The changing field of professional cameras

skieur

TPF Noob!
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
5,071
Reaction score
204
Location
Canada
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Well at the top end of the "35mm format" size is the Canon IDs Mark III at approximately $7,000 and 21 megapixels, the Nikon D3x at approximately $8,000 at approx. 24 megapixels and surprisingly the Sony A77 at $1,500.

If you put photos side by side from these cameras you will find very little difference. They are equally sharp with similar noise levels at very high ISO. Canon tends to have cooler colours than Nikon and Sony but that is a matter of taste.

Nikon and Sony have 920,000 pixel LCDs versus the 230,000 pixel LCD from Canon. Although the Sony has an EVF, rather than optical viewfinder, it is the new OLED technology with 2.4 million pixels resolution and greater contrast than any other EVFs.

Sweep panorama and enhanced HDR in camera are interesting features on the Sony. Canon and Nikon however have great strobe and related accessories for elaborate light set-ups and in-studio work.

Lenses are somewhat similar too. The best Canon and Nikon lenses are not drastically better or worse than the best Zeiss lenses, Sony G lenses, or rebranded Minolta lenses. Third party lens manufacturers have improved for all these makes as well.

Many or most pros will use Canon or Nikon but a few will probably be asking themselves whether the Canon or Nikon are 5 times better (as per the price) than the Sony and a few with lower budgets will probably consider that direction.

The competition for market share will benefit all photographers.

skieur
 
Last edited:
The 21 MP 5D Mark II is $2,000
 
The Sony is not marketed as a pro camera, it's listed as being more in the enthusiast/semi-pro line. It's build is nowhere near the solid quality of either the Nikon or the Canons you are trying to compare them to. Take that Sony out in one rainstorm and you may soon notice why the others are "Pro" cameras with their weather resistant sealing.

If you put photos side by side from these cameras you will find very little difference. They are equally sharp with similar noise levels at very high ISO. Canon tends to have cooler colours than Nikon and Sony but that is a matter of taste.

The image quality comparisons don't match up well once you get up into the ISOs over 1600. You also lose some of it's functions when you start getting up into the higher frame rates, like live view. Here's one quote on the image quality from an online review about the image quality.. " At ISO 1600 and above, the destructive effects of the A77's noise reduction setting become more apparent and it is obvious that at ISO 3200 and 6400, the A77 isn't producing 24MP' worth of actual resolution "

It is a good camera, but it's not anywhere near the Nikon and Canon pro class cameras.
 
The 21 MP 5D Mark II is $2,000

Yes, the 5D Mark II is closer to the Sony in price and features. It then becomes more a matter of individual needs and use.

skieur
 
You can put an iPhone 4S photo up against those same bodies and even then you may not be able to tell the difference if they were all similar shots taken in an ideal, static environment with adequate lighting. The problem is in the real world this almost never happens. If you took photos with all those same bodies of a ferrari racing through a rainstorm, you'd quickly be able to tell the difference in which body took what photo... assuming they all functioned in the rain storm.
 
The Sony is not marketed as a pro camera, it's listed as being more in the enthusiast/semi-pro line. It's build is nowhere near the solid quality of either the Nikon or the Canons you are trying to compare them to. Take that Sony out in one rainstorm and you may soon notice why the others are "Pro" cameras with their weather resistant sealing.

If you put photos side by side from these cameras you will find very little difference. They are equally sharp with similar noise levels at very high ISO. Canon tends to have cooler colours than Nikon and Sony but that is a matter of taste.

The image quality comparisons don't match up well once you get up into the ISOs over 1600. You also lose some of it's functions when you start getting up into the higher frame rates, like live view. Here's one quote on the image quality from an online review about the image quality.. " At ISO 1600 and above, the destructive effects of the A77's noise reduction setting become more apparent and it is obvious that at ISO 3200 and 6400, the A77 isn't producing 24MP' worth of actual resolution "

It is a good camera, but it's not anywhere near the Nikon and Canon pro class cameras.

The Sony A77 is dust and weather sealed as in both body, dials and lens and I have not seen any posts of problems with it in a rainstorm. It is also heftier than the other models with a magnesium alloy body

With photos side by side at ISO 1600 and ISO 3200, print was sharper on the Sony A77, than on the Canon 5D MarkII. Go to imaging-resource and check out the back of the book in the photo.

skieur

.
 
You can put an iPhone 4S photo up against those same bodies and even then you may not be able to tell the difference if they were all similar shots taken in an ideal, static environment with adequate lighting. The problem is in the real world this almost never happens. If you took photos with all those same bodies of a ferrari racing through a rainstorm, you'd quickly be able to tell the difference in which body took what photo... assuming they all functioned in the rain storm.

Ah, not unless you are blind or a newbie in photography. You don't see any pros using an iPhone in their photo studios do you?;)

skieur
 
You can put an iPhone 4S photo up against those same bodies and even then you may not be able to tell the difference if they were all similar shots taken in an ideal, static environment with adequate lighting. The problem is in the real world this almost never happens. If you took photos with all those same bodies of a ferrari racing through a rainstorm, you'd quickly be able to tell the difference in which body took what photo... assuming they all functioned in the rain storm.

Ah, not unless you are blind or a newbie in photography. You don't see any pros using an iPhone in their photo studios do you?;)

skieur

Yes, The iPhone Fashion Shoot By Lee Morris | Fstoppers ;)
And that was with the crappier iPhone 3 camera
 
A magnesium metal chassis is mostly about heat dissipation, and the blocking of electromagnetic interference.

The insertion of the iPhone camera into a discussion of pro grade DSLR cameras is a canard, and a useless canard at that.
 
You can put an iPhone 4S photo up against those same bodies and even then you may not be able to tell the difference if they were all similar shots taken in an ideal, static environment with adequate lighting. The problem is in the real world this almost never happens. If you took photos with all those same bodies of a ferrari racing through a rainstorm, you'd quickly be able to tell the difference in which body took what photo... assuming they all functioned in the rain storm.

Ah, not unless you are blind or a newbie in photography. You don't see any pros using an iPhone in their photo studios do you?;)

skieur

Yes, The iPhone Fashion Shoot By Lee Morris | Fstoppers ;)
And that was with the crappier iPhone 3 camera

I noticed that the iphone 3 could not handle the range in skin colour and brightness due in large part to the lighting and limitations of the camera.

skieur
 
I think it's too bad the Sony A-850 has been discontinued. A full-frame size sensor, and the huge viewfinder image, and the impeccable traditional layout were really impressive, and the price of under $2,000 for a full-frame was market-leading.Sony Alpha DSLR- A850 Full Frame Digital SLR Camera DSLRA850 B&H

The A77 is NOT impressive to me...read the dPreview review...cramming 24.6 MP into a crop-sensor leaves the image performance severely lacking, and far below that of a FF camera...and the high frame rates are nice and all, but the autofocus system cannot even begin to keep up...and the image through the viewfinder is so dim that in-studio use under modeling lights is severely impaired. Sorry, but the Sony A77 is in NO WAY a "professional" camera...it has some serious,serious fundamental flaws as a "machine", and would make a disastrous choice for somebody looking for a real "professional camera".

If you put the photos from the A77 side by side with those from a Nikon or Canon 12 megapixel camera (meaning 5D original, Nikon D3, D3s, or D700), you can see that the camera's JPEG images are soft, and the sensor is very noisy, and the image quality is strictly not up to snuff, at ANY of the higher ISO values...and the camera has NO LIVE VIEW in 8- or 12 frames per second mode, so panning and following motion is basically damned near impossible...the RAW files are noisy at high ISO...in all, the Sony A77 is not a very good professional-level instrument. The Sony A77 has some very serious shortcomings in image quality, ISO range, lack of viewfinder at high FPS!! (Good Gawd, that's a serious problem!), and poor viewfinder image under lower-light levels.

I honestly have no idea why you are calling this a "professional camera", when it is clearly not up to the BASIC level of functionality for a pro camera...it's high-end gadget freak consumer all the way....small sensor, bad finder under anything but bright light, poor sensor performance at high ISOs, strong noise reduction, poor control over degree of noise reduction, an AF system that cannot keep up with the shutter, and no real-time viewing at 8 fps or 12 fps...and SOOC JPEG Images that are severely lacking in detail...

Sony SLT-A77 Review: 26. Conclusion: Digital Photography Review

"Ehhh..."
 
I have no idea what the deal is with these fixed mirror SLRs. All you're going to get is continuous phase detection AF at the expense of decreased SNR.

This translucent mirror "technology" seems like it's an attempt by Sony to convince us that their corner cutting is actually a good thing.
 
The insertion of the iPhone camera into a discussion of pro grade DSLR cameras is a canard, and a useless canard at that.

I believe the point that was intended to be made, was.

I saw your point, and it was a valid one.

Ah, not unless you are blind or a newbie in photography.

This is such a stuck up horse **** comment it's not even funny.
 
I think it's too bad the Sony A-850 has been discontinued. A full-frame size sensor, and the huge viewfinder image, and the impeccable traditional layout were really impressive, and the price of under $2,000 for a full-frame was market-leading.Sony Alpha DSLR- A850 Full Frame Digital SLR Camera DSLRA850 B&H

The A77 is NOT impressive to me...read the dPreview review...cramming 24.6 MP into a crop-sensor leaves the image performance severely lacking, and far below that of a FF camera...and the high frame rates are nice and all, but the autofocus system cannot even begin to keep up...and the image through the viewfinder is so dim that in-studio use under modeling lights is severely impaired. Sorry, but the Sony A77 is in NO WAY a "professional" camera...it has some serious,serious fundamental flaws as a "machine", and would make a disastrous choice for somebody looking for a real "professional camera".

If you put the photos from the A77 side by side with those from a Nikon or Canon 12 megapixel camera (meaning 5D original, Nikon D3, D3s, or D700), you can see that the camera's JPEG images are soft, and the sensor is very noisy, and the image quality is strictly not up to snuff, at ANY of the higher ISO values...and the camera has NO LIVE VIEW in 8- or 12 frames per second mode, so panning and following motion is basically damned near impossible...the RAW files are noisy at high ISO...in all, the Sony A77 is not a very good professional-level instrument. The Sony A77 has some very serious shortcomings in image quality, ISO range, lack of viewfinder at high FPS!! (Good Gawd, that's a serious problem!), and poor viewfinder image under lower-light levels.

I honestly have no idea why you are calling this a "professional camera", when it is clearly not up to the BASIC level of functionality for a pro camera...it's high-end gadget freak consumer all the way....small sensor, bad finder under anything but bright light, poor sensor performance at high ISOs, strong noise reduction, poor control over degree of noise reduction, an AF system that cannot keep up with the shutter, and no real-time viewing at 8 fps or 12 fps...and SOOC JPEG Images that are severely lacking in detail...

Sony SLT-A77 Review: 26. Conclusion: Digital Photography Review

"Ehhh..."

What you say contradicts with what I see in these side by side shots Imaging Resource "Comparometer" ™ Digital Camera Image Comparison Page Take a look at the maniquin in the green outfit with the book in 1600 ISO. The Canon 5D Mark II image is SOFTER than the image from the Sony A77.

Looking further you will find that the image performance is not lacking at all. Notice the detail of the A77 is equal to that of the Nikon D3 or Canon IDs mark iii. I don't think that ISO 25,600 is lacking in ISO range either. The viewfinder image is better under lower light than usual optical viewfinders since it is OLED. The autofocus system according to Popular Photography is the fastest of any DSLR in both movie mode and photo shooting.


skieur
 
Last edited:

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top