Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Quote: If you look at the DPR comparisons for the A77 they show it as being better than the A900 at ISO 1600
Not finding that I found
Quote: If you know what you're doing, and you're prepared to spend a little time doing it, you can get results out of the A77's raw files which at least rival the resolution we'd expect to get out of cameras like the Canon EOS 5D Mark II, and the venerable Sony Alpha 900. At least up to ISO 1600. Beyond this point it becomes progressively more difficult to 'rescue' the A77's raw output due to elevated chroma noise levels.
They did not say the A77 bettered the A900 Image quality. And their test images would certainly not support your view which looks to differ from what they wrote.
Can you point out where in their review it states what you say. Try their test images.
Quote: I guess you're just another google expert who carries on googling
You mentioned DPREVIEW before so I went there to examine if your claim was correct. Are you confusing some of the not so good forum posts with the views of the guys doing the review??
Quote: LOL it was from the DPREVIEW review. I just took the A77 review and added in the other cameras. Yes the A900 is old and they arereputed to be making a new one so the gap will probably grow again.
Better to be old and know what you are talking about
This is the DPR test:
DPR test
The A77 and A900 look pretty similar to me. I have no idea how whoever did the test that you've pasted got the A77 output to look so bad - a camera phone could do better than that.
As for you "knowing what you're talking about" I should let the readers (if there are any) be the judge of that. Your point about the SLTs being a "stepping stone" is a typical example of the kind of pretentious stuff you come out with. What you actually mean is that it's transient technology - like ALL technology. The clever thing about the SLTs is that they allow the use of standard DSLR lenses while, at the same time, getting rid of the flipping mirror yet retaining phase detection AF - both in movie mode and stills mode. The movie mode of the SLTs blows the DSLR out of the water and the stills mode provides frame speeds that the conventional DSLR can't match. The latest EVF is also brilliant and provides a lot of advantages over the OVF IMO. I actually own an A77 and I reckon it's an amazing bit of kit which will be very difficult for Sony to improve on in any meaningful way. It's a pity that people like you scan the reviews for negative remarks (which there are for any camera) and then repeat them on this forum. The stuff about your mate's mate tried an A77 once and he didn't like the EVF and found the "A850 IQ so much better" blah, blah is pretty nauseous. Basically if your mate did a blind test with pictures taken with an A850 and an A77 he would never be able to tell the difference.
Lets keep it simple at what point do they say the A77 bettered the A850 or A900 image. Specific simple point. If they say that it will be easy to pick out that text and their test images would back it up too. If not then......
Also read the JPEG comments on the page you linked to then go on two pages to the RAW comparisons.
Is your assertion valid???? If not then you are spreading miss information and as such we should correct it less people are miss lead.
And in the JPEG, move the zoom in point over to the watch. You can see the A900 has retained more detail. I picked that because the sony JPEG has some clever noise filtering going on that keeps some edge detail sharp but looses fine detail. Its impressive stuff from the Sony SW engineers, then look at the RAW images to see how well they are doing. It is not better than A900.
i found being on a budget, i know this doesnt apply to everyone, when it came to buying lenses for my sony alpha a230, they were exspensive by comparison to canon nikon pentax lenses etc, and if buying secondhand on ebay for example, i wished i had a canon, many more lenses available, however i do like the simplicity of the sony alpha , but i am just a begginer,
Hi did you remember to look for Minolta lenses as well. You need to look for autofocus ones, the MD and MC series were a different mount but often have good optical properties so with an adapter they could be ok as long as you are happy with manual focus. Also Sony often price kits of a couple of lenses and camera at a lower price than the competing Nikon and Canon but you need to buy all at once.
Quote:
Is your assertion valid???? If not then you are spreading miss information and as such we should correct it less people are miss lead.
A mild rebuke Strawman - it's misinformation and mislead. I don't like correcting people's English but yours is beginning to bug me.
LIke I said I don't know where you got that watch face comparison from. The DPR comparison I found shows that the A900 and A77 are very similar at ISO1600 and it's generally reckoned that the A77 is slightly better than the A900 at the lower ISOs (it has the later generation sensor). DPR say that the A77 delivers more detail than any other APS-C camera they've tested. Basically the image quality of the A900 and A77 is pretty similar, so your mate's "assertion" that the A850's image quality is "so much better than the A77" is to say the least dubious. Maybe you could back that up with proof. The differences in IQ between most modern DSLR type cameras is now pretty small and whenever people say that one is "so much better" than another you know that they're talking rubbish.
If you move the comparison on to things other than IQ, the A77 has faster focus. It also has more accurate focus which means that its IQ is likely to be significantly better than the A900 when the DOF is small - and the A900 will have a smaller DOF too. The focus accuracy of the A77 is something I really appreciate after years of iffy DSLR focus. It's also got better image stabilisation - Sony have moved this on since the A900 was designed. It's got a much faster frame rate, and vastly more features than the A900. The A900 can't do video - and even if it could it would basically fairly useless unless stuck on a tripod because the OVF doesn't work in this mode. It would also lack the phase detection AF that the A77 has in both video and stills mode. Also IMO the EVF is better than the OVF in many significant ways - too many to go into here.
Oh, and it's about half the price of the A850. Yet you think the A850 is a "steal". Basically in your opinion the A850 is better because it's FF and has an OVF. You just couldn't make this stuff up.
Quote: A mild rebuke Strawman - it's misinformation and mislead.
You are correct and I put my hand up to spelling errors now will you also admit that the A77 does not have better image quality than the A900/A850.
Quote: LIke I said I don't know where you got that watch face comparison from.
You know the review you linked to, the one with the test samples. Have a close look at the photo. It has the watch at the bottom right. So use their review widget to look at the image in that area.
Quote: The DPR comparison I found shows that the A900 and A77 are very similar at ISO1600
No it does not. Look at page 25, set the ISO to 1600 and move the widget to show the detail of the watch and you will see the performance I mention. Go look around the image. DPREVIEW have not stated the A77 image quality is equal to the A900 at ISO1600, far less supported your view that the A77 is better.
Quote: it's generally reckoned that the A77 is slightly better than the A900 at the lower ISOs (it has the later generation sensor).
Not stated in any review I have seen. Reckoned is not factual. Bloke down the pub reckoned England could beat Italy. That is something you have said.The evidence would say no. Have you any proof.
Quote: Maybe you could back that up with proof.
I have the DPREVIEW test images and camera review. You have read it have you not?
Quote: The differences in IQ between most modern DSLR type cameras is now pretty small and whenever people say that one is "so much better" than another you know that they're talking rubbish.
Make you mind up so are you now attacking your own position for saying the A77 performed better than the A850.
Quote: You just couldn't make this stuff up.
You are correct I did not make the review up or the test images. But I reckon your A77 V's A850 performance views are.
Quote: I put my hand up to spelling errors now will you also admit that the A77 does not have better image quality than the A900/A850.
Absolutely not. Before I bought my A77 I spent a long time reading all the reviews (both on the internet and in the magazines), most of the comments on the Sony/Minolta sites and also the opinions of various professionals who use Sony equipment (e.g. David Kilpatrick of photoclubalpha and Gary Friedman). I didn't just accept the views of one review because their views vary. The overall impression of the A77 - that I gleaned was:
- It's got the best image quality of all APS-C cameras - even DPR say that
- Its IQ is better than the A900 at lower ISO. At higher ISOs the A900 may have less noise. Basically the FF's 1 stop advantage over APS-C is taken out of play because the A77's sensor is a later generation and is more sensitive. The main difference is that the SLT loses about half a stop because of the translucent mirror. There's about 4 years of development between the A900 and the A77 and that has been enough to cancel out the advantage of the larger sensor.
- It's got faster and more accurate focus
- It's got better IS
- It's got the best video of any DSLR on the market
- It's got a huge list of features
People who use these cameras every day (like Gary Friedman) say it's a brilliant camera and that it's the camera he tends to use - even though he has access to any Sony camera.
LIke I said, when it comes to image quality the reviewers are clutching at straws when they try to differentiate between the IQ of modern DSLRs (whether they be FF, APS-C or 4/3). They all take great pictures when used properly - the only main differences are noise and DOF. Your mate's mate's comment that the A850's IQ is "so much better than the A77's" is nonsense - he almost certainly couldn't tell the difference between them.
BTW, it's very poor advice to suggest that someone buys a Sony A850 because it's got a proper OVF. Sony have made it very clear that they are making no more OVFs - the reflex mirror is dead in their opinion. If people, for some reason, want an OVF they should look no further than Nikon or Canon IMO - never Sony.
Quote: - It's got the best image quality of all APS-C cameras - even DPR say that
Please show me the bit in the review that says that. I could not find that. Read the Pro and Con parts of their review. They are quite clear on image quality and they do not say it is the best.
Quote: - Its IQ is better than the A900 at lower ISO.
Again find me an image or review statement that says that. I could not find a piece of the DPREVIEW review that said that. And the images included in the review would allow you to say the A77 gets close to the A900 at low ISO, but as you raise the ISO the A77 falls away.
Quote: There's about 4 years of development between the A900 and the A77 and that has been enough to cancel out the advantage of the larger sensor.
That is a supposition that needs to be verified. The evidence in this thread does not back up the statement.
Quote: - It's got faster and more accurate focus
Case not proven. DPREVIEW did say on AF.
Quote: The A77 is very good, but in our experience the more conventional Canon EOS 7D and Nikon D7000 both offer slightly more reliable AF tracking
They did not compare to the A900 and A850.
On better IS and video and added features you may well be correct, not seen the IS tested so its hard to tell and it depends if video is important to you and whether the added features are ones you will want.
Quote: it's very poor advice to suggest that someone buys a Sony A850 because it's got a proper OVF. Sony have made it very clear that they are making no more OVFs -
Why will all the A850 and A900's stop working because Sony have decided to make no more. It could be that all cameras will end up with EVF's once they have overcome the limitations the existing cameras have. At least with the 850/900 you can wait and see if Sony overcome the problems they have with the EVF. Also if you have Sony/Minolta lenses already at least you can keep on going with them and then at a later point decide rather than have to jump ship because Sony have taken a particular product and marketing strategy.
In all seriousness my issue/complaint etc, is you are being unrealistic in how you are describing the A77. Is it a competitor to the 7D, D300 etc, then yes it is. Is it better, well sometimes yes sometimes no. And ironically its slightly worse for sports and action where you would expect it to have the advantage, and slightly better for landscapes. It is different and people need to understand that EVF solutions have plus and minus points. Sometimes an advantage, sometimes a disadvantage. So its in there but it is not a clearly better product.
Now compare it to the full frame cameras. at times it almost manages to do as well, and I think a good ISO100/200 print and it may well be so close you could not tell it from an A900 shot. But as you raise the ISO it falls away. Now why is it you have a problem that Sony's flagship camera, all be it a bit older, is capable of better performance?? Why is it that you get upset because someone evaluated the two cameras and found that the high ISO performance of the A850 and its ability to track action shots is better? It is what the DPREVIEW review would also say.So he found the same and yet to you this is invalid data, why? To be honest its good that the A77 is getting close to it al low ISO. So would you rather the guy traded in all his Minolta/Sony stuff and walked out with a Canon or a Nikon because the Sony SLT did not work in a way he liked, or would you rather he walked out with a nearly new A850 at the same price as the A77 and still used his Sony/Minolta kit.
It may be that the A77 is good for you, it does not follow it is the best for all, or that the A850 is a worse choice.
Look at the RAW ISO1600 images from the A77 and A900 in the DPREVIEW, you yourself made disparaging comments on the quality. So why is it he cannot draw the same conclusion and be valid. Look at the images.
ZZZZzzzzz.....
Haven't you got anything better to do Strawman? You seem to have a lot of very fixed opinions about cameras that you've never owned and almost certainly never used. And you place a lot of faith in DPR for some reason. I'll answer your nonsense for one last time, but I reckon your posts are getting "vexatious".
Quote: - It's got the best image quality of all APS-C cameras - even DPR say that Please show me the bit in the review that says that. I could not find that
DPR said it had "the highest resolution of all APS-C cameras". DPR were not very happy with the JPEG implementation but they used an early version of the firmware - the latest 1.05 version is fine. Amateur Photographer said that the A77 "is the most capable APS-C camera for image quality" when they compared it against the Canon 7D.
Quote: - Its IQ is better than the A900 at lower ISO. Again find me an image or review statement that says that. I could not find a piece of the DPREVIEW review that said that.
DPR don't say that - I didn't say that they did. It's a common theme of comments on DPR and dyxum from people who have both cameras. Gary Friedman says it's easier to get a good picture with the A77 than the A900 in his blogs - he's a professional who uses both cameras - but mainly the A77.
Quote:
There's about 4 years of development between the A900 and the A77 and that has been enough to cancel out the advantage of the larger sensor. That is a supposition that needs to be verified.
The basic facts are that the FF sensor has double the area of the APS-C sensor so it has roughly an extra stop advantage (from the noise point of view). But every new generation of sensor is more sensitive than the last - the A77 sensor is roughly double the sensitivity of the A700's (which had roughly the same sensitivity as the A900's). I don't think any of this is particularly controversial.
Quote: - It's got faster and more accurate focus Case not proven. DPREVIEW did say on AF. The A77 is very good, but in our experience the more conventional Canon EOS 7D and Nikon D7000 both offer slightly more reliable AF tracking They did not compare to the A900 and A850.
It's generally agreed (by those who actually USE Sony cameras, Strawman) that the A77's focus is about the fastest of all their cameras (it's the latest version of their AF so it should be). I can certainly vouch for the fact that it's faster than my A700. I can also vouch for the fact that it's a ****ing sight more accurate too, which is more important. The Sony SLTs seem to be more accurate than the "conventional" DSLRs. David Kilpatrick (on photoclubalpha) wrote an article about this last year where he explained the possible reasons - look it up. I can't say whether the A77 is faster at AF tracking than the 7D or D7000 (and I've never commented on this). Kilpatrick compared the A77 AF to the 7D's and said that he preferred the A77. Kilpatrick is a Sony user - DPR reviewers are Canikon users - AF tracking requires practice and familiarity with the camera - draw your own conclusions.
