Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > SLRs - the unRF

SLRs - the unRF For those of you who must talk about SLRs, if only to confirm they are not RF.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Sony's big gun....anyone been tempted?
Old 01-18-2010   #1
Dave Wilkinson
Registered User
 
Dave Wilkinson's Avatar
 
Dave Wilkinson is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Hull, Yorkshire, U.K
Posts: 2,281
Sony's big gun....anyone been tempted?

Sony's Alpha 850 ( and the 900 ) 24mp full-frame DSLR seems to me a viable alternative to the far more highly priced ff offerings from Nikon and Canon. I think that without the steadying hand of a good woman - I could easily be led into temptation on this one!, and keep telling myself that in a years time, the prce will be considerably lower!. Anyone taken the plunge yet? or seen some samples?......I wonder - is this the year that full-frame will become an affordable and plentifull option?.....I think it might - but IMO sadly only in SLR's.
Dave.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2010   #2
jarski
Registered User
 
jarski's Avatar
 
jarski is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,632
like you said, these are big guns. what would you use the camera for, birds or sports ?

am hoping this year full frame become more common in smaller dSLR's than current 5D, D700 and Sony's.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2010   #3
user237428934
User deletion pending
 
user237428934 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Wilkinson View Post
Sony's Alpha 850 ( and the 900 ) 24mp full-frame DSLR seems to me a viable alternative to the far more highly priced ff offerings from Nikon and Canon. I think that without the steadying hand of a good woman - I could easily be led into temptation on this one!, and keep telling myself that in a years time, the prce will be considerably lower!. Anyone taken the plunge yet? or seen some samples?......I wonder - is this the year that full-frame will become an affordable and plentifull option?.....I think it might - but IMO sadly only in SLR's.
Dave.
highly priced Canon?

Street prices in Germany: Sony A900 - 2200 EUR, Sony A850 - 1600 EUR, Canon 5D II - 2000 EUR.

All reviews say the A900 has a remarkable resolution but a noise issue beginning at ISO 400. Only thing I really like is the body stabilizer.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2010   #4
johannielscom
Ich bin ein Barnacker
 
johannielscom's Avatar
 
johannielscom is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Universitas Terre Threntiae
Posts: 7,372
Thought never crossed my mind.

But, I got interested and read DPreview.com on the A900. That is, until I got to the part where it says 'frame coverage' 100%, magnification 74%.

Last DSLR I shot was a Nikon D300. Frame coverage 100%, magnification 94%. Now that was some camera.
__________________
Gegroet,
Johan Niels

I write vintage gear reviews on www.johanniels.com |

flickr | instagram |
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2010   #5
user237428934
User deletion pending
 
user237428934 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLE-RF View Post
Thought never crossed my mind.

But, I got interested and read DPreview.com on the A900. That is, until I got to the part where it says 'frame coverage' 100%, magnification 74%.

Last DSLR I shot was a Nikon D300. Frame coverage 100%, magnification 94%. Now that was some camera.
Read the conclusion: One of the best (biggest, brightest) optical viewfinders on the market, 100% frame coverage
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2010   #6
hans voralberg
Registered User
 
hans voralberg's Avatar
 
hans voralberg is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Birmingham, UK & Hochiminh, Vietnam
Posts: 2,021
The A900 is kinda noisy for digital, and although the body is cheaper, sure, but the lens is way more expensive. The pro-grade Sony lens anyway, is priced up there somewhere in the stratosphere. You can get more 2nd hand gear for Canon/Nikon, so you can save quite a bit in glass.
__________________
Bodies: Leica IIIf - Leica M3 SS - M6 Black TTL - M9

Lens: Too many to list!

