Danish DPReview contributor has just entered following comment on DPReview:

This Danish magazine were also the first to "spill the beans" on the A900 with a photo so maybe they are on to something. Apparently they will feature a review of a camera they are testing in their September issue so I would guess that Sony's official release will precede that month.

I just read this over at dpreview. Very interesting news. Adding HD video will hopefully shut up the vocal minority over there.
Lets wait and see if the rumours of Sony "wanting to do it right" holds any water.

I already bought the HX1 for pictures+HD-video, so I am set for a while.

-Sonolta[/quote]
Yep, that's why every time I'm about to buy a HD handycam I stop and realize that better to wqait for the next Sony vdSRL

True on both points. I bet when we get HD-video, the "vocal minority" will be replaced by a new vocal minority. I know the resistance to HD video is pretty strong by some on Dyxum from the looks of it.

And yeah, the HX1 will not give me the same quality video as a dSLR with video. Right now I'm using the HX1 for "general" video, not much artistic stuff. This is only the 2nd video camera I own, the first one was a Handycam which we got in 1996.
I hope Sony manages to implement some way of getting accurate AF in there for video, or has that already been "solved"?

Panasonic has AF in video. but it's a smaller sensor. haven't really heard anything else about it though.

My guess is that the next new Sony DSLR will be a D500 series as this would tie in with the Canadian revelation posted by Javeling in the DSLR section:


I guess it probably will have some form of HD video. It will be interesting to see the specification and how they manage to come up with something that is neither a 300 nor a 700 series in terms of specs.

I have resolved to make one more purchase but only when Sony comes up with the right goods for me. That will primarily be an APS-C sensor with at least 16 Mp and as good noise performance through the ISO range as my A700 v.4. Having used both the A350 and A700 extensively on two recent outings lasting total 21 days I can say that the A350 is fantastic at ISO 200 but I hate the small OVF. The A700 was primarily used with my Tamron 70-300 at higher ISOs. Good images but slow focusing. I must say that my future "dream DSLR" is an updated A700 with a larger sensor, A350 dynamic range and A700 v.4 ISO capability. Produce that and I shall be happy. I just feel that the A500 (if that is what is coming) will probably fall short, but you never know.

I would be rather cautious on this, Sony have not yet to date done anything "wow" shocker, blow people away. And I don't expect them too either. If they do, it will be a pleasant surprise for everyone.

My biggest concern is that the folks who run the show, are not experienced enough in the SLR market, it's not the same as the compact one, and it's ultra competitive at that.

I am expecting 2 models which are identical bar the sensor, and probably "fast live view" A350 type ones, with a beefed up spec, we are not likely to get a mini A700. I hope I am wrong

Just a couple of weeks ago it seemed that many people were expecting there to be the A5xx family perhaps with the same 12MP sensor as the Nikon D90 to compete at a similar price point and that left speculation for a A7xx to compete with the expected Nikon D400 with a 15-16 MP sensor.

If the leak about the Nikon D300s is fundamentaly correct, I wonder whether Sony will just introduce the A5xx family and let the A700 sell out and then not be replaced until a new 14/15/16 MP sensor is ready and offers a performance boost. The Canon 15 MP has hardly been acclaimed.

An A730 with say an improved 12MP sensor with focus adjustment, LV and Video would keep sales ticking over but I wonder whether the costs would justify it unless this model was designed for 12 MP now and 15MP later with the factory simply plugging in a different board.

Reference Sonolta's review of the EOS 50D features and performance capabilities on one of my outings to northern Scotland and Orkney I met a bird photographer with the EOS50D at the end of a Sigma 350-800 long tom with a 1.4 extender in between for good measure. I mentioned the question of image quality v. noise reduction and he was quite adamant that whereas he had problems with noise above ISO350 on his old 40D he could get as good images with the 50D at ISO 2500 or thereabouts. He was in fact effusive in his praise of the 50D, its processing capabilities and image quality. I think Canon is on to a winner with this camera and it is time that Sony comes out with something similar. Based on their APS-C size they should be able to deliver at least a 16.5 Mp sensor to equal Canon's 50D ISO performance all the way up. I wonder if they are going to. I can imagine that Nikon are at least urging them to if not outright demanding such a sensor. That is what I want from Sony and I am not going to join the FF crowd ever.

A couple of weeks ago I read a review of the new Canon 500D/T1i and it said that even though it has the same sensor (more or less) as the 50D the high ISO performance in RAW is quite a bit better. Raw samples in the review were definitely better.

The Nikon D5000 betters the 500D and 50D at high ISO - but the video in low light looks more grainy. Figure that out if you can, the 500D gives a much smoother looking result when filming even though for still RAW captures, the Nikon (Sony) sensor has the edge at 1600-6400. I know the reason because I've studied the results from both cameras, and it's down to much less NR, much less smoothing-sharpening, lower MPEG-4 or whatever video compression is used, and finer overall detail from the Nikon video.

Having used the Canon 50D and 500D, I'd say that despite all the test results appearing a satisfied A700 owner would not necessarily fall in love with the look of the Canon output. It is very difficult to describe exactly what Canon is doing, it may give higher marks in some tests but it doesn't look all that good - there is a sort of 'roughness+softness' or imprecise rendering to the images at pixel level. I don't think this is due to the sensor exceeding the quality of lenses, as the A350 is close to the same resolution and its results have a fluid, natural look in comparison - and are sharp in detail from similar grade lenses. Though I do reckon the 1.6X 15.2 megapixel is pushing both optical quality and technique to a limit.

If the Nikon D5000 sensor appears in a Sony body, you'll all be very surprised and happy with the results. I've been using the D5000 with just the basic 18-55mm VR and the sharpness is exceptional at low ISO, even at 1600 the level of detail is excellent. Practical Photography attempts to say that the Canon beats it at low ISO because of 15 megapixels versus 12, but I would disagree. I have used ACR now to compare 17.4 and 25 megapixel upscaling from both, the Nikon upscales better. Practical's head to head test - which I expected would go for the Canon - chose the Nikon as the better of the two, and reading their reasons carefully, it seems they found pretty much the same as I have.

So, any of these test sites raving about the Canon's image quality should go through the ceiling when assessing the Nikon - and maybe a future Sony with the same revised CMOS sensor. But knowing Sony...

David

I had assumed the 12.3mp sensor in the D5000 was the same as the A700/D300/D90 sensor. You are saying it isn't?

Daniel Oi (dkloi) who has just joined here will confirm that it is not.

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2009/03/0 ... -revealed/

This refers to the D90 chip, and having compared results from the D5000 and D90, then either the chip has been further revised or the D90 chip has improved processing in the D5000.

David

Ref. David Kilpatrick's contributions above, so the D90 and D5000 provide better detail than the 50D and the D90 has an improved sensor chip compared with the A700 and the D5000 is even better. I wonder where that leaves the A700 v.4 compared with the D5000 for definition and detail rendering. I am quite happy with my A350/700 performance. I could do with more room to crop on occasion hence my hope for a larger APS-C sensor in a camera at least as capable at the A700. I do not need video. I will purchase when Sony delivers a camera that can produce better 50Mb images than either the A350 or A700, but I do not want another A350 OVF.

The D5000 is more like an A100 version of the A700 - there's a bit less AA filtering and early stage NR apparently happening, so pictures look very crisp. But, unlike the A100, the high ISO is pretty amazing - a step ahead of the A700. Having said that, it would not be worth changing from the A700 to either the D90 or D5000 unless you wanted video in a DSLR, or specifically wanted to shoot ISO 1600 all the time. The D5000 has a very slow interface to use compared to the A700 (or even the D90).

David