Rebuttal of lukewarm A550 review...

[GaryFriedman]

Hi, all.

I'm in the midst of writing a book on the A500/A550, and as part of my "research" I took off my "pro photographer" hat and used it as the only DSLR on my family vacation. And while my opinion of the camera started out to be pretty much in line with what Mr. Kilpatrick had expressed in his review, after using it for its intended purpose (for shooting moving toddlers in low light ) I have to tell you I think this camera is just awesome for this kind of shooting!

You can see examples of what the camera was able to produce here:

http://friedmanarchives.com/newsletters ... /index.htm

Disclaimer: This is just my opinion. Your mileage may vary.

Sincerely,
Gary Friedman

[David Kilpatrick]

I don't think my review is lukewarm. I demonstrated that the A550 was equal to, or better than, the much-praised D300S at 6400 and I'm pleased to see that other more technically grounded reviews (i.e. lab tests not human observation) have supported everything I said about the A550 from higher noise levels at low ISO to superior performance at high ISO.

Also, the camera is clearly not ONLY intended to shoot toddlers or any other particular subject. There are certain things it does extremely well (better than any competitor) and others which it simply can't do - one of those, for example, is to allow me to sell my A350. Being able to use 100 not 200 is critical to me in my studio. At ISO 100, with my 300/300/600 flash rig at minimum power all round, I can use f/11 to f/16 for my product shots (normal exposure is f/14). These are flash units which turn down to 1/16th power level, modern Elinchrom, not old stuff with just 1/2 and 1/4 power! ISO 200 sticks me on using f/20 (or f/16 to f/22 range) and that just destroys the sharpness on the A550.

I would very much like to have been able to hand down the A350 and just have the A550 but I can't.

Now if you want lukewarm review, visit dPreview... they seem to have been immune to the unique points of the A550.

David

[GaryFriedman]

Hi, David.

Actually, I intentionally didn't name names when I talked about "lukewarm reviews" - yours I thought was on-target and outstanding (as always). I was just trying to drive the point home that Sony didn't have advanced users like you and me in mind when they designed that camera (as evidenced by many of your observations - a manual focus Live View check which is great for Macro shooting if only the mirror slap didn't ruin the sharpness of the shot), or studio shooting of any sort.) I just attempted to approach the camera as Joe Average and came away more impressed than I thought I would be. I may retire my A700 for photojournalism-type assignments.

-GF

[David Kilpatrick]

I would have passed the A550 down to my daughter to replace the A350 she has, because they often get low light subjects to shoot, and end up with poor shots. But I want to keep it for exactly the same reason I should really hand it to her and get a higher proportion of usable stock pix!

David

[stevecim]

Nice review Gary

I love the colours I get for the A350, but these days 70% of the photos I take are Family type pics, so the A550 is sounding like a really good upgrade to the A350. Now if I could get Gary and David to email my wife on how great the kids photos will be with a A550, she might let me buy one

[bfitzgerald]

New A5xx book out in Jan 2010
That just about sums up my thoughts on the matter.
Had hoped to see a bit of "Thom Hogan" (he can be blunt and critical, and give praise at the same time) in the article, but it was not to be..

No disrespect Gary, but I think Sony's direction is entirely wrong on this. I keep hearing about how new xyz model is not for photographers..so wake me up when we get something interesting..

[Mike-Photos]

New A5xx book out in Jan 2010
That just about sums up my thoughts on the matter.

Really unnecessary, Barry.
Your objections are well-known, but more and more you are sounding like anyone who disagrees with you cannot possibly be right, and now cannot even be an ethical person.

[bfitzgerald]

I think I raised a valid point, sorry you disagree, but surely if there is a commercial connection, then it's near impossible to take the OP's view as objective.

A rebuttal is bottom line saying that the reviews presented are void and not trust worthy. But I didn't see anything wrong with them myself, they gave pros and cons much the same as any review.
Hard to question my "ethics" when I simply state my own views, I don't make money from doing so, nor do I have anything to gain on a financial level from them.
My point stands, however unpleasant it might be, I see 3 identical posts about this, one here, one on DP, and one on Dyxum. It certainly raises a few questions in my mind.


Leaving that aside (and frankly I don't care that much), nobody minds if Sony whacks face detection in there, but not at the expense of basic and expected stuff..which I have no need to mention. You might wing the "not for you" line for the new 3 entry models, but it's a lot harder to sell on these ones.

I think DP were spot on (for once) and entirely right to mention these areas, and they indeed did say good things about it too.

[Mike-Photos]

My point stands, however unpleasant it might be, I see 3 identical posts about this, one here, one on DP, and one on Dyxum. It certainly raises a few questions in my mind.

LOL, are you serious? I see probably way more than THREE HUNDRED identical posts from you on the same forums, but Gary can't post ONCE? Commercial interests or not, your posts raise a few questions in my mind too! Crusades are not based on commercial reasons, but commercial reasons are not everything to everyone. It's not the reason you post, so why must it be the reason Gary posts?

How about this: for some uses, Gary really likes the A550, not because he is trying to make money out of it, but because it gave him some fantastic results. He has a few niggles, and it won't replace his A700 or A900, just as it won't for David, but there's a lot to like. And so, Gary posted three positive views on three forums to show that there's another view besides your 300+ views on the same forums.

Thinking about it from the commercial point of view, by the way, wouldn't Gary be far better off saying how limiting the camera is, but, here's an e-book that will really help you to get much more out of it and overcome its limitations?

Anyway, apologies for the rant Barry, I'm not carrying on this conversation anymore.

[Javelin]

Barry! are you taking money from Nikon or a big Nikon retailer to do this? you keep mentioning the D90.. did someone promose you one if you keep up these negative posts and attack people like Gary or Brian on the other forum I seem to remember? I think I see a pattern here.

[bfitzgerald]

Take a wild guess? I mention only the D90 in reference to the fact Sony offer no equivalent.
It's less about posting or promotion, and a lot more to do with defending a 5 model line up, that is clearly flawed. Ok so everyone can have a view, no problems there. It might help if the OP took a line that supported user requests for improvements. I for the life of me cannot understand why anyone would pass off the obvious crippling, and talk about face detection, nice enough..but not at the expense of other useful bits.

On the A2xx-3xx models, it's impossible to defend an obviously flawed choice of design..I mean compacts don't exactly handle well, and require multiple button presses to perform even simple tasks. Designing a DSLR range based on that, is simply pure madness.

Not everyone shares my view, but I am disappointed to see an experienced photographer support these choices.

[Javelin]

So your not really denying that you will acheive some gain financial or otherwise by continuing this tact ?

[bfitzgerald]

Why would you suggest I am being paid by Nikon? Do you see me using a D90? Nope
My main point of beef with the OP, is that he is defending what some consider to be obvious crippling of a camera system, and that's it.

I have and do not receive any financial benefit for my opinions, no freebies, and no money off vouchers, not even a ball point pen. I don't see what's so hard to grasp about that. Frankly I don't really care if the OP gets a free ad off a few forums, nothing wrong in giving it a go, nothing wrong in making user guides for folks either..

But I suspect it might influence any criticisms he might make on cameras, after all if I made an A5xx user guide, how many sales do you think I would get? About 1 if I were lucky But if you are suggesting I am being paid by Nikon, that's about a million miles away from the truth, I am amazed you would even suggest it..

[Javelin]

Hi Barry. I didn't really beleive for a minute you were. but me bringing it up in this way is very similar to you sugesting Gary Or Brian are doing the same when they are the few that are contributing professionally to the Alpha mount. I didn;t see you attack Carls reviews of the A5X0 cameras in the same way when he clearly also has an interest in the mount? is that soley because he was negative? So really the only time you would undermine a poster like this is if his view isn't agreeing with your own?

[bfitzgerald]

I don't undermine anyone, I merely comment. Sometimes that does not go down so well, this might be one such example. I am suggesting that it's harder to be critical of products, that you have a financial interest in, be it end user guides, or magazines, or websites.

As for Brian, I would find it deeply embarrassing to be taking handouts from Sony, esp a Pulitzer Prize winner at that (I'm sure he has no problems funding his own gear). As a photographer I respect him, but I wouldn't even entertain his views on gear for one minute, because he is paid to talk for Sony..and given significant freebies. You might not agree with that view..but that's life. Neither of these points are personal attacks, I simply say what I think..sometimes that's not so easy to swallow, but I'm not out to take anyone down. I'm a lot more interested in the views of people who make a choice, buy their own gear..and don't have any audience to play to..in any way.

Carl writes his own reviews, and I don't have any influence on them (nor should I) He comes to his own conclusions. I have in some cases disagreed with him, but again..I know we live in a world where it's "ok" to disagree..life goes on. As it happens, whilst I can see why he feels the A500 is a better buy, and some issues are less critical when you pay less, I feel both are too similar, and even if one is cheaper in the USA, the same issues are there.