Sony A-99 11

Specifically for the discussion of the A-mount DSLR range
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.
classiccameras
Viceroy
Posts: 873
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:33 am

Sony A-99 11

Unread postby classiccameras » Wed Feb 15, 2017 10:08 am

DP Reviews have reviewed the new A99 Mk2 and generally a favourable review except Sony's old bug bare, Jpegs, Described by DP Review as 'displeasing'. Can't say I disagree. OK most will use this camera on RAW but its no excuse to expect users to make do with naff Jpeg colours, and compared to Olympus, Fuji, Canon and Nikon they are poor.

CHOLLY
Oligarch
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Nov 01, 2013 6:21 pm

Re: Sony A-99 11

Unread postby CHOLLY » Wed Feb 15, 2017 7:17 pm


CHOLLY
Oligarch
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Nov 01, 2013 6:21 pm

Re: Sony A-99 11

Unread postby CHOLLY » Wed Feb 15, 2017 9:30 pm

Since DPreview has a LONG and WELL DOCUMENTED history of being both biased and ANTI-SONY, I prefer the reviews from Imaging Resource when it comes to unbiased and COMPLETE reviews of new Sony gear.

classiccameras
Viceroy
Posts: 873
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:33 am

Re: Sony A-99 11

Unread postby classiccameras » Thu Feb 16, 2017 12:42 pm

I see your point but recent DP reviews of the new Sony A6000xx and A7 FF cameras gave them gold star rating

If any one was biased its Amateur Photographer, still in the old school mode where if its not Nikon, Canon or Pentax its an also ran

I do respect Imaging resources, its a good fair site, if not a tad harsh on lens reviews

User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3533
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Sony A-99 11

Unread postby bfitzgerald » Tue Feb 21, 2017 2:01 pm

I'd wait for the Imaging Resource review myself I struggled with the DPR review the sites really sunk in terms of review quality in recent years mix in the tiny screen size (yes I know some use mobile to watch still it's way too small) lost interest fairly quickly. Maybe they make some valid points maybe not can't really say jpegs have always been ho hum on Sony. They mention AF i'd like to read more on that from other sites before coming to a conclusion can't say as I've not used it.

DPR don't have Sony they hate "mirrors" if it's not an ILC or Mirrorless they seem harsher. Even on Nikon or Canon reviews they can't help themselves but throw some digs at DSLR's or models like that. My thoughts on ILC are well known I don't find it that appealing I'm not against it. DPR are quite biased and have been for years they even credit themselves with starting the mirrorless revolution by raising it so often. I think a review site needs to at least try to be impartial regardless of brand or type of camera, that site is not DPR. It's tanked in Alexa rankings and continues to fall just lost touch with it's readers and the content isn't up to scratch.
I admit I visit camera sites/forums a lot less..still it used to be the place to go for news/reviews and chat.

Sad to see how it's slumped

peterottaway
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 590
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:24 am
Location: Northam, Western Australia

Re: Sony A-99 11

Unread postby peterottaway » Fri Mar 24, 2017 8:22 am

Imaging Resource summary on the A99 II is now published. One thing I have noticed is that the IR published photos for most reviews seem to be a lot more real world to me than some I could mention. The same criticism goes for Photo Zone lens reviews, too many what I consider to be simple snaps that don't really tell me much.

There has been a few comments in PZ recently about them still using a 24 MP Nikon D3x and by extrapolation a 21MP Canon as opposed to a 42 MP Sony. Mike Johnston has just written an article in The Online Photographer about lens testing which is just as relevant to camera testing.

classiccameras
Viceroy
Posts: 873
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:33 am

Re: Sony A-99 11

Unread postby classiccameras » Fri Mar 24, 2017 9:25 am

When will the pixel race stop, never is my guess, but lens performance is not keeping up with these new high pixel count FF censors, it will get to the stage where the lenses will be prohibitively expensive, well they are almost now for FF especially the FE for E mount. It will be a market for the pros, and rich enthusiasts, but I cannot see Sony enticing too many pros away from Canikon

peterottaway
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 590
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:24 am
Location: Northam, Western Australia

Re: Sony A-99 11

Unread postby peterottaway » Fri Mar 24, 2017 12:49 pm

Some have moved, some have added Sony to their equipment list and many of the true believers will die with their Canon or Nikon in their hands as you can't go to Valhalla without it. Those that the dementia ward at the local care facility doesn't get first !

