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.
I think that the one who tested the camera for dpreview or has crooked hands or just hates Sony
Tracking autofocus (AF-C) works fine, I should mark it better than on the A77-2, on which I am also very satisfied
Thank you! All this pictures it's line of sport shots from camera in mode AF-C.sury wrote:Excellent colors, Valery. The last one is my favorite.
How do you like it?
Are there any features that you love?
Are there any features you absolutely hate?
I ask because I will either replace my A99 with an A99II... or an A9, and right now I'm not sure which.
The price ... Here of course the most "cool" development of Sony.
I like everything in the camera. There are some nuances, differences from the same a77-2, but basically the camera is also perfectly in the hand and works just as well.
Resolution and low level noise.
AF system, I use 24-70 CZ, Tamron Sp 70-300 USD and even Minolta 50/1.7 works very good with the camera.
The first thing I checked in the camera is AF's work. I'd not complain about the AF at a77-2, then AF a99-2 even better. I shot the series in AF-C mode - it's "strong like a rock". The person who wrote for dpreview camera review, or did not read the instructions to the camera, or simply hates Sony. Well this is his problem. And will remain on his conscience.
I made a report almost in total darkness. The level of the noise surprised. Very usefull ISO 6400. I have not played RAW files yet. And they are not particularly needed for the reportages. The JPG of the camera is excellent. Maybe I'll shoot something in the studio, then I'll spin RAW. For today, I do not see any reason to deal with RAW.
This is the first impression of working with a99-2. So far very pleased with the camera. Really wonderful professional tool. Maybe there will be some negative aspects, as without them. But for today everything satisfies 100%, except for the price of the camera. Or maybe it should be like this, yet this camera differs sharply from Sony's previous models.
PS. Sorry for my english.
Oh! I know what I hate in a99-2 and a77-2 - joystick ! The thumb aches after use it. Very sharp edges.
I have been leaning towards the A99II for a number of reasons, but when the A9 came along I really liked the features.
But I have LOTS of quality A mount glass, and NO E mount glass.
And I was NOT happy with the AF or frame rate of the A7RII with adapted A mount glass. It was NOT suitable for wildlife, which is what I do for fun.
With the A99II I get the resolution of the A7RII AND the Frame Per Second rate of my favorite APS-C A77II... best of both worlds.
THANKS for posting the pictures AND answering my questions. You have helped my decision process.
The camera a9 is wonderful, but you need to replace almost all the optics in the E format for shooting in sports and similar modes. The camera itself comes out of my budget, and together with good optics it is exactly above my capabilities for today. Well, resolution a9 24mr is resolution a77-2, the speed is slightly above 20f/s against 12f/s which I practically really rare use. Personally, I always have an average speed of 8-10f/s(mid mode).
AF-C mode sure it's better on a9, but again if you know what you doing AF on a77-2 and a99-2 works great too
I did some portrait for my second granddaughter and her friends graduation. It's not studio work, just instantly shots but it can give you an idea about resolution. Features of the camera working with portraits. JPG from camera with little adjustment in LR.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests