Photoclub Alpha

SONY has shown itself to be lagging behind the competition as we reach the third bend on the second lap of the development of HD-video capable DSLRs. At PMA 2010, nothing ‘real’ was shown and the closest they came to further launches in the Alpha range was an advanced pre-production prototype of a 24mm f/2 Carl Zeiss T* ZA SSM.

But Sony may prove yet to be the tortoise – or perhaps to be Brer Rabbit. They could make the finishing line, the goal of a truly useful video DSLR, before Nikon/Canon/Pentax/OlySamPanny get there.

The Alpha System celebrates its Silver Jubilee or 25th Anniversary this month – though left uncelebrated by the inheritors of the Minolta AF legacy, Sony. They have no reason to draw fresh attention to the age of the system, as in four years they have taken it the same sort of distance that Minolta took the world’s first AF system in the late 1980s.

It’s not only Alpha’s 25th birthday. This is also the 25th birthday of modern AF SLR systems – all of them!

This is a multi-page article. See the links at the bottom of the page to Continue Reading after each page.

For Photoclubalpha and the historic Minolta Club of Great Britain, the anniversary does matter. A good many of you out there have been members since the launch of the system, often using the earlier SR and X manual focus systems before that. We still have a 1985 Minolta 7000AF and it’s still working just as it did when new.

25 years before the first Minolta SLRs appeared – a folding Minolta Six of 1935

I don’t mind showing my age to make a comparison. I was 11 in 1963 when I took my first pictures with an SLR camera. My father had bought himself a Pentax S3 – and the camera it replaced was 25 years old, a pre-war Zeiss Ikon Kolibri collapsible 16-on-127 model.

When the Kolibri was made, 127 was the ‘vest pocket’ format of choice. 35mm was on the rise, but 35mm SLRs had not yet arrived. They were as much a thing of the future as digital SLRs were when the Minolta 7000AF was launched.

But within that 25 years, there was hardly a single camera system made with interchangeable lenses that did not become obsolete. Only the ‘frozen assets’ of the cold war kept some systems, like the Exakta bayonet and the Praktina, alive. New brands were launched, from the British Wrayflex and Periflex to the Italian Rectaflex and many German oddities. It was not unusual for an entire system to be come and gone within a few years.

Even in the following quarter-century, the high years of the Japanese 35mm SLR, the succession of lens mount changes was bewildering. Independent lens makers like Tamron and Sigma were forced to make systems using interchangeable mounts not just because the public wanted it. A dozen or more mounts were made for every lens and in the 42mm screw thread fit alone there were endless variants – Praktica LLC (Pentacon Electric), Olympus FTL, Pentax ES and more.

It was more or less a 25-year cycle – the SR system was announced in 1958, and really got underway by 1960. It was to be another quarter century before the AF system arrived. We are now a further 25 years on – can we expect a totally new camera system, once again, in 2010?

Minolta’s SR bayonet mount, introduced in 1958/9, actually remained basically unchanged all the way through to 2005 when the last manual focus model, the X-370S, was available. It survives even now as a mount popular in China where the Seagull range from Shanghai Optical includes Minolta fit models. That mount only ever had one major revision, to add a linkage for open aperture TTL metering. The introduction of programmed exposure and shutter priority was cleverly enabled by using the existing design of lens mechanism and improving its accuracy, while adding a simple reference lug to the ƒ-stop setting ring.

Nikon’s 1959 F-mount proved similarly easy to improve without any basic modification. Both these bayonet mounts celebrated half a century of production in 2008/9 – another landmark, which Nikon was able to celebrate but Minolta of course could not.

My review of the Alpha 550 has caused controversy because of the blue sky noise. I might as well say that over the last week, I’ve used the 550 in a wide range of conditions – some very bad conditions included – and its failure to match ISO 100 finesse would not worry me at all. The performance at higher ISO settings is so much improved it’s worth putting up with the minimum of ISO 200, and a touch more noise than the best ISO 100 results from the Sony CCD sensors.

Even so, something was clearly happening during the period of sunnier weather used for my earlier A550 tests. I used Auto ISO initially, because I had not realised how readily the camera will select settings right up to 1600. Auto ISO has thrown up some surprises. Here’s something to consider:

Please note that although ‘process’ symbols are shown with these Adobe Bridge/ACR images, the defaults were restored and then each picture was set back to defaults. They are all shown relative to each other in density, the image preview built by ACR. There is no question of DRO or any other tonal setting interfering with the apparent exposure – DRO does not affect the .ARW file, ACR discards any DRO generated embedded preview in my setup prefs, and DRO was not being used anyway.

It has already been noted by other reviewers that the A550 has considerably more headroom without clipping, even compared to the A350 which was already a top-ranking camera for dynamic range. This is what I meant when I compared its default images to Canon with Highlight Tone Preservation switched on, or KM/Sony older models using the Hi200 setting. This can mean that the A550 is really ISO 100 at its lowest on-sensor gain setting, but the exposure system is programmed to underexpose by a stop and the post-processing (BIONZ) is set up to boost the gain.

Why would Sony do this? Perhaps they read the many posts referring to the Alpha 900 and 700 ISO settings. The on-sensor gain controls the main ISO steps, but a rather cleaner post-process gain adds the 1/3rd step intervals. Experienced Alpha 900 users set ISO 320 manually because the sensor is at its optimum at roughly ISO 160 (DxO tests bear this out). The standard ISO 200 setting can produce more noise than ISO 320 because two different digital stages are used to produce the gain.

In search of superior high ISOs, they may have realised that the early gain stage (on the chip assembly) is inferior to the later BIONZ processor, and you can indeed get better high ISO by underexposing a lower ISO setting, then processing it with clipped blacks. That’s a Nikon technique, which has served them well. It’s also a technique used by experienced DSLR owners.

Now consider the four shots above. They are all taken at ‘ISO 200′ but the camera was set to auto ISO. Other shots in the same set show ISO 250, 500 etc confirming the auto ISO was in operation. They are taken in the afternoon in Scotland, so it is fairly near to the end of the day for sunshine by 14:49hrs, around an hour away. But the two locations at 50 minutes apart, 14:00hrs and 14:49hrs, should not have the extreme variation in exposure shown here.

Just what is going on for an exposure of 1/400th at f/11 to look correct at ISO 200, with the dark sandstone buildings of Jedburgh at the end of October? 1/400th at f/11 is the ISO 200 exposure for full sunshine in midsummer (aka f/16 light). You hardly ever find f/16 light in Britain unless you are on the beach, surrounded by pale concrete, in a field of golden corn or out on a lake.

50 minutes later, exposures range from 1/60th at f/11 to 1/100th at f/11 – that is, more or less, from two to three stops more. In fact these exposures are in line with what I would expect, it’s the 1/400th at f/11 which is the odd one out. I have no evidence to suggest that my CZ 16-80mm has an aperture which fails to stop down consistently.

Now look at some sky samples:

Here is an in-camera JPEG version which shows less noise – the in-camera process is equal to using much stronger NR in raw conversion than I would normally choose for ISO 200:

Now for the same processed from raw – notice that despite the noise, it is slightly more detailed or sharper:

This is a reprocessed second version of the original noisy sky instance. Here, I have used Adobe Camera Raw 5.6r1 defaults, which include some basic sharpening and also 25 on the chroma NR scale. No exposure adjustment is made at all. This view, by the way, looks more or less due north and it is not a case of a brighter sky underexposed; also, the stone and the chimney pots look normally exposed.

This is the 1/100th at f/11 shot, processed exactly the same way. It’s interesting in that I expected to see much lower noise, but in fact it’s much the same. The sky density is similar as well. The view is slightly more towards the east. While my Alpha 380, 200, 100 and even 700 shots are capable of showing blue sky noise at ISO 100 and as much as this as 200 it’s not as obtrusive.

