Photokina with the A900

[bossel]

David, I know you're not a Bibble fan, but did you take any time to look at the new version 5? Given the Adobe prices in Europe, it looks like a good alternative to Lightroom.

[01af]

David it's a wonder you didn't run accross Olaf over there somewhere ...

So Olaf is there too. That's wonderful news.

Photokina is in Germany, and I am in Germany---still I was some 400 km away from Cologne. I don't like huge fairs ... even if it's the Photokina. I feel I'll learn more about the latest gadgets in general and about the A900 in particular when monitoring the news from Cologne via the Internet, just as most of you do. To really take advantage from a one-day or two-day visit at Photokina you'd need a lot of contacts and appointments with insiders---however I am not an old-hand journalist like David, just a little photographer who at Photokina would just swarm around the booths and stands along with hundreds of other photographers little and big ... and wanna-be photographers ... no, thanks!

I think I will buy the A900 ... not right now but in a few weeks or months. And that's even though I need neither 35-mm full-frame nor 24 MP; the A700's sensor would satisfy my needs well enough ... if it only would focus accurately. I tried two samples and returned both immediately due to strong back-focus with some lenses (not all). What I like about the A900 most is the AF micro adjustment (even though David keeps saying how accurately the A900 is focusing, without any need to actually fine-adjust anything---it seems it's the first Sony DSLR that has AF micro adjustment and also the first that doesn't need it).

Still I have not yet given up the idea of purchasing a Nikon D300 with MB-D10. But if I do then I would not jump ship entirely; I'd use Sony and Nikon both. For some of my assignments I simply need more than 5 fps. I'd be happy with six megapixels and APS-C format if it only would do 8 - 10 fps and focus accurately.

-- Olaf

[Jonathan K]

David, thanks for your report and blog post. You wetted my appetite..
Well I am off to Photokina tomorrow. Just need to get up early.

See you tomorrow night!

Cheers Jonathan

[Tkevan]

Don, not one of these images is in comparison with anything taken using the Alpha 900, in similar conditions or othewise.

LOL...Give me a break...these are REAL WORLD 6400, 12,800, and 25,600 shots. Not some dimish snapshots...Start shooting some similar stuff and we will see the a900 get toasted.

It doesn't help at all to fill up a thread like this with countless links to Nikon images which everyone has seen, so I will take this thread no further.

LOL...Stop trying to imply that the a900 is better than he D3 at high ISO.

Photokina shots will now appear in a blog post, and not in the forum where only a tiny fraction of people see them, and you then make multiple replies which do absolutely nothing to help people understand rthe A900 better.

Stop trying to make users believe the a900 is better than the D3 at high ISO.

I have work to do and this is just wasting my time.

You are wasting our time and money by trying to imply that the a900 is as good as the D3 at high ISO. You go ahead use your a900 for high ISO editorial mudshots...the other guys will use the D3 high ISO in real world tough low light situations like indoor sports! Please, put your flash back on and do stop trying to play ISO games, DK.

David

Sony a900...the fanboy camera of all-time...it beats all cameras in everything...NOT!!!

-Sonolta

Wow, deja vue all over again. Didn't we here this when the A700 came out??

[David Kilpatrick]

David keeps making statements like "the Nikon loses color saturation after 3200" and the "a900 has as more detail at 3200 than the D3"

If you want to know why I made those statements, the answer is easy - both are true. The A900 has more detail at ISO 3200 than the D3 - about 25% more detail in terms of lines per image height, the usual way of measuring image information. And the D3/D700 loses colour saturation progressively above 3200 ISO, but noticeably at 12,800 and seriously at 25,600 - I know, because I have tested the camera all these speeds on the same subject and seen very clearly how the saturation falls and the image becomes more monochromatic. Also, it is a sensible strategy for dealing with chroma noise. Ask any Nikon D3 user and they will confirm this.

What is unusual is the minimal loss of saturation in the A700 at ISO 3200 (the A900 is similar) and, for in-camera JPEGs especially, at 6400. I wrote about this in January. It is possible that Firmware v4 has changed this slightly, as the retention of saturation was closely linked to the heavy chroma blur (aka 'smearing' or 'watercolour effect').

There are clear technical reasons why the A900 is able to match or better the D3 up to 3200, assuming the same output size (print size, or file interpolation). Posting Nikon-sponsored specimen shots taken in special conditions designed to emphasise good qualities, like the high-key white bright ice hockey images with simple brightly coloured details, proves nothing - I see what the D3 does almost daily in 'normal' conditions, it's very good, but nowhere near the same.

As more and more users get to experiment with the Alpha 900, you'll see what comes out of it.

David

[Tkevan]

I remember quite well exactly what your issue with the A700 was. My point being that you railed against the A700 until folks pointed out it wasn't the camera, but the conversion software that was the problem. Now you rail against the A900. And when David, who has shot both, gives his opinion, you basically call him a (banned term). And once again, you fill posts with strings of links and images to make the thread almost unreadable. Quite frankly, with the direct attack on David’s integrity, I'm surprised you’re still allowed here. The man has incredibly thick skin.

[David Kilpatrick]

So what?

[David Kilpatrick]

Looks like you were a day late! You boasted about what you had written...I showed you what I had written about a700 high ISO color on the day before you published your piece. That's all. Take it FWIW.

-Sonolta

You clearly haven't read any of my earlier pages about the Alpha 700, and the only person 'boasting' around here certainly isn't me. This was four months after the Alpha 700 appeared. Damir Tiljak did high ISO samples from the Italy launch for this site in September, and on dPreview, it was commented how well the Alpha 700 retained saturation - as a result of those samples. By October I was posting stuff about using 6 megapixel output size Extra Fine JPEGs to get superior ISO 3200 to the D7D. By December we had already had the first firmware update, and many sites and individuals had experimented with all kinds of raw conversion, settings, etc. You were one amongst dozens of users making such observations and so was I.

The article was written before it was posted here, and laid into the magazine pages. Normally, I don't put Photoworld articles on the website until two weeks or more after the edition has reached paying subscribers. In this case we had an agreement and a deadline after which images were not supposed to be published, so once the copy was off to press, I produced a web version. Whatever I wrote had absolutely nothing to do with any shot of book-ends you might have posted on dPreview, or wherever.

David

[Gianluca]

The man has incredibly thick skin.

I always read with interest David posts in his blog and I think that this forum is really useful because it gives direct access to his enormous knowledge. After I start lurking in search of more informations about A900 from a user point of view, I was a bit sorry seeing repetitive and inconclusive posts from the same user, because his "contributions" are somehow affecting the readability of some topics. Luckily the phpBB forum engine has a nice feature: user control panel - Friends and foes - Manage Foes

Now it's much easier to search for the informations I'm searching for

[Dr. Harout]

Gianluca's first post here.
Hi and welcome.