Realism in photography in the future (if you need it)

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.
Heidfirst
Oligarch
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 2:07 am

Re: Realism in photography in the future (if you need it)

Unread post by Heidfirst »

Thom Hogan's take http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/the ... to-be.html
It's also worth reading http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/the-new-nikon.html - possibly the most telling part imo is " what I see is that people are buying a US$100 less expensive camera with fewer features and less performance than the current entry-level camera. Put another way: offer that entry buyer a significantly updated camera for US$100 and they aren't taking it. The same thing seems to be true at all of the consumer levels: people are buying on price, not latest-and-greatest. "
User avatar
Greg Beetham
Tower of Babel
Posts: 6117
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
Contact:

Re: Realism in photography in the future (if you need it)

Unread post by Greg Beetham »

bakubo wrote:
classiccameras wrote:Thing is with Sony, they are such a huge company with wide ranging assets globally, that if a small part of their empire starts to get poorly, they can afford to put a sticking plaster on it and wait until things improve or a new direction is required for that section.
Being so big and diversified cuts both ways. Sony could just sell the still camera stuff off or shut down it down and they still have a large business with many products. No one knows how any of this will pan out over the next decade. I don't worry. I figure there will still be cameras around and I will be able to get on with them. I am pretty adaptable, but I know that some people here aren't. If still cameras should totally die out then I will use what I have until I can't or I lose interest. :lol:

Did you get the A100 yet?
I suppose reading between the lines H you mean stubborn people like me as being non adaptable? I daresay I could quite easily use a camera with an EVF that does video and wastes battery power needlessly on things I don’t want, but why should I?
I don’t like their ignorant attitude (all makes) that is basically ‘take it or leave it.’ All cameras now have video and ours have delayed reaction EVF’s as well so suck it up, we’ll also outdate and devalue the purchase you make fairly soon too along with a lottery in what lenses and flashes, (by by i-shoe) have full functionality both old and new, but none of that is your concern sucker, your job is too just buy what we make…and stop complaining about us working in our best interests too when we overload you with MP’s and you have to buy all new memory cards (by by CF) and stock up on them there batteries, and oh btw you better upgrade the computer, software and hard drives too while you’re at it.
The funny part of that thought is, what’s perceived by them as being in their best interest is most often counterproductive, then it’s discovered, (or re-discovered) too late, it’s not in their best interest to stiff their customers with hidden anomalies and jerk them around with undisclosed incompatibilities after all.
Greg

Ps I get the impression Thom Hogan is rather disappointed by Nikon’s performance during the D600 debacle, and rightfully so, but Nikon isn’t the only maker that remains aloof and treats its customers as if they are a disposable commodity
classiccameras
Viceroy
Posts: 1044
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:33 am

Re: Realism in photography in the future (if you need it)

Unread post by classiccameras »

Greg, I looked at a couple of A100 and A200, but so far I have not found one in decent condition, but I'm still looking.
Any advice on these cameras and their picture taking qualities/parameters would be greatly appreciated.
Its interesting to see what sony may do, they are currently hovering like Vultures over Olympus and I believe one other company. Of course as you say, Sony could sell off ailing sections of its empire but I don't know any one who would be interested in the camera division. Sony even in these hard times are an expansionist company and their ethos is to maintain as many as their products as market leaders, which in reality is not always the case. The vast majority of Sony's wealth comes from the entertainment industry which is a billion dollar/pound business.

I think Ricoh [who make their money mostly from the photo copier industry ] taking over Pentax is possibly the way things are going to be for other camera manufacturers, a sort of, united we stand, divided we fall. We may well see more take overs or amalgamations. Panasonic is another big player who might be 'looking'.
User avatar
Greg Beetham
Tower of Babel
Posts: 6117
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
Contact:

Re: Realism in photography in the future (if you need it)

Unread post by Greg Beetham »

Pete the A100 is getting long in the tooth now that’s the only problem, I still use mine I guess because I don’t like compromised cameras, it’s just a basic honest camera warts and all, no internal jiggery pokery going on. I suppose there will come the day when it stops working but mine is low mileage, not even 5000 shots yet, or was it 6000? I forget, so it might last a while longer.

I bet there would be quite a few forgotten A100’s around that would be in good condition but they probably won’t ever get listed now because of the low value/prices they would command, the owners would probably say 'why bother trying to sell it.'

There are a couple of minor things that bug me about the camera, one is the left hand knob, it’s a grey silver and the printing on it is white so it’s a low contrast deal and not easy to read if you are in a dark hide or some dark location using flash. I usually turn it one way looking at the rear screen and if I don’t stumble over what I’m looking for I turn it back the other way, but I usually turn it the wrong way to begin with, unless the Fn button press in centre of the knob opens the screen I want right off of course, that can happen.

The KM5D just had the Fn button on the back of the camera and then you just up arrow or down arrow to get the screen you want, that design I believe is actually faster than the ‘quick nav’ on the A700, although there isn’t much in it. Six of one and half a dozen of the other basically, the only thing is the A700’s screen when using ‘quick nav’ has a lot of settings that aren’t selectable via that method (those most likely have their own dedicated switch or button) so there is some clutter that you don’t get with the KM5D method. I’ve frequently pressed the Fn button on the A700 only to realize that the items that can be selected on the rear screen after navigating with the joystick don’t include the one I actually want. It’s visible but I can’t select it with quick nav.

Comparing the three cameras using the Fn button interface the A100 is slightly worse because Sony fixed something that wasn’t broken, it’s still quite usable though, just a bit more fumble potential.

The rear screen on the A100 can be scratched fairly easily, it’s just plastic not glass and there aren’t any warnings about that anywhere that I ever saw, but the screen resolution itself is streets ahead of the one on the KM5D that’s for sure.

The shutter is almost exactly the same as the KM5D, (the other con) basic really, only 1/160sec x-sync, that’s its top cycle speed with SSS off (1/125sec with SSS on) while the A700’s is much faster 1/250sec and 1/200sec respectively.

Both the A100 and the KM5D are smaller and a lot less cumbersome than the A700, I could carry the A100 with the 18-200 lens all day without any problem but I’d say the A700 would be more noticeable especially if the grip was fitted with two batteries in it. (no grips were made for either of the other two)
the A700 has a three position switch for metering and a four position switch for AF mode that the other two don’t have but they have those via the Fn button so that’s no great hurdle.

The A100 doesn’t have a dedicated ISO button, Sony fixed that and included it in with the other selections on the LH dial, while both the KM5D and the A700 have a separate ISO button. The A700 has a front and rear dial, the A100 and KM5D have just the front one. Bracketing and drive modes, I hardly ever use those myself so I can’t tell you much about them.

It has mirror up via the 2sec timer, and the DOF preview button works as expected, also the +/- button has the usual -2 +2 stops exposure bias screen and the same again for flash exposure balance, which I found works pretty reliably overall with my F56 and 3600HS(D), but then I have all bought new KM (D) lenses, there could be irregular flash with older 5 pin and non OEM (Sigma/Tamron) lenses when taking WL and bounce flash especially (so I’ve heard, don’t have any myself so I have no first hand on that), there were quite a lot of flash problems I believe that were caused more from sticky apertures in old lenses than anything else. I never had any shoe contact problems on either the KM5D or the A100 but I did on the A700, Sony had decided two consecutive models without problems in that area was enough.

All three cameras turn on and off almost instantly and focus with my collection of lenses mostly quite accurately from what I’ve seen, there are differences in AF speed though; the A700 on slow AF is still faster than either the A100 or the KM5D with most lenses, the slow lenses are the KM18-200, KM100-300APO(D) and KM100Macro, no surprises there, fast lenses are the KM24-105, KM28-75 and KM17-35.
You can discover some noise with the A100 if you try, but then I’ve taken ISO1600 on occasion that hardly shows any, it really depends on the ambient EV and how dark the shadows are I suspect. I would say taking photos in a gloomy church with an A100 without a bank of lights would be a very bad idea.

I have the habit of leaving my JPEG’s untouched by any in camera enhancements on all three cameras and that usually works ok, they come out of the camera a little bland looking but they only need a slight lift in PP and then they usually look ok.
That’s about all I can think of offhand, if you want to know anything in particular about the A100 let me know.
Greg
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Realism in photography in the future (if you need it)

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

Digging around a bit on the A100 I found this...
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/NEW-Sony-Alph ... rid=229508

You could buy a "new" A100 :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
From that seller!

In my own experiences buying bodies and lenses, if you are patient enough something will come along. I am fairly fussy (esp with lenses) regarding their condition, but if you persist long enough then you will find a very good body/lens or whatever it is you are looking for.
Someone somewhere has an A100 sitting in a box and they might have barely used it, it's surprising the number of items I see at times and they are very near as good as new condition.
classiccameras
Viceroy
Posts: 1044
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:33 am

Re: Realism in photography in the future (if you need it)

Unread post by classiccameras »

Thanks Greg and Barry for your help, I am currently chasing one on LCE site. According to DPReviews, The A200 was a slightly better camera but both use a CCD sensor which some say gives more pleasing colours and IQ than the CMOS sensors as long as you stay below 800 ISO.

Peter
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Realism in photography in the future (if you need it)

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

You can get ok results with the 10mp CCD up to around ISO 1600, but Sony's metering is too cautious and underexposes quite a bit at times.
The difference between the older CCD's and the newer CMOS sensors is that you CAN get away with some underexposure at high ISO on the CMOS ones, but you're in a bad place with the CCD ones.

My advice for low light is add +0.7-1.0 stop of exposure for low light, the A200 is esp prone to lots of colour noise at high ISO (blue channel noise), this clears up mostly with better exposure. Even today all the Sony models I've tried and even the A57 continue to be overly cautious with metering, which is fine for daylight shots, but not for low light ones.

I have to say that KM had it about right metering with the Km5d, it's very close to ideal exposure even for very long exposures. I'd drop it down a little -0.3 at times you could leave it set to that and have almost no problems shooting all day. Being blunt it probably meters better than any of the DSLR's I've used since, D7000 was all over the place and very prone to overexposure, D90 was not bad has to be said, K-x and K-r were not very good major underexposure for low light as much as 2 stops at times!

Only reservations with the A200 are lack of MLU (avoid if you are a macro shooter) and the annoying flash comp buried in the main menu. Both the A100 and A200 are cheap as chips though to buy s/h, just keep an eye on the metering. It's kind of strange Sony have yet to make a camera I've used that can meter well in low light!
alphaomega
Viceroy
Posts: 1196
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:20 pm

Re: Realism in photography in the future (if you need it)

Unread post by alphaomega »

I remember almost buying an A100 from Argos at the end of its shelf lift for a knock-down price but resisted remembering reviews pointing out a loud shutter noise and (more alarming) slow focusing. This was Sony's first real DSLR. I resisted and stayed with my R1 until the release of the A700 with the Zeiss 16-80 as a kit lens at around £1200 (and Sony offered their cash-back so I think I had the assembly at around £1100.) My son wore out the original A700 and now using a second purchase I made for £550 when production ceased.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests