ondjultomte
Aktiv medlem
Lite intryck från olika ägare.
Citat:
My findings are beautifully distributed tonal range, very pleasant midtone and highlight contrast, and extremely neutral and good colors all the way up to ISO 6400. This night I made my first A3 size print from a correctly exposed ISO 6400 shot, and the result is simply stunning. There is almost no visible noise/grain pattern at normal viewing distance, fine details are well defined, and colors and contrast looks very natural. I have also made many 70 x 100 cm prints from my A900 (Epson 9880) and the quality is just amazing. The A700 is very good, but the results from the A900 is just something else!
slut citat.
Citat:
I've had a loaner A900 from Sony for the last couple of weeks. In this time I made sure that I booked some good fashion opportunities and both studio and location work.
To cut to the chase, I'm buying one. I was pretty sure I would do so but wanted a good solid push to confirm my assumption that there would be solid benefit there for me.
My thoughts in no particular order:
- The viewfinder takes getting used to. Simply put, I had to retrain myself not to compensate for a lack of 100% view which I always had to be conscious of with my A700
- Detail is as expected - remarkable. I use Zeiss glass mostly, and being able to use my 85 for fashion (and even my 135) is a joy.
- Focus easily as good as the A700, if not better. Thats subjective though when you're talking about thousands of a second.
- The cropping advantage cannot be understated. I have such tremendous latitude in post that it really does make for a new ballgame. All those lovely 'extra' pixels.
- The files are huge, and getting them into Aperture requires (for now) DNG conversion. Adobe's new DNG converter makes this fairly painless, but it does involve walking away for a while while it munches on a few hundred images from a fashion shoot.
- I don't know if its my imagination, but I am nearly convinced that I am seeing more dynamic range in my results. Particularly with skin tone. This may be my imagination entirely, but I don't think it is.
- Handles just like my A700. Zero learning curve.
- I haven't been in a position to print anything yet, thats coming. Later this week I will be printing one or two shots at perhaps as large as 3 x 4 (feet).
My A700 is wonderful, and I love it - but I will probably not use it for fashion any longer. It will serve as my backup body and be used for some recurring client shoots where 12mp output is more than sufficient. But after using a 100% viewfinder - I can't go back for my fashion stuff.
As I mentioned in another thread, I won't be posting pixel-peep images - that sort of thing doesn't interest me. But I must say that now that I've been able to use it in reality, its truly an impressive beast. I'm smitten.
Jim
"
slut citat.
Citat:
ive been shooting with a demo a900 today
since this is the first Sony for me I'd like to share my first impressions (and some of them are somehow stupid or superficial, I know.. LOL but again Ive never had the chance to shoot with a Sony before!)
- the camera is small
- excellent ergonomics, maybe better than nikon (d300). The grip is one of the best hands down. It feels very solid and steady at the same time
- the sound is not good: the shutter with that ka-ta-clack is disorienting. Loud(ish) and sometimes embarrassing. Sorry but the sound of the a900 is not good LOL
(the best sound goes to the 1Ds Mark I, no questions for me!: which is elegant and intriguing at the same time, in particular when shooting girls). Again shooting girls with the a900 will make me increase the volume of the CD playing to cover the ka-ta-clack of the camera)
- The burst is well controlled , very similar to the D300 again but far from the 1DIII "perfection" (with a much faster rate by the way).
- The AF is accurate (over 300 shots and never missed a single one) but it didn't give me the same feeling of the D3 which I believe is the best at the moment.
- ISO and high ISO: I don't know since I don't really care more than 800-1000 . And at 800 is good in both raw and jpeg. But jpeg give "fiction" colors, just like the Nikons do. In RAW is plain spectacular. Amazing. no more I need to say. The best raws Ive ever shot.
- The grip is necessary, not that big but will help holding the camera in a big way (better) in particular with the zeiss 24-70 -which is big, not that heavy but big!. I had a 1Ds Mark II with a 24-70 with me and in comparison the a900 looks like a rebel (but some heavy rebel, not the plastic one)
if it wasn't for the ka-ta-clack of the shutter this camera would've been perfect. I'm going to renew my CD collection and make sure that the JBL 310 that I have in the studio are working fine because I'm gonna need 'em
the camera is black but I also don't like that mix between the huge orange alpha logo and the blue zeiss logo on the side of the lens. Again the 1Ds with the red ring on the lens, the gold 1Ds label and a red strap do look better, I mean "cuter", I mean more "impressive". if that counts as it does
Slut citat.
Fyll på med fler intryck, egna eller andras.
Citat:
My findings are beautifully distributed tonal range, very pleasant midtone and highlight contrast, and extremely neutral and good colors all the way up to ISO 6400. This night I made my first A3 size print from a correctly exposed ISO 6400 shot, and the result is simply stunning. There is almost no visible noise/grain pattern at normal viewing distance, fine details are well defined, and colors and contrast looks very natural. I have also made many 70 x 100 cm prints from my A900 (Epson 9880) and the quality is just amazing. The A700 is very good, but the results from the A900 is just something else!
slut citat.
Citat:
I've had a loaner A900 from Sony for the last couple of weeks. In this time I made sure that I booked some good fashion opportunities and both studio and location work.
To cut to the chase, I'm buying one. I was pretty sure I would do so but wanted a good solid push to confirm my assumption that there would be solid benefit there for me.
My thoughts in no particular order:
- The viewfinder takes getting used to. Simply put, I had to retrain myself not to compensate for a lack of 100% view which I always had to be conscious of with my A700
- Detail is as expected - remarkable. I use Zeiss glass mostly, and being able to use my 85 for fashion (and even my 135) is a joy.
- Focus easily as good as the A700, if not better. Thats subjective though when you're talking about thousands of a second.
- The cropping advantage cannot be understated. I have such tremendous latitude in post that it really does make for a new ballgame. All those lovely 'extra' pixels.
- The files are huge, and getting them into Aperture requires (for now) DNG conversion. Adobe's new DNG converter makes this fairly painless, but it does involve walking away for a while while it munches on a few hundred images from a fashion shoot.
- I don't know if its my imagination, but I am nearly convinced that I am seeing more dynamic range in my results. Particularly with skin tone. This may be my imagination entirely, but I don't think it is.
- Handles just like my A700. Zero learning curve.
- I haven't been in a position to print anything yet, thats coming. Later this week I will be printing one or two shots at perhaps as large as 3 x 4 (feet).
My A700 is wonderful, and I love it - but I will probably not use it for fashion any longer. It will serve as my backup body and be used for some recurring client shoots where 12mp output is more than sufficient. But after using a 100% viewfinder - I can't go back for my fashion stuff.
As I mentioned in another thread, I won't be posting pixel-peep images - that sort of thing doesn't interest me. But I must say that now that I've been able to use it in reality, its truly an impressive beast. I'm smitten.
Jim
"
slut citat.
Citat:
ive been shooting with a demo a900 today
since this is the first Sony for me I'd like to share my first impressions (and some of them are somehow stupid or superficial, I know.. LOL but again Ive never had the chance to shoot with a Sony before!)
- the camera is small
- excellent ergonomics, maybe better than nikon (d300). The grip is one of the best hands down. It feels very solid and steady at the same time
- the sound is not good: the shutter with that ka-ta-clack is disorienting. Loud(ish) and sometimes embarrassing. Sorry but the sound of the a900 is not good LOL
(the best sound goes to the 1Ds Mark I, no questions for me!: which is elegant and intriguing at the same time, in particular when shooting girls). Again shooting girls with the a900 will make me increase the volume of the CD playing to cover the ka-ta-clack of the camera)
- The burst is well controlled , very similar to the D300 again but far from the 1DIII "perfection" (with a much faster rate by the way).
- The AF is accurate (over 300 shots and never missed a single one) but it didn't give me the same feeling of the D3 which I believe is the best at the moment.
- ISO and high ISO: I don't know since I don't really care more than 800-1000 . And at 800 is good in both raw and jpeg. But jpeg give "fiction" colors, just like the Nikons do. In RAW is plain spectacular. Amazing. no more I need to say. The best raws Ive ever shot.
- The grip is necessary, not that big but will help holding the camera in a big way (better) in particular with the zeiss 24-70 -which is big, not that heavy but big!. I had a 1Ds Mark II with a 24-70 with me and in comparison the a900 looks like a rebel (but some heavy rebel, not the plastic one)
if it wasn't for the ka-ta-clack of the shutter this camera would've been perfect. I'm going to renew my CD collection and make sure that the JBL 310 that I have in the studio are working fine because I'm gonna need 'em
the camera is black but I also don't like that mix between the huge orange alpha logo and the blue zeiss logo on the side of the lens. Again the 1Ds with the red ring on the lens, the gold 1Ds label and a red strap do look better, I mean "cuter", I mean more "impressive". if that counts as it does
Slut citat.
Fyll på med fler intryck, egna eller andras.
