Discussion of all digital SLR cameras under the Minolta and Konica Minolta brands
Forum rules
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
Though almost unbelievable...whereas A55 scores only 73.
I believe the 14 bit DAC does a lot.
If in real life a 14bit image takes minutes to finish, then a 12 bit DAC should be provided for fairer comparism.
D7000 will have a similar result.
If A580 scores the same...then A55's SLT does affect image quality.
Apart from the physical connections these sensors will be the same family, and 1.6 stops even with the differences in support bits like the on camera processor between a $750 camera and a $1600 camera.
And that is without any reservations about the real world application of the DxO testing.
As for 12 bit AD as opposed to 14 bit AD there may be some differences when pixel peeping, there isn't when you are printing. Just an afterthought.
Well - the 14 Bit ADC does alot here, but maybe not so much what many may think. The tonal range isn't really increased much therefore the nearly 14 bit dynamic range is used up by not much more tones than with the A55. If the K5 really just maps the sensor output linearly to its increased dynamic range, it would be a really dumb idea. It only makes sense, when they apply some tonal correction on the output and the target space of this not really linear space is actually 14 bit. Maybe they even can adapt the mapping to different settings - so they map real 12 Bit (actually less) into a 14 bit space. So the 14 bit are more an issue of internal computation that is applied to the RAW data. Bad guys would say "cooking" but I doubt that there is any maker that doesn't do it and it mostly is only a bad thing in the head of some purity freaks.
Personally I'd rather look at the real images than spend time crunching (somewhat dubious numbers). On the other hand I got a good giggle watching the A55 super fans howl in pain as their god like camera king of APS-C go de-throned in spectacular fashion and rather quickly as well.
Anyway let's look at the images and leave the numbers to the geeks. After all we are end product users not lab rats..end use it what counts.
bfitzgerald wrote:Personally I'd rather look at the real images than spend time crunching (somewhat dubious numbers). On the other hand I got a good giggle watching the A55 super fans howl in pain as their god like camera king of APS-C go de-throned in spectacular fashion and rather quickly as well.
.
I haven't seen anyone howl. Just more madeup nonsense. Indeed it was already expected that k-5, d7000 and A580 would all score higher than A55 since they use the same sensor but don't lose light. Moreover, it is already expected that since A580 has 12-bit RAW, it will score lower than K-5 and D7000. A580 is $800 cheaper than K-5 and still has the best APSC sensor in the market (and better video too). A580 is also better than K-r, but not as good as A55, as the IQ is not everything. AF in video mode plus larger EVF and no miror blur makes A55 a better camera than A580.
By the way, A55/A580 crushes K-5 in hand-held multi-shot mode for high IO -- something that neither K-5 nor D7000 do. So in fact, A55 is better in lowlight than K-5
I think there is a lot more to a camera than a dubious score on a geek site..that's my own personal view. I would never suggest anyone make a buying choice on numbers being bashed about..that would be very unwise.
I have not encountered mirror blur problems either so can't comment on that. Multi shot mode to reduce noise, yes I have that on finepix Being stuck with almost no customisation nor the ability to fine tune the LCD or set the Auto ISO limit are far more obvious problems. Different folks look for different things in cameras, and it goes far beyond DxO numbers.
bfitzgerald wrote:Personally I'd rather look at the real images than spend time crunching (somewhat dubious numbers). On the other hand I got a good giggle watching the A55 super fans howl in pain as their god like camera king of APS-C go de-throned in spectacular fashion and rather quickly as well.
Anyway let's look at the images and leave the numbers to the geeks. After all we are end product users not lab rats..end use it what counts.
I guess I'm still not getting the point. Maybe I'm slow. Even if the K-5 sensor is rated higher, does that make the A55 any less of a camera?
Does the notion that a camera may only rank second best in a cetain aspect make it not worth owning and suggest a status-seeking mentality trying to fill an insatiable need?
Is the point a newfound glee in the disparagement of others gratification?
Will we hear howling in pain should the A77 rank higher than the K-5? The relentless painful howls since the A55 emerged suggests the answer is obvious.
edrice wrote:
Will we hear howling in pain should the A77 rank higher than the K-5? The relentless painful howls since the A55 emerged suggests the answer is obvious.
Ed
The only people who are howling are in fact A55's detractors. There is in no camera that comes close to A55 for the price (it's $749 in the US, cheaper than K-r, 550D). 10 fps, video AF, multishot modes, panorama, HDR, GPS, 100% viewfinder larger than Canon 7Ds OVF.