My Flickr

  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2010   #7
Matus
Registered User
 
Matus is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Frankfurt, DE
Posts: 1,843
Concerning the viewfinder magnification: Yes the D300 has 94%, but when comparing to full frame you need to account for 1.5x factor so it ends up like 63% - that is the true magnification.
__________________
________
Matus
... Flickr galleries: New Zealand , Spain
... per camera: Olympus XA , Jupiter J3 , Rolleiflex T, Mamiya 6, Ricoh GRDIII shots
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2010   #8
historicist
Registered User
 
historicist is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: lost
Posts: 563
Quote:
Last DSLR I shot was a Nikon D300. Frame coverage 100%, magnification 94%. Now that was some camera.
94% of a small thing can be less than 74% of a big thing... The D300 has a 1.5x smaller sensor, works out the same size as a 0.64 mag full frame camera.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2010   #9
meezy
meezy
 
meezy is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 67
i have a bunch of old minolta lenses that i really like, so i've been looking seriously at the 900 - but then the 800 came out with almost identical features and about $700 less (i think).

the biggest complaint i've heard and read about the sony line is that relative to its competitors, they're noisy at high ISO. it's a pretty widely held opinion.

i'm waiting for them to correct that issue and then i'll pull the trigger.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2010   #10
Monz
Monz
 
Monz's Avatar
 
Monz is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,068
Didn't Amateur Photographer do a head to head between 5dmk2 and one of the Sony 24MP cameras last week? IIRC, both cameras had an overall score of 81%.


EDIT It's the AP cover dated 16 Jan 2009:

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk...ne/current.php
__________________
RFF Gallery

My Top 10

Flickr Gallery

Last edited by Monz : 01-18-2010 at 11:59.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2010   #11
Dave Wilkinson
Registered User
 
Dave Wilkinson's Avatar
 
Dave Wilkinson is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Hull, Yorkshire, U.K
Posts: 2,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monz Ahmed View Post
Didn't Amateur Photographer do a head to head between 5dmk2 and one of the Sony 24MP cameras last week? IIRC, both camera had an overall score of 81%.


EDIT It's the AP cover dated 16 Jan 2009:

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk...ne/current.php
They did indeed - although I'm a afraid I've lost faith in a lot of magazine tests and reviews in recent years, they all seem to be afraid to upset their advertisers, and other biases seem to prevent an totally honest appraisal - just my two pennorth
Dave.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2010   #12
mfogiel
Registered User
 
mfogiel's Avatar
 
mfogiel is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monaco
Posts: 4,658
I have just had a look at these cameras in a shop (while I was waiting for my printer cartridges...) The Sony A900, Nikon D3 Canon MK something, plus the lenses - all this looked plastic, cheap, and hugely overdimensioned to be considered a camera one would like to seriously take around. For car driven cameras, probably Roger's Gandolfi 11x14 will beat them anyway in image quality... The first thought that crossed my mind when I was observing that, was that in 5 years time all these cameras will be melted into junk in some recycling plant.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2010   #13
Dave Wilkinson
Registered User
 
Dave Wilkinson's Avatar
 
Dave Wilkinson is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Hull, Yorkshire, U.K
Posts: 2,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfogiel View Post
I have just had a look at these cameras in a shop (while I was waiting for my printer cartridges...) The Sony A900, Nikon D3 Canon MK something, plus the lenses - all this looked plastic, cheap, and hugely overdimensioned to be considered a camera one would like to seriously take around. For car driven cameras, probably Roger's Gandolfi 11x14 will beat them anyway in image quality... The first thought that crossed my mind when I was observing that, was that in 5 years time all these cameras will be melted into junk in some recycling plant.
They will - if you want them to be!....it seems we always return to the same old chestnut - " Do I just want to walk around with a piece of metallic precision engineering - around my neck".....or....."am I concerned with quality pictures taken efficiently". Of course "Roger's Gandolfi 11x14 will beat them anyway in image quality" - but by the time I had that set up - it would be dark again!. Yes - size is important, but even after a heart attack last year, and being nearly as old as god - I can still walk around with a Nikon F5 around my neck for a few hours before collapsing in the nearest bar room!
Dave.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2010   #14
Dave Wilkinson
Registered User
 
Dave Wilkinson's Avatar
 
Dave Wilkinson is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Hull, Yorkshire, U.K
Posts: 2,281
I'm so... disappointed (for want of a more appropriate word) at the inability of so many people on this forum to accept the fact that others, myself included, can enjoy using modern 'cheap 'n nasty' plastic digital cameras, as well as trusty old metal examples of precision engineering. I seems that every new thread develops into film V.digital argument, or when will film die debate, there is also the increasing trend for 'pseudo-intellectual-psychological stuff' - and would-be professors - trying to out- do one another with multiple pages of boring nonsense, that establishes nothing. All in all - I think it's time I occupied more of my time in other directions - Hurrah! - I hear the cry!, but as Clarke Gable remarked - frankly my dear....I don't give a damn!
Dave.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2010   #15
pvdhaar
Zoom with your feet!
 
pvdhaar's Avatar
 
pvdhaar is offline
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 3,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Wilkinson View Post
I'm so... disappointed (for want of a more appropriate word) at the inability of so many people on this forum to accept the fact that others, myself included, can enjoy using modern 'cheap 'n nasty' plastic digital cameras, as well as trusty old metal examples of precision engineering. I seems that every new thread develops into film V.digital argument, or when will film die debate, there is also the increasing trend for 'pseudo-intellectual-psychological stuff' - and would-be professors - trying to out- do one another with multiple pages of boring nonsense, that establishes nothing. All in all - I think it's time I occupied more of my time in other directions - Hurrah! - I hear the cry!, but as Clarke Gable remarked - frankly my dear....I don't give a damn!
Dave.
I share your disappointment Dave; it's a shame that there are some here that need constant self gratification at the cost of others.. I'd also feel sorry if that would make others give up on RFF..

Back on topic:
Considering the body price alone, the A850 is indeed tempting, although 1600 is still a bit steep. It also probably indicates that it's possible to make FF DSLRs at a lower price point still. Main obstacle for me would be the cost of changing brands. I've locked up too much in Nikon flashes and lenses to switch.. But if I were to start from scratch again, I'd certainly consider the A850.
__________________
Kind regards,

Peter

My Hexländer Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2010   #16
user237428934
User deletion pending
 
user237428934 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,675
The lens lineup of sony is a little bit disappointing, if you want to have fast prime lenses. Even the new zeiss manual focus lenses are not delivered with a sony mount.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2010   #17
mfogiel
Registered User
 
mfogiel's Avatar
 
mfogiel is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monaco
Posts: 4,658
Dave,
I just think these cameras are really ridiculously overdimensioned. If I had to take one, I would probably go for the Nikon D700 - it was the smallest, the plastic looked least ugly, and you can mount lots of great lenses on it, including Zeiss and CV.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2010   #18
wgerrard
Registered User
 
wgerrard is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Wilkinson View Post
I'm so... disappointed (for want of a more appropriate word) at the inability of so many people on this forum to accept the fact that others, myself included, can enjoy using modern 'cheap 'n nasty' plastic digital cameras, as well as trusty old metal examples of precision engineering. I seems that every new thread develops into film V.digital argument, or when will film die debate, there is also the increasing trend for 'pseudo-intellectual-psychological stuff' - and would-be professors - trying to out- do one another with multiple pages of boring nonsense, that establishes nothing. All in all - I think it's time I occupied more of my time in other directions - Hurrah! - I hear the cry!, but as Clarke Gable remarked - frankly my dear....I don't give a damn!
Dave.
The assumption that non-metallic bodies are flimsy is incorrect. Many modern plastics are lighter, stronger and less prone to breakage than any metal used in old cameras.

If people like metal cameras, fair enough. But, to argue that non-metallic components can't be strong is wrong. Ask the people who make airplanes.

