PDA

View Full Version : Sony A700 DSLR



Rooz
09-05-2007, 10:36 PM
Sony have thrown their hat in the ring. Is this the revolution you were hoping for Don ?

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0709/07090601sonydslra700.asp

anco85
09-05-2007, 10:52 PM
I'm acctually quite excited about this camera, lets hope it can hold its own against the Nikon/Canons

Rex914
09-05-2007, 11:27 PM
Don't forget to view Jeff's preview too. This is his site after all...

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/sony/dslr_a700-review/index.shtml

Rooz
09-06-2007, 12:33 AM
it looks pretty good. a 16-105 kit lens in particular looks VERY handy. but my GOD it's ugly. whoever designs these things needs to be shot immediately.

TheObiJuan
09-06-2007, 01:10 AM
sweet deal.
Its a great time to be a digital photog.

I wanna see these, already!
"ISO 3200-6400 expanded range"

What is the crop factor on the Sony?

Riley
09-06-2007, 01:15 AM
In cam IS w 4stops for normal lenses or wider and 2.5stops for teles of unspecified FL.

Which means it either reads lens data like Olympus does, or via lens coding like Leica does, or you punch it in like Pentax do.

anco85
09-06-2007, 02:20 AM
sweet deal.
Its a great time to be a digital photog.

I wanna see these, already!
"ISO 3200-6400 expanded range"

What is the crop factor on the Sony?


1.5x I believe

TheObiJuan
09-06-2007, 03:06 AM
It appears Sony is willing to provide at least some examples of high ISO, including ISO 6400!

http://www.popphoto.com/photonews/4565/sony-unveils-alpha-a700.html

The photos look good reduced, noise is visible and acceptable for what it is.
I am eager for November; the comparisons will be exciting.

coldrain
09-06-2007, 05:58 AM
Every in-body IS system works the same, whether it is from Konica-Minolta/Sony, Olympus or Pentax.

They all base their camera shake counter movement on the focal length the lens reports.

For fixed focal length lenses that do not report their focal length to the camera (older primes), Pentax provides that the user can give in the focal length mounted, so in-body IS still can know what it needs to know.

Leica does not have in-body IS. Leica uses in-lens IS.

timmciglobal
09-06-2007, 06:24 AM
Nothing personal to knock sony but 1400 body 1500 kit? That's a lot of money for something on paper that doesn't sound that impressive versus the dollars. I'm really shocked at that price point and wonder how it's going to compete with 40D.

Tim

erichlund
09-06-2007, 06:42 AM
Nothing personal to knock sony but 1400 body 1500 kit? That's a lot of money for something on paper that doesn't sound that impressive versus the dollars. I'm really shocked at that price point and wonder how it's going to compete with 40D.

Tim

Simple, they made it for Don.

coldrain
09-06-2007, 06:46 AM
Hmmm Tim, the price point is not THAT strange.
It is sturdy like a D300 and 40D, K10D.
It is weather sealed like a D300 and 40D, K10D.
It has a semi-pro operation like the 40D and D300, K10D.

The only thing that is a bit weird about the camera... it is understandable that Sony says they do not want to put live-view on a DSLR until it loses its quirckiness. Totally understandable that they would want good AF and a smooth 30fps before putting it on a DSLR. But... why then a huge 3" screen?
I do not get that.

What it lacks:
40D = 14 bit, D300 = 12/14 bit, A700 = 12 bit
40D = 30fps live view, D300 = 15 fps live view with sensor AF, A700 no live view

Plus points: in-body IS.

Minus points: no in-lens IS lenses, very limitted lens range, with only a few really good lenses.

Too early to say anything about image quality in relation to the competition.
The Penatx K10D is the lesser camera in this group, but by far the cheapest.
But the price of the Sony seems normal, compared to the D300, SD14, S5 Pro and even the 40D, which is only $100 under the A700 list price.

DonSchap
09-06-2007, 07:36 AM
Actually, some predictions, back in March, had it up around $1700 ... so having them lop $300 off is probably a direct result of Canon's price points.

If it works anything like it did with the A100's introductory-release (July 2006) ... three months later .. that price will drop. Plan to buy in January, 2008, after the holidays, which will probably provide the biggest dip.

Yeah ... APS-C ... the struggle for dominance ... 2nd generation-style.

I can't wait until those full-frames hit the street ... then the real fun will begin. Shake-shake-shake, shake-shake-shake, shake your body ... shake your body. (musical interlude as we wait for the street release) :D

coldrain
09-06-2007, 07:45 AM
Actually, some predictions, back in March, had it up around $1700 ... so having them lop $300 off is probably a direct result of Canon's price points.

If it works anything like it did with the A100's introductory-release (July 2006) ... three months later .. that price will drop. Plan to buy in January, 2008, after the holidays, which will probably provide the biggest dip.

Yeah ... APS-C ... the struggle for dominance ... 2nd generation-style.

I can't wait until those full-frames hit the street ... then the real fun will begin. Shake-shake-shake, sahke-shake-shake, shake your body ... shake your body. (musical interlude as we wait for the street release) :D
I already have a prototype Sony A10 with full frame and sensor-IS.
Works wonders as you can see... taken at 1/3rd of a second.
A shame IS does not counter object movement blur... the pig is a blurry mess :(.
And it is not the lens that vignets so much, it was just the moving sensor which got partly blocked by the limitted image circle of the Minolta lens mount :(.
A shame the IS moves the full frame sensor out of the light... but at least you can crop it back to APS-C size and have a useful image again :cool::D.

timmciglobal
09-06-2007, 08:09 AM
I must of missed the sturdy build and weather sealing when I read it.

Still shocking, sony really isn't a "pro" brand so I'm wondering about the price point still. I don't see the A700 competing with the 40D or the near d300 featureset of the d3 (sans FF sensor)

I think the'll have to drop the price a lot like they did with A100.

Tim

erichlund
09-06-2007, 08:12 AM
There's a bit of an incongruity in the build. Phil and Jeff both say it's built like a tank, but the hands on says it's a metal frame with a plastic shell, and that the plastic is not of the best quality in terms of feel. That basic build is more like my old D70 than my D200. Confirming this is the fact that while it has the size of its competitors, it's significantly lighter. OTOH, the metal frame does seem more substantial than the frame that was on the D70. A bit of a hybrid.

Both Sony and Nikon seem to shop at the same parts store, at least for the big pieces. I cannot argue with their decision to use the 3", very high resolution screen. I will predict that we will not see another dSLR announced without it, accept for possibly the ones that are out there now but just haven't been announced. Anything out there that's in development that doesn't have it is now in redesign, because that resolution is a whole new ballgame.

One thing, though, has become abundantly clear. Sony has cornered the market on ugly.

coldrain
09-06-2007, 08:27 AM
The A700 seems to be a nice upgrade for KM 7D owners. Its higher than 6.1mp resolution, probably better high ISO performance, faster fps and better AF system do seem to be a big step up...

DonSchap
09-06-2007, 09:04 AM
There are significant features to the A700 that the A100 did NOT have ... a couple of the important ones are the PC (sync) port and HDMI port (You had to add a third party hot-shoe clip-on to get the PC (sync) port).

That wireless remote kicks, too. You don't see that for free, everyday.

Considering that PocketWizard does not offer a Minolta/SONY wireless release cable ... that is something worthwhile, too. Since my Minolta film days, I have always had to use a 16-foot release cable ... and they often get tangled around all your stuff, in the bag. Wireless is a far better idea. No trip-hazard.

No ... upgrading from the A100 to the A700 with be a feature-rich experience ... addressing the lack of ports the earlier A100 suffered from. Will I improve my photography with this particular camera ... I'm sure going to try. It is a definite improvement ... especially going from that nasty little 10.1MP to a much healthier 12.6MP. :p (Okay, okay ... just teasing you Canon dudes ... who got short-changed, this time).

The 16-105mm f/3.5-5.6 in an interesting choice for a walk around lens ... but I still have a hunch the TAMRON 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 is a better one. I'll be interested in the side-by-sides on that comparison.

Then, finally, the vertical grip which does something more than more the shutter release and hold a battery (The earlier DiCain VG-1 developed for the A100 held only the one battery, not two. It was pretty basic.). That is improved thinking, for sure ... since most of my recent shots are Portrait-orientation. Nothing beats a vertical grip for that. Makes the camera a lot more friendly to use, too.

Considering the overall "picture", it would be hard to say you'd go wrong get your hands on the A700. The low-cost Minolta glass is still out there, too. You might actually save yourself some significant money, in the long run, not having to POP for in-the-lens IS with EVERY SINGLE LENS PURCHASE.

coldrain
09-06-2007, 09:18 AM
Haha Don, why would you upgrade the A100 to the A700 for 10.x to 12.x MP, when you say you will not consider an upgrade from your 20D to a 40D (8.x to 10.x Mp).

What do you need a "PC sync" port for? How will it improve your photography?

And what do you think of my A10 prototype image sample?

DonSchap
09-06-2007, 09:34 AM
The PC (sync) port directly connects my strobe layout to the camera. I couldn't do that with the A100 without gerry-rigging the entire layout. Very annoying ... but I made due and eventually got a third-party solution in place, but it has some drawbacks. That little addition to the actual camera body changes everything and it is more like the Canon connections, now.

Yeah ... this is a much more powerfully thought out camera (with the exception of "live view", which I never had before, anyway.) The A100 was rushed out because of the Minolta-aquisition and they needed to save their lives in the market. The A700 is probably more in line with where what it was supposed to be ... of course, with a much bigger and more sensitive sensor than the original 6.1 MP found in the Minolta 5D & 7D.

Hey ... maybe it's time for that much needed change, Coldrain. Why not slap a TAMRON 90mm f/2.8 (SONY mount) on the front of the A700, when you get a chance, and see what shows up? You never know ... you may even like having ...

IS.

coldrain
09-06-2007, 10:08 AM
A Sony A700 does not work with a 70-200 f4 L IS USM or EF 180mm f3.5 macro USM, Don.

And you don't like my pic :(:p

DonSchap
09-06-2007, 10:45 AM
No, you will have to break down and upgrade some of your lensing, that is true. Trading in that EF 70-200mm f/4L USM for a AF 70-200mm f/2.8 G, one of the finest lenses available in the range. Oh, I feel your pain. LOL :D

And as far as the 180mm Macro ... yeah, again, TAMRON to your rescue, which another great lens, that simply covers that range, too. Readily available with your ... trade-in?

This change is quite doable and I fully expect you will expore the option, when it presents itself. Just think how nice it will be when a big ol' full frame comes down the pike ... sporting IS, too? You will be good and already set to go.

A major improvement with a company obviously setting it sights on the future ... with a clear doorway to its past. Remember, all glass since 1985 ... useful and available to you and the A700.

Oh well ... I've got to start saving for the upgrade, so I can shoot my first "thousand words" with it. ;)

coldrain
09-06-2007, 11:45 AM
Well, apart from not being upto the same optical performance as the 70-200 f4 L IS USM, that 70-200 f2.8 G also is very heavy and expensive.

So, that sounds like a down grade... not an upgrade...

And about that Tamron 180mm f3.5... It is not upto the standard of the 180mm f3.5 L USM. Not as fast in focussing, not as sturdy in build quality.
And I would like to use them with my 1.7x TC.

So, to me the A700 would even be a downgrade compared to my EOS 350D :eek:

But for KM 7 owners, yes it can be an interesting camera.

Riley
09-06-2007, 11:58 AM
Every in-body IS system works the same, whether it is from Konica-Minolta/Sony, Olympus or Pentax.

They all base their camera shake counter movement on the focal length the lens reports.

which as i recall it, you denied earlier




Leica does not have in-body IS. Leica uses in-lens IS.

which would be why i was referring to lens coding not OIS Leica D lenses
Leica introduced lens coding for M lenses available to M8. Older lenses can be sent to Solms to be coded, or you can code them yourself. Its simply marks made on a lens recorded by receiving hardware on the M mount of the camera, but it offers a way to automatically code lenses

coldrain
09-06-2007, 12:03 PM
which as i recall it, you denied earlier




which would be why i was referring to lens coding not OIS Leica D lenses
Leica introduced lens coding for M lenses available to M8. Older lenses can be sent to Solms to be coded, or you can code them yourself. Its simply marks made on a lens recorded by receiving hardware on the M mount of the camera, but it offers a way to automatically code lenses
No, I never denied "that". Denied what?

Reread your own former post, it is not "compatible" with mine. My post straighens out some errors in yours.

And what does lens coding on an M series range finder camera have to do with image stabilization?

DonSchap
09-06-2007, 12:03 PM
So, to me the A700 would even be a downgrade compared to my EOS 350D :eek:

Hey, I'm not buying into that line of reasoning. Good ahead, keep your money in your pocket ... and keep on truckin'

You could always get an A700 for laughs ... and just use it when you needed rapid fire (5fps), superior sensor levels (ISO 100-6400) and ... anti-sh-sh-shake. AN then, when it's not too busy, you could shelve it and use your "upgrade" 350D for the real legwork.

Hey, it could happen! :eek: :D

Riley
09-06-2007, 12:15 PM
No, I never denied "that". Denied what?

Reread your own former post, it is not "compatible" with mine. My post straighens out some errors in yours.

And what does lens coding on an M series range finder camera have to do with image stabilization?

you know sometimes you have to wonder how many times you need to mention lens coding to get the point across.

The are no errors in my post, just some dumb interpretations

I am talking about lens coding for IS lens FL reporting, which you denied existed earlier. And I mention Leica M8 has lens coding that also reports the FL, that the coding is used for completely different reasons doesnt deter the point,

......that it is possible to add lens coding to old lenses and automatically report FL to the body....

coldrain
09-06-2007, 12:19 PM
Wait, we are talking about the Sony Alpha series here, Riley.

Most of the "older" Minolta lenses are zoom lenses. Most modern Sony lenses are zoom lenses. What good will encoding lenses do for IS?

The camera needs to know the focal length, not the lens model...

Riley
09-06-2007, 12:32 PM
Wait, we are talking about the Sony Alpha series here, Riley.

I am picking you up on your numerous erroneous comments to my posts



Most of the "older" Minolta lenses are zoom lenses. Most modern Sony lenses are zoom lenses. What good will encoding lenses do for IS?

for primes, lens coding identifies the lens, therefore reports the FL
there are a good amount of primes in the old Minolta range, actually they are some of the nicest lenses around.

Leica's Tri-Elmar WATE has the same problem, but you can record the FL into the camera




The camera needs to know the focal length, not the lens model...

for primes, lens model gives you the FL

DonSchap
09-06-2007, 12:33 PM
Look, let's not get shook up about this ... the few number of Minolta lenses that are in use, out there, with the SONYs ... you could probably count on fingers and toes. Most lensing is under 100mm ... except for the few 75-300 and 70-200s that are still in use. I think the IS can default to 100mm and be pretty functional. It works fine in the A100 ... which doesn't know FL (focal length - for the unwashed) from squat.

Why shouldn't SONY have an attractive portion, such as Focal Length endowed lenses, to buying their SONY-glass. Cripes, Canon won't even put IS in anything short of $1000, usually, unless it is to play a sneaky effort at "catch-up" with all the other manufacturers, as a direct result of their corporate-level lack of vision. :rolleyes:

Man, I would hate to be the guy who argued for that course of action. Explaining it is one thing, but then there's that "life-sentence" in the Japanese unemployment line. :eek:

JTL
09-06-2007, 02:06 PM
All I care about, dudes, is this: Does it play Playstation titles? And can I use Blu-ray disks in it? :p:p:p

coldrain
09-06-2007, 02:21 PM
All I care about, dudes, is this: Does it play Playstation titles? And can I use Blu-ray disks in it? :p:p:p
No! But you can show your annoyingly rich grandma the snapshots you just took with your "semi pro" DSLR on her SOny HD flatscreen TV...

TheObiJuan
09-06-2007, 02:23 PM
Nothing personal to knock sony but 1400 body 1500 kit? That's a lot of money for something on paper that doesn't sound that impressive versus the dollars. I'm really shocked at that price point and wonder how it's going to compete with 40D.

Tim

what's missing to pleas you? Live view?

DonSchap
09-06-2007, 02:28 PM
what's missing to pleas you? Live view?

I wonder if Jeff 'Almighty' could talk SONY into activating one of the "extra" buttons into running the software patch they'd need to activate "Live View"? I may be dead wrong on this, but I honestly do not believe it would be that big a modification for this camera. More like an "overlooked detail" in programming. :rolleyes: <--- programmer looking OVER the software upgrade to the A700

It's kind of a little easier than Canon's overlooking the fact they needed a bigger sensor in the EOS 40D.

TheObiJuan
09-06-2007, 02:46 PM
Don,
I've put a lot of thought into IS the past few weeks; you and coldrain sure have helped. :p

It does appear that in-lens IS would be superior, especial for super-telephoto.
My problem is I do not care to shell out for IS versions of all my lenses and I will never be able to afford a 400 f/2.8L IS or 500 f/4L IS.

It is feasible to find a 600 f/4 G Minolta lens for a bit over 3k or a 300 f/2.8 G for 2k though. With Sony's technology, they would have IS to boot.

From my budget-oriented standpoint, the A700 seems reasonable. When I used to be a gear head and Canon fanboy I could understand rushing to Canon's 40D.
But it appears the A700, image quality provided, would be a wiser purchase.

I don't care that the in-body IS may only provide 2.5 stops of IS with the long lenses, it still is a huge difference! I can always up the ISO to 1600, 3200, or god forbid and quality provided, ISO 6400.

timmciglobal
09-06-2007, 02:48 PM
Better viewfinder? Live view? Non-blind designer? Higher FPS?

Edit: before I get ranted at, these are all based on "what the 40d and d300 bring to the table" if the A700 was competing vs d200/30d it would be pretty much on price.

Drop it 200$ and I'll say it's a pretty nice deal.

Tim

DonSchap
09-06-2007, 02:57 PM
I'm still waiting for someone to comment on the $1159 price I found for the EOS 40D ... no one seems to care.

I don't think they're buying ... uh, Canon, this year. I suspect Canon is going to get "brained" :rolleyes: for this.

erichlund
09-06-2007, 03:07 PM
I wonder if Jeff 'Almighty' could talk SONY into activating one of the "extra" buttons into running the software patch they'd need to activate "Live View"? I may be dead wrong on this, but I honestly do not believe it would be that big a modification for this camera. More like an "overlooked detail" in programming. :rolleyes: <--- programmer looking OVER the software upgrade to the A700

It's kind of a little easier than Canon's overlooking the fact they needed a bigger sensor in the EOS 40D.

Or maybe they were just too tight on space to implement it in the firmware. After all, live view was not a huge issue until the big guns started including it. Now people ask, why don't you have it? The reality is that it doesn't really matter to a still camera, so don't be surprised if Sony just sized the available firmware space with no live view included.

Of course, they'll never admit that. They just say, "We don't think the current solution is acceptable". This is really no big deal.

It's probably going to be a very decent camera. Like all the new cameras, actual testing will give a better indication of where it's at. That includes the new D3, D300, 1DsMkIII, Panasonic Lumix ... and any others I've missed that are not yet "proven".

Am I considering changing. Look at my signature. I don't have as much glass as some, but that's a pretty substantial investment. It would take a miracle of engineering to get me to change. Ain't gonna happen.

coldrain
09-06-2007, 03:14 PM
Don,
I've put a lot of thought into IS the past few weeks; you and coldrain sure have helped. :p

It does appear that in-lens IS would be superior, especial for super-telephoto.
My problem is I do not care to shell out for IS versions of all my lenses and I will never be able to afford a 400 f/2.8L IS or 500 f/4L IS.

It is feasible to find a 600 f/4 G Minolta lens for a bit over 3k or a 300 f/2.8 G for 2k though. With Sony's technology, they would have IS to boot.

From my budget-oriented standpoint, the A700 seems reasonable. When I used to be a gear head and Canon fanboy I could understand rushing to Canon's 40D.
But it appears the A700, image quality provided, would be a wiser purchase.

I don't care that the in-body IS may only provide 2.5 stops of IS with the long lenses, it still is a huge difference! I can always up the ISO to 1600, 3200, or god forbid and quality provided, ISO 6400.
You will not get 2.5 stops at 600mm though... not even close...

TheObiJuan
09-06-2007, 03:17 PM
What would be expected? I don't know of anyone that has tested it.
Most in-body IS folks don't use expensive super-teles.

What level of IS does the Canon 600mm provide?

coldrain
09-06-2007, 04:51 PM
What would be expected? I don't know of anyone that has tested it.
Most in-body IS folks don't use expensive super-teles.

What level of IS does the Canon 600mm provide?
The Canon 600mm f4 IS USM is from the IS generation that does 2 f-stops handheld. The same with the 300 and 500mm lenses.

The newer generations of IS give 3 or 4 f-stops now.

Same as the newly introduced Nikon tele's.

Rooz
09-06-2007, 05:08 PM
My wish for the sony a700:

it performs very well and steals market share from the 40D and D300 which starts a price war. its all about the coin baby and hopefully this ugly duckling can spark something that will be great for all of us.

TheObiJuan
09-06-2007, 05:13 PM
Other than the orange, I don't think it's ugly.
I think Maroon would have been a better color choice. ;)

Rooz
09-06-2007, 05:19 PM
my goodness, i beg to differ. its the ugliest camera i've ever seen. even the fonts and labels are messy and seem splattered over the back with no thought.

No Control
09-06-2007, 05:23 PM
my goodness, i beg to differ. its the ugliest camera i've ever seen. even the fonts and labels are messy and seem splattered over the back with no thought.

I have to agree with this one. And I'm not being facetious when I say that I literally said "But it's so ugly!" out loud when I was first looking at it!

DonSchap
09-06-2007, 06:17 PM
What do you want? To look good ... or superior shots that will make you money?

I would suggest the latter would be the way to go. Ugly is only exterior deep ... I want to know what is coming off that sensor! If that's ugly ... you're done. :eek:

Rooz
09-06-2007, 06:21 PM
What do you want? To look good ... or superior shots that will make you money?

I would suggest the latter would be the way to go. Ugly is only exterior deep ... I want to know what is coming off that sensor! If that's ugly ... you're done. :eek:

i would suggest they design it like the d300 or 40d and have both. one is not mutually exclusive of the other. of course its not that big a deal but it IS goddam ugly.

erichlund
09-06-2007, 06:26 PM
And if you can't get a good shot with a D300 or 40D, then you ought to hang it up. It ain't about the camera.

Rex914
09-06-2007, 08:32 PM
What do you want? To look good ... or superior shots that will make you money?

Don't start that argument to cover up the fact that the camera's not a looker. A great product is one that should excel in all areas, and industrial design is one of those areas. Apple woke up to this reality 10 years ago, and everybody else in the industry has also woken up to it too.

For a company like Sony, which is known for making some great, stylish looking products, this is really surprising.

- Jon

DonSchap
09-06-2007, 08:55 PM
Don't start that argument to cover up the fact that the camera's not a looker. A great product is one that should excel in all areas, and industrial design is one of those areas. Apple woke up to this reality 10 years ago, and everybody else in the industry has also woken up to it too.

For a company like Sony, which is known for making some great, stylish looking products, this is really surprising.

- Jon

Then, if I were you folks ... let them know. I doubt it'll get that much notice on the DRCP.

fionndruinne
09-06-2007, 09:17 PM
Ugly. :p

I think Sony made a mistake in not offering 14-bit raw. That's one area where (hopefully) the 40d and D300 will take digital photography further - I want to see some s-t-r-e-t-c-h-i-n-g of that dynamic range! Live view and other current features may be convenient, but it's the advancements made in data recording and sensor technology that will produce better photos.

... there's even dust all over that A700's lens barrel... as if to say, "did I (pant) arrive (pant) on time?":D

erichlund
09-07-2007, 07:06 AM
Ugly. :p

I think Sony made a mistake in not offering 14-bit raw. That's one area where (hopefully) the 40d and D300 will take digital photography further - I want to see some s-t-r-e-t-c-h-i-n-g of that dynamic range! Live view and other current features may be convenient, but it's the advancements made in data recording and sensor technology that will produce better photos.

... there's even dust all over that A700's lens barrel... as if to say, "did I (pant) arrive (pant) on time?":D

Actually, you cannot change the dynamic range of the sensor by measuring the data in 14 bits rather than 12. You only change the granularity of the measurement. The granularity becomes smoother.

The sensor my have more dynamic range than a previous sensor, but only because the sensor has a higher signal to noise ratio, not because of the number of bits the image is crammed into when it's converted from analog to digital.

No Control
09-07-2007, 12:01 PM
Can someone explain in laymen's terms the difference between the bit numbers? Thanks. :o

fionndruinne
09-07-2007, 12:02 PM
If I recall aright, the extra data recorded by 14-bit raw is said to record mostly in the highlights and shadows range.

coldrain
09-07-2007, 12:36 PM
8 bits can contain 256 values from black to white. So with 8 bit JPEG you can store 256 gradations from black to blue, 256 gradations from black to green, and 256 gradations from black to red.

12 bits, which most DSLRs deliver in their RAW format, ups that to 4096 values from black to white.

14 bits, which some DSLRs now offer, go upto 16384 gradations that can be stored. This gives a tremendous headroom, and it can be used to put what the camera sees as "white" and what the camera sees as "black" into more dark and more light ends what comes into the lens, expanding dynamic range of what we see in the photo.

Doing this is actually compressing the dymanic range of a scene into what we can show on screens, photo paper and such, but it is called a bigger dynamic range anyway.

fionndruinne
09-07-2007, 01:00 PM
Thanks, coldrain, that's what I was a-thinkin'.

r3g
09-07-2007, 02:56 PM
The camera is pretty ugly but if it performs I dont care.

faisal
09-08-2007, 11:39 AM
I handled the A700 today....it felt nice in the hand but not special...I was having issues manual focusing in low light though it might be because of my incapabilities. Also the ISO performance did not match the numbers it was displaying like ISO6400 did not seem that different from ISO1600 or maybe again it comes down to my capabilities..

but in the end it seem nice to handle, on the lighter side...but the price tag looked ridiculous. I dont see why its priced over the Nikon D80 or the E-510. It just does not seem to have something more to offer that would justify the higher price in comparison :confused: . [its priced here at $1600 for body only]

fionndruinne
09-08-2007, 11:49 AM
Well... this is Sony, the folks who charge $700 for a game system, when the competition is $400.:rolleyes:

TheObiJuan
09-08-2007, 11:52 AM
I handled the A700 today....it felt nice in the hand but not special...I was having issues manual focusing in low light though it might be because of my incapabilities. Also the ISO performance did not match the numbers it was displaying like ISO6400 did not seem that different from ISO1600 or maybe again it comes down to my capabilities..

but in the end it seem nice to handle, on the lighter side...but the price tag looked ridiculous. I dont see why its priced over the Nikon D80 or the E-510. It just does not seem to have something more to offer that would justify the higher price in comparison :confused: . [its priced here at $1600 for body only]

It's more expensive because its theoretically a better camera. MP, LCD, focus points, metal body, weather sealing, Super Steady Shot, etc.

kombizz
09-08-2007, 12:24 PM
I was waiting for a long time.
I hope Sony didn't miss anything important in this 2nd generation.
Fingers cross !

fionndruinne
09-08-2007, 01:59 PM
It's more expensive because its theoretically a better camera. MP, LCD, focus points, metal body, weather sealing, Super Steady Shot, etc.

Not seeing its advantages over the ~$1300 40d, though.

DonSchap
09-08-2007, 02:16 PM
In-the-body-IS comes immediately to my mind ... and a remote control for complete wireless operation. Give me a break! :p That wireless is at least a $200 improvement, in the Canon world, probably more like $400, knowing them and their, "Oh, we'll just piece it all together and charge ala carte."

The EOS 40D is only a 10.1 MP sensor (last year's news) ... the SONY is shooting with a 12.6MP (probably digital sensor of the year), since roughly this size is the current mainstay of APS-C and Full-Frame sensor size.

I can just roll my eyes wondering how these things get missed. But, obviously, Canon missed them, too!

You get more in this one camera than most people get in four months of tracking down the extras for better pricing. I know, I did it for my EOS 20D. :mad: Wireless release with the PocketWizard 2 is nearly $450 with the associated motor release cable. SONY just hands it out for free ... in the box.

So, when they ask: "What's in the box?"

With the SONY A700 ... the answer is: "Darn near everything!"

fionndruinne
09-08-2007, 03:04 PM
Yes, in-body IS is there, Don, I recognize that. And it should be a useful feature... but is it necessary to charge so much for it? Sensor-wise, the Nikon and Canon models have more to recommend them, while in-body IS hasn't been so expensive to implement that Sony, Pentax and Olympus haven't managed to put it in and still sell their cameras for very affordable prices. So IS doesn't drive up the cost of manufacture.

And the sensor while powerful does not possess the "next-gen" features which the D300 and 40d do, like 14-bit raw, so... my premise is... Sony is overcharging for their product. Possible? Heck, possibly Sony's trademark.

DonSchap
09-08-2007, 03:13 PM
Everything, no matter how goofy, is priced at what the market will bear. It's a law of economics. If the public won't pop for $1400 ... the camera price will drop.

It happened to the A100 ... the XTi ... the K10D ... and even the D80. They started high for the first six months, then slowly sank by a couple hundred. That initial surge to the store will end by Christmas ... then look for the price to drop. If you "NEED" the camera ... you pay the money and walk away ... shooting superior shots that much longer.

GREED + SPEED = NEED + BLEED ($$$, that is) ... go figure! :rolleyes:

Personally, I still think it's not bad, considering all the goodies included. Canon won't do that ... they are just throwing in that crappy 28-105mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM ... because they've got nothing else. If they'd have made it the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM ... then, maybe, they'd have had something to get our attention. I see no reason to use that mediocre lens. Play it straight, go f/2.8!

14-bit RAW ... when I shoot weddings, maybe. Just makes the filesize bigger ... and I use more storage.

coldrain
09-08-2007, 03:35 PM
No, the D3 does not use that same sensor type, Don

DonSchap
09-08-2007, 03:59 PM
No, the D3 does not use that same sensor type, Don

I guess I must have misread the promotional material then ... they looked oddly similar, both being around 12 MP. Sorry, I have err'd.

D3 = Full Frame 12.1MP
D300 = APS-C 12.3 MP
A700 = APS-C 12.6 MP

Thanks for the catch, Cold one.


The EOS 40D is only a 10.1 MP sensor (last year's news) ... the SONY is shooting with a 12.6MP (probably digital sensor of the year), since roughly this size is the current mainstay of APS-C and Full-Frame sensor size.


Editted and corrected.

timmciglobal
09-08-2007, 04:01 PM
Neither does the D300. All promotional specs indicate the a700 has been built just for a700 and I would be highly suprised if they don't share a similar "base" but probably modified AD and specific setups to each camera.

I'm interested to see though if the d90 (d80 upgrade) shows this same sensor and what nikon does. A d90 with this sensor + same cam3500 AF system would be a real shock to the market.

Tim

faisal
09-09-2007, 12:33 AM
Well the In built IS did not seem great to me....my Sony W90 does a better job....

the Wireless thing is a good inclusion...agreed...
11AF points, well other cheaper priced brands like the pentax K10D has it....
10mp compared to 12mp does not seem to be such a great stride to boast the price so much higher... [it costs 2 XTi's here]
Unfortunately I could not find the nikon or canon stand in this exhibition....will have to look for them again today, they might have the newer models on display.......with which I could maybe judge the sony.......

Nautique
10-05-2007, 12:05 PM
I think I will sell my A100 and purchase the new Sony. For those that also purchase the A700 I included my personal file for it. It will help you organize all the documentation and customer service links.

Sony A700 (http://personafile.com/SONY-alpha-Digital-SLR-Camera%7c-a-(alpha)-SLR-12.24-Megapixel-Camera-Body-DSLR-A700-P027242000258.htm)

TheObiJuan
10-05-2007, 12:10 PM
Don, you saying the A700 can trigger flashes wirelessly/remotely with RF?

DonSchap
10-06-2007, 08:29 PM
Don, you saying the A700 can trigger flashes wirelessly/remotely with RF?

No, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express ... and I use a PocketWizard Plus II Transceiver to remotely trigger flash with the A700's PC(Sync) port driving it.

Both of the SONY DSLR Alpha camera's, themselves' can "wirelessly" trigger the SONY HVL-F36AM or HVL-F56AM (Minolta 3600HS D or 5600HS D <- same as SONY) flash. There is a kind of "SLAVE" technique to it ... and you have to read the instructions carefully to make it work. Personally, I'm not crazy about it and feel it limits my shots ... but, others may not feel the same way (who knew?). Can you imagine someone having the audacity to disagree with me? Unheard of.

Anyway, to perform "Wireless" flash shooting, here are the steps (straight out of the Alpha 700 User's Guide):

Attach the external flash to the camera (page 166) and turn on the camera and the external flash.
Select "WL" (WIrless).
Remove the external flash from the camera andd pull up the built-in flash on the camera. "WL" appears in the viewfinder and on the LCD monitor.
Determine the position of the camera and the external flash.
Make sure the built-in flash and the external flash are fully charged.
. . * The built-in flash is fully charged when the lighting bolt icon apprears in the viewfinder.
. . * The external flash is fully charged when the lighting bolt icon appears on the back of the external flash and the red lamp flashes on the front of the flash.
Press the AEL (AE Lock) button on the camera to test fire the flash.
. . * If the flash does not fire, change the camera, external flash, or subject position.
Check both flashes again to make sure they are fully charged. Press the shutter button to take a picture.

. . * Turn off the wireless flash mode after wireless flash shooting. (You can either deactivate the camera and the external flash separately, or you can attach the external flash to the camera and select a different flash mode, as shown on page 73). If the built-in flash is used while the wireless flash mode is still active, inaccurate flash exposures will result.
. .* You can select the wireless setting on the camera and the external flash separately. See page 73 to set the camera. To set the external flash, refer to the operating instructions supplied with it.


I have NOT tried this technique with more than one SONY/Minolta external flash ... it may work, but who knows? If you have the time and the resources, step right up and let me know, will ya?

I like the true wireless method (using the PC(sync) port and the PocketWizards) for flash, but it does require a bit more setup and tear down time with strobes. :o

BBPhoto
10-06-2007, 08:36 PM
Sounds like a complicated affair, Don. Did Sony go from model A100 to A700 to reflect the increase in the number of pages in the instruction booklet?

Just kidding Don.. It looks like a very capable unit.

TheObiJuan
10-07-2007, 12:53 AM
too much work, PW is far easier! ;)
I'm buying a few units soon.
I purchased a couple of 550EXs for a steal, so I need to get a consistent method of triggering them.

Rooz
10-07-2007, 03:06 AM
lol wireless flash for beginners huh ?

TheObiJuan
10-07-2007, 04:20 AM
lol wireless flash for beginners huh ?


Speaking of which, had Aparmely not mentioned Strobist to me months ago I would have known NOTHING about wireless flash and general lighting.
Jesus, I have soaked up the internet [and books].:D

Nautique
10-20-2007, 12:49 PM
I have had great luck with my A100. I'm going to sell it and trade up to the Sony A700.

Sony alpha A700 (http://personafile.com/SONY-alpha-Digital-SLR-Camera%7c-a-(alpha)-SLR-12.24-Megapixel-with-16-105mm-SAL-16105-Lens-DSLR-A700P-P027242000260.htm)

Djzleite
10-29-2007, 02:42 PM
Image stabilization is working wonderfull in the A100 even when im at 420mm, the rest is working as expected, talking about the A700 im only waiting for the price drop to grabb mine but also keeping my first Sony DSLR.