A77 II has landed!

[classiccameras]

A Sony A-57 Mk 2 would be good and if the price was right, it would be a good seller for Sony. They need to push the 58 right down to entry level with the approriate price or better still drop it.

[ValeryD]

I agree to the "global" conclusions about the cameras Sony. I like the same A57. I use a lot. Yes, Sony could leave electronic management camera closer to the A77. And certainly not to cut functionality opportunities in A58 camera. I took the A58 for a week, in principle it is a one step low from the A57. Good camera, but it's even more cuts option in control system of the camera.
According to the new A77-2 can add a few advantages. This is really the better autofocus system. I have compared with the Nikon D610 and Canon 6D. By AF system I did not like the Nikon d610, d610 able to focus in a dark room on the same object as other cameras only the third time! Canon 6D worked perfectly as Sony A77-2. The picture quality (sharpness, resolution, noise) Canon and Sony were in the same category as opposed to Nikon. Then of course, a optics could play crucial, Canon 6D was with 24-105, Nikon D610 with 24-85. Sony c SAL1680CZ. This is understandable, drawing quality is determined primarily by the lenses. All this things together stopped me once again from switching to a FF camera. I took the A77-2. Plus, absolutely no desire to change all lenses to the Sony FF format A mount, when Sony has strange policy in the A mount cameras. Yes and a pricing Sony lenses format FF mount A is very difficult call to be affordable. Personally for me, it's a big reason to get Canon 6D with a kit lens 24-105, than Sony a99 with 24-70CZ.
About the noise matrix in A77-2, it's way better than the first A77 and A57.

Sorry for my broken english.
PS. Some examples from a77-II :
http://www.photoclubalpha.com/forum/vie ... =17&t=8248

[classiccameras]

I actually think that the A-57 shows less noise below ISO 1600.

[ValeryD]

I actually think that the A-57 shows less noise below ISO 1600.

No, new a77-II has less noise than a57 in same ISO1600, ISO3200 and ISO6400 (in RAW file format). I did compare two cameras. Actually I do have both cameras.

[bfitzgerald]

I'll reserve judgement until ACR supports the A77II so I can see properly what's going on (though there may be other raw converters that do well I've not used many recently) I will do my A57 v A77 high ISO test just to see what really is going on (same settings, lens and light etc)

Having used a few bodies recently 70d, previously D7000, A57, Canon 650d and some of the recent Nikon's entry level. I'm not seeing much of a difference, some are a bit better, but not hugely so. Some have better DR at high ISO..a bit. So far nothing has stood out as hands down clearly showing an advantage. I know the A77 II has a newer sensor so some improvements are expected. The other thing is the ISO values might not be the same so that's why I'm going to tripod both the A57 and A77 to see what the actual exposure is with identical settings.

So far jpeg wise I'm seeing more NR (though I'm not sure what settings are being used) on the A77 II, there might be a bit less noise.
I think some DPR forum posters have unrealistic expectation and an aversion to noise and processing. You will get noise..at high ISO. But looking at some folks saying they'd only use ISO 800 in a push..is a bit comical to me. Noise is far far less visible in print (grain noise that is) some freak out at any noise with 100% views.

I'll get on with my controlled test, I think it's the only way to see what is going on

[ValeryD]

I did a short test with 2 cameras on same SAL1680 and look on the big screen later on RAW files with any NR or so. New sensor in a77-II make a big improvement compare to the first a77 and a57.
But any way it's nice to see other test as well too.

[ValeryD]

Today I did a little test on noise on A57 compared to a77-II
All shots done on manual mode with a single optic (Minolta 50/1.7)
F3.5 ISO 3200 ISO 6400 all with a single point. I made a little sharpness mistake on A77-2 , but basically it was done to determine the level of noise. I use a Sony Image Data Converter with the switched off all noise reduction, etc.
https://plus.google.com/114643882696180 ... fTXZgPiSKM

[bfitzgerald]

I assume these are 100% crops?
They look pretty close to me.

Just being honest I'm not defending the A57 here maybe there is a minor improvement in the A77 II, it's not what I would call "a big jump up" by any stretch. That's just my take I'll wait for ACR as I'm not entirely convinced with Sony's IDC, I have used it recently and it's annoyingly slow even on fairly pokey 6 core pc, so I don't use it.

[ValeryD]

I assume these are 100% crops?
They look pretty close to me.

Just being honest I'm not defending the A57 here maybe there is a minor improvement in the A77 II, it's not what I would call "a big jump up" by any stretch. That's just my take I'll wait for ACR as I'm not entirely convinced with Sony's IDC, I have used it recently and it's annoyingly slow even on fairly pokey 6 core pc, so I don't use it.

I like both cameras a57 and a77-II, not like first a77. I had a77 probably two year ago and returned it back to the shop, because the "killing" noise.

[bfitzgerald]

The reason I avoided the A77 for so long was noise and what I felt was bad low light performance. However..now I've had the chance to see what's going on, I don't think the noise is an issue at all really.

At default exposure yes the performance is disappointing, but now I've seen what's really going on (metering and actual exposure v the A57) there is very little between the 2 bodies for high ISO performance. I'm not sure how the A77 II meters does it give more exposure than previous bodies?

The D7k I had even though I've long since sold that body was very aggressive with exposure to the point of having to dial it back a bit (good light and low light) the A57 and A77 are very different in relation to metering

[classiccameras]

I partial defence of the 57, IMO below ISO 800 its hard to beat and satifies my demands for the type of work I do. I found the 65 noisier than the 57 when I borrowed one. Again in IMO, my Canon 550D exhibits cleaner pictures with nicer more natural colours [in Jpeg] than the Sony up to ISO 1600. This for me is academic as I almost never go above ISO 400 and I usually use a tripod rather than increase ISO, I'm a bit old school in that respect. I can however see that the A-77-11 has some improvement in several areas on the older model.

[peterottaway]

The jpeg output is really of little importance to me as I so rarely use it. Even when shooting local sports ( not exactly pro level ) as i don't have thousands of shots to go through.So with these it's just a case of put them through on auto to see what I have got.

Yes it does help to have more than one computer but if you are dubious about Sonys out of the camera production, then it is an alternative. Also helps when wanting to do some printing

[bfitzgerald]

Jpeg can be handy at times, despite some of the "raw only" folks out there. Time and a place for everything really
I don't really need or want to trawl through 16/24mp raw files for say shots of a birthday party where jpegs will be just fine (images that won't require lots of editing)

I have been using lossy DNG converting ARW files to that as an alternative to jpegs. But it would be much better if I could simply use lower resolution raw files too, and have better jpegs. I may convert some 24mp raw files into lower resolution, unless I can find an example where 24mp shows some improvement over 16mp (and currently it's not on my tests)

[peterottaway]

Sure jpegs have their place but you don't need to judge a camera or lens just from them. Time after time you see "reviews" which are at best just quick and dirty first impressions. Which are using some kind of jpeg setting but usually without proper details of what they are doing. Being first to publish may get you an elephant stamp for your homework from some, but a kilo of partially ripe lemons from me.

I may be going warm and cuddly in my advancing years but for the social events I am thinking of getting an RX100 or the like. Rather than being totally in your face with my A77 with zoom and my HVL-F58 flash.

[classiccameras]

Peter, I guess all review sites are under some sort of time limit as quite often the same camera gets passed around from one site to another so its possible that they didn't have the time to run extensive RAW tests. It could be that in their view most people will use Jpeg at least to start with and move over to RAW as they develop their skills, but we have to recognise that it won't be everyones cup of tea, and now, according to DPReviews the Jpegs on the latest ILC Fuji's are so good little is gained from shooting RAW.
I think the RAW/Jpeg argument is flawed as both serve the photographer in different ways and at least it gives us a choice.