A58 has best image quality

[classiccameras]

Imaging Resource said the new Sony Alpha A58 had the best IQ they had ever tested of any entry level DSLR currently on the market including cameras with 24mp.
Forget the body spec and some other lower budget issues, this must indicate that Sony have more to offer with SLT. Apparently it has got Canikon's attention who once sneered at Sony as an also ran.
I'm still a fan for the moment and will wait and see what they have in store for us next year and then its decision time.

[bfitzgerald]

You'll be disappointed with the A58 in the real world I can guarantee that.
I would not look at this model unless it reached insanely low prices say £200 odd body only. Then you might be able to overlook some of it's shortcomings at that uber low price point (the new hot shoe might annoy though).

There are a number of questionable points to the IR review. Firstly they never gave the A57 a full review, just a few test shots.
Secondly he's raving about the IQ and testing it against a number of other makers models in jpeg. I can spot where he's gone wrong straight away in that area because I've used a fair few Pentax, Nikon and Canon's. All the other makers have a very low/off NR setting for jpeg that Sony don't have (applies to A57 as well no off NR)

I personally am interested only in jpegs with low NR and the other makers I've used offer far better jpegs mostly in terms of detail with NR off. Just testing at defaults isn't a test IMO, not really. The A58 might do a bit better with the bottle shot v the A57, but IMO both are not that great compared to other makers with NR set to the lowest you can. Take a look at the shot of the guy with the white beard, lots of melting and NR, and it has quite a bit of chroma noise left there smeared into the image. That's not great it's quite poor really and I'm sure you'd get better results from other makers (I've used Nikon and Pentax and Canon at high ISO levels and they do far better, but NR set to lowest level)

I don't doubt the A58's sensor is "decent", but I'm not seeing a major step forward, just more chroma noise at higher ISO levels...and so far no tests have shown it to be better than the older 16mp CMOS either in DR or low light)

Problem with reading reviews online is you can never really see what's going on real world. Having used the A58, it feels much worse build wise than the A57, much lower grade smooth plastic. The rear LCD has poor contrast and is pretty unimpressive, even the touted OLED EVF sounds better and yes no tearing but when you use it you instantly spot the viewfinder isn't better than the A57's, it's actually a lot smaller (significantly so) Bar a couple of bits Sony added such as proper bracketing and Auto ISO in M mode it's just a far weaker camera overall than the model it's supposed to replace.

It's not one of IR's better reviews they made a lot of errors during that review (I had to point out on the news section that the aperture ring control is metal but not load bearing, so they changed that) silly things that an experienced A mount user or reviewer would have spotted and known. The buffer isn't correspondingly smaller because it's 20mp, the buffer is a LOT smaller because it is actually a lot smaller rather than the same buffer being used on the A57/65/77 which gives the A57 a bigger buffer than the other 2 only because the files are smaller. No mention of the lack of remote or IR remote ports either.

I've lost a lot of respect for IR after that review it's really let them down, the A58 is merely a very average camera overall and isn't award winning in any way.

[classiccameras]

I have no intention of getting an A58, Just thought it worth mentioning the IR review as a talking point.

[bfitzgerald]

Fair enough I'm just pointing out some obvious errors and how sloppy the review is overall. It's a real shame as IR used to be pretty decent.
I honestly doubt the A58 is going to worry Canon at all..Sony are running a bad line up this Christmas that's for sure they had really better pull things out next year big time.

[alphaomega]

Clearly the A58 does not meet Barry Fitzgerald's requirements and fair enough.
The A58 is now available at just over £300 here in UK. I was wondering about purchasing one solely for video. I used my A580 (no AF during recording and lousy external mike). I have tested my NEX-6 with LA-EA2 and Sony 18-250. Works fine but my tripod is not 100% stable and wind is not easily controllable here in Scotland.
Would I fare better if I used the A58, which would provide sensor stabilisation and also accept my new microphone ECM-XYST1M, which also fits the NEX-6 new universal shoe.
In other words, would sensor stabilisation help stabilise video recording on a tripod? problem is at the long end of my Sony 18-250 in wind. Anyone with a view on this?
I was also looking at the SAR rumor with sensor stabilisation in the NEX-6/7 replacement. This camera would probably be heading towards £1000 and I am not certain that Sony will take this step (or indeed they have the space for the movement). Don't want to buy a NEX dedicated 18-200 either. Don't want a heavy dedicated video tripod either. Too big and heavy for my use.

