Consumer Reports Sony SLR ratings

Started Jul 4, 2012 | Discussions
Chip Scavone
Regular MemberPosts: 170Gear list
Like?
Consumer Reports Sony SLR ratings
Jul 4, 2012

For a good laugh, check out the August 2012 issue of Consumer Reports. The A55, A33, A65 and NEX-7 are all all ranked above the A77.
--
Chip Scavone

 Chip Scavone's gear list:Chip Scavone's gear list
Konica Minolta DiMAGE A2 Sony Alpha DSLR-A700 Sony SLT-A77 Sony DT 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 Sony DT 16-50mm F2.8 SSM +2 more
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony SLT-A33 Sony SLT-A55 Sony SLT-A65 Sony SLT-A77
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
seilerbird666
Senior MemberPosts: 1,101
Like?
Re: Consumer Reports Sony SLR ratings
In reply to Chip Scavone, Jul 4, 2012

Chip Scavone wrote:

For a good laugh, check out the August 2012 issue of Consumer Reports. The A55, A33, A65 and NEX-7 are all all ranked above the A77.

I agree. I wouldn't trade my a55 straight up for an a77. The a77 is a nice camera but I much prefer the a55. I upgraded to the a65 and after one month sold it and bought me another a55.

-- hide signature --

My photos:
picasaweb.google.com/seilerbird

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keith Hanlan
Regular MemberPosts: 212Gear list
Like?
Re: Consumer Reports Sony SLR ratings
In reply to Chip Scavone, Jul 4, 2012

Chip Scavone wrote:

For a good laugh, check out the August 2012 issue of Consumer Reports. The A55, A33, A65 and NEX-7 are all all ranked above the A77.

Consumer Reports has a different objective than your average photography reviewer. It is aimed at identifying value for money. That includes assigning a not insignificant weight to the reliability of the product - something almost completely ignored by other camera reviewers (and pixel peepers). I'd say that those four cameras do provide better bang for the buck than the A77. That doesn't mean that they're "better" cameras than the A77.

I use Consumer Reports when I'm buying an appliance or a car. I don't use it when I'm buying a motorcycle or a DSLR. (I would look at it when I'm interested in buying a P&S however - primarily for the purposes of assessing reliability.)

Regards,
Keith

 Keith Hanlan's gear list:Keith Hanlan's gear list
Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D Sony Alpha DSLR-A580 Tamron SP AF 10-24mm F/3.5-4.5 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Neeyon
Contributing MemberPosts: 972Gear list
Like?
Re: Consumer Reports Sony SLR ratings
In reply to seilerbird666, Jul 4, 2012

seilerbird666 wrote:

I agree. I wouldn't trade my a55 straight up for an a77. The a77 is a nice camera but I much prefer the a55. I upgraded to the a65 and after one month sold it and bought me another a55.

Curious as to why?

I'm still holding onto my A55 for the moment though too. It suits my present needs very well and for what I shoot here's just not enough extra value yet to justify upgrading to an A57/A65/A77 (though I won't pretend I haven't been tempted). Plus I travel a lot and have small-ish hands, so I like the small size of my A55.

 Neeyon's gear list:Neeyon's gear list
Canon PowerShot S100 Sony SLT-A55 Sony 70-400mm F4-5.6 G SSM Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Sony DT 50mm F1.8 SAM +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
seilerbird666
Senior MemberPosts: 1,101
Like?
Re: Consumer Reports Sony SLR ratings
In reply to Neeyon, Jul 4, 2012

Neeyon wrote:

seilerbird666 wrote:

I agree. I wouldn't trade my a55 straight up for an a77. The a77 is a nice camera but I much prefer the a55. I upgraded to the a65 and after one month sold it and bought me another a55.

Curious as to why?

I could not get the a65 photos to come out as sharp as the a55 photos. I loved everything else about the camera except the weight. I love the lightness of the a55. I shoot primarily BIF so I spend a lot of time walking around with my Tamron 200-500 attached to the a55. That is the lightest DSLR/SLT made and the lightest 500mm zoom lens. So it doesn't get any lighter than that for me. Weight is a huge issue. With a heavier camera and lens on my shoulder I would get back aches.