You have to have some howling to counter the ultra fan love for the A55. Sure it's got some impressive bits in some ways. On the other hand take out the 10fps, sweep pano and video AF and you've got a pretty ordinary camera. It looks decent but not for me..it is not however the re-birth of Jesus or anything near like the hype it's been getting on some sites.
bfitzgerald wrote:You have to have some howling to counter the ultra fan love for the A55. Sure it's got some impressive bits in some ways. On the other hand take out the 10fps, sweep pano and video AF and you've got a pretty ordinary camera. It looks decent but not for me..it is not however the re-birth of Jesus or anything near like the hype it's been getting on some sites.
So even if you take out the 10fps, sweep pano and video AF, it's the other "impressive bits" that made me such a mindless extremist and fanatical zealot. Do you honestly think that all this howling in pain can possibly dislodge me from this drunken, stupified, frenzied orgy of lust for this picture-taking machine that has made me lose any sense balance or objectivity - such doltishness that shouldn't even be mentioned, much less permitted in polite company?
Do you suppose a self-appointed intervention by yourself has any chance of saving me or the mindless masses of myrmidons who have so obviously lost our way by peering through EVFs which are nothing more than barriers to the real world?
Taste is a personal thing..having had a hands on briefly with an A55 (yesterday)..I frankly don't see what all the fuss is about. It's good (if you like EVF's), but I am surprised it got some rave reviews (well not that shocked but it's really not a gold award camera) as I failed to get caught up in the excitement...I'm sure some do and good luck to them.
Most of the pro points for the A55 are not high up my list of wants..thus it's not as mind blowing to some folks.
I am just as entitled to want an OVF as anyone else is to want an EVF. A simple concept if there ever was one..choice
Bottom line is I think it's getting massively over hyped after all a camera only gets so mind blowing.
bfitzgerald wrote:Taste is a personal thing..having had a hands on briefly with an A55 (yesterday)..I frankly don't see what all the fuss is about. It's good (if you like EVF's), but I am surprised it got some rave reviews (well not that shocked but it's really not a gold award camera) as I failed to get caught up in the excitement...I'm sure some do and good luck to them.
Most of the pro points for the A55 are not high up my list of wants..thus it's not as mind blowing to some folks.
I am just as entitled to want an OVF as anyone else is to want an EVF. A simple concept if there ever was one..choice
Bottom line is I think it's getting massively over hyped after all a camera only gets so mind blowing.
Really? Somehow I missed that in all the preceeding posts.
bfitzgerald wrote:... On the other hand take out the 10fps, sweep pano and video AF and...
Why? Why should one take out all interesting things before comparing it to other offerings? Because others do not have it? Because you do not need it? Duh!
I agree with you that taste is a personal thing - and I fully understand, that the top features of the A55 are not interesting for your own hobby; but is it fair or differentiated to declare it as an ordinary, not innovative thing, because you alone may not need it and you're incapable of recognizing the progress in it?
There certainly are some people buying into the A55, who are loud and not very tasteful in their opinionated way; this is actually the bane with any successful product. But is this a reason to discredit ANY buyer or fan of this camera?
Why is the pure existence of some bugging fans reason enough to start a bugging hate-war? Have to ask the same to those "All things Apple"-Haters.
I build my own pc's and have done for some time now. Apple make nice stuff but bottom line is bang per buck you're paying well over the odds for what is essentially a pc hardware in a nice case with their own OS. Nice and all but terrible value for money. If it works great but I've less choices with Apple (Intel only) That's my point on that hence I would never buy an Apple computer myself.
They also seem to have a habit of not allowing easy access to batteries which is a glaring design oversight IMO. The A55 is pretty nice, bit small..some strange choices (erm 3:2 aspect ratio yet they don't have a VF of that native size..odd very odd) EVF is pretty good really, for an EVF I'll give it that. But for landscape, portrait photography 10fps is redundant and of no real use. So a big headline fps was never going to make much difference to me on that side. I'd have to agree with Carls's A33 review on AMW on this one..nice but it could have been better. Really annoying about no ISO in the VF yet again (even more odd esp with the EVF), again barren and bare customisation wise.
Being stuck with almost no customisation nor the ability to fine tune the LCD or set the Auto ISO limit are far more obvious problems. Different folks look for different things in cameras, and it goes far beyond DxO numbers.
