The changing field of professional cameras

[skieur]

So you've compared (and used) the A77, D7000, D3, D700, 5DII,7D, 60D, 1D all side by side?

As you well know, by now. I am keeping the comparison to the 3 cameras I mentioned: Nikon D3x, Canon IDS Mark III, and the Sony A77.

skieur

Yes, I can see that you do ignore posts.

Ok so you've used all 3 cameras side by side? Or did you "try them out". Because odds are you did not explore the cameras to their entirety.

I said this.

You compared the 3 cameras you mentioned side by side? At the same time? And used them all in the same scenario?

OK, to give you something to look at carefully, go here. Imaging Resource "Comparometer" ™ Digital Camera Image Comparison Page. It compares images. On the left hand side pick one of the cameras I mentioned. Double click to zoom in. On the right hand side pick the Sony A77.

Sony and Canon for example. Look at the back of the book held by the girl in green. How readable is the text? Look at the top edge of the book in ISO 6400 for both the Canon and Sony. The Sony is slightly better. The Canon has inaccurate coloured pixels in the grain which is much more prominent than in the Sony image.

Compare the Nikon D3x as well. Frankly none of the 3: Canon, Nikon or Sony handle noise extremely well in these images but the Sony is a little better, certainly not worse than the other 2.

skieur

 

[gsgary]

Limited view of technology, eh? The EVF on the Sony A77 reduces vibration from the mirror producing greater sharpness, increases speed which permits new features such as in camera panorama, tilt-shift, and HDR, as well as better HD video, and produces a what you see is what you get image in exposure.
With all thoses pluses, it is an obvious direction to go.

skieur

Well your 'views' are certainly one sided... for instance, you've failed to acknowledge that the mirror introduces 1/2 stop loss of light all the time. I'll take faster shutter speed advantage over the miniscule mirror vibration any day.

"Sony has unveiled the SLT A55 and SLT A33, the first pair of cameras to incorporate the company's translucent mirror design. The Single Lens Translucent (SLT) cameras offer live view with full-time fast phase-detection AF whether in stills or movie shooting. This is achieved by having a fixed, semi-transparent mirror that redirects a small amount of light onto the AF sensor while allowing the rest through onto the main imaging sensor. "

No mention of a 1/2 stop loss of light here and it is definitely not from a Sony biased web site.

skieur

They are that good when i set up a studio shoot the Sony user had to borrow one of my cameras because his A55 was crap in the studio

 

[skieur]

I think it unlikely that Nikon will bring out a 36 mp camera to replace a 12mp. In any case Skieur you have limited knowledge about the differences between sensor sizes and their relationship to image quality. If you think it is all about number of mp you are very much mistaken. The Nikon or canon having a 36 mp sensor will not kill digital medium format. It's a different market. It's like saying crop will kill full frame and we know that's not true.

It has already been indicated that Sony has made a deal with Nikon for selling them the 36mp sensor and that a Nikon D800 will come out in February 2012. Sony in turn will come out with an A77 36 mp camera in April. I know all about sensor sizes but multiple sensors and blending high speed shots reduce picture noise too. Sony, Nikon or Canon 36 mp sensor will not kill medium format digital, but it will certainly squeeze the lower end of that market. Pros have noted that the medium format market is not as large as the one for digital single lens reflex cameras in the first place and that it will continue to decline.

skieur

Nikon_Josh

(OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE TO WRITE YOUR NICKNAME AT THE END OF EACH POST SO EVERYONE KNOWS WHO YOU ARE)

Pretty funny, since you have done exactly the same thing.:lmao:

skieur

 

[unpopular]

No mention of a 1/2 stop loss of light here and it is definitely not from a Sony biased web site.

maybe it's a third or a sixth or even less. but it is less light and there must be enough light diverted to illuminate the EVF's sensor, light that could be used to illuminate the primary imaging sensor.

 

[gsgary]

As you well know, by now. I am keeping the comparison to the 3 cameras I mentioned: Nikon D3x, Canon IDS Mark III, and the Sony A77.

skieur

Yes, I can see that you do ignore posts.

Ok so you've used all 3 cameras side by side? Or did you "try them out". Because odds are you did not explore the cameras to their entirety.

I said this.

You compared the 3 cameras you mentioned side by side? At the same time? And used them all in the same scenario?

OK, to give you something to look at carefully, go here. Imaging Resource "Comparometer" ™ Digital Camera Image Comparison Page. It compares images. On the left hand side pick one of the cameras I mentioned. Double click to zoom in. On the right hand side pick the Sony A77.

Sony and Canon for example. Look at the back of the book held by the girl in green. How readable is the text? Look at the top edge of the book in ISO 6400 for both the Canon and Sony. The Sony is slightly better. The Canon has inaccurate coloured pixels in the grain which is much more prominent than in the Sony image.

Compare the Nikon D3x as well. Frankly none of the 3: Canon, Nikon or Sony handle noise extremely well in these images but the Sony is a little better, certainly not worse than the other 2.

skieur

A reveiw i have just read the Sony had noise from the lowest iso right through it's range and he would not use it above ISO400 i know which i would buy

 

[skieur]

Well your 'views' are certainly one sided... for instance, you've failed to acknowledge that the mirror introduces 1/2 stop loss of light all the time. I'll take faster shutter speed advantage over the miniscule mirror vibration any day.

"Sony has unveiled the SLT A55 and SLT A33, the first pair of cameras to incorporate the company's translucent mirror design. The Single Lens Translucent (SLT) cameras offer live view with full-time fast phase-detection AF whether in stills or movie shooting. This is achieved by having a fixed, semi-transparent mirror that redirects a small amount of light onto the AF sensor while allowing the rest through onto the main imaging sensor. "

No mention of a 1/2 stop loss of light here and it is definitely not from a Sony biased web site.

skieur

They are that good when i set up a studio shoot the Sony user had to borrow one of my cameras because his A55 was crap in the studio

Well the A77 is a considerable improvement over the A55 with a new 2.4 million dot resolution viewfinder and a much brighter with more contrast OLED viewfinder.
It also has the viewfinder advantage of what you see is what you get mode in exposure and white balance, filters, etc. as well as a gain up mode for low light shooting in studio or other low light setup.

On the other hand as I have said many times before, I would NOT use any of these cameras for studio work.

skieur

 

[unpopular]

A reveiw i have just read the Sony had noise from the lowest iso right through it's range and he would not use it above ISO400 i know which i would buy

But did you read the Comparometer? The comparometer says... THE COMPAROMETER!!! COMPAROMETER!!!!

​COMPAROMETER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[skieur]

Yes, I can see that you do ignore posts.



I said this.

You compared the 3 cameras you mentioned side by side? At the same time? And used them all in the same scenario?

OK, to give you something to look at carefully, go here. Imaging Resource "Comparometer" ™ Digital Camera Image Comparison Page. It compares images. On the left hand side pick one of the cameras I mentioned. Double click to zoom in. On the right hand side pick the Sony A77.

Sony and Canon for example. Look at the back of the book held by the girl in green. How readable is the text? Look at the top edge of the book in ISO 6400 for both the Canon and Sony. The Sony is slightly better. The Canon has inaccurate coloured pixels in the grain which is much more prominent than in the Sony image.

Compare the Nikon D3x as well. Frankly none of the 3: Canon, Nikon or Sony handle noise extremely well in these images but the Sony is a little better, certainly not worse than the other 2.

skieur

A reveiw i have just read the Sony had noise from the lowest iso right through it's range and he would not use it above ISO400 i know which i would buy

Well, dpreview is questionable beside the very large Popular Photography magazine organization in North America, labs, and staff experts. Also dpreviews test images do NOT back up what they say.

skieur

 

[unpopular]

wait. are you seriously saying that Popular Photography is reputable??? :lmao:

 

[skieur]

A reveiw i have just read the Sony had noise from the lowest iso right through it's range and he would not use it above ISO400 i know which i would buy

But did you read the Comparometer? The comparometer says... THE COMPAROMETER!!! COMPAROMETER!!!!

​COMPAROMETER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What are you talking about???? I read the images. Can't you analyze images????

skieur

 

[unpopular]

Were they RAW? I didn't read the whole thread, where are they at?

--

nm I thought the comparometer was a different website

 

[unpopular]

Ok. I looked at the sample images for the a77.

Skieur. You're *officially* on crack. Those samples are noisy as all hell.

 

[skieur]

wait. are you seriously saying that Popular Photography is reputable??? :lmao:

It has the advantage of size, staff, contributors, and readership and as such it represents a broad consensus of trends in photography. It's labs for testing are more advanced and more expensive than those of any other organizations that review cameras. There is also an effort made to be unbiased, which is more than what I can say for some other reviewers, so yes they are more reputable than most.

skieur

 

[unpopular]

^^ have you ever read an outright negative review in Popular Photography? Reading that magazine you'd think every camera was as good as any other.

 

[skieur]

No mention of a 1/2 stop loss of light here and it is definitely not from a Sony biased web site.

maybe it's a third or a sixth or even less. but it is less light and there must be enough light diverted to illuminate the EVF's sensor, light that could be used to illuminate the primary imaging sensor.

Even if it were true, I don't see a sixth of a stop or less as being even noticeable let alone an issue.

skieur