I played with an A900 today

[Mike-Photos]

The Sony rep was at my branch of Henry's today, and my sales guy called me and I rushed over to play.

I had two major issues that I was interested in:

1) Is the A900 much heavier than the A700?
2) How would my APS-C lens work on the A900?

Quite simply, I can't justify having two cameras, and I can only consider the A900 if it replaces the A700, and I have a number of APS-C lenses.

The weight is not an issue at all. It's supposed to be heavier, but it feels almost the same weight. I had the vertical grip and my CZ16-80 on it, and I couldn't tell the difference.

With the APS-C lenses, if you stick one straight on without adjustment, you obviously have heavy vignetting, and it's like looking through a tunnel, albeit a wonderfully bright and clear one - the viewfinder really is something special.

However, there's a menu setting to switch into APS-C mode, and then the vignetting goes away. You still have to use the frame outline in the viewfinder to see how the shot is framed, though.

I've never wanted Live View, but for me the A900 review mode seems far better than Live View, and I know I would use it. Once you take the preview shot, you can make a whole lot of adjustments, and then, when you are ready, you take the shot and it uses those settings.

I took some RAW shots with my CZ16-80, including at the for-some-people-all-important high ISOs, and they seem at least as good as, if not better, than the A700. Exposure was spot-on, even in challenging outdoor high contrast shots. But, since I as using the CZ16-80, they are only 11mp. There was no time for me to put a FF lens on the camera.

The Sony rep said that Sony Japan were not guaranteeing 100% accuracy on exposures with APS-C lenses, but that the simple remedy is to use center-weighted exposure to ensure all the exposure sensors were in the ambit of the lens.

The camera grip is better shaped than the A700, it fits slightly better than the A700 for my hands.

So, I think I am sold. Thinking about it, the A900 gives you a lot of flexibility with your lenses, because you can so easily switch between FF and APS-C mode, even with FF lenses. So, you can go very wide, or very long, sometimes without even changing lenses. All you have to lose is about 13 megapixels of resolution .

[01af]

I can't justify having two cameras ...

Huh!?

Well, I can't justify not having two cameras. When shooting for a customer then you cannot afford not having a back-up body in case of calamity ... and when there's fast-moving action unfolding quickly right before you then you cannot afford wasting time switching lenses. Two bodies is the minimum.

-- Olaf

[Mike-Photos]

NOTES
______

1) The Sony Rep said something about there being A firmware and B firmware, where B is later than A but is still not the final firmware.

2) I was shooting with my APS-C CZ16-80, so the photos are all 11MP, not 24 MP.

3) Converted in IDC 3, and saved at maximum JPG quality settting.

4) The WB was wrong, everything was very blue, set for indoors no doubt. In IDC, I changed WB to Auto.

5) No other adjustments whatsoever.

That's all the disclaimers over with. Not great shots, I just wanted to test exposure, and shadows in high ISO for the pixel peepers. REMEMBER: not final firmware.

http://mikekatz.smugmug.com/gallery/623 ... 7338_agUdf


Each JPG is over 8MB! You can download the full size ones here, or via each small photo by moving the mouse over the image and selecting the Original option.

[Mike-Photos]

I can't justify having two cameras ...

Huh!?

Well, I can't justify not having two cameras. When shooting for a customer then you cannot afford not having a back-up body in case of calamity ... and when there's fast-moving action unfolding quickly right before you then you cannot afford wasting time switching lenses. Two bodies is the minimum.

-- Olaf

Hi Olaf,
I understand, but I'm an amateur, and I just don't need two cameras.

[KevinBarrett]

I can see how two cameras would make it difficult to get into some places. Here in Fort Worth there is a Japanese garden that charges $3.25 to get in unless for whatever arbitrary reason they decide you're a professional, whereupon they charge $75 instead. Officially a tripod is the determining factor (hello SSS!), but I'd hate to find out that two cameras did it for them as well.

That said, I'd still love to have two bodies! The a900 probably wouldn't be one of them...not when there's an a700 at 1/3 the price, and I don't seem to have any wide FF lenses.

[Javelin]

Hey mike. where is your henry's store? I've not had much luck with them. actually had a sales guy walk away while I was trying to buy a sony camera once. there was a girl in the brapton store that seemed really good but I haven't seen her since.

[Dr. Harout]

I am downloading the file to check it, so I'll get back a bit later. (I am downloading with a Dial-up, so it takes time )

[PhotoTraveler]

Can you clarify something? On the APS stuff, are you saying you could shoot APS lenses in FF mode, I read before that the auto crop to APS could not be over ridden. If you can keep it in FF mode with the APS lenses on, that will be good. I don't have any APS lenses, but to be able to use something like a forth coming 10-24 Tamron in FF mode where I could crop the vignetting away and still end up with a pretty good 16x9 image that is bigger than I would get in crop mode would be nice. I've read the Manual for the A900, and it really didn't make this any clearer. I can't understand why Sony would not allow this, but reports have been you can't do it.

On 2 bodies, well, I'm not sure that you would get the value out of selling your A700. I think you would be best just waiting a bit, keep using the A700 and let the A900 get cheaper, and then buy the A900 to go with it. If I stick with Sony, I'll have an A900 and my A700. Probably keep the 70-200 on the A700, and the A900 gets the primes and wides.