It is really up to Sony to keep up the running, offering a sensible number of cameras with a decently broad feature list and see what happens. And not just Sony but every sale that goes to Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic is one less to Canon and Nikon more than Sony.

User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3533
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Sony A-99 11

Unread postby bfitzgerald » Fri Mar 24, 2017 1:00 pm

It won't stop until you can crop an UWA lens shot to a 600mm telephoto and print the size of a cinema screen and it has to be tack sharp with your face right up close to it ;-)

Onto the review the only area I mourn with IR is the move to DxO I still can't really get my head around the testing matching up with the real world results I've had from many cameras it's merely a guide I couldn't base a buying choice off of that. What I tend to do with cameras and lenses is read some reviews and then go look at the real images coming out of them. I find that works best for me you do need to see the real shots..but as has been said samples do vary lenses can be tricky but I've read reviews that are entirely misleading due to a bad sample.

42MP is huge huge overkill for the vast majority I still find 24MP too much and wish I had a S or M raw option it's a shame Sony don't add that so you can get smaller raw files. The camera looks good high ISO is right up there and it needed to be for the price big buffer and they are more positive about the AF performance than DPR (no sports shots though). Regarding the article and "testing" I think over time you grow tired of ultra peeping/testing in all but the important areas ie main stuff. Sometimes too much information can be as bad as not enough.

1 area stood out though on the A99II and a CIPA rating below 400 for battery use with the VF that's a really low figure I would have expected some kind of improvement there. Often real world tends to be less. I'd not rule out the A99I for playing around it has the AF assist and GPS built in high ISO not as good but not bad either. I suppose it's a bit less than the 5d MkIV.. Fuji's terrible mistake was not going full frame or at least having it as an option I think down the road that could hurt them

classiccameras
Viceroy
Posts: 873
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:33 am

Re: Sony A-99 11

Unread postby classiccameras » Fri Mar 24, 2017 2:11 pm

Yes, Canikon users are very Tribal and although as you say they are losing users to other brands they are still the number one seller on a global market, but we all accept that sales are diminishing across most brands, DSLR's taking the biggest hit. For me at least M/4/3 is a very tempting system to move to or even a high end Bridge. From my point of view 20mp on the A58 is plenty big enough, but really the earlier models with 16mp were fine. Never understood DxO, they seem to ignore real world quality. I have not bothered with DxO for several years.

peterottaway
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 590
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:24 am
Location: Northam, Western Australia

Re: Sony A-99 11

Unread postby peterottaway » Fri Mar 24, 2017 4:06 pm

You probably have as much choice now as there has been for some years. To my mind if you are one of those who are the Leica type then you can buy a Fuji X-T2 and 2,3,4 primes or the 10-24 zoom for a lot less money. Or in m43 you can get the Olympus Mark1 16 MP with a 12-40 zoom for two thirds the price of the Mark 2, and for most people they wouldn't notice the real world difference unless you have some specific needs.

User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3533
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Sony A-99 11

Unread postby bfitzgerald » Sat Mar 25, 2017 1:44 am

M 4/3 is potentially interesting as a compact replacement some of the bodies are quite good value lower end. Oly has a solid rep for lenses and always have done they just went a bit odd ball at times on design (seem to be on target recently). I wouldn't invest in the system though not to any serious degree. Fuji bar not having a FF option which may or may not be a problem for them (as said I think long term it's nice to have a choice), the lack of IBIS also holds them back. Some lenses insanely don't have IS either such as the 16-55mm F2.8 not a bargain priced lens by any means nor the 90mm F2 the kind of focal length that screams for IS. Bizarrely the 16-50mm kit lens is surprisingly good strange macro at the wide end aside..they do have some good lenses just ignore the IS side another mistake.

