Sony Alpha A99 Field Test Report

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.
User avatar
bakubo
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 5632
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Hawaii
Contact:

Re: Sony Alpha A99 Field Test Report

Unread postby bakubo » Sun Apr 09, 2017 4:04 am

bakubo wrote:
bfitzgerald wrote:Also some makers are overstating the ISO ratings more than others (OM-D is off by a stop which is way more than most) so I'd be cautious about DxO ratings on sensors (for some reason they give the 24mp CMOS a better rating on the SLT models v the 16mp for high ISO, which is odd real world doesn't support that)


These are interesting articles for people who want to understand this stuff better:

RAW is not Raw

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/10/raw-is-not-raw.html

Why ISO Isn't ISO

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/09/why-iso-isnt-iso.html

Sense and Sensitivity

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4241806072/sense-and-sensitivity

Sensitivity (ISO) in digital imaging seems to be the subject of quite a lot of confusion - it's becoming common to hear talk of manufacturers 'cheating with ISO.' So we thought it made sense look at why sensitivity appears hard to pin down, why we use the definition we do and how it's actually not as complicated as it can sometimes seem.


Good stuff that is worth reading. Self education never ends. :)

User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3572
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Sony Alpha A99 Field Test Report

Unread postby bfitzgerald » Sun Apr 09, 2017 11:49 pm

If only I took articles written by Ctein seriously unfortunately I don't. I can only comment real world with Fuji and they were over stating their ISO by a large margin which was obvious when using the cameras ie the actual exposure. Did it matter? Well it did actually because Fuji seemed to be promoting their super low light capability thing is when ISO 6400 is looking not too bad it's was less than ISO 3200 so it was misleading. A bit of variation I can understand a stop off is unacceptable

It's like those lithium cells that state 8000mAh on the label but even the best cells are barely 3600mAh. It's called marketing/sales

User avatar
bakubo
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 5632
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Hawaii
Contact:

Re: Sony Alpha A99 Field Test Report

Unread postby bakubo » Mon Apr 10, 2017 1:55 am

Yes, Fuji actually meters and gives a different and more exposure for a given ISO than what is standard and expected. That has a real, practical affect on the photographer. That is not the case with Olympus, Sony, etc. That is why it is worth understanding the digital ISO stuff reported by DxO. Easy to jump to wrong conclusions otherwise.

User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3572
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Sony Alpha A99 Field Test Report

Unread postby bfitzgerald » Thu Apr 13, 2017 2:34 pm

DxO have not tested the Fuji X cameras or sensors as far as I can see no idea why that is. They are reporting Olympus are overstating ISO in excess of a stop. I don't hang on every word DxO say but there must be a reason for that difference. They are also suggesting the A99II and A99 is a stop off of set ISO. Other Alpha models are a bit off including the E mount ones but not as much (A77II less accurate than A77 A68 also off and the A58) seems a trend in lately though they are not a full stop off. Looking over their data it might explain real world why the A77 gives more exposure real world (a bit) at a given ISO setting v the A57 and I tested both extensively and saw that identical lenses

That means you cannot make direct high ISO comparisons between some models say cameras set to ISO 1600/3200/6400 etc and get any accurate idea of performance. That makes browsing sample images pretty dangerous unless you factor that in. I'm not suggesting it's just Olympus other makers are also doing it but not quite as much. If ISO 12800 looks pretty damn good on the A99II and it's really ISO 6400 that's something I think would concern buyers. Just as I found with Fuji the ISO values are fudged shooting side by side it was quite obvious.

As a buyer it is something that bothers me I think it's done to over inflate real world performance

User avatar
bakubo
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 5632
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Hawaii
Contact:

Re: Sony Alpha A99 Field Test Report

Unread postby bakubo » Sat Apr 15, 2017 9:04 am

bfitzgerald wrote:DxO have not tested the Fuji X cameras or sensors as far as I can see no idea why that is. They are reporting Olympus are overstating ISO in excess of a stop. I don't hang on every word DxO say but there must be a reason for that difference. They are also suggesting the A99II and A99 is a stop off of set ISO. Other Alpha models are a bit off including the E mount ones but not as much (A77II less accurate than A77 A68 also off and the A58) seems a trend in lately though they are not a full stop off. Looking over their data it might explain real world why the A77 gives more exposure real world (a bit) at a given ISO setting v the A57 and I tested both extensively and saw that identical lenses

That means you cannot make direct high ISO comparisons between some models say cameras set to ISO 1600/3200/6400 etc and get any accurate idea of performance. That makes browsing sample images pretty dangerous unless you factor that in. I'm not suggesting it's just Olympus other makers are also doing it but not quite as much. If ISO 12800 looks pretty damn good on the A99II and it's really ISO 6400 that's something I think would concern buyers. Just as I found with Fuji the ISO values are fudged shooting side by side it was quite obvious.