Finally, this is the 1/60th exposure – perhaps more what would be expected at ISO 100 in this light with f/11. Here, I have set -1 EV exposure reduction in Adobe Camera Raw to get much the same final sky tone density. The noise is lower.

Checking other images I’ve taken since, I am now suspicious about the Auto ISO function in the Alpha 550, and whether it reports the gain applied to each shot accurately. It’s hard to reconcile the same ISO 200 setting shown in EXIF with the range of exposures encountered, and the actual exposure of the raw file. Yet ISO 250 was also selected for this shot taken a few minutes before the chimney shot:

This is also included in the main report (click image to view full size on pBase). If I darken the sky as much as the other examples, I get noise similar to the 1/60th ISO 200 clip, or better.

Since making these tests, I’ve started using the Alpha 550 only on fixed ISO settings, with some misgivings as intermediate gain like ISO 250 or 320 might possibly be yielding better results. I just feel something is happening in the BIONZ stage, perhaps involving analysis of the Auto ISO images and compensation for deviations from the reported EXIF Auto ISO setting. This is just a hunch. Fixed settings seem to be equal to the worst case from Auto ISO. Here’s a textbook example, 1/125th at f/16 for a blue sky on November 3rd, facing due north, at 14:19hrs, ISO 200 fixed setting, ACR 5.6 defaults as above:

The answer seems to be to overexpose your manual ISO 200 shots by not simply one stop, but as much as two stops when shooting raw. At least if Adobe Camera Raw is used, recovery of normal tones (not burned out highlights) will fully restore the exposure from 1 or 2 stops over depending on the subject.

Here is an overexposed image, taken at 1/80th at f/10, ISO 200, in mid-day sunshine:

Below is what the sky looks like in a normally exposed image (1/250th at f/10), processed using Adobe Camera Raw defaults (including sharpening at 25/1/25/0 and NR at 0/25), looks like:

And here, finally, is what an adjusted ACR process from the overexposed image looks like with sharpening turned off, NR set to 25/50, exposure and brightness determined by the simple process of using Auto (which can be set as a default in ACR if you want to consistently make generous – over – exposures ‘to the right’):

This is much more how I expect to see a sky looking from the base ISO of a 2009 DSLR release, viewed at 100 per cent. From this stage, different types of sharpening can be applied to suit resized versions for different purposes.

Results with other raw converters, as more become available for the Alpha 550, may be finer in noise structure than ACR or may offer less scope for overexposing – ACR is well known for its ability to recover highlights. I do not intend to go much further into this with tests of converters, but I hope I have shown how the ‘true ISO’ of the A550 is difficult to pin down especially in Auto ISO mode, and how it is possible to benefit from the great high ISO performance of the camera (just use it!) and at the same time secure good low ISO results for travel and landscape shots where a clean blue sky is important.

It’s important to note that in-camera JPEGs will not necessarily show similar noise levels. If they do it’s not so easy to fix without using NR software. I prefer to shoot raw for many reasons.

So, why not be very happy with the Alpha 550 as a choice? Here are two pictures. You can view the full size Alpha image, and the Nikon D3S image resized to match 14 megapixels, by clicking on the smaller size here. Of course the Nikon image is better, though 1/250th at f/5.6 and ISO 400 is more of a step away from 1/250th at f/9 and ISO 200, and I’m not sure the light was SO different on the two occasions:

- DK

My review of the Sony Alpha 550 was supposed to appear at the end of November, allowing one week abroad in good weather with plenty of subject-matter, in Tenerife. Sadly that trip had to be cancelled, and the Nikon D3S arrived for review on the day we were meant to have travelled. So, with far too much work to do on the D3S, I’m “going to press” here with my initial thoughts based on a fairly short time using the Alpha 550. There are 11 pages in this review, please use the Next Page navigation at the end of each page to continue reading.

PLEASE NOTE: this website uses a rating system where readers can rate the posts, like this review. This rating is NOT my ‘rating the camera’! I have read elsewhere that I ‘gave the camera 4.83 out of 5′ – that was the rating readers gave my review… sorry, this is very confusing, I had not realised how easily it could be confused. We have had the post-rating system for a long time and it’s a standard feature on many Wordpress based sites. I do not want to remove it (along with the ratings) so please accept this apology for incorporating a dangerously confusing ’star rating’ here.

According to Sony UK, the Alpha 5oo and 550 were shipped to UK dealers starting at the beginning of this week (October 19th) – though calls to WarehouseExpress, and to our local Edinburgh Sony ACE dealer, produced no knowledge of the new cameras. WE said that they expected the camera ‘hopefully within the next month’ and Edinburgh Sony Centre Shandwick Place said ‘we will have it in stock on October 29th’.

Paul Genge of Sony UK confirmed that deliveries had in fact been made by October 22nd to selected dealers and that ‘both cameras have been available since the beginning of the week’.

However, a Google search showed no for sale items except Hong Kong based grey market shippers. WarehouseExpress still showed a pre-order status for the Alpha 550 and its kits. We have been trying to obtain one for the past two weeks, as review samples were not available. The initial report in Photoworld magazine has been completed with the help of our Photoclubalpha subscribers round the world who already have the camera, and will appear in the edition printed next week.

UPDATE: Monday October 26th – WarehouseExpress had bodies, 18-55mm and twin lens kits all in stock this morning.

- DK

The Sony Alpha division is sponsoring the British Journal of Photography’s Vision09 show which takes place in London on November 27th.

Vision09: The Essential Event for Pro Photographers
Come and learn from the world’s leading experts
Vision in association with Sony Alpha

Picture © Eugene Richards/Reportage by Getty Images

British Journal of Photography is delighted to announce its second key speaker for its November show, Vision – Europe’s only event dedicated to aspiring and early career professional photographers.
Eugene Richards will be flying in from New York to speak at Vision on 27 November, where he will be joined on the day by Martin Parr – giving visitors the chance to see two of the biggest legends of photography under the same roof on the same day.

Known for his uncompromising documentary work, award-winning books and critically-acclaimed short films, Richards will present an exclusive insight into his latest project, War is Personal, together with his first major colour series, The Blue Room. Among his numerous honours, the American has won the W Eugene Smith Memorial Award, a Guggenheim Fellowship, three National Endowment for the Arts grants, the Leica Medal of Excellence, the Leica Oskar Barnack Award, the Olivier Rebbot Award from the Overseas Press Club, three Canon Photo Essayist Awards, and the Robert F Kennedy Lifetime Achievement Journalism Award.

Vision’s unique one-day event features a packed programme of talks, demos, seminars and portfolio reviews.  Located at the Business Design Centre in the heart of London, Vision provides inspiration, information and essential ideas to help aspiring professionals and early career photographers get their careers moving.  Many of the industry’s leading manufacturers will also be there to showcase their latest products and services.
With an emphasis on creative cutting edge, and focusing on effective tools and solutions to further photographers’ businesses, Vision is this year’s don’t miss photography event.

Peter Crouch cuts a striking figure on the football pitch at the best of times and when recently asked to train the UK Sony ‘Twilight Football’ team ahead of their big game on the 22nd September, the outcome was some simply stunning imagery. (Editor’s note – continue reading to see the ’stunning imagery’… but have somewhere handy to put the hair you tear out)

ALL the current DSLRs made – whether by Canon, Nikon or even Sony with the A700 and A900 – state their maximum fps continuous shooting speed as being with NO autofocus, and NO exposure metering changes. There’s a lot of talk on forums about the 7fps of the new Alpha 550 – 14.3 megapixel CMOS APS-C with a good high ISO capacity – being in some way crippled because it has been made clear by Sony that this speed applies to a ‘lockdown’ of focus and exposure with the first frame. This is not surprising as it’s a quiet, mirror-up mode using the off-sensor live view to maintain contact.