Quote: On better IS and video and added features you may well be correct, not seen the IS tested so its hard to tell and it depends if video is important to you and whether the added features are ones you will want.
Very gracious of you to admit the possibility that someone who owns and uses these cameras "may well be correct", Strawman. I know there are many DSLR owners who look down their noses at features like video, panoramic shots, GPS, multi-shot noise reduction etc etc. In the case of video I can understand it because the standard video implementation on DSLRs is IMO totally useless - and that's why Sony made the conscious decision not to put it into their now obsolete DSLRs. The SLT implementation is magical - you can take videos (at the highest HD quality 60p) through your own DSLR lenses, with full AF and a superb EVF. It's addictive. So are the other features when you start to use them.
Quote: it's very poor advice to suggest that someone buys a Sony A850 because it's got a proper OVF. Sony have made it very clear that they are making no more OVFs - Why will all the A850 and A900's stop working because Sony have decided to make no more.
Your mate's mate, Strawman, bought the A850 (so you say) because he "didn't like the A77's EVF" and he found the A850's image quality to be "so much better than the A77's". This suggests to me that (apart from being full of BS) your mate's mate wants to carry on using an OVF - in which case it's not particularly sensible for him to be buying the last OVF camera (now obsolete) from a manufacturer who has stated their intention never to make any more. Everything seems to have to be spelt out to you, Strawman.
OK so you accept that at least the following are wrong
Quote: If you look at the DPR comparisons for the A77 they show it as being better than the A900 at ISO 1600
Quote: - It's got the best image quality of all APS-C cameras - even DPR say that
That is two wrong you accept then, life is too short to pick up some of the others. I have used the A850 a few times its a good camera in my opinion.
I suggest you look in the mirror. There is a lot of anger in your posts and you do like to run down other people and belittle them if they hold a view that is contrary to your own.
I never said the A77 was a bad camera, just that it is not the best and the A850 and A900 cameras are not as bad as you make out in comparison to it, especially in terms of image quality. That is different. I would not mind you spelling it out if you were accurate. Lets try this, one person may like the A77, another the A850. It is also possible that in the next gen of EVF cameras Sony improve on some of the downsides.
You have made enough incorrect assumptions. My advice to people is read the reviews have a go and decide what suits them best. Avoid evangelists who shout down anyone who dares to question the dubious assertions being made. The A77 is a competitive camera that is different from the offerings of Canon Nikon, Pentax etc. Give it a try you may love it or you may some of its drawbacks annoy you. Each will have their own opinion.
Anyway its been fun.
Quote: OK so you accept that at least the following are wrong
No, I don't.
As for "belittling people who hold a view contrary to my own" that's the pot calling the kettle black - that's what you do. If anyone disagrees with you you accuse them of not understanding the subject.
Anyway, I shall ignore your nonsense in future - you're a time-waster. But I suggest that you don't post silly comments like "my mate says that the A850's image quality is so much better than the A77's" and "the SLT's are a stop-gap" etc etc. You know SFA about the SLTs as your ludicrous posts show (even your last one has a few snide digs). If you don't know about a subject you shouldn't comment - it's called trolling and it spoils many forums.
Try showing pictures that show the A77 has better image quality from real world back to back tests. I linked to some test images and ironically you linked to the same test. You also made claims about the same review and it is not my fault you have made a few incorrect statements. All I did was examine your claims in detail and reference you back to some source material you were using as a basis for your assertion. If I am a troll for correcting your post, what does that leave you as.
Is it unacceptable to put the counterpoint? Is it unacceptable to show evidence?
Phew..... some very interesting comments on here which has left me, the very amature photographer absolutley confused 
My little ole alpha 450 seems so simple now and I promise never to say another bad thing against it 
I do however find the OVF a nuisance as I wear glasses, but I get along as best I can. One day I will aim to upgrade when finances allow and did have my eye on the 580 or 65SLT, but I will cross that bridge when I get to it. I have a lot to learn about the different cameras and what all the dials and buttons do, so I will continue to read and draw from the vast experience, no matter how different it may seem, from the other members who care to post and share with the rest of us.
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
Related Content
Join Our Free Newsletter
Awards
Current Competitions
Olympus 'Portraiture' Competition - Win £1000 Worth Of Gear!
30th April 2013 - 31st May 2013
This month, to celebrate the launch of Olympus' new micro site Olympus Image Space, Olympus are giving you the chance to win £1000 worth of Olympus gear!...
Featured e2 Photo
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.
