it’s a matter of compromises. You cannot get both. If Sony gives us the option of choosing between the two, that would be ideal. For now, this is what we have…
I can’t correlete the resolving power graphs with the measurement pics at Sheya’s review. To, the A77 images are far better than the rest of the bunch but in the graph, the K5 seems to have the highest resolution. Might be a typo (or reado on my part:).
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sheya.net%2Fsheying%2Fxiangji%2F201109%2F4838-2.html
The amount of EXTREME negativity, focussed on one or two points suggests to me that a number of our contributors here are probably trolls – maybe organized by competitors.
Who in their right mind would believe that a Sony camera is a perfect fit for them without any problems they could pick on?
😀
Hey, is there a specification comparison between A77 and Nex-7? I thinking of buying one of the and a know that Nex-7 is missing some of the features so a complete specification comparison would be nice like they do on dp review “compared to”
hi guys…
I prefer noise and grain in a photo. I don’t understand why you need that bad crystal and digital look…
Because it’s bad when the equipment makes the choice for the artist. You can always add noise, you can’t add original clarity.
Actually, I think Sony did a good job with the a77, including the ISO story. The semi-transparent mirror removes about 1/3 stop of light reaching the sensor, so ISO needs to be increased with a third stop to get identical exposure values compared to traditional DSLRs. So the sensor based low light ISO DxOMark score is actually 1068 (801+((1/3)*801), if testing is done with the mirror in place. Correct me if I’m wrong. Considering this, sensor based low light ISO score is close to D7000’s with 1167. This is very good, since the pixel density is much higher on the a77’s sensor.
Whether this is correct or not, I think that cameras with a fixed semi-transparent mirror will never be better at noise performance compared to traditional DSLRs, due to the light removal, and we should not be worried about that. We should be reasonable, and conclude that the a77 could never ever reach the ISO performance of a D7000 or a580 in theory with actual sensor technology. So most people complaining about the ISO performance of the a77, should consider that that is not right to begin with. The a77 maybe isn’t the real thing for us high ISO lovers, but it is quite a nice package of features, which may appeal to another type of customer.
It may sound wrong, but if you want high ISO, 1) don’t expect that from TMT-cameras like the aXX line; 2) expect that from traditional SLRs, especially the expensive ones.
Maybe we will see in the interim before the A99, a A75n , that uses nex5n.
Till then, all hail the APSC-ISO King DSLR !
Assuming the A77 mirror is the same as the A55, the loss is one-half stop, actually 0.51. The calculation is not simple; it involves logs to base 2. Also, when detector area is reduced, signal and noise are both reduced in the same proportion coming off the detector, so signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) stays the same at that point. The amount of amplification applied behind the detector is in proportion to the ISO number. If amplifiers were perfect, there would be no noise penalty for the smaller detector — you’d just crank up the amp gain and SNR and bottom-line noise would remain constant. Unfortunately, amplifiers are imperfect: noise introduced in the early stages is multiplied by later stages. The result is that smaller pixels and/or higher ISO mean more noise, because more amplification must be applied. Now suppose that Sony has invented better amplifiers. The better the amplifier, the less the penalty for smaller detector area. Bottom line: We can’t predict the effect of smaller detectors (assuming the detector material is unchanged) without knowing the amplifier characteristics. Suppose Sony has invented new detector technology that produces higher signal output for a given detector area with no SNR penalty. Then all bets are off. I say, we can read these lab reviews, but just like in audio, measurements don’t necessarily tell the story on the perception of human sensors and the human brain. I will concede this: if noise measures worse, it’s not likely to look better. It just may not look significantly worse. Finally, there is the question of noise reduction through processing. Sony’s big problem in the A850 is, IMHO, that they apply too much sharpening without enough preliminary noise reduction. The result is that noise becomes highly visible in the jpegs. My solution for my A850 is to shoot both RAW and jpeg. I run selected RAW shots through CS5 with a Noise Ninja plug-in. I can create killer low-light, high-ISO shots that way using an A850. I hope that Sony learned from the A850/900 noise issues; after all, they got bashed in reviews on their own SonyStyle website. Meanwhile, I don’t believe lab tests can predict how things will work out. We need to try the A77 for ourselves. Until then, we’re engaging in marginally informed speculation.
Beside those serious BUGss.
I also find some minor bugs in my A77.
1, the orientation of the menu does not change, when the camera is held vertically.(Such as shooting with vertical Grip)
2, During traditional menu display mode(LCD without LV), no way to change setting shown on the menu.
3,During A-Mode, the shot result preview does not show correctly when pressing the preview button.The brightness change with the aperture value, which is difference from the real shot result.
4,The focal length shown in the EXIF is incorrect when I use it with the 1680za.It shown 55mm but it was 80mm.
In the old days in my lab, I would take Tri-MAX 400 and push it to 800 or above. I liked the coarse grain for some shots and it was part of my art, and I knew that if I wanted a smooth sharp print I would use a different film and different development process and avoid the enlarger and aggressive crops. Today I do the same things but use different tools; Photoshop with a B/W plugin to process/enlarge/crop.
What I want from my camera (the device that holds the optics) is a tool that allows me to use my digital processing lab to realize my artistic vision.
I want all of the resolution I can get short of purchasing a Phase-one or similar system, and optical performance that makes the resolution useful along with the ability to capture the image in less than optimal lighting conditions (low light).
I love my Alpha 850 Zeiss 135/f1.8 combination; it gives me all of the sharpness and resolution I can afford and allows me to crop to a finished product and send it out to the printing house knowing that even at a 11×14 or greater my aggressively cropped image will be a sharp and clean finished product.
This is why any improvement in ISO performance over my current a850 body is much welcome.
Some posters here write that people like me, who express the desire for better ISO than it looks as if the latest Sony technology is capable to deliver, are whiners or trolls or even plants from the competition to disparage the a77, or somehow not real photographers……….really?
If both of my a850’s and all of my lenses were lost or destroyed today, I would still take my insurance settlement and replace them with the Sony a900 as it still is the best value around for the type of photography I do, and I look forward to seeing an even better camera in its replacement in 2012 with higher resolution, better dynamic range and use less noise at higher ISO settings.
Yes! It got a great review!
But that’s all it is, a review. You will NEVER take better pictures because of this camera ever! There are some photographers that will take better pictures with a Nikon d40, 6mp camera that 90% of the people on these Sony forums.
Why you ask? Because while you talk about pixel peeping, video modes, and how great Sony is, the person with the d40 is making their next amazing photographic capture. That image they take will be in art galleries, and they will be paid for their work. All this while most Sony users are not even close to done describing how many features this camera has.
+1