I have had no problem severely cropping 10 mp images so the extra mp of the a77 or a65 doesn't help me.

-- hide signature --

My photos:
picasaweb.google.com/seilerbird

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
seilerbird666
Senior MemberPosts: 1,101
Like?
Re: Consumer Reports Sony SLR ratings
In reply to Keith Hanlan, Jul 4, 2012

Keith Hanlan wrote:

Consumer Reports has a different objective than your average photography reviewer. It is aimed at identifying value for money. That includes assigning a not insignificant weight to the reliability of the product - something almost completely ignored by other camera reviewers (and pixel peepers). I'd say that those four cameras do provide better bang for the buck than the A77. That doesn't mean that they're "better" cameras than the A77.

You hit the nail on the head Keith. I find it humorous that many people here just don't understand value for the money. I have read a few rave reviews of the Sony's new 500 f/4. When I mention my Tamron 200-500 is just as good if not better they get their panties all in a bunch. But my Tammy is just as sharp, it can zoom, it is way lighter and a much better value for the money. But many people think wow, the Sony costs so much more it must be so much better. Too many people only see the price tag.
--
My photos:
picasaweb.google.com/seilerbird

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
cyainparadise
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,577
Like?
Let's not get carried away
In reply to seilerbird666, Jul 4, 2012

seilerbird666 wrote:

You hit the nail on the head Keith. I find it humorous that many people here just don't understand value for the money. I have read a few rave reviews of the Sony's new 500 f/4. When I mention my Tamron 200-500 is just as good if not better they get their panties all in a bunch. But my Tammy is just as sharp, it can zoom, it is way lighter and a much better value for the money. But many people think wow, the Sony costs so much more it must be so much better. Too many people only see the price tag.
--

The Tamron 200-500 is a very good lens, no mistake about that. It is a better value for the money, it is way lighter, and yes, it can zoom, which the Sony 500mm f/4 can't do. However, I think you've taking it too far when you said it "is just as sharp".

I have yet to see any zoom that is really as sharp as a high quality prime lens, which the 500mm is. Your lens may be 'nearly' as sharp, but it isn't 'just' as sharp. When Minolta had their 200mm G lens and the 70-200mm G lens out, the fixed focal length 200mm was better at that focal length then the zoom was. Any zoom lens has compromises, and I'm sure the Tamron 200-500mm has them as well.

Do you have test results that can back up your claim? Don't let one word, make you out to be a Tamron fan boy.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Chip Scavone
Regular MemberPosts: 170Gear list
Like?
Original subject of this thread
In reply to cyainparadise, Jul 4, 2012
-- hide signature --

Anyone else have comments related to the original subject of this thread?
Chip Scavone

 Chip Scavone's gear list:Chip Scavone's gear list
Konica Minolta DiMAGE A2 Sony Alpha DSLR-A700 Sony SLT-A77 Sony DT 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 Sony DT 16-50mm F2.8 SSM +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
thubleau7
Contributing MemberPosts: 516
Like?
Re: Original subject of this thread
In reply to Chip Scavone, Jul 4, 2012

If you have a link I will make a comment but if this is the same organisation that tests childrens toys I suspect their camera reviews are not accurate and often contain incorrect information.

However point me to the site and let me remind myself whether this is the same site that i was directed to in another thread,:)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
OntarioJohn
Senior MemberPosts: 1,959Gear list
Like?
Re: Original subject of this thread
In reply to thubleau7, Jul 4, 2012

Fanboy. Geez I'm a Sony fansenior. What a dumb word anyway.