[mixxer]

Hi
The a58 takes quality stills and video and is a sound purchase at current prices (even the kit lens is good when stopped down to ~ f8). Steadyshot isn't recommended on Sony cameras when they are tripod mounted but in the scenario you describe (250mm focal length on a light tripod) there will always be some vibration and Steadyshot, which works excellently when hand held, should be an advantage.
Different photographers have different needs/expectations from their cameras, sometimes up to the point of dismissing perfectly good equipment. I can only report from my own experience and state that the a58 takes images as good as my Sony a57, a37 and a350. Buy the a58 and enjoy it, it's a Sony SLT after all which makes it one of the most versatile means of expressing your imagination in a visual form.

Mick

[teshi]

Ill be honest. I have the 58 sitting right here and there is something about the images that im just not happy with. They seem to lack the same punch I have manage to obtain from earlier bodies like the 57 but I have not sat and compared pixel by pixel. Its weird since I like the photos it produces but just feels like there is something missing. I suppose I have only really used it in a studio style setup so it wouldn't be entirely fair. I should take it out for a walk or into town to see how it handles there.

I am happy to give it some more testing if there are any areas you would like to see,

[alphaomega]

Thanks for the reply mixxer.

Steadyshot isn't recommended on Sony cameras when they are tripod mounted but in the scenario you describe (250mm focal length on a light tripod) there will always be some vibration and Steadyshot, which works excellently when hand held, should be an advantage.

Just my thoughts as well, but I thought that seeking other users opinion would be a good idea.

[classiccameras]

Most review sites have been positive about the A-58 saying it produced excellent pictures, but a couple were not so praising saying the extra 4mp had increased noise very slightly at higher ISO setting, which in turn have been over smoothed out by heavy handed noise reduction rendering high ISO pictures lacking detail.
I seem to remember Sony getting a pasting on this from earlier model reviews, over zealous noise reduction from about 1600 ISO upwards causing picture degradation. Having a 57 and a 37 I am very pleased with their IQ but I rarely venture above 800 ISO.
When will Sony give users more control over noise reduction, its about time.

[mixxer]

High ISO performance isn't an issue for me so I haven't done any testing... until today.
I've just finished a comparison test between the a37 and the a58 using the same subject, same viewpoint, same lens and same camera settings. These are taken at ISO 12800...

[mixxer]

Just to add...
These are re-sized copies of the original untouched, unedited JPEG's. There isn't much between them up to and including ISO6400 and the RAW files are likewise pretty much a match up to iSO6400 although they both look sharper than the JPEG's with a rather pleasing grain structure. I can't see any objective person disputing my own conclusion that at ISO12800, the image from the a58 is noticeably better than that from the a37. From this 'experiment' I intend to use high ISO settings more in future.

[mixxer]

Alphaomega

I've just completed a video test with my a58 and a Minolta 100-200 lens set at 200mm on a tripod. Steadyshot-ON reduced my induced vibrations by about 50% compared to Steadyshot-OFF although this wasn't enough for a pleasing result. However, using the Media Stabilizer option in Movie Studio Platinum (Version 11) completely removed the vibrations.

BTW
To replicate the field of view produced at 200mm with Steadyshot-OFF, you would need to zoom out to around 150mm with Steadyshot-ON. This would reduce any vibrations further still. Hope this helps.

Mick

[classiccameras]

Thanks for posting those comparisons of high ISO noise levels, its a bit acedemic for me as although there are differences between the 2 cameras, I'm unlikely to ever go beyond ISO 800 with the type of photoraphy I do. By the way, I'v seen worse noise at those settings from a 24mp Nikon and the 24mp Sony's.
I hold the opinion that up to 400 ISO, the Jpegs from my A37/57 are superb, main reason is the over zealous noise reduction has not really kicked in yet to smear out detail.

[mixxer]

I agree, both JPEG and ARW files at or under ISO800 are quite remarkable with both the a37 and a58. However, after looking at the ARW files produced at ISO3200 and 6400 today I can see great potential for 'moody' B&W images.

[alphaomega]

Thank you very much for your test of A58 with 200mm lens mixxer.

Seems to me that I need a Sony camera with steady shot to obtain best results. Might purchase one of these A58 cameras due to low price and excellent sensor. I will also check if my software provides for stabilisation or I might purchase Sony's Movie Studio Platinum.