As a buyer it is something that bothers me I think it's done to over inflate real world performance


Going back several years I have posted good info about digital ISO so you could start to understand it. I guess at this point I realize you are not interested in reading it and trying to understand though so I will no longer bother. :)

User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3572
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Sony Alpha A99 Field Test Report

Unread postby bfitzgerald » Sat Apr 15, 2017 10:06 pm

If it's linking to an ex film shooter who has IMO written some pretty weird articles over the years completely ignoring real world conditions and blowing off about technical qualifications then no don't bother there is nothing to support his odd article. ISO is ISO in the real world be it emulsion or sensor ISO

User avatar
bakubo
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 5632
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Hawaii
Contact:

Re: Sony Alpha A99 Field Test Report

Unread postby bakubo » Sat Apr 15, 2017 11:10 pm

bfitzgerald wrote: ISO is ISO in the real world be it emulsion or sensor ISO


Exactly. Sony, Olympus, etc. do it right. ISO is ISO. They meter and expose properly for the light and ISO. They match each other or a handheld meter. Fuji seems to be doing something strange though since their ISO does not match. Anyway, if you prefer not to understand digital ISO then that is okay. Lots of people prefer not to know about things that they use. :)

User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3572
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Sony Alpha A99 Field Test Report

Unread postby bfitzgerald » Sat Apr 15, 2017 11:48 pm

It's not about not understanding digital ISO (you can use various methods as I did read) it's about the cameras being tested with a level playing field and real world use too. I'm sure if I got an Olympus I would find the ISO is being over stated to conclude that properly I'd use an adapter and fit an identical lens thus the transmission is the same. That's exactly what happened with Fuji they fudged the ISO values to give the impression their real world high ISO is superior to other makers when it's not really (there were some DR advantages I already noted and some drawbacks such as native ISO 200)

Metering has nothing at all to do with it that varies from models and makers it's about the light that enters the camera. Sony seem to be overstating their ISO values too with some models. DxO indicates the KM5d is pretty accurate for ISO they seem to be testing cameras in a consistent manner even though I'm not a fan of the site (I think the ratings can sometimes indicate larger differences than is obvious in person using the sensors). I'd put a bit more weight on their findings than Ctein

User avatar
bakubo
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 5632
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Hawaii
Contact:

Re: Sony Alpha A99 Field Test Report

Unread postby bakubo » Tue Apr 18, 2017 11:51 pm

bfitzgerald wrote:It's not about not understanding digital ISO (you can use various methods as I did read) it's about the cameras being tested with a level playing field and real world use too. I'm sure if I got an Olympus I would find the ISO is being over stated to conclude that properly I'd use an adapter and fit an identical lens thus the transmission is the same. That's exactly what happened with Fuji they fudged the ISO values to give the impression their real world high ISO is superior to other makers when it's not really (there were some DR advantages I already noted and some drawbacks such as native ISO 200)


Please do that and report back here the results. Thank you.

User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3572
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Sony Alpha A99 Field Test Report

Unread postby bfitzgerald » Mon Mar 19, 2018 12:34 am

Send me an Olympus and I will it's quite easy. The Fuji X models I used all fudged the ISO values by a stop or so it was very obvious shooting them next to my other cameras.
https://photographylife.com/does-fuji-c ... ts-sensors

User avatar
bakubo
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 5632
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Hawaii
Contact:

Re: Sony Alpha A99 Field Test Report

Unread postby bakubo » Tue Aug 07, 2018 5:19 am


User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3572
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Sony Alpha A99 Field Test Report

Unread postby bfitzgerald » Tue Sep 18, 2018 1:18 pm

IMO a pretty silly article
"In short, ISO is an increasingly shaky metaphor that promotes misunderstanding, obscures what your camera is doing and robs us of the tools we need to get the most out of our cameras. Isn’t it time for something better?"

Most people with an interest in photography know what ISO is and I think it's working just fine. To me on a practical level there is no difference digital/film I know what both do and why they are used. Unless you're a millennial intent on trying to be different (but ending up the same anyway), I don't see the point


Return to “Alpha A-mount System”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests

cron