Besides, if we really wanted cameras that can't break when we drop them, we'd be lobbying for cameras encased in three inches of bouncy padding.
__________________
Bill
-------------------------------------
This is my only legible signature.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2010   #19
user237428934
User deletion pending
 
user237428934 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfogiel View Post
Dave,
I just think these cameras are really ridiculously overdimensioned. If I had to take one, I would probably go for the Nikon D700 - it was the smallest, the plastic looked least ugly, and you can mount lots of great lenses on it, including Zeiss and CV.
What? D700 = small? It's bigger and more heavy than a 5D.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2010   #20
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,645
A lot of these high end DSLR's may have plastic exteriors but it normally surrounds a magnesium, or some type of composite alloy chassis, for thermal stability and rigidity.

They are well made and generally very reliable ... I don't see a problem here.

Not that I own one of course!
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2010   #21
Range Loser
Registered User
 
Range Loser is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 129
I have often toyed with the options of buying a beautiful old german precision camera, or a large format tripod mounted camera, both would give a different quality to digital, but I can carry a D700 with 17-35 and 70-200 in a Billingham Hadley all afternoon with little discomfort, and it's very quick to use and produces quality equal to medium format film. What's not to like, as they say?
__________________
D700 and D800 + Nikkors for everyday.
Fuji TX1 and a few old Zorki's/Fed's for special occasions.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2010   #22
jke
Registered User
 
jke's Avatar
 
jke is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 290
I've actually messed around with a Sony 850 while Sony was doing some sort of promotion at their shop in NYC. While the body seems really wacky with all the buttons, with the grip attached, the buttons and wheels are basically in the same position no matter the orientation. The grip duplicates the buttons on the body in portrait orientation. Redundant, yes, but also strangely convenient.

The pro lenses seemed very nice. But their AF seemed noticeably slower. At least, I would point the camera and expect AF to lock in, but there was a heartbeat's tick before it did. And I could find things to make it hunt. As mentioned above, the pro lenses are expensive compared to Canon but perhaps about the same or a bit less than the pro lenses from Olympus. However, they have a lot of affordable level lenses, including the all the Minolta AF lenses of yore.

One caveat: My father has a Sony Alpha body - one of the low to mid range bodies. A couple of the Sony-brand lenses (an 18-200 and a 70-300) wouldn't connect properly with his camera body. The camera didn't recognize that a lens was mounted, or if it did, nearly immediately lost contact. Ironically, every Minolta lens has worked perfectly.

But Canon is now selling the Canon 5D mkII for $2499. 3200ISO looks like 400ISO on other cameras. Yeah, there is noise in the shadows, but the rest of the image is clean. And with a 17-40mm f4.0L lens, I am barely above $3000 in initial cost. Seemed a no brainer to me, but then I just might not have a brain.
__________________
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2010   #23
benlees
Registered User
 
benlees is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Edmonton, AB
Age: 47
Posts: 1,615
I sometimes get tempted as I have no investment in other systems- except a relatively small one in Pentax- and the price is not too bad. I don't care how big it is or how plastic it is- my main camera is a Mamiya 7. The main thing about the a850 is that it shows prices are dropping and quality is going up quite quickly in the digital realm.

But... I like the Mamiya and the K200D still impresses. No need to spend any money.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2010   #24
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
 
Ezzie's Avatar
 
Ezzie is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Norway
Posts: 2,708
Specs and performance may be whatever really (at that price they are all good, Sony, Canon, Nikon and the rest). If you don't like the handling then the camera will not get used. I have a Nikon D2X, rather than similar spec Canon, Pentax, Sony or other because I like the feel of it. The handling, the button lay out and controls. I find the others to be over complicated and the controls to be awkwardly located. Problem with system cameras of course, is once you collect more than a few lenses, swapping systems is expeeeeeeensive.

So go get your mits on one and give it a spin!
__________________
Eirik

RF: Leica M4-2 | Royal 35-M | Polaroid 110A/600SE hybrid
VF: DIY 4x5 | DIY 6x17 | Voigtländer Vito CL | Foth Derby | Welta Weltix | Smena Symbol | Lomo'Instax
SLR: Canon EF | Pentacon SIX | Pentax SP1000 | Pentax SV
TLR: Rolleiflex 2.8E3 | DUO TLR
CSC: Fuji X-E1
Pinhole: 6x17 Vermeer | ONDU 6x6 | DIY 4x5 | DIY 6x24

My Flickr
Silver Halides - Pictures in B&W
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2010   #25
japro
Registered User
 
japro is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Zürich, Switzerland
Age: 34
Posts: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom.w.bn View Post
The lens lineup of sony is a little bit disappointing, if you want to have fast prime lenses. Even the new zeiss manual focus lenses are not delivered with a sony mount.
What exactly is lacking there?

35/1.4, 50/1.4, 85/1.4 135/1.8 (!)... Nikon and Canon have 200/2's and Canon has a 50/1.2, is that what it needs today to have a satisfactory linup of fast Lenses

I mainly shoot with Minolta AF gear but only have one digital body (a D5D). The FF-bodies are tempting, but at the moment i'd rather put a full frame sensor into my D9's and buy a lens for 1600$, since the D5D has been adequate for my digital needs so far.

Last edited by japro : 01-19-2010 at 08:28.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2010   #26
Frank Petronio
-
 
Frank Petronio's Avatar
 
Frank Petronio is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Rochester, NY, USA
Posts: 1,868
I think that we achieved all the resolution most commercial and "practical" serious photographers ever needed back a couple of years ago with the Nikon D300. The improvements in ISO and range may come eventually but not until the manufacturers stop trying to win the (dumb marketing-driven) megapixel race. Kudos to Nikon and Leica for at least trying to balance resolution versus ISO and dynamic range performance.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-20-2010   #27
user237428934
User deletion pending
 
user237428934 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by japro View Post
What exactly is lacking there?

35/1.4, 50/1.4, 85/1.4 135/1.8 (!)... Nikon and Canon have 200/2's and Canon has a 50/1.2, is that what it needs today to have a satisfactory linup of fast Lenses

I mainly shoot with Minolta AF gear but only have one digital body (a D5D). The FF-bodies are tempting, but at the moment i'd rather put a full frame sensor into my D9's and buy a lens for 1600$, since the D5D has been adequate for my digital needs so far.
I was aiming at fast wideangle like a 35/1.4 or 24/1.4. Yes, at least it seems that Sony has a 35/1.4 but I didn't find it on the sony website. Looked it up in a price-finding website. So I must admit that they have it.

But still Zeiss does not produce it's lenses with a sony mount. Does anybody know the reason?
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-20-2010   #28
hans voralberg
Registered User
 
hans voralberg's Avatar
 
hans voralberg is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Birmingham, UK & Hochiminh, Vietnam
Posts: 2,021
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom.w.bn View Post
I was aiming at fast wideangle like a 35/1.4 or 24/1.4. Yes, at least it seems that Sony has a 35/1.4 but I didn't find it on the sony website. Looked it up in a price-finding website. So I must admit that they have it.

But still Zeiss does not produce it's lenses with a sony mount. Does anybody know the reason?
Zeiss ZA range has Sony badge on it as well, there's no Zeiss only lens for the Sony mount.
__________________
Bodies: Leica IIIf - Leica M3 SS - M6 Black TTL - M9

Lens: Too many to list!

My Flickr

  Reply With Quote

Old 01-20-2010   #29
user237428934
User deletion pending
 
user237428934 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by hans voralberg View Post
Zeiss ZA range has Sony badge on it as well, there's no Zeiss only lens for the Sony mount.
Zeiss has "Zeiss (ZA)" for Sony (mostly Zoom lenses) and "Zeiss SLR Lenses" which are prime lenses for Canon, Nikon, Pentax. And I was speaking of those Zeiss SLR Lenses where they have really good ones and intersting wide angle lenses.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 19:33.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.