Colours And Textures-Minolta; A100.>..>..A350.>.A700.>.A900

[aster]

Hello everyone,

We own or owned at least one of these cameras. I solely own the A100 at the moment and enjoy the colours and textures I get in all my photos.
Lately, I've been reading Alpha owners of multiple latest models to be switching to A100 when shooting to get a certain colour range that they miss with the newest models. They emphasize that A100 delivers a different light, colour and texture which is more to their liking.

I think most of the members of this forum come from Minolta and earlier Alpha models or even are the owners of multiple Alpha DSLR's. So, here's the question:
You might have moved onto newest, but do you find yourself trying to achieve the colours and texture details of a certain model?
Some say they are trying to achieve the colours of the A100 on their A700's but couldn't so far and still are trying. How do you see and find the colours and details to differ with these cameras? Any comprimises you find yourself doing? Or, in other words, what do you do for the colours you wish to see in your photos?

(Not necessarily about settings of a particular model, just mentioning the default, out of the factory qualities would be fine)

Thanks
Yildiz

[David Kilpatrick]

I think a lot of this is down to the strength of the AA filter. A strong AA filter spreads each point on the image over a wider range of sensels, a mixture of RGGB. This doesn't make any difference for plain colours without texture, but many surfaces have a complex pattern of very small areas of colour and tone change. I have worked with camera that do not have any AA filter at all, and you really see something different in the way colour is rendered. The gradations within the colour of an object are more detailed, and this is not 'noise' either. The A100 has a weak AA filter and I think it may benefit, because when a weak AA filter is used the deBayer routine for raw processing involves a smaller group of sensels for each final pixel. You end up with higher sharpness and better defined pixel-level colour changes. You also end up with more noise, when any is present (ISO 400+); and any dust spots on the sensor cover are more sharply visible.

In the A900, Sony has achieved something unusual by making a weaker AA filter then moving it further from the sensor. This spreads the image forming points as much as a strong filter close to the sensor, but with less of a CA-emphasising effect on wide angle lenses, and with less sharp dust (I have several dust spots on my A900 and I have not bothered to clean the sensor, they just don't have any effect on most pix). A900 colour is probably closer to A100 colour than A700 is. In theory, A200/300 colour should be like A100 but it's not - whatever changes they made to reduce noise have also changed the colour to something more neutral and with less appeal. The A350 is the odd one out. I really like the colours from the A350, they are more subtle but I think they are the most natural. The extra pixels (like the A900) help make coloured objects look more three-dimensional as well.

But I would not go back to using the A100 just for its colour.

David

[bfitzgerald]

I might be alone here, but I never really liked the colours from the A100.

Though many factors are involved, WB is one..hard to get accurate side by side comparisons on this. The KM skintones are very good, has to be said, though the A200 appeals more than the A100 did, based on colours alone. But 9 out of 10, I end up running my digital shots through exposure 2, to give a more film like look

For landscapes, I still find I prefer the look of film, and on a tonal level it's unique. That's just me though...I am set in the old ways. But I never understood the love of A100 colours, it didn't really have any appeal to many KM users. I will admit though, that maybe KM pushed the reds a bit too strong, you could run into trouble at times.

[aster]

Hi David,

Thank you for the detailed, mildly technical analysis. This explains it. And no, I didn't think you'd want to go back to using the A100 for the colour !


Barry, I understand how you feel about the A100 but everyone is entitled to their own so I don't judge them for what they seek in each camera or which camera they seek for certain expectations. My future purchase probably will be a far leap from the A100 skipping all the A200/A300/A350/A700 so I'll not know the qualities A200 provided for your needs. But I was trying to understand the retro-envious state that some other camera owners were sharing with the world.

So, you are finely enjoying your A200 I hope! (after the many you had to send back, I mean)

Thanks,
Yildiz

[Dr. Harout]

Aha, an A900 is getting prepared for Yildiz. Hurray...
And still she doesn't believe in the photoclubalpha magic (along with the titles)
As for the A100, I do respect that camera not only because it was my first DSLR, but the A700 has more appeal to me, specifically its viewfinder (a100's viewfinder was so dim).

[bfitzgerald]

No judgements on anyone, I simply stated my thoughts on the A100 colour wise.
I only had a small time with one, I am sure others have a much great knowledge of the camera than I do. I felt though, that the AWB tended to be "cooler" than expected. So the actual colour differences might not be so big..as many do shoot AWB, that could be the root cause of my cool A100 thoughts.

The A200 seems a bit warmer WB wise, colours, well I have not done enough outdoors shots to really come to a conclusion, though I will say, I consistently have disliked the colours from Canon, and on the other end of the scale, the "bright" pentax mode/Nikon D40 colours are too far into saturation land for my tastes.

Once we get to raw, we have even more problems, different software will render colours with a notable variation

[aster]

Aha, an A900 is getting prepared for Yildiz. Hurray...
And still she doesn't believe in the photoclubalpha magic (along with the titles)
As for the A100, I do respect that camera not only because it was my first DSLR, but the A700 has more appeal to me, specifically its viewfinder (a100's viewfinder was so dim).

Yeah, there may be an extra elf put on the job!
Thanks Dr. Harout, your enthusiasm does erase a few certain doubts off of my mind and rubs some good-natured enthusiasm on me too. And I began believing that you are holder of some dark powers!
So long dark is the last thing before light arises in the horizon with its magic I'm fine .... (I wonder what the new ranks shed upon members)

A700 is a great equipment, and since the firmware V4, it's a new camera for sure. I find the A100's viewfinder a little tiresome too, especially when SSS is on and I'm trying to see camera-shake amount indicators in the viewfinder, it's very possible to lose the sight of the subject and not compose as wished.

Thanks
Yildiz