I played with an A900 today

[Javelin]

Thats great. I asked to se the 58AM flash. (pointing to it on the shelf) and he says. Oh I didn't know Sony had flashes, then wouldn't open the box because they didn't have one already opened.

[Mike-Photos]

Sorry guys - the Menu item only enables a voluntary APS-C crop using normal lenses, setting it to OFF does not disabled auto crop with APS-C lenses. So, the answer is simple - you can not use the 11-18mm at 15mm on full frame. And it applies to raw. The raw is genuinely windowed, cropped down, not like the 16:9 on the A700 where a full raw is captured but only part of it is seen by conversion programs.
David

Hi David
So the viewfinder displays the same no matter which mode you are in?
Perhaps I just was confused because I zoomed in more with the 16-80 after I changed the setting?

[pakodominguez]

Sorry guys - the Menu item only enables a voluntary APS-C crop using normal lenses, setting it to OFF does not disabled auto crop with APS-C lenses. So, the answer is simple - you can not use the 11-18mm at 15mm on full frame. And it applies to raw. The raw is genuinely windowed, cropped down, not like the 16:9 on the A700 where a full raw is captured but only part of it is seen by conversion programs.

Ah!
:-/

I didn't try the camera with an DT lens (I don't have any) So? we start complaining and making alot of noise about it in order to have that function available on the next firmware upgrade? Not that I think I'll be buying a DT lens, but we already have an advantage over the competence(Canonites can't even mount their EF-S lenses on a FF body), let's try to take it farther

I'm review the few shots I took with the A900 yesterday, mostly at hi ASA (Midtown by 4:30 pm isn't sunny, and they didn't allow me to take the camera to Central Park) and the noise doesn't disturb me at all. I enjoyed the intelligent preview and the fast rendering of the modifications.

[Mike-Photos]

Usual style? Look dude (Mike-Photos)...it was OLaf that blasted you for only *needing* a one camera kit, not me! I was defending you by mentioning you probably did not *need* two bodies since you were not a "pro" shooter! Geesh...what that means is it's not a critical problem for you if your one body gives out. Please give Olaf the business, not me!

Don, Olaf didn't say anything about me at all. He said that HE needs two bodies, no bash there at all.
And, thanks for justifying to him why it was okay for me to need only one - I thank you for that, and I have no issue with it at all.
It was just how you worded your sentence that came across as dismissive, and I apologise if you don't like that. It IS your style, I read many of your posts, and I enjoy them, you are a good photographer, and you know and research a great deal.

Stop putting words in my mouth...I NEVER said you only had DT lenses! Sheesh...You yourself mentioned DT lenses were a big factor for you.

I said "And no, I have FF lenses - CZ135, KM85, Sony 70-200, KM 100mm macro, and others."
You never said I only had DT lenses, and I never said you said I only had DT lenses, I just told you which ones I had. YOU said I said you said, and this sentence just addled my brain ! You're denying something that both of us never said, so I don't quite follow, but it's okay.

Who the he** said your hobby requirements were "inferior"...certainly not me. In-fact, it was only you mentioning such things![\quote]
Once again you said "I have to agree with you on this, but I suspect he might be just a hobby shooter that wants a full frame DTish kit."
Maybe, being a technical writer by profession, I'm just over-sensitive to grammar, but "just" in your sentence is definitely a pejorative use of the word. I'm happy to accept that you didn't mean it in that way.

And, being a writer, "You said I said you said..." is not something I have been able to write meaningfully before this!

I hope that you too have a great day.

[paulobro]

<...>
The raw is genuinely windowed, cropped down, not like the 16:9 on the A700 where a full raw is captured but only part of it is seen by conversion programs.

I advise buyers not to rush into it unless they know for sure the image size and full frame is a priority.

My list of criticisms is growing faster than my list of 'wow!' factors right now.

David

I hear you.
All movement ceased.
Standing by for further ado.

And tks.

[bossel]

Lack of screen protector too, Nikon supply them with bodies at this level, A700 hard protector does not fit......

I never liked the Sony protector and went straight for a Silicon-Film based one. Easy to fit, doesn't come off and invisible.

I wonder about the list of critics! The A900 is out of reach for me as hobbyist, but of cause I'd like to hear good things about it, just for the dreams I think many people might be disappointed - due to the length of waiting our expectations have grown and grown every day, to expect the Uber-camera, but it's just an FF A700 with better viewfinder (which is nothing bad, btw).

[David Kilpatrick]

I don't think that's what it does, I think it's the other way round - you can choose APS mode with FF lenses, but not FF mode with APS lenses. David will no doubt let us know.

Correct, that is the case - and the viewfinder never shows anything, you just have to use the marks. There is no LCD overlay to dim the edges or stuff like that.

David

[Jonathan K]

My list of criticisms is growing faster than my list of 'wow!' factors right now.

Hmm, I am really looking forward to hearing your opinion on this camera. I actually refused to get involved in comparing pictures etc because I expect (or is is hope) that there will be a A700v4-like upgrade for the A900.

Jonathan

[Dr. Harout]

I expect that there will be a A700v4-like upgrade for the A900.

Jonathan

I expect that too.

[Jardyn39]

Just to add to the comments on the APS-C capture function on the A900 (Firmware 1.0):

With “APS-C Capt.” Set to ON, the picture saved is cropped to the APS-C size irrespective of the lens.

However, the behaviour of the OFF setting seems to be different depending upon whether or not the lens is detected as FF or not.

I’ve a Tamron 18-200 mm and the Sony 18-70 mm. At 18 mm and with “APS-C Capt.” set to OFF, the Tamron capture shows heavy vignetting in 6048 x 4032 pixels. Whereas, with the Sony attached the camera automatically crops the file down to 3984 x 2656.

I don’t have another APS-C Sony lens to compare, so I’m not sure if this applies to all non-Sony APS-C lenses or just the Tamron and Sigma examples I have.

To my eyes the viewfinder crop guides are not particularly clear in low light, so I much prefer to have the vignetting with the option to crop manually later on.

[Philip]

This possibly has something to do with the way in which 3rd party manufacturers 'chip' their lenses. My understanding (I think it was a Phototraveller thread) is that Tamron/Sigma reverse engineer mounts and chip their lenses with a lens chip that they know works (my 12-24 Siggy id's itself as a 28-80mm f3.5-5.6), so if the chip is a FF chip, then the A900 would not know to automatically crop for APSC. Good news for some lens owners

Philip

[Rincewind]

Hi Philip

Isn't your Sigma 12-24mm a full frame lens?
Why would it activate APS-C crop on the A900?

Regards.
Den.

[Dr. Harout]

Hi Philip

Isn't your Sigma 12-24mm a full frame lens?
Why would it activate APS-C crop on the A900?

Regards.
Den.

First post Den. Welcome.

[Rincewind]

Thank you for the welcome

I've lurked for a while, but have been meaning to register.
It's a good forum, well worth supporting, so if anyone else is doing what I was, maybe it's time to join

Regards.
Den.

[KevinBarrett]

Thank you for the welcome

I've lurked for a while, but have been meaning to register.
It's a good forum, well worth supporting, so if anyone else is doing what I was, maybe it's time to join

Regards.
Den.

Welcome, and thank you for the encouragement! All you other lurkers sign up and claim a user name! Post some pictures and converse!