A900 and Tilt & Shift

[Dr. Harout]

That's something we are all hoping and waiting.
Meanwhile big hellos and a warm welcome to the forum.

[Schmiddi]

I'm not so hopeful that this is too high on the Sony-list. They have more gaps - and more important those where they should sell more than a handful of lenses... Though (as such lenses always will full manual on our mount - I see no way to move the blades through the mechanics) there would be the option to make a mount with chip (for communication with the body) for this Schneider. Or the Hartblei-Zeiss-lenses. It would be nice to have the shift- and rotation-value in the EXIFs
"My" Schneider is on the way to me, the mount for Sony-AF is also ordered locally (the lens I got has a Leica-mount). I will keep you informed about this lens (I see that I'm not the only one who is interested ).

Andreas

[PhotoTraveler]

See the Luminous Landscapes review of the A900. It's just the thing I was waiting for. The dead on target user for the A900 can't really use it since the most useful lens for such a camera doesn't exist for it.

I would love an A900 with the nikon 24 PC-E. I really hope the Sony folk are reading that review and getting the message. You don't make a 24MP medium format replacement camera and not have the lenses the people who will be using it need. Sony would move a lot more A900s with such a lens. And seeing Nikons Pricing Blunder with D3X, Sony is blowing an opportunity.

[alphaomega]

I opened this interesting debate about T&S availability some time ago and the information provided is amazing.

I found this articled entitled

Why the D3X will still sell

on http://www.dphotoexpert.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; written by none other than David Kilpatrick.

David asks the question why the 24 megapixel D3X camera with Nikon's 14-24mm lens is so useful. The answer can be found in the article but basically the 14-24 in an excellent optic and converging verticals can be adjusted in Photoshop's Lens Correction Filter and still leave plenty of pixels after cropping. The wide lens provides for the opportunity to leave sufficient space around the object for cropping.

I must admit that I have used the same trick with my A350 and Sigma's 10-20 mm wide lens. I have even stretched my arms high using LV to minimise the distortion before final correction in PS and it works, the A350 with 14 Mp providing some leeway to have enough pixels left for photo libraries such as Alamy.

Looking at the Hartblei 40 mm T&S lens at nearly Euro 5000 (more than £4000 now) It would probably pay off to purchase the A900 with CZ 16-24 when it becomes available in January as it would be cheaper than the Hartblei lens on its own. The 16-24 CZ would compare with the Sigma 10-20 on an APS-C sensor giving 15-30 at FF equivalent.

[aster]

would probably pay off to purchase the A900 with CZ 16-24 when it becomes available in January as it would be cheaper than the Hartblei lens on its own. The 16-24 CZ would compare with the Sigma 10-20 on an APS-C sensor giving 15-30 at FF equivalent.

Hi,

Is there actually a Carl-Zeiss 16-24mm zoom for the A900 or do you mean the 16-35mm F2.8 ZA SSM Carl Zeiss® Vario-Sonnar® T* zoom that is listed among A900-compatible new Sony zoom lenses?

Yildiz

[alphaomega]

Aster is right with his comment above. Naturally I meant the 16-35mm F2.8 ZA SSM Carl Zeiss® Vario-Sonnar® T* zoom rather than a fictitious 16-24.

It does not alter the suggestion that the combination of the A900 with that CZ 16-35 lens could be a great choice for architectural type photography.

Hopefully David Kilpatrick will oblige us by publishing his findings and a comparison with the D3X/14-24 when he has had a chance to test his A900 with the CZ 16-35.

[Schmiddi]

Hello,

I now have my Schneider 28mm PC-Super-Angulon adapted to A900. One picture is added, f8 (as no lens data make it to the EXIFs), shifted some 8mm up. Pictures taken at Zeche Zollverein, Essen, Germany.

The lens is a wonderful wide-angle lens unshifted. When shifted, at about 7 mm (when along the long side) the edges start to fall off in sharpness even at f8 or f11. Also there is some vigneting. If adge-sharpness is not so important (sky or so ), then about 9 to 10 mm are possible - using the full 11 mm gives very dark corners...
Shifting along the short side you can use the full range of 11 mm.

I changed the screen of my A900 to the L-type, the lines help very much holding the cam horizontally (even without tripod, though using a tripod is a wise idea!). Focussing is also easy with the big and bright screen (though a 28mm lens is not so challenging there...).

Andreas

[Dr. Harout]

Not much evident on that shot, Andreas. Congratulations with your new toy, that Santa probably brought to you in recognition of being good the past year.
Would be glad if you could add more shots, not only city buildings, but try on close ups.
Happy New Year.

[David Kilpatrick]

Never worry. You might think a Nikon 45mm PC-E used at f7.1 would vignette much less, after all, it's 45mm and designed in 2007:

Shot yesterday (or was it the day before? I'm losing track, sitting here trying to write about this damn camera - there is too much to write).

David

[Dr. Harout]

...sitting here trying to write about this damn camera....

David

Which one? The D3x?

[David Kilpatrick]

Yes. Testing these cameras really gets in the way, like it or not. I have spent days and days on this, far more time than the job is worth. Here is a sample of what I have been researching: this will probably have to be omitted from the review, because it is too detailed and too long to include in a magazine. But I am prevented from posting reviews on a website, when I am commissioned to do them for a magazine - I'd get no more commissions if I wrote up everything I found, and put it in the web in full. This section just compares the drive modes alone, of the A900, D3X and 5D MkII:

