A580 vs A55 resolution

[bakubo]

Once again dxomark does not score resolution. How many times do I need to repeat it? Am I speaking English? Of course A580 will score higher on dxomark. Dxomark score is based on noise, and A580 gets 1/2 stop more light.

Read the topic of this thread. It says resolution -- at base ISO. That's the topic. A580 doesn't score better resolution at base ISO. That's the topic.

Actually, you pretty much talk the language of Measurebating. How about posting some of your photos for a change?

[OneGuyKs]

Once again dxomark does not score resolution. How many times do I need to repeat it? Am I speaking English? Of course A580 will score higher on dxomark. Dxomark score is based on noise, and A580 gets 1/2 stop more light.

Read the topic of this thread. It says resolution -- at base ISO. That's the topic. A580 doesn't score better resolution at base ISO. That's the topic.

Actually, you pretty much talk the language of Measurebating. How about posting some of your photos for a change?

Read the topic of the thread. It's say A580 vs A55 resolution. If you have nothing to say about it, why bother? If you have proof/site that shows A55 resolution scores at base ISO is lower than A580 due to mirror, then that would be on topic. Post it.

[Dusty]

I think a few of our newbies don't realize that this is a friendly site. We try to have honest debates without 'getting into it' with each other.

Some of you guys are flame-baiting, another thing we don't do here.

Remember that we have several years of solid but not always agreeing relationships with each other, and you'll lose out if you try to start fights. The moderators will lock the threads first, then restrict you, then you'll disappear some day.

We welcome honest debate. Many of us here are old Minolta die-hards, but we also worry about what Sony's doing to the Alpha mount, and express that. We don't always agree on things, like whether or not SLT/EVF is a good idea. We've had other disagreements in the past too, but we get over them, mostly by the fact that we try to not p*ss off the other guys when debating.

Honestly, most of you guys would be kicked off a debating team right away!

Let's keep the tone civil, can we?

Dusty

[Dr. Harout]

I think a few of our newbies don't realize that this is a friendly site. We try to have honest debates without 'getting into it' with each other.

Some of you guys are flame-baiting, another thing we don't do here.

Remember that we have several years of solid but not always agreeing relationships with each other, and you'll lose out if you try to start fights. The moderators will lock the threads first, then restrict you, then you'll disappear some day.

We welcome honest debate. Many of us here are old Minolta die-hards, but we also worry about what Sony's doing to the Alpha mount, and express that. We don't always agree on things, like whether or not SLT/EVF is a good idea. We've had other disagreements in the past too, but we get over them, mostly by the fact that we try to not p*ss off the other guys when debating.

Honestly, most of you guys would be kicked off a debating team right away!

Let's keep the tone civil, can we?

Dusty

SECONDED

[David Kilpatrick]

Agreed, please avoid assuming that anyone says here reflects on them personally - not everyone is writing from the same language basis.

I do not think any of the test sites, no matter how scientifically based, provide a complete overview of the merits of each camera type. They may also sometimes get a poor example. In principle the A55 and A580 are comparable cameras and I'd very surprised if anyone could tell their images apart except under special conditions.

David

[Neonsquare]

@OneGuyKs
I understand what you're up to, but comparing resolution isn't that easy as it first seems. Just comparing out of camera JPEGs doesn't tell you the whole story. Just applying some USM sharpening on the results might make the "softer" samples be quite similar to the seemingly superior samples. This was actually a major gripe of me for the last years because most magazines here in Germany test "resolution" simply from out of camera JPEGs in default settings. The Alphas always got bad marks against the Canons, just because the default sharpening of the Canons was higher. With the new Sony models I think I saw an increase in default sharpness applied too.

[neon]

[bakubo]

Agreed, please avoid assuming that anyone says here reflects on them personally - not everyone is writing from the same language basis.

Thanks, you said it better than I did.

[Greg Beetham]

It looks like default sharpening might be it, that's what occurred too me as well, but then the noise would go up surely? However they're doing it, they are doing a pretty good job of it.
Greg

[Scooterman]

It looks like default sharpening might be it, that's what occurred too me as well, but then the noise would go up surely? However they're doing it, they are doing a pretty good job of it.
Greg

I quite agree Greg the Jpegs from the A-580 are very sharp, when using a good lens and really far better than Sony’s attempts in the past, so good in fact many will now only use jpeg I’m sure.
As yet I have not had the chance to shoot RAW as yet but if the Jpegs are anything to go by I am in for a treat. Well I do hope so.
Regards
Richard

[soaringclauz]

...and I'd very surprised if anyone could tell their images apart except under special conditions

...that applies to A55 with and without mirror too, especially if we concentrate on resolution.

[Greg Beetham]

I quite agree Greg the Jpegs from the A-580 are very sharp, when using a good lens and really far better than Sony’s attempts in the past, so good in fact many will now only use jpeg I’m sure.
As yet I have not had the chance to shoot RAW as yet but if the Jpegs are anything to go by I am in for a treat. Well I do hope so.
Regards
Richard

I suppose Richard you could try IDC if you were desperate, although there has been lengthy discussions on dpr as to how the A55 is equal too the A580 in image IQ, there is still no support from Adobe on the A580 as yet so it's still too early to draw definite conclusions; as far as I'm concerned at least.
There has been some that 'fooled' Lightroom etc. with replacing the A580 in exif with the A55 to get a RAW file processed, but I'm not sure if that's delivering the whole nine yards or not, we'll just have to wait on the RAW front I guess.
And yes I can believe the jpegs from the A580 are superb if the A55 is any guide.
Greg

[OneGuyKs]

Agreed, please avoid assuming that anyone says here reflects on them personally - not everyone is writing from the same language basis.

I do not think any of the test sites, no matter how scientifically based, provide a complete overview of the merits of each camera type. They may also sometimes get a poor example. In principle the A55 and A580 are comparable cameras and I'd very surprised if anyone could tell their images apart except under special conditions.

David

Now that you have both cameras, can you post any example where SLT is losing resolution and/or contrast at the base ISO?

A580 should be better at high ISO, but I don't think the difference would ve visible till ISO 3200.

[David Kilpatrick]

So far the A580 is generally not looking as sharp as the A55 so I can't post such an example - but conditions have not been good here and I am reserving judgement until I have done some more exact direct comparisons.

David

[pakodominguez]

So far the A580 is generally not looking as sharp as the A55 so I can't post such an example...

AF is not good? or you think there is another reason?

[David Kilpatrick]

It does look as if the image file has a slightly different low-pass filter treatment, and that may be all. I get a feeling that the A55 has a lower strength AA filter to enhance its sharpness a touch and compensate for any effect of the trans-mirror.

David