Amazing amount of fine detail captured by the Sony Alpha 900

[rush2112]

Carl...I guess it was your settings, eh? Because now all-of-the-sudden your PM button is showing.

-Sonolta

Apparently so Don. After you mentioned it, I went back and checked the settings in the UCP. I again apologize for any misleading commentary. I joined quite some time ago and do not remember whether or not those were default settings or that I checked them off initially. I haven't checked those settings since I have been active here (a year or two ago? can't remmeber).

Thanks for the reminder however, now you can PM me if you wish. Or not.

Carl

[rush2112]

All of the previous babble aside,

Since the A900 is more of a resolution for the bang, try to do the most it can, sort of machine for Sony...there are some things of course it doesn't do very well. However considering what it was designed for, it does nearly all it was set out to do extremely well. Detail, is right at the top of the list.

Jpeg engine firmware update is something I asked Sony immediately about when I spent a day with them in LA handling one of the first prototypes. I was assured the final firmware wasn't finished and that it would be better. After recieving anA900 for review purposes from Sony, I still wasn't satisfied with the Jpeg output fully. Mainly because I knew it could be done better, and that those who want quick and dirty excellent output from the A900 would agree with me.

Turns out I was right in general. Most are happy enough with the output, but wouldn't mind an upgrade there, some (mainly non owners) completely despise it. Recently, I surmised that turning down the sharpening engine to near off and doing sharpening out of camera really helped the Jpeg output in the noise grain structure category. Every little bit helps.

I mentioned the same in the A900 review I completed as far as the Jpeg engine is concerned.

That aside

Even with the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 (my current choice for most applications) the A900 can, and does put up excellent resolution for most types of photographs. You really don't have to spend a bundle to get a lot out of the A900 if you know which lenses are great performance for the dollar. Thats the tricky part, but in general you will get more resolution out of the A900 than the A700 by far no matter what lens you attach.

I've mentioned all this before, elsewhere but felt near obligated to chime in. .

It is funny what experience can/will do for an impression.

Carl

[rush2112]

Now that's a solid post. FTR I am receiving some if not all PM's today...

Thanks.

-don

And I still maintain that I liked the output from the A700 prior to the fw update. Do I like it more now? Sure in most ways (I still like the transitions and gradations of fw 1 better), yet I do not believe in going in an all out attack on anyone (less a camera company, with great pride in its own work) for doing most things right and getting one or two things wrong in a particular design.

Asking nicely goes much further than attacking (most of the time).

Carl

[rush2112]

Please do me a favor, Carl.

Take the Beercan and shoot identical scenes somewhere between f8-f11 and full zoom. Then crop the a900 frame to match the a700 frame and them post the files somewhere so we compare the actual detail difference using the same lens at full zoom.

Thanks.

-Sonolta

PS...I have found that sometimes when a customer(s) screams loud enough they often times get more action than the silent and quiet types. Not always...but quite often.

Why?

Carl

[destrianlives]

This thread is becoming a big fat a900 fanboy joke....The OP keeps dropping link after link to his own threads in other forums, and to his a900 web pages!

Maybe you guys need to make an "a900 is the greatest camera ever built" website so y'all can pat yourself on the backs and drool all over your a900's on there without interruption.

How many posts do we need that raves over the fine detail of the a900? You guys seem to get off on patting each other on the backs on your a900 purchase in every forum on the internet!

According to you guys the camera is missing NOTHING and it can do no wrong!

Let me clue you in on a little something....RESOLUTION IS NOT EVERYTHING!

-Sonolta

Wow man. You really seem to hate the Alpha system Sonolta. I certianly think the A900 has its flaws: Non standard Hotshoe (GOD THIS SUCKS!), Hi noise at ISO 1600 and up, JPEG is a little harsh, Noise Reduction isnt perfect... however its a 3 trick pony ride in the fast lane:

1.) Hi res for enlargements - nobody better not say it aint a factor - cause if it werent, then there wouldn't be damn a 60mp digital back out there lurking for someones $60,000.
2.) Functional Studio DSLR at a cost that shames the Nikon D3X's beautiful black lensmount!
3.) The ability to have full frame (If it werent a differnce maker, then wedding photographers wouldnt have died over the Canon 5D when it was originally introduced... AT ABOUT 3K Mind us all!

But the a900 aint perfect by NO end! Not even a built in pocketwizard, not even a wifi connection, not even built in GPS tagging, not even God forsaken transfer jet technology! Sony got into this thing for the Megapixels and to undercut the D3X's price people.

I say, as long as you take the A900 it for what it is... you wont really regret it. Now for 3k the only think I think I should get more of...is Less Noise at all ISO's (I'd say about 1.5 fstops less!!!). Other than that. I really cant hate on it. All I know is that even with my inferior lens' such as the Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 I'm getting great image quality.

But I gotta agree with you Sonolta... to sell the system, they gotta sell the glass! You cant expect somebody on an 18-70mm F3.5-5.6 to stick to your system for 7 years!!! Sonolta's right as hell about that! They gotta figure a way to get the pro glass bought. They either dont know how or been spending too much money on the PS3 to fight the Xbox 360!!!

[rush2112]

[quote="Sonolta"]Because the Beercan acts like a 315mm FOV lens on the a700 and it produces only a 210mm FOV on the a900. So you will need to put the a900 in crop mode, or crop the frame to get the same FOV from the same position with the same lens.

>> Right but the APS-C crop will only be 11 mp area compared to 12mp of the A700, plus what you lose through the glass, so the A700 at that focal length would win out. To be fair, you'd need the exact same lens that shot at 315fov on the A900 as it did on the A700 (which we know is impossible so this comparison is really irrelavent) and not crop, then compare to see the difference, and indeed you would, the A900 would win flat out.

Since I am not a wide angle shooter almost everything I shoot is at full zoom...You know what I am talking about here. I get a a 202.5 eq. FOV with the 135 2.8 on the a700....Since I use it as a 200mm lens I would need to crop the a900 frame, or I may need to purchase an expensive 200 2.8 prime to get the same FOV and quality.

>> If you are considering the A900 as a viable alternative for what you do at long zoom for what work you accomplish, I'd suggest using a different lens on the A900 to get more detail. Perhaps the 70-400G. Otherwise the A700 has a FOV crop advantage in the 12mp center image section.

How will I feel about carrying and hand holding that 500mm lens all day long?

>> I don't see how this topic is suddenly brought up or relevant. Of course the A900 is heavier and subsequent lenses for a given focal length are also probably going to be as well. Stick to what works for you, the A700 I say. A900 has other advantages. FF and APS are obviously two different animals for different purposes with pros/cons, and no need to compare one against the other.

Do you see what I am getting at here? Not only that but we also know it's easier to fund a top quality lens collection on APS-C due to the lenses needing solid corners on APS-C...the lenses do not need to be quite so good for APS-C since the extreme edges of the lens is not being used. Don't forget DOF is less on the a900 so you may need to stop the a900 down to get the entire subject in-focus in the first place...that's can a serious advantage for many APS-C shooters dpending on what they shoot.

>> Yes I do see what you mean, from an APS-C advantage viewpoint, but there are full frame advantages as well. Oil and Water Don.


Carl

[rush2112]

Don, you sure are a tornado of replies. Look, one thing at a time. My goodness man calm and easy.

You are trying to compare an aps advantage to an ff advantage, and they are like I said - oil and water.

You act like im trying to talk you into the A900 or something. I said to keep your A700 for what you do and that it is probably the best solution for what you do, so what gives?

Bottom line they cannot be cross compared without equal lenses with the exact same FOV because such lenses do not exist for APS and FF, because they are designed differently for APS than they are for FF obviously.

The A900 has more resolution at a given FOV, that is my point.

Carl

Edit: your last reply with the cute squirrel pictures was done while I was replying to your other reply. (see I include an actual edit so that people can see what I said before and now, instead of changing the text without informing people).

[Lonnie Utah]

You may have also needed a tripod as well, and in that case I can promise you that the creature would have been long gone if you could have even set your tripod rig up to get the shot in the first place.

You really need to check out the image stabilization capabilities of the 900. As I said earlier, I have gotten 1 second hand held exposures with this camera. I will post some up later if I can...

[Lonnie Utah]

I have used AS/SSS for the last half decade on longer with the z3, z5, A2, the KM5D, the Sony a100, and now the Sony a700. Please post a few of your extreme handheld 300mm shots and a few of your best hand held 450mm slow SS shot samples.

Let me borrow the long lenses and I will. Most of my stuff is wide angle. I am sure that is why I get decent results...

[stevecim]

Don, you sure are a tornado of replies. Look, one thing at a time. My goodness man calm and easy.

You are trying to compare an aps advantage to an ff advantage, and they are like I said - oil and water.

You act like im trying to talk you into the A900 or something. I said to keep your A700 for what you do and that it is probably the best solution for what you do, so what gives?

Bottom line they cannot be cross compared without equal lenses with the exact same FOV because such lenses do not exist for APS and FF, because they are designed differently for APS than they are for FF obviously.

The A900 has more resolution at a given FOV, that is my point.

From a newbie Yes the A900 has more resolution at a given FOV, but Don asked a valid question, that I would like to know the answer to, David maybe can help, since he has both the A700 and A900,
If you use the same lens at it longest end on both cameras, then crop the A900 image to match the same FOV has the A700 image, which image retains more detail?

It may well be that they are the same or the A700 has more detail or the A900 retains more detail. I think it's a valid question.
If your thinking of moving from a APC to FF it would be nice to know that you will be no worst off once you crop to get the same FOV or to know that you will have to factor in longer lenses when changing from APC to FF .

[Winston]

From a newbie Yes the A900 has more resolution at a given FOV, but Don asked a valid question, that I would like to know the answer to, David maybe can help, since he has both the A700 and A900,
If you use the same lens at it longest end on both cameras, then crop the A900 image to match the same FOV has the A700 image, which image retains more detail?

The A700 wins because its sensor has a higher pixel density. The A350 is even denser.

[Lonnie Utah]

Exactly as I figured. Many cameras do very well with image stabilization at the wide end.

Thanks anyway.

Dude, why the snippy response? I am just here to learn. I have been nothing but cordial.

Were you born a jerk or did you have to work at it?

If this is the level of community here, thanks, I think I am done with this forum....

[Lonnie Utah]

my reply to you was perfectly appropriate.

Well you can make your point without being a pointy stick.

Or maybe YOU can't....


EDIT: Nice edit job to add "REASONABLE". No, it wasn't. As I said, I am just here to learn. I think you have a lot of knowledge, you don't have to be but with the way you hand it out.

[Lonnie Utah]

Dude, please go post your jokes somewhere else.

Thanks.

-Sonolta

It was the forum software editing my post, It was not a joke...

Edit: PS. I saw your other post that you deleted.

[Lonnie Utah]

Dude...I often edit my posts...are you new? I deleted a post? So what? Why can't yiou work with the text I have on the board? Please stop talking about your personal problems and please do start talking about the a900 or something at least sorta related to image making!

Yes I'm new. You know that.

When you change the text on the board, the story changes for those that read the tread at a later date. For example, what if you call someone every name in the book, then they respond, they you change your post to make it look like the response was unprovoked. That's why. But whatever.

From now own, "quoted for posterity" with you....

Edit: As for me I am going home and do awful things with my 900, things that you could never dream of doing with your 700... LOL, THAT was a joke...