 OntarioJohn's gear list:OntarioJohn's gear list
Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D Sony Alpha DSLR-A100 Sony SLT-A77 Sony 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 G SSM Sony DT 16-50mm F2.8 SSM +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MerliKnight
Junior MemberPosts: 32
Like?
Re: Let's not get carried away
In reply to cyainparadise, Jul 4, 2012

cyainparadise wrote:

seilerbird666 wrote:

You hit the nail on the head Keith. I find it humorous that many people here just don't understand value for the money. I have read a few rave reviews of the Sony's new 500 f/4. When I mention my Tamron 200-500 is just as good if not better they get their panties all in a bunch. But my Tammy is just as sharp, it can zoom, it is way lighter and a much better value for the money. But many people think wow, the Sony costs so much more it must be so much better. Too many people only see the price tag.
--

The Tamron 200-500 is a very good lens, no mistake about that. It is a better value for the money, it is way lighter, and yes, it can zoom, which the Sony 500mm f/4 can't do. However, I think you've taking it too far when you said it "is just as sharp".

I have yet to see any zoom that is really as sharp as a high quality prime lens, which the 500mm is. Your lens may be 'nearly' as sharp, but it isn't 'just' as sharp. When Minolta had their 200mm G lens and the 70-200mm G lens out, the fixed focal length 200mm was better at that focal length then the zoom was. Any zoom lens has compromises, and I'm sure the Tamron 200-500mm has them as well.

Do you have test results that can back up your claim? Don't let one word, make you out to be a Tamron fan boy.

This is the same guy that, about a year ago I think, claimed his Tamron 200-500 was just as sharp as (I think he even claimed "sharper" than) the Sony 70-400G. The pic he posted was the same not-so-sharp dragonfly he's been posting ever since then. I found it humorous because it wasn't even that sharp. I've seen way sharper images from the other lenses.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tbcass
Forum ProPosts: 16,144Gear list
Like?
Re: Consumer Reports Sony SLR ratings
In reply to seilerbird666, Jul 4, 2012

seilerbird666 wrote:

Chip Scavone wrote:

For a good laugh, check out the August 2012 issue of Consumer Reports. The A55, A33, A65 and NEX-7 are all all ranked above the A77.

I agree. I wouldn't trade my a55 straight up for an a77. The a77 is a nice camera but I much prefer the a55. I upgraded to the a65 and after one month sold it and bought me another a55.

To each his own. Is it because of the size? I love my A55 but it is second to my A65 which is now my primary camera.

-- hide signature --
 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony SLT-A77 Sony SLT-A65 Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Chip Scavone
Regular MemberPosts: 170Gear list
Like?
Re: Original subject of this thread
In reply to thubleau7, Jul 4, 2012

thubleau7 wrote:

If you have a link I will make a comment but if this is the same organisation that tests childrens toys I suspect their camera reviews are not accurate and often contain incorrect information.

However point me to the site and let me remind myself whether this is the same site that i was directed to in another thread,:)

-- hide signature --

I subscribe to the print edition. The site is consumerreports. org. However, unless one pays a subscription fee, access to the rating info is limited.

Chip Scavone

 Chip Scavone's gear list:Chip Scavone's gear list
Konica Minolta DiMAGE A2 Sony Alpha DSLR-A700 Sony SLT-A77 Sony DT 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 Sony DT 16-50mm F2.8 SSM +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
seilerbird666
Senior MemberPosts: 1,101
Like?
Re: Consumer Reports Sony SLR ratings
In reply to tbcass, Jul 4, 2012

tbcass wrote:

seilerbird666 wrote:

Chip Scavone wrote:

For a good laugh, check out the August 2012 issue of Consumer Reports. The A55, A33, A65 and NEX-7 are all all ranked above the A77.

I agree. I wouldn't trade my a55 straight up for an a77. The a77 is a nice camera but I much prefer the a55. I upgraded to the a65 and after one month sold it and bought me another a55.

To each his own. Is it because of the size? I love my A55 but it is second to my A65 which is now my primary camera.

