DK on the a99

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2012/12/27/sonys-alpha-99-mastery-wrapped-in-dilemma/

--

Cheers,
Ralf
www.ralfralph.smugmug.com

Wow, that's quite the review.  I'll have to re-read it at subsonic speed to get most of it into my skull, but, he seems to bash where he thinks bashing is required.

He replies to several threads on the go, the one where the poster put Scandal in the heading, and of course he goes into the video threads with...

The A99 has one of the best 1080/50(60)p HD video functions on the market.

I guess some will differ.

Nice images, and I must say the whole thing looked first class, his shots, his presentation, and the writing had a good professional flow that one does not often see these days.

Maybe it could be called the Beauty and the Beast.

I'm keeping mine.

--
proud father of an a100, a77, and a99
John D. Conley, Canuck

Greetings Ralf!

Thanks for the link.

--
"Those who would sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin.
You can see larger versions of my pictures at www.dennismullen.com.

Overall a positive review. I agree with him about the pricing. If it is priced at $2500 at launch and $2200 at street price after 6 months, I am sure A99 can win many more praise and popularity.

A good read.  Nicely written and put together.

He makes good points.  He has some genuine criticisms and makes his point about them well.

Having observed the points he doesnt like, it is then pretty clear that of all the compromises one ( it seems ) has to take when choosing a camera and system,  he is happy to continue shooting Sony.

I feel much the same way.  I am here because I like using the EVF and love the live view experience. If it was not for that,  I'd probably be all over the D600.

How I wish the A99 was a little cheaper than it is however.  And I wish they bundled it with a decent zeiss designed lens and saved a few $$ that way, too.

A FF frame compatible travel zoom, maybe 24-120 or 28-200 , made to G lens standard , would sell more A99's too....

I don't lose sleep over batteries, and he makes it a big criticism.  I got 600 shots with the a100 through Europe and seem to get 500 with the 77 not sure about the 99.  I like that the 77 and 99 use the same.  I have 4 and the grip so I'm not about to lose sleep over that issue.

--
proud father of an a100, a77, and a99
John D. Conley, Canuck

+1

Totally agree.

I bought the Tamron 28-300 out of desperation, and it's cr@p.

I'd prefer an update to the "secret handshake" Minolta 28-135, but with closer focusing and lighter weight.

I think the review is correct that the A99 is competing with the D600. The price of the D600 is making me take notice. Heck, seeing the 5D3 drop to $2,500 here and there also means that I have it competing against the A99. I'd love articulating screen on the A99, but the A99 would have drop about $500 for me to consider it. I'd rather wait for the next 5D3 sale or just get the D600 with its current sale through the 29th (effectively making the D600 $1,650-ish).

--
60 of my favorite shots from 2012

"When we processed the raw files, Nikon’s ISO 6400 was less noisy than Sony’s despite the very similar (not identical) Sony manuactured 24 megapixel FF sensors. The difference is a little more than we would expect from the 2/3rds EV light loss caused by the trans-flective SLT mirror. The remaining difference seems to be down to Nikon treating a gain which Sony would call ISO 4000 as one labelled 6400, but giving exactly the same exposure Sony would give at 4000."

Seems like DK's opinion agree with DXO result.

No, because DXO already corrects for differences in real sensitivities.

Not sure where the 2/3 EV comes from either, because both previous implementations and patents suggest about a 30/70 split, between 0.2 and 0.5 EV in practise.

In the footnote he says:

"Like it or not, the Alpha 99 is actually competing with the 6D and D600, and it does not matter to the market that some aspects of its construction and specification are closer to 5D MkIII ‘build’. Sony is doing something in enthusiast-level photography right now that it has done well in the past in television and audio, positioning its pricing as a premium consumer brand. The DSC-RX1 specification and pricing tells you everything you need to know about how Sony sees the market."

That is a matter of opinion and in mine he's wrong there.  It's precisely these things that are going to determine price of cameras more and more form now on.  Not the sensor or number of pixels.