Tamron’s 18-250mm lens – later adopted by Sony – was so good that it really takes some effort to beat it. Sigma has put that effort in, but the cost is a very much larger and heavier lens. If all you got was some better performance, it might not be all that exciting. But you get potentially superior anti-shake through its built-in OS, and faster focusing with HSM, the Sigma equivalent of SSM.

Sony’s new Alpha 850 will be identical to the Alpha 900 in size, handling and external design – including the omission of onboard flash. The camera, expected to be launched before September, uses the same 24.6 megapixel CMOS sensor as the Alpha 900 but has – it is rumoured – only a single BIONZ processor, and a very slightly modified viewfinder. It is shipped without the Remote Commander (this becomes an optional extra) indicating that minimum retail price is Sony’s aim.

This is a screen grab from Fotobrenner.de in Germany who have the body only offered for €1999.00 and the kit with SAM 28-75mm f/2.8 new lens for €2699.00. As listed that makes the body about 10% more expensive than the current street price of the Alpha 900 – indicating either that the A850 prices are RRP and will rapidly fall, or that the A900 is about to get a price hike. They offer the A900 for €2499.00 and that would – pro rata – make the UK street price for the A850 about £1599. Please note: though the 28-75mm picture is authentic, the body shown has the AF switch set to C – just like the Sony shots of the A900 issued to dealers. Maybe they would do this for all packshots for some reason, maybe it was chance – more likely. It would be unlikely to happen again for the 850 shot so I reckon this is shopped.

This post has been updated on August 29th as it features second in Google searches for Sony Alpha 550 – but it contained only rumour links when first posted in May.

The camera is now launched, along with the 500 and the full-frame 850.

Please visit our detailed launch and specification reports -

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2009/08/27/new-alpha-a500-a550-official-news-release/

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2009/08/27/alpha-850-official-press-release/

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2009/08/24/sensor-feed-live-view-in-new-alpha-500/

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2009/08/27/7fps-alpha-550/

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2009/08/01/alpha-850-24-megapixel-3fps-in-900-body/

- DK

My first tests with the Canon EOS 500D were posted on dphotoexpert.com, but given the number of search engines now flagging up this site for Canon 500D searches, I’m putting this post here as well.

This is an edited selection, shot in a mixture of 1080 and 720 modes, assembled using iMovie and written as a 720p final project for YouTube. Please feel free to link directly to the YouTube vid or to this page.

It’s been a marathon exercise – all 18 editions of Photoworld, from the time of the Konica Minolta merger to our last (January) back issue, have been converted to a really great readable format (using Flash Player) which you can view via your web browser, print out or download for off-line reading. We have now added five more earlier editions of MINOLTA IMAGE, taking the archive back to December 2002 – plus two compendiums of reviews and articles from our other magazines.

The cost to access all these back issues – over 750 pages, fantastic portfolios, technical reports and tests covering the entire history of the Alpha digital system – is just £10 (by Paypal) and also gets you a full year of new Photoworld issues in advanced of the mailed copy. Or instead of it, if you prefer to subscribe this way. £25 now buys the postal magazine subscription plus the e-version and archives, worldwide.

There is no need to dismantle the mount of the original series Sigma AF TELE 400mm f/5.6 lens, to bring non-functional versions (old chip) up to speed with later film and current digital SLRs. The whole process takes under five minutes, and requires two tools – a small Philips screwdriver, and a precision end cutter.

SONY’s stand was a real brightener for Focus. Gone were the black and orange colours I criticised at photokina, which for two successive years created a black hole compared to Canon’s oasis of light. Instead, huge white silks extended to the roof with bright spots and floods creating an inviting zone of pure light. White and orange rules!