[Dr. Harout]

Can you clarify something? On the APS stuff, are you saying you could shoot APS lenses in FF mode, I read before that the auto crop to APS could not be over ridden. If you can keep it in FF mode with the APS lenses on, that will be good. I don't have any APS lenses, but to be able to use something like a forth coming 10-24 Tamron in FF mode where I could crop the vignetting away and still end up with a pretty good 16x9 image that is bigger than I would get in crop mode would be nice. I've read the Manual for the A900, and it really didn't make this any clearer. I can't understand why Sony would not allow this, but reports have been you can't do it.

Hmmm...This interests me too.

[David Kilpatrick]

Paul Genge said clearly that you could over-ride the crop mode when asked. This was a direct question from me, and got a straight answer, so I assume that in the menus, you can disable the function. I'll find out soon enough.

David

[pakodominguez]

Paul Genge said clearly that you could over-ride the crop mode when asked. This was a direct question from me, and got a straight answer, so I assume that in the menus, you can disable the function. I'll find out soon enough.

David

I was playing yesterday PM for 15 minutes with the A900 at the Sony Plaza here in NY (this is the first production sample in the USA, the second is in San Diego)
So yes, is in the menus. So you can "windowed" the chip and use only the APS size with APS or FF lenses.

[David Kilpatrick]

Sorry guys - the Menu item only enables a voluntary APS-C crop using normal lenses, setting it to OFF does not disabled auto crop with APS-C lenses. So, the answer is simple - you can not use the 11-18mm at 15mm on full frame. And it applies to raw. The raw is genuinely windowed, cropped down, not like the 16:9 on the A700 where a full raw is captured but only part of it is seen by conversion programs.

After having the A900 in my hands for a couple of hours without pressure, I advise buyers not to rush into it unless they know for sure the image size and full frame is a priority. One thing which I noticed in the quiet of my studio, rather lost in the hubbub of the press conference, was the shutter-mirror sound. You will no doubt read about this in reviews. I am trying right now to think of a good place to visit for some better than normal quick test shots.

My list of criticisms is growing faster than my list of 'wow!' factors right now. But I will try to reduce these by finding the causes. Some are not removable - nasty cheap neckstrap for example, my A900 proudly wears a comfortable all-fabric Dynax strap. Lack of screen protector too, Nikon supply them with bodies at this level, A700 hard protector does not fit, so my A900 now has a Palm Protector stick-on film applied before it goes out into the wide world in a few minutes.

David

[Mike-Photos]

I can't justify having two cameras ...

Huh!?

Well, I can't justify not having two cameras. When shooting for a customer then you cannot afford not having a back-up body in case of calamity ... and when there's fast-moving action unfolding quickly right before you then you cannot afford wasting time switching lenses. Two bodies is the minimum.

-- Olaf

I have to agree with you on this, but I suspect he might be just a hobby shooter that wants a full frame DTish kit.

-Sonolta

Hi Don

I suppose this is your usual style.

Yes, I'm "just a hobby shooter", whatever that's supposed to mean. And no, I have FF lenses - CZ135, KM85, Sony 70-200, KM 100mm macro, and others.

However, I also have DT lenses, such as the CZ16-80 and the Sony 18-250. They are much lighter and smaller than the FF lenses, and they are great for travel. So, for my rather inferior hobby requirements, it's important for me to be able to travel light. If using the DT lenses on the A900 is unpleasant, I'd rather pass on it for now, and wait for the price to drop.

Another factor is that I can return my A700 and the vertical grip for half of what I paid for it, until September 28. That would make the A900 much easier to obtain. It's way more than I could get ebaying it right now, so the savings are real.

So you see, other people can have factors that influence their decisions that are not the same as yours.

[Mike-Photos]

Hey mike. where is your henry's store? I've not had much luck with them. actually had a sales guy walk away while I was trying to buy a sony camera once. there was a girl in the brapton store that seemed really good but I haven't seen her since.

Thornhill Ontario. I have a very clued-up sales guy, and he's not the only one there either.

[Mike-Photos]

Can you clarify something? On the APS stuff, are you saying you could shoot APS lenses in FF mode, I read before that the auto crop to APS could not be over ridden. If you can keep it in FF mode with the APS lenses on, that will be good. I don't have any APS lenses, but to be able to use something like a forth coming 10-24 Tamron in FF mode where I could crop the vignetting away and still end up with a pretty good 16x9 image that is bigger than I would get in crop mode would be nice. I've read the Manual for the A900, and it really didn't make this any clearer. I can't understand why Sony would not allow this, but reports have been you can't do it.

On 2 bodies, well, I'm not sure that you would get the value out of selling your A700. I think you would be best just waiting a bit, keep using the A700 and let the A900 get cheaper, and then buy the A900 to go with it. If I stick with Sony, I'll have an A900 and my A700. Probably keep the 70-200 on the A700, and the A900 gets the primes and wides.

Hi PT
I don't think that's what it does, I think it's the other way round - you can choose APS mode with FF lenses, but not FF mode with APS lenses. David will no doubt let us know.