Size was one of the issues, but image IQ was the main reason. I get sharper photos with the a55.
--
My photos:
picasaweb.google.com/seilerbird

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
seilerbird666
Senior MemberPosts: 1,101
Like?
Re: Let's not get carried away
In reply to cyainparadise, Jul 4, 2012

cyainparadise wrote:

The Tamron 200-500 is a very good lens, no mistake about that. It is a better value for the money, it is way lighter, and yes, it can zoom, which the Sony 500mm f/4 can't do. However, I think you've taking it too far when you said it "is just as sharp".

I have yet to see any photo from the Sony 500 f/4 that looks sharper than what I get from my Tamron. I only look at photos on my monitor and I don't print. I would assume if I did print very large photos that the Sony would win. And I bet if I was a super pixel peeper I could probably prove the Sony was sharper. But in the real world the Tamron is just as sharp.

Do you have test results that can back up your claim? Don't let one word, make you out to be a Tamron fan boy.

I don't need test results to prove anything. First off every one of these "tests" I see are totally bogus. I only own one Tamron lens so I would hardly qualify as a Tamron fan boy.

The whole problem is you don't have any proof the Sony is sharper other than it costs more so therefore it is sharper. You really need to read Ken Rockwell's opinion on lens sharpness.

http://kenrockwell.com/tech/lens-sharpness.htm

-- hide signature --

My photos:
picasaweb.google.com/seilerbird

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Clayton1985
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,655
Like?
Re: Consumer Reports Sony SLR ratings
In reply to Keith Hanlan, Jul 4, 2012

Keith Hanlan wrote:

I'd say that those four cameras do provide better bang for the buck than the A77. That doesn't mean that they're "better" cameras than the A77.

For you maybe. IMO, we determine "value for money" differently as our needs change. Consumer Reports likely caters more to the masses that buy the entry level and mid level cameras. In general they aren't going to see value (or at least enough value) in many of the advantages that the A77 offers. Establishing the best value across different classes of cameras is meaningless IMO. Years ago when I bought the entry level Nikon D40 I would not have placed enough value on the higher end cameras to justify the cost but I would now.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
seilerbird666
Senior MemberPosts: 1,101
Like?
Re: Let's not get carried away
In reply to MerliKnight, Jul 4, 2012

MerliKnight wrote:

This is the same guy that, about a year ago I think, claimed his Tamron 200-500 was just as sharp as (I think he even claimed "sharper" than) the Sony 70-400G. The pic he posted was the same not-so-sharp dragonfly he's been posting ever since then. I found it humorous because it wasn't even that sharp. I've seen way sharper images from the other lenses.

It is just as sharp and you have no proof otherwise. That dragonfly photo has awesome resolution and detail in the wings. I didn't see you posting any images that were sharper. I find your whole post humorous because it shows you know absolutely nothing about lens sharpness. You need to read Ken Rockwell's article on lens sharpness:

http://kenrockwell.com/tech/lens-sharpness.htm

-- hide signature --

My photos:
picasaweb.google.com/seilerbird

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
seilerbird666
Senior MemberPosts: 1,101
Like?
Re: Consumer Reports Sony SLR ratings
In reply to Clayton1985, Jul 4, 2012

Clayton1985 wrote:

For you maybe. IMO, we determine "value for money" differently as our needs change. Consumer Reports likely caters more to the masses that buy the entry level and mid level cameras.

Consumer Reports caters to the masses and they could care less about your opinion.

-- hide signature --

My photos:
picasaweb.google.com/seilerbird

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tbcass
Forum ProPosts: 16,144Gear list
Like?
Re: Consumer Reports Sony SLR ratings
In reply to seilerbird666, Jul 4, 2012

seilerbird666 wrote:

Size was one of the issues, but image IQ was the main reason. I get sharper photos with the a55.
--

That's strange because I get sharper photos with my A65. Maybe your A65 had focusing issues.

-- hide signature --
 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony SLT-A77 Sony SLT-A65 Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Steve Paradise
Contributing MemberPosts: 855
Like?
Re: Consumer Reports Sony SLR ratings
In reply to Chip Scavone, Jul 4, 2012

I wouldn't rate Consumer Reports as photo experts. I have owned both cameras and each has it's own advantages and disadvantages.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads