Photoclubalpha

Reichmann also says he will have an A900 review next week. Very nice photo.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/

A few comments about the A900 and also he says he canceled his Nikon D3x order because of the very high price:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/whatsnew/

If Hogan is correct about a D700x followup, dare I suggest that Nikon will price it about the same as the D3 ?

bakubo wrote:Reichmann also says he will have an A900 review next week.

It's now up. Good read.

He says the A900 has no PC flash sync socket and thinks 2009 is 2008, and believes that some Sony lenses are reworks of Minolta '70s and 80s' designs (actually, 1986-2006), does not realise Minolta had SSM, calls SSM SST by mistake, fails to understand the context-sensitive nature of the top LCD display (I can assure anyone that in the field, it's far superior to Canon and Nikon displays which cram so much in you can barely see what you are adjusting). A most peculiar mixture of extremely careless writing with some favourable conclusions.

David

Well let's not be too hard with him, he's a more Canon and MF focussed. SSM is mentioned twice, SST once. He says the top LCD reports on the status of each (button) when pressed, that sounds a bit context-sensitve. But then I have no A900 and maybe miss a point. In any case I think it's a positive report and people interested in A900 can then go to more specialized sites (like this one or dyxum) if they need more detailed or more accurate info from people with better Sony-Minolta experience.

David Kilpatrick wrote:He says ... A most peculiar mixture of extremely careless writing with some favourable conclusions.
David

He also says the A900 reminds him of the Contax. I am so glad I've still got my Contax gear. I'm beginning to think I'll get it a younger brother

Well he has corrected some mistakes.

If you guys want a real review, you know where to send your A900's, happy to do a real in depth 30 page web one for you, just don't expect the camera back.

Just send it to me and I'll pay you a dollar/day for a whole year.

Are my eyes deceiving me or has Zeiss changed the rubber grip on their 24-70?

That looks like a low quality 3D render of the camera rather than the real deal... I think somebody was just getting hopeful.

Short summary.

Sony made a camera that a lot of independent pro's who user medium format would buy but the lack of TS lenses blows it and thus Sony has botched the A900s existence.

End summary.

I sent him an email with a list of corrections and comments, no response, which is odd from him, but he may be swamped with such things. It's basically the review I expected. I do get a sense he rushed it out after the D3X pricing in a fit of anger at Nikon, which could be in part why the mistakes are there.

PhotoTraveler wrote:Short summary.

Sony made a camera that a lot of independent pro's who user medium format would buy but the lack of TS lenses blows it and thus Sony has botched the A900s existence.

Except that for just $3k for the body or $8k for a complete kit with 16-200mm covered at f/2.8, a photographer has an enormously more tempting choice before him...after all, with 24MP, there's more than enough resolution to play with and digitally "tilt and shift" your images.

Reichmann already purchased 2 A900's.