sony a77

mjhoward said:
I'm sorry, I should have known I needed to spell it out for you... Sony A-mount lenses have only been around since 2006. Sure the mount might be the same, but we were discussing lenses were we not?

We were talking about the lens. You started talking about the A. EF, and F-mount.

If you notice, the A-mount was the only one I specified a manufacturer for... EF has always been Canon and F mount has always been Nikon so no need to distinguish the lens manufacturer. It doesn't matter anyway, you're thick headed and will seemingly never be capable of a sensible argument. So thats it for me, there's a daycare down the street if I decide I want to continue arguing with a child.
 
mjhoward said:
If you notice, the A-mount was the only one I specified a manufacturer for... EF has always been Canon and F mount has always been Nikon so no need to distinguish the lens manufacturer. It doesn't matter anyway, you're thick headed and will seemingly never be capable of a sensible argument. So thats it for me, there's a daycare down the street if I decide I want to continue arguing with a child.

By the looks of that post, you weren't talking about just the lenses. Couldn't you just say Sony, Canon, Nikon lenses? Even dxqcanada thought you were talking about the A-Mount.

So that's it? Why giving up so soon bro? nyehehehe!
 
mjhoward said:
Well it wouldn't make much sense to include FD mount Canon lenses in the discussion now would it? Bye-bye Argue... err I mean Argie.

It wouldn't matter. We were talking Canon, Nikon, Sony DSLR lenses. Your post was misleading. Like I said, even dxqcanada thought you were talking about A-mount.

Yea, run away chicken lol
 
Last edited:
Wow, it's amazing people who shoot Canon can even take pictures! How do they even make images if the sensor is "behind" Nikon and Sony? Jeeze, I might as well throw away all my gear that renders awesome image quality on a 36x24mm full frame sensor and switch over to the APS-C, crippled in low light A77.

I bet we'll see all the big names, like Annie L, switch over to Sony from shooting Canon. I bet she'll hop right on the EVF bandwagon for all her studio work... Since you know, the EVF is the "next big thing." :lmao:

Really Argie, your posts are funny (because they're so amazingly far from the truth). But give it a rest. It's old now. You're a diehard Sony Fanboy and you refuse to admit it. Your previous forum posts prove so.

With that, I'm adding you to my ignore list. Have a great time continuing to be delusional.

Then if the low light abilities of the Sony sensors are so bad, how do they take picture? You ain't stupid ain't you? He's just stating the fact that Sony sensors are better than Canon when you're trying to say Sony sensors are bad. Protecting Canon eh?
 
DxOMark - Compare cameras side by sideook at the points - 15 points = 1 stop improvement in everything. 12 points = more than 2/3rd of a stop. And if you resize the A77's pictures to 18MP (same as 7D), you are likely to get 33% better noise performance, which means A77 gained more than 1 stop over 7D.
 
Derrel said:
It seems from the DxO Mark link you provided us argieramos, that the Sony A77's Low-Light performance LAGS BEHIND the now ancient Canon 1D-Mark II (not even the N-version,but the ORIGINAL Mark II!) AND it is wayyyyyy below the now-old Canon 5D in terms of High ISO performance...the a77 gets its ass kicked at elevated ISO levels by the old Canon 5D. Why am I not surprised that the A77 is inferior at High ISO levels to both a seven year-old Canon FF, and an eight year-old APS-H pro Canon???

For your info Derrel, even your favorite D7000 got it's ass kicked at high ISO by the old Canon 5D.
http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon_EOS_5D-vs-Nikon_D7000
So are you going to consider D7000 a bad high ISO performer? lol

You wrote, "The a77 destroyed Professional Level cameras of Canon in Image Quality. Cameras that use much bigger sensor." Uh...not QUITE...the A77 fell FLAT ON ITS FACE at higher ISO values...the old Canon 5D performed the best of the three cameras that YOU chose to compare it with...but the Sony did have wider dynamic range and color depth and a marginally higher overall score...but let's say for lower-light shots, the roughly 800 score of the A77 versus the roughly 1300 score of the original Canon 5D...that's a poor performance for the new Sony against a camera that's about seven years old...

Oh right, 1D Mk II (APS-H) and 5D (Full Frame) that use much bigger sensors and much more expensive has better high ISO performance than the a77 that use smaller sensor. Well, bigger sensor supposed to do better in low light, right? But you can't change the fact that the a77 still has better IQ in low ISO than those Pro-level, bigger sensor, and much more expensive cameras could ever achieve in their low ISO.

As with most things in the photography world, there ARE trade-offs...from what I gather, the A77 24 MP sensor looks fine at lower ISO levels, but it LOSES DETAIL pretty fast as the ISO levels rise, and in fact, the degree of noise reduction needed at elevated ISO levels brings the overall resolution down to the 16.2 megapixel level of the "other Sony sensors" used by both Pentax in the K5 and Nikon in the D7000, and also the 17.8 MP (effective) MP sensor used in the Canon 7D. Also, the RAW files of the A77 are "cooked", to help alleviate all the danged noise the sensor and electronics create...a few years ago "cooked" RAW files was something people would scream about all day long on-line. Of course, now, with a 24 MP starting point, it seems like "cooked" RAW files and HEAVILY-cooked JPEG images from the A77 are actually a pretty good compromise, all things considered. There are now enough MP that some noise reduction, or even heavy NR, seems like a good trade-off to me, even if it effectively lowers the A77 from a 24 MP camera down to a 16- to 18-MP camera...that seems fine to me...

Many manufacturers have been secretly cooking Raws for years. Yes, even Nikon. I am surprised you didn't know that. a77 loses detail in high ISO. Yea, just like every single camera does. But still, a77 in ISO 1600 has better IQ than the 7D and way better than the D300s in their ISO 100.

I think if a person has Sony lenses and flashes, then they ought to look into the A77. If not, then there's not much need to look into the A77. As Pop Photo's Michael MacNamara wrote in his review, he thinks it's a good idea for Canon and Nikon users to "wait and see" what those companies come out with in the **video** front in their upcoming cameras...meaning it's nowhere near the blanket "Let's all migrate to Sony!!!" call to action that "some" people want to try and spin that one, single review into being.

Yes, Canon and Nikon should do "wait and see and shut up" lol

You're supposed to be a Pro Derrel. But you're keep getting owned by me. :)
 
Wow, it's amazing people who shoot Canon can even take pictures! How do they even make images if the sensor is "behind" Nikon and Sony? Jeeze, I might as well throw away all my gear that renders awesome image quality on a 36x24mm full frame sensor and switch over to the APS-C, crippled in low light A77.

I bet we'll see all the big names, like Annie L, switch over to Sony from shooting Canon. I bet she'll hop right on the EVF bandwagon for all her studio work... Since you know, the EVF is the "next big thing." :lmao:

Really Argie, your posts are funny (because they're so amazingly far from the truth). But give it a rest. It's old now. You're a diehard Sony Fanboy and you refuse to admit it. Your previous forum posts prove so.

With that, I'm adding you to my ignore list. Have a great time continuing to be delusional.

Then if the low light abilities of the Sony sensors are so bad, how do they take picture? You ain't stupid ain't you? He's just stating the fact that Sony sensors are better than Canon when you're trying to say Sony sensors are bad. Protecting Canon eh?

You've proven since you've been here that you have less than satisfactory reading comprehension. I am assuming this issue carried over into this thread for you.
 
argieramos said:
For your info Derrel, even your favorite D7000 got it's ass kicked at high ISO by the old Canon 5D.
Canon 5D vs Nikon D7000
So are you going to consider D7000 a bad high ISO performer? lol

Argie, according to your own link above, they wrote: "
1,368 ISOvs1,167 ISO
help_14.gif
The 5D has a slight edge (0.2 f-stops) in low noise, high ISO performance".




So, Argie, you consider 2/10 of one f/stop "getting its ass kicked"? You really are a delusional boy! Have a great week!
 
Derrel said:
Argie, according to your own link above, they wrote: "
1,368 ISOvs1,167 ISOThe 5D has a slight edge (0.2 f-stops) in low noise, high ISO performance".


So, Argie, you consider 2/10 of one f/stop "getting its ass kicked"? You really are a delusional boy! Have a great week!

Yes. If you look at the fact of how old the 1D MkII compare to the D7000.
Didn't you also say that 1D MkII kicked the a77 ass in high ISO? Go back to the 1D MkII and a77 comparison again then do the math and tell me which one of us is the real delusional. The slight advantage of the 5D to the D7000 is not a big deal to you, but it is on 1D MkII to the a77. You got an issue bro..
 
Last edited:
Is it time to start posting 'stupid' you tube videos again yet? Where is 'unpopular' when you need him!
 
Derrel said:
Argie, according to your own link above, they wrote: "
1,368 ISOvs1,167 ISOThe 5D has a slight edge (0.2 f-stops) in low noise, high ISO performance".


So, Argie, you consider 2/10 of one f/stop "getting its ass kicked"? You really are a delusional boy! Have a great week!

Yes. If you look at the fact of how old the 1D MkII compare to the D7000.
Didn't you also say that 1D MkII kicked the a77 ass in high ISO? Go back to the 1D MkII and a77 comparison again then do the math and tell me which one of us is the real delusional. The slight advantage of the 5D to the D7000 is not a big deal to you, but it is on 1D MkII to the a77. You got an issue bro..

Actually, from what I've seen, the A77's noise is luminance noise, while the 1D gives more color noise. The A77 probably has better ISO overall, because of newer sensors/processors, but it's kind of hard to compare two cameras that act completely differently.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top