Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
AP have done a side by side test of these three cameras because they all share the same Sony sensor. It'a straight comparison between the cameras despite the fact that the Sony is £600, the K5 is £900 and the D7000 is £1000. Many on this forum would reject such a comparison because they say that the cheaper Sony is not in the same league as the other two, but the AP test says different. They tested the image quality (using a Sigma 17-50mm on all cameras), compared the metering, autofocus, resolution and noise. And, guess what - there's basically nothing in it.
IQ - "The margins are very slight here"
Metering - "All systems are very proficient" (Nikon have recently corrected a firmware problem they had, apparently)
AF - "All were quick to lock on and had no low light problems". For liveview the A55 was best but the D7000 "lags behind, visibly hunting in front and behind the point"
Resolution - On chart testing the D7000 was best, closely followed by the K5 which was slightly better than the A55. In a "real world test" they said, "when shown at 100% it is difficult to say which image is more detailed"
Noise - The K5 and D7000 were very slightly better than the A55 "probably due to the translucent mirror". It's a pity they didn't also include the A580 to check that out.
They also got some professor to examine the sensors and he said that they were obviously all the same sensor. "The silicon in the sensors is identical, just as it is with the Sony A900 and the Nikon D3X. Very likely the whole sensor is identical, but there is scope for differences with identical silicon - the colour filter array could be different, although the DXO analysis shows identical colour response". He said "This is, by some margin, the best DSLR sensor ever made, area for area".
So it looks like the A55 is something of a bargain.
Quote: So it looks like the A55 is something of a bargain.
Only if you want to own a Sony, Or already have a Sony...!
Whatever thats just a body, Now take a look at the lens & accessory options from brand to brand, Both in price and performance....!!
Bottom line....." So What " all it proves is that Sony are undercutting prices, Thats an old trick to gain a larger proportion of the market, The others could play that game, But why should they......
Quote: Noise - The K5 and D7000 were very slightly better than the A55 "probably due to the translucent mirror".
Sonys gimmicks are all a bit " Betamax " ....
Quote: So it looks like the A55 is something of a bargain.
It does. Someone coming to DSLRs for the first time with no existing lenses etc and who had no ambition to buy many more would be daft to pay extra for the other marques.
There's the guy* I know, an architect, who after buying a Sony DSLR fell in love with photography and taking images of buildings new and old. Something he started to do for profit.
He regretted buying Sony though when he wanted to get a decent full-frame weather proofed body and tilt and shift lenses.
There'a another interesting article in this AP, about the new Sony sensor. Apparently it possesses a radically new architecture. Sony has integrated the analogue-to-digital converter into every column of the pixel matrix. So there are many more of these converters than in previous sensors and this allows them (according to Prof Bob Newman) to work much more precisely. There's too much geek speak and graphs to go into here (quantum efficiency graphs and read curves) but the consequence of this is that the sensor can be "pushed" a long way (6 stops) and still produce clean images. There's an example photo comparison between the Nikon D7000 and the D3s where the D7000 seems to produce a cleaner picture at ISO6400 than the D3s - whose sensor can't be pushed without noise degradation. He calls the new Sony sensor "an evolutionary step change in sensor design that could change the whole practice of our hobby". It's interesting stuff.
Couldn't agree more with what they say about the new sensors. It will change our hobby when it's possible to get clean and sharp pictures at incredibly high ISO. No more having to use a tripod or IS lens because you've been forced to use a slow shutter speed. No need for a flashgun at the low light gig. etc etc
Imagine shooting owls at dusk hand-held.
*A made up guy to illustrate a point
The real steal is the A580 as it is lower cost than the A55, has a longer battery life, and because it transmits @33% more light onto the sensor should have a small noise advantage. Plus it has arguably a better viewfinder and then there is lower heating of the sensor and its electronics that is important in sensitive measurements. Mind you the D5100 should settle down to a price around that of the A55 as its pitched in at the same market point, the D7000 and K5 being pitched a bit further up the functional curve and of course the Nikon uses the same sensor...
When looking at all this remember sensor noise is impacted by light gathering efficiency, electrical noise in amplifier and converter electronics, plus the base sensor technology and lets not forget cross talk. So the D3X has different micro lenses from the A900 giving rise to its different performance. The ADC architecture was predicted, if you follow the evolution of CMOS sensors and overcoming the issues of converting the acquired signal and avoiding switching noise its a logical development and was widely predicted, with the ultimate being each pixel has its own ADC converter avoiding many of the cross talk etc issues as you would read out data rather than an analogue signal per pixel.
The good news for us, and it has been for about 3 or so years, is that the adoption of CMOS sensor has lead to a decent reduction in high ISO noise and with each generation you get closer and closer to the point of you stop worrying about noise. also the resolution has reached the point of more than enough for most of us. So the focus switches away from sensors onto other attributes of the camera. And that is why I think it is healthy as it allows the camera makers like Pentax to shine again and moves the power away from the electronics giants. So I hope Pentax and Olympus pick up market share from the others.
Quote:
Bottom line....." So What " all it proves is that Sony are undercutting prices, Thats an old trick to gain a larger proportion of the market, The others could play that game, But why should they......
Noise - The K5 and D7000 were very slightly better than the A55 "probably due to the translucent mirror".
Sonys gimmicks are all a bit " Betamax " ....
Actually Sony are not cutting the prices of the SLT range. They've been caught out by the demand for these cameras and they are being held at the introductory price and will be for some time. By contrast the A580 is being discounted. Although the A580 is more expensive to make than the A55 it's over £100 cheaper. BTW Betamax wasn't a gimmick - it was the best video recorder technology available but Sony dragged their feet licensing it to other manufacturers and were beaten by better VHS marketing. It's a bad analogy anyway. If you think SLTs are a gimmick you should read what DK says about them on the sonyalphaclub site - you might learn something.
Quote:
He regretted buying Sony though when he wanted to get a decent full-frame weather proofed body and tilt and shift lenses.
"He" could have bought an A900 or A850. They're not advertised as weatherproof but there don't seem to be any complaints - my A700 isn't weatherproof in theory but it doesn't seem affected by adverse weather. And I thought tilt and shift lenses had been made redundant by software correction.
Quote:
It will change our hobby when it's possible to get clean and sharp pictures at incredibly high ISO.
His prediction was more that the concept of ISO will become almost irrelevant. You would just take your picture at the aperture and shutter speed you wanted. You'd then adjust the exposure afterwards. The example he showed was where a picture was taken (with a D7000) of a night scene at 1/8 sec, f11, ISO100 - which was the correct exposure. He then took the same picture with the same settings but ISO6400. He then adjusted the image to the same output density as the ISO100 shot and the pictures were the same. That's what he was saying is so incredible about this new Sony sensor.
Quote:
The ADC architecture was predicted
Quite possibly, but Sony have brought it to market and you can buy a camera with this technology for well under £500.
Quote:
Sonys gimmicks are all a bit " Betamax " ....
...but let's not forget that, technologically, Betamax was a far superior system to VHS. Just as BSB's Marco Polo satellite TV system was far superior, technologically (at the time), to Sky's Astra system and TiVo was far superior, technologically, to Sky+.
In all the above cases, the inferior system captured the critical market share due to commercial factors that had nothing to do with technological superiority.
I read the AP comparison with interest and, basically, concluded that making a choice would really depend upon factors other than the sensor performance and, in that regard, different prospective purchasers would have different priorities.
Quote: And I thought tilt and shift lenses had been made redundant by software correction.
Is that why both Canon and Nikon have updated their T&S ranges? I didnt now software can maximise dof from a single image - interpolation used in software correction is a very poor second to getting it right in camera.
Sony have certainly upped the game from the old Minolta which is good for competition - all top range dSLRs are excellent irrespective of manufacturer.
You have to look at the full package not just the camera sensor which will be old technology in 6-12 months when it will be Canon/Nikons turn to lead the field.
Quote:
You have to look at the full package not just the camera sensor which will be old technology in 6-12 months when it will be Canon/Nikons turn to lead the field.
At least you recognise that Sony is now in the lead.
Quote:
Beta had slightly better signal-to-noise ratio when measured in the lab but you'd struggle to see it on the screen. Certainly not "Far superior".
It was better though. There are many reasons why VHS won the day, but technical superiority wasn't one of them. It's interesting to see that old Betamax video recorders still sell for a reasonable amount on ebay, while VHS usually fails to sell - possibly rarity value.
Quote: the consequence of this is that the sensor can be "pushed" a long way (6 stops) and still produce clean images.
Clarification - I Think you mean "pulled" - not "pushed".
The comparison was 6400 pulled to 100 holds the same detail as at 6400.
That is not quite the same as 100 pushed to 6400 holding the same detail as 100 
Sony sensor division currently have a marginal advantage as Canon did over Sony as their product cycles are out of step. i.e New Sony 16mp sensor has small noise (but not resolution advantage) over Canon 18mp sensor. Canon 18mp sensor has noise and resolution advantage over Sony 12mp sensor. for far too long Canon had a massive sensor advantage over Sony so it is good that in the past few years Sony have at last been able to compete and give some competition.
I think for all the reasons given in the AP article and copied in this thread that sensor performance is not the thing that splits the cameras, so Sony are competing at the entry level, but and are not at the enthusiast level as Olympus, Nikon, Canon Pentax all have cameras (E5, D7000, D300, 60D, 7D, K5) while sony has no product until you get to full frame where it competes, but the products are ageing.
Since the D300 and D3 came along and Nikon re-found its good spots I think it has helped improve the lot for all brands. I hope the new Pentax marks an equal good time. After all without the D300 I doubt Canon would have make the 7D and it helped give the environment for the new Pentax. and Olympus making progress in small cameras that made Sony react and make the NEX. So you can see competition is good. All we need to avoid is the electronics giants dominating over the camera brands. That is why Olympus and Pentax having good models is important to me, and why it has been good to see Nikon step up their game.
Did you read the AP D60 and D7000 side by side review? what split the cameras was not the sensor it was the other aspects of performance. Sensor difference was not enough to tip the result. I was surprised at the result.
Quote: Clarification - I Think you mean "pulled" - not "pushed".
The comparison was 6400 pulled to 100 holds the same detail as at 6400.
That is not quite the same as 100 pushed to 6400 holding the same detail as 100
I think my explanation was a bit rushed. The actual words of the article were "it has been pushed by 6 stops". The correct exposure was for ISO6400.
Quote: Sony sensor division currently have a marginal advantage as Canon did over Sony as their product cycles are out of step.
That's not quite what the good professor said. He said the Sony sensor was "by some margin the best DSLR sensor ever made". Let's see how long it takes Canon to copy it - sorry, match it. I'm dead sure they'll be studying the sensor right now.
Quote: I think for all the reasons given in the AP article and copied in this thread that sensor performance is not the thing that splits the cameras, so Sony are competing at the entry level, but and are not at the enthusiast level as Olympus, Nikon, Canon Pentax all have cameras (E5, D7000, D300, 60D, 7D, K5) while sony has no product until you get to full frame where it competes, but the products are ageing.
Interesting. When a Sony product is nearly 4 years old it's "ageing". When a Nikon product is over 4 years old (e.g. the D90 and D300) it's still competitive with, and possibly better than, the brand new stuff. Your arguments SM are a mass of inconsistencies - you lack objectivity. Also, you're still categorising cameras by price. Just because the A580/A55 are cheap you call them "entry-level". The likes of Gary Friedman and DK don't compartmentalise them like that, and nor does AP. AP's verdict was "For quality alone all 3 cameras deserve consideration (D7000, K5, A55), so other factors must come into play. If you want small and creative the A55 will appeal. If you want something a little meatier in size then the D7000 could be for you. But for overall performance the K5 would be my first choice, with strong build, fast shooting and great looking images". The last bit about the K5 is slightly strange, in that all the cameras had "great looking images" according to previous text, and the A55 shoots a lot faster than the K5, so I guess he's saying he would pick the K5 because of its strong build. As he's a professional that's not surprising but I'd guess that 99% of those looking at these cameras are amateur so build is less of a concern - I've never broken a digital camera. Anyway, there's no suggestion that the A55 is in a lower class than the other two, because it isn't. He could have added that if you want to save yourself £400 get the A55 (and Sony also has a vastly more extensive lens range than Pentax).
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
Login or Join Now
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Nikon Nation
Are you a Nikon owner? Check out Nikon Nation to find the latest Nikon news, reviews, discussion and photos on ePHOTOzine.
Join Our Free Newsletter
Awards
Current Competitions
foliopic 'Movement' Competition
1st May 2012 - 31st May 2012
This month's competition theme is 'Movement' which can be interpreted in a number of ways. You could photograph an animal running, a person walking or a car speeding...Featured e2 Photo
Featured Directory Listing
May's Photo Month
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
Interact
Photography Gallery Photography Forums Recent Forum Activity Members' Meetings Members' BlogsSearch ePHOTOzine
Having trouble or would like to make a suggestion? Create a report
Calibrate your monitor so you can see 16 different shades.
ePHOTOzine © 2001 - 2012 Magezine Publishing | Contact Us | Site Map | Top