You want features the A99 has such as articulated screen and in-body stabilisation that a D600 lacks?  Don't expect them for free.  The underlined text reminds me of the Nikon 3200 v A77 comments we saw on this forum.

I am not saying the A99 price is right but its features are worth a premium over a camera with a similar sensor that lacks them.

A nicely put and unbiased review.   This is a first review of the a99 that i have found useful.  He clearly emphasizes the pros amd cons without limits.

Thanks for the link,  I am keeping my a900

--
All harsh, impolite and/or unreasonable replies will be simply ignored.
Measurebators are out of my world, photography is not about babbling behind a computer... but rather being out of your home, shoot and share photographs with other people. Shoot and Share...Thanks.

Indeed.  The a99 should be price slightly above the D600, 2200 USD seems to be the right price tag.  By doing so, popularity might be favored.

--
All harsh, impolite and/or unreasonable replies will be simply ignored.
Measurebators are out of my world, photography is not about babbling behind a computer... but rather being out of your home, shoot and share photographs with other people. Shoot and Share...Thanks.

One point in DK's review that I hadn't yet considered. Is it possible to switch off both EVF and LV? Eg for taking star trails - after composing, there's no need for either viewfinder, and it would be a concern if the unnecessary battery drain was going to compromise such photography.

--
i know what i know, which is a fraction of what i don't

Wicker Man - when you make a long exposure, there's no feed to any finder/screen. BUT thanks to you, I've just tested this, and system continues to power the OLED... for the sake of a black view with faint glowing edges.

So that might be something they could change to improve performance.

David

Very well done review from the perspective of a "real" user of these systems. A must-read for those pondering the pros/cons of the a99.

--
- AlanS

before the original owner unjustly booted him off of here. I'd read his article yesterday. He makes some valid points and some of his other points imo, are subjective ones. The point that the A99 is a semi-pro camera based on the wording that's on the orange ring is subjective and doesn't equate to the A99 being a semi-pro camera. Although he does have some valid points about some things that are on the A900, aren't on the A99. Dual Bionz is a one of them. I still see the A99 as a pro-camera and one that was/is geared towards the 5D III and D800, regardless of what Sony's consumer target is.

The reality is, Sony's timing against the lower end cameras that are producing top notch images is off. Even if Sony were to keep the price higher, there's a time and place for that. You have to compete against the competition by listening to your consumers to some degree. This doesn't mean you give the camera away, but you look at who's buying what, why and what do I have to do to get them to buy my product. It's obvious that many want this camera, but the price is keeping them from getting it. Christmas was a good time to drop the price temporarily and make some coin here. Sony blew it by not doing this. Nikon made money off of the D600. Even with the existing issues in that camera. This due to established reputation and the attractive price deal. Now you can buy the D800 for the same price that Sony's asking for the A99. People will jump all over that 36 mp deal. Nikon finally got smart by dropping the prices of their cameras. And Canon's competing in this department too with the 5D II low price. It's no longer being made, but people are buying them like crazy due to the low price.

While you are right that the a99 has to be compared to the D800 and 5DMKIII, however the perception in the real world is different. Look at all these comparisons between the D600 and a99. It has been even done here so many times. The problem with Sony was the timing of the release of the camera. It should have been released much earlier so as to be well positioned. So DK is right in that regard. Some may know better, but the general practice has been to compare the a99 with D600. If it was not the case, the price argumnet would not have held water.

'Comparing the A99 with the A900, there is a clear one stop gain in ISO related performance above 1600. But at 100 to 400, the A900 from raw has a kind of fluid quality – the pixels seem to merge and give a luminous yet crisp image. The A99 never really produces this special quality at low ISO, though at the expanded 50 setting it’s impressive. Perhaps there’s an element of illusion in this, that the exceptional optical image through the A900 finder conditions me to see the final picture differently.'

It could be nice to see some images that show this. Or perhