Citat:"Please, Sony, can we have A700 with the 14 MP CCD!"
Det pågår en diskussion på Dyxum.com (
http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/forum_posts.asp?TID=35946&PN=1) där folk bl.a. klagat på DR i A700 som har en CMOS på 12 megapixel för att den inte klarar av att rädda högdagrarna.
Vissa hävdar att A350 som har en CCD på drygt 14 megapixel klarar sig bättre, vilken den teoretiskt kanske inte borde.
Citat 1 (av Tomz):
"I think others have mentioned it before, how much cleaner the 14mp sensor is, with more resolution and detail. The problem is A350 is too plastic and a punishment to handle. Sony should have come up with a different body for this type of camera, not just copying A200 platform, hence this is a mid-class model. I mean, just like Nikon D80 body is different from D40/60 and D300 on the other hand. Why did they release an inferior body with a superior sensor, only God knows. Sony should really break away from their mass production sort of approach, if they want to win more users. So, an A700 sort of body with the 14mp ccd would be ideal. ISO 50 would also be nice to have but I think I'm asking for too much now. All the best! "
Citat 2 (Jon van de Grift):
"The A350's body might be more robust than you know (not sure if you own one). There's a stainless chassis under that high-grade polycarbonate, and tolerances are pretty tight. It's certainly a more robust body than the Nikon D40 or Canon 450.
The A350 definitely has better overall image quality than the A700. Sony really tweaked the A350's sensor to provide amazing tonal properties, better dynamic range, greater spatial resolution, etc. The A700 does have slightly better high ISO noise performance but in terms of IQ, that is its only advantage over the A350's sensor. I've done some controlled testing to confirm this and when I have time (don't hold your breath), I'm hoping to publish the comparison. In the meantime, I can say that I like the A350's IQ so much, I shoot almost exclusively with it instead of my A700 or Nikon D300. So, I guess I'll agree with the OP and say that I would love to see this sensor (and corresponding processing?) further developed."
Citat 3 (Jon van de Grift):
"Originally posted by MarkSangenito
you guys being serious about the a350 having a better sensor?
the a700's is much cleaner in terms of noise, especially at higher ISO's and its much faster output.
"Jons svar min anm.)
Yes, and as was stated earlier, all aspects of IQ except for high ISO noise are better on the A350. When considering whether one sensor is better than another, you really should consider all aspects of IQ and not just high ISO noise, which is usually the least important. That's my two cents anyway."
Citat 4 (Jon van de Grift):
"last point...according to DPR the a700 gives you 8.8 stops of DR at its best, the a350 is 8.6, still good, but you got to give it to the a700.
Jons svar min anm)
Yep, I still like the A700 but in no way can it compete with the A350's DR. For whatever reason, DPR's numbers are either miscalculated or they do not accurately characterize DR. Time and time again, my A700 blows its highlights while my A350 keeps them under control. Yes, the A350 has a more accurate metering system, but it's not just metering. Even when I manually control for metering differences, there is noticeably more DR on the A350. Could I have a problem with my A700? I suppose that's possible, but I've never heard of this type of issue. "
Citat 5 (badlydramnroy):
"I own both the A700 and A350 and I have to say I agree with jvandegr when he says
"Time and time again, my A700 blows its highlights while my A350 keeps them under control."
Also I am on record here as saying I think the IQ of the A350 at low iso is a little better than A700.
Roy"
(Slut på alla citat)
Denna diskussion tycker jag är både "vild" och intressant ur många synvinklar och reser en hel del frågor:
Varför vill folk ha CCD-sensorer i semi pro-kameror och se en fortsatt utveckling av den CCD-sensor som sitter i A350? Hur mycket kan man i så fall räkna med att exv. hög ISO bruskontroll förbättras? Alla tillverkare har ju i princip migrerat till CMOS av flera välunderbyggda skäl (kanske främst bättre brusegenskaper vid höga ISO). Det förvånar dock även mig att A350:s CCD klarar sig så pass bra.
Kan det vara såsom flera snuddar vid, att förklaringen till att A350 klarar sig bättre i vissa avseenden än A700 (om den nu verkligen gör det) när det gäller DR, att Dpreview helt enkelt mätt fel eller att det faktiskt finns en olycklig algoritm i A700?
Sen undrar man ju verkligen vad folk menar när de talar om IQ (bildkvalitet). Bildkvalitet uppfattar inte jag som något entydigt ens på ett rent tekniskt plan utan den beror ytterst på en mängd omständigheter som Jon van de Grift påpekar. Jag tror man riskerar att hamna fel om man inte frågar sig vilken typ av fotograf man är och vilka begränsningar en viss kamera har som man eventuellt upplever som användarbegränsningar reellt och inte bara teoretiskt/intellektuellt.