------------------------------------------

Driving forces
Both the D3X and Alpha 900 offer 5fps, 24.6 megapixel shooting with 12-bit conversion. The Canon always does 14-bit conversion and this slows the 21 megapixel file capture rate down to 3.9fps. Before this maximum shooting speed is criticised, consider what happens when you set the Nikon to 14-bit – you get a stately 1.8fps. The Canon is actually twice at fast at capturing and processing image data.
Should Canon have offered 12-bit with a higher fps? They clearly thought not. Nikon even squeeze 7fps from their sensor when shooting in DX cropped mode. Sony can shoot cropped mode, but with no gain in shooting speed.
The D3X treats self-timer, mirror-up and live view options as part of its drive controls, which are physical – a real collar you turn and lock, round the left-hand control ‘knob’ cunningly designed to resemble a film camera rewind. This approach segregates the self-timer from mirror-up and LV, making a cable or wireless release almost essential for tripod exposures. The only quick and dirty method is to use mirror-up, which will fire the shutter after 30 seconds if you don’t fire it yourself.
Canon’s 5D MkII drive modes are electronically set and not segregated. You can enable self-timer delay, mirror-lock and wired or wireless remote release in combo. Each setting is separate (mirror-up via a menu option) and it’s easy to get shake free exposures with 2 or 10 second delays. If left for 30 seconds the mirror-up mode cancels without making an exposure.
Sony’s drive modes are mid-way beween the two; mirror-up can not be used with the supplied wireless remote control (comes packaged with the A900) or with a 10 second timer. You must choose between 2 second delay with mirror pre-lift, 10 second self-timer with no mirror lift, or manual mirror lift. Using the remote, you can select 2 second delay or immediate release but the mirror does not pre-lift. If you use manual mirror-up, a wired remote release is essential. After 30 seconds, the mirror will reset without making an exposure.
Nikon and Sony both feature built-in eyepiece shutters where the 5D has just a plastic eyepiece cap to fit.
Auto bracketing is handled very differently by the three makers. Nikon allows the main parameters (linking flash to ambient or not, switching to WB bracketing) to be set via menus. In default setup, you press the BKT button on the left hand control then use front and rear wheels to control 0, 3, 5, 7 or 9 frames at 0.3, 0.7 or 1 stop increments. The camera does not automatically switch to continuous shooting, and if you are in single frame mode each successive shot (whether the same subject or not!) will get the sequence of 0, minus, plus allocated. There is an indication in the finder as well as on the top LCD, but it’s easy to forget and the only way to cancel bracketing is to press BKT again and set 0 frames. WB bracketing is limited to JPEG only, and processes a single raw (not saved) to a set of different balanced JPEGs. It is also an alternative menu choice to exposure bracketing. If you leave WB bracketing set in raw shooting mode, you can not access EV bracketing without going into the menus to change it.
I’d prefer Nikon’s bracketing to work by programing a sequence like 3 frames 0.7 EV, and then switching to continuous drive to shoot this when the BKT button is depressed, returning to normal shooting without the button. With a 24 megapixel image, the one-stop maximum increment means that for HDR shots five or seven frames may be needed (three is not enough for some scenes). That eats card space rapidly.
Sony’s bracketing is also stays set even if you turn the camera off and on, but does automatically use continuous 5fps drive – this acts as a better reminder than the finder and LCD displays. You can set single frame auto bracketing and since it’s a separate setting, it will remember a different set of parameters to continuous drive AB. Auto Bracketing offers 0.3, 0.5 or 0.7 EV steps over 3 or 5 frames but Sony adds a special HDR mode, 3 frames at 2 EV interval. This is sensible and economical but not enough to keep HDR users happy. Sony WB bracketing is limited to 3 frames, hi or lo WB shift, and works in any file quality including raw. Only one shot is taken but the camera creates three identical raw files with different JPEGs, embedded previews and tags! This wastes around 70-100MB of card space as all the raws are basically the same.
Canon’s WB bracketing works in a similarly profligate manner but offers more control over the three files created, with Magenta-Green and Blue-Yellow (CC and LB) scale correction. The 5D will only take three shots even in EV bracketing mode, and this must be set via a rear screen menu, the front command dial controlling the increment from 0.3 to 2 stops in 0.3EV intervals. While limited, it offers the same HDR potential as the A900, and by default switches to continuous burst mode. It also works with the self-timer, which neither the Nikon nor Sony can do as they fire only one frame (in bracket sequence for Nikon, with bracketing cancelled entirely on the Sony). Cancelling auto bracketing calls for more menu diving on the Canon.
Finally, for straight choices of shooting rate, Nikon offers 5fps (CH) or 3fps (CL) full frame, 12 bit; 1.8fps full frame 14-bit; 5, 6 or 7fps DX format 12-bit; 2.6fps DX format 14-bit. Sony offers just 5fps (HI) and 3fps (LO) full frame 12-bit, identical to the D3X and no big surprise given the shared sensor gene-pool. There is no gain by cropping to APS-C. Canon has no options, just 3.9fps maximum, 14-bit.

------------------------------

Now that's only a tiny part of the work of comparing these cameras (made harder by the Canon going back before the Nikon arrived!). If I make a mistake, of course some owner out there will spot it immediately and write to the magazine involved. So I have to sit with the cameras and manuals in front of me going through every procedure, then go out taking pictures to test it all.

David

[dynaxfl]

I only wish a900 extended bracket shoot to 7 or even 9 frames since i do shoot a lot of HDR. Five frames generally is good enough but often time it's limited. I care more about this than a900 high iso performance

[mcddeb]

All this talk about the tilt shift lens makes me miss the Sony F828, that had a great tilt shift lens, wish it had the alpha mount.

D

[David Kilpatrick]

All this talk about the tilt shift lens makes me miss the Sony F828, that had a great tilt shift lens, wish it had the alpha mount.

D

You're wrong there, it had an articulated lens but not one capable of Scheimpflug or rise-cross movements!

David

[Greg Beetham]

David, I suppose those manuals are all the same style (still), you can't get the full gist of some topic on the one page or section, you have to flip back and forth all over the place ie. "For details on bla bla see page 356" and then there is always some hidden "footnote" on something, or "Details on using such and such when used in/with frazilstan X" buried somewhere, that then changes some previously held perception about the exact way some combo of settings and functions work and the effect they have.
Greg