Sony Announces A900 - 24mpix DSLR

Don't take it personnaly Marcell, Minolta/Sony do not have the underwater cult following that Canon & Nikon have. i'm sure in the future it will be a different story, the Sony A series workshop are always book solid and constantly have a waiting list, that should be giving even the dumbest of us a serious hint on the future of thing.

On spec, the A900 looks pretty impressive, and without actually seeing some test results, it's hard to determine. I read this recent review which would give me some cause for concern, despite a lot of the positive features of the camera. Most concerning is outlined at the end of the review in the "cons" section regarding increasing ISO and noise.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/AA900/AA900A.HTM

Mind you, this is but one review, and an early one at that but I'd still sacrifice some resolution for lower noise any day.

I doubt many of us will turncoat, once you tie up to a system its expensive to cross over (I know it was for me when I went fron C to N). Where I see potential is in the newcomer outgrowing their point in shoots (anybody recognize themselved here ) and joining the ranks of the DSLR shooters. that is a vast market

Is that really the A900 market? I don't think so. People who have point and shoots are far less likely to move to a 5D, A900, D3, D700 or any camera in the $3k+ range. Not when they have to invest in lenses, too. They are more likely to choose the D50 or equivalent. The appeal is to those who know what FF really means and may have some nice FF lenses already in the bag.

Personally, I couldn't care less about FF, but I do have some FF lenses that now have some real value back to them.

Mind you, this is but one review, and an early one at that but I'd still sacrifice some resolution for lower noise any day.

I second that. Having a low noise camera has really created whole new possibilities for me, at least topside. 5D shooters have had an inkling of this for a while.

At the moment higher resolution though desirable will only provide one advantage, and that is bigger enlargements, but will not really create new shooting possibilities that I am aware of.

Of course I really want a 30MP camera with less noise than my D700.

It's difficult to judge the high iso performance since raw converters are not yet available. The samples from a900 are really big and the flaws are also amplified.

I saw some downsized images to 12 megapixel and the high iso noise is comparable to the d700.

I agree that there is no underwater cult of sony. Or it has but only among videographers, but I hope it will change soon.

a900 Iso1600 from RAW with a non-official converter:

http://madgie.uw.hu/a900/iso1600_nw2.jpg

I think it's not that bad

The 1DsmkIII has nearly the same sized pixels. I've shot ~3,000 dance photos at the theater at ISO1600 in all kinds of lighting conditions. The ISO1600 performance from the Canon is better but is it$5,000 better? I could probably still sell the pix from the Sony, but the Canon's performance is definitely better.

Cheers

James

Example: http://reefpix.smugmug.com/gallery/5941101...370158094_hSDZz

It's a very promising camera for UW-photograpy but it hasn't even mentioned in the opening page of the wetpixel :-(

There is no housing that I know of for the Sony. Once a housing appears and someone actually starts using it underwater, it will make the front page.

There is no housing that I know of for the Sony. Once a housing appears and someone actually starts using it underwater, it will make the front page.

Ikelite has a full support of the sony dslr cameras so far. However, I have no clue about their plans about the a900. (unfortunately I won't upgrade my a100 in the near future)

Another very interesting camera for UW usage is the recently announced panasonic lumix G1.

Cheers

Marcell

So would Canon or Nikon already shooting a pro body switch to the Sony FF DSLR if Sony offered you a camera and some funds towards having a custom housing built to take your existing ports?

Alex

The camera already has a complete set of underwater lenses (at least on paper). It can use the Sigma 15mm, the complete range of Sigma macro lenses, plus there's a 16-35, a 24-70, and 50mm and 100mm macro lenses plus teleconverters.

I agree with George, though, that this is not a camera for first-time underwater DSLR buyers and way too many people count camera brand as part of their belief system. I would consider this camera under the right circumstances but I wonder how many others would. Who gave the Kodak a chance when it was the resolution champ?

I'd be interested how many would honestly answer yes to Alex's question. Works for Ike strobes, right?

So would Canon or Nikon already shooting a pro body switch to the Sony FF DSLR if Sony offered you a camera and some funds towards having a custom housing built to take your existing ports?

 

Alex

Alex, you must know that Nikon offered a lot of Canon pro users plenty of incentives to switch. Entire magazine and newpapers switched, as well as independent pro shooters. Why not? I think the best example is to watch the photog gallery at various sporting events. US Open tennis had more Nikon this year. The fabled sea of white lenses gave way to patchy black lenses.

I mean, would you switch if Sony paid you £XXXX to put Alex Mustard, Sony Alpha? Especially if you were confident your image taking ability wouldn't be compromised?

For the average person with a cache of lenses from other brands, the incentive isn't there as much. New buyers on the other hand, the choice is now pretty darn interesting. For $3k, one can hit 24mp, beating the D700 and 5D by a lump and some. Perhaps Sony came out at the wrong part of the economic cycle (or maybe it was the right time). It does bode well as competition tends to drive competitors to bring out better products.

I mean, would you switch if Sony paid you £XXXX to put Alex Mustard, Sony Alpha? Especially if you were confident your image taking ability wouldn't be compromised?

I don't think I'd take one without trying it. I'd borrow one and do a week in the Red Sea before signing up.

Olympus did a similar thing when they made their first DSLR housing, although I am not sure that many people who were offered took them up.

Alex

p.s. it only costs one £X to buy me!

It will suffer the same problem as all full-frame and bigger size cameras. To get a sharp picture from edge to edge with a wide-angle lens, you'll need and ENORMOUS dome port. There are cameras for using in air and cameras for use underwater. Discuss!

It will suffer the same problem as all full-frame and bigger size cameras. To get a sharp picture from edge to edge with a wide-angle lens, you'll need and ENORMOUS dome port.

p.s. it only costs one £X to buy me!

As your agent, I suggest you shaddup and take your pics. I'll talk to them about how many Xs is good to buy you.

I doubt anyone would switch without trying the cameras. I know a few people who switched as from Canon to Nikon because of the 1DmkIII AF fiasco. All too happily since they could change their lens collections to Nikon without a loss. In fact, one made money he kept his favorite L lenses juste en cas he had to switch back to Canon at some later date.

It will suffer the same problem as all full-frame and bigger size cameras. To get a sharp picture from edge to edge with a wide-angle lens, you'll need and ENORMOUS dome port.