Lens reviews I'd tread with caution but sometimes they are right too. I tried the Pentax 18-135mm ages ago it was just as the PZ review said horrible at the wide end and top end was just a disaster even stopped right down I expected some drop off it just drops off a cliff most of the frame. Mix in the "big marker pen" CA it was shocking bad. Yet someone somewhere will go ga ga sharpening on images with monster artefacts and try to convince people it's wickedly sharp. The Fuji equivalent I also found disappointing not great at the 18mm mark at focal range I would use often. On the other hand I've been happy with the Sony 18-135mm I found Kurts test to be not representative of the lens I had yes there are some weaker points and sharpness drops off corners at 24mm and 135mm but not massively not smeared out mess those other two were. I also got a new boxed 24-105mm Minolta (from a 7 kit) and it's wickedly sharp even wide open top end and very decent at the 24mm mark bar some fall off I think it's a ridiculously good lens and very small.

I remember seeing the new 18-55mm kit yet despite about 4 copies never found one that came even close to the 18-70mm yet many reviews suggest it's far better. Maybe the Sony 18-70mm was bad (tried a few poor) the KM badged one was pretty sharp

CHOLLY
Oligarch
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Nov 01, 2013 6:21 pm

Re: Sony A-99 11

Unread postby CHOLLY » Mon Mar 27, 2017 5:11 am

Tony Northrup has done a How-To video with an extensive review forth coming.

He is a well known Canon/Nikon man... but says that the A99II is the closest to the perfect camera he has EVER seen. Even better than his beloved 5Dsr and D810!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7pYEnIvpq4

His tutorial on the A99II:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZiLDX5t2ADk

Here is his comment about the A99II being nearly perfect:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quuFqDZXTuA

A Canikon man like Tony coming over to the Light Side of the Force!!! ;)

classiccameras
Viceroy
Posts: 873
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:33 am

Re: Sony A-99 11

Unread postby classiccameras » Mon Mar 27, 2017 9:23 am

There's no doubt, the A99ii is a great FF camera and it has seriously challenged and beaten in some areas, the Canikon's, However, its not the sort of camera I would want to own or use let alone afford as I am not a pro, just a happy snapper using Sony cameras at the budget end of the line. I still remain 'confused' as what Sony are planning if at all for the future of APS-C A mount, E mount is not for me, its yet another system you have to support with more lenses some very mediocre and some crazy expensive. This is why I am attracted to M/4/3, its an easy and value for money system that delivers on many levels, plus I love the Jpegs.

I find DYXUM, site good for Sony/Minolta lens appraisals, Its a collective users opinion rather than lab tests and the Sony 18-135 came out excellent with high marks from ex number of users. The Mk 1 18-55 SAM kit lens did perform quite well, read Photozone review, but my Mk2 was so awful I sold it on E Bay. Sony fooled around with a modified rear lens group and cropped rear aperture to remove rear element flair, end result, they wrecked the resolution. In my opinion, the best APS-C A mount kit lens is the Tamron 18-50 F/2.8 (non IS), its easily as good as the CZ 16-80 and Sony 16-50 F/2.8 and an absolute bargain. Even the Sigma contemporary series lenses are excellent alternatives to Sony. You must have had a good copy of the 18-70 as it generally got poor reviews. I might just look around for a used one to try out.

classiccameras
Viceroy
Posts: 873
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:33 am

Re: Sony A-99 11

Unread postby classiccameras » Mon Mar 27, 2017 10:46 am

Amendment to my last post, Re the Tamron, I meant to say 17-50 F/2.8 (non VC) and the Sigma 17-70 F/2.8 4.5 DC macro old model, both excellent alternatives to Sony


Return to “Alpha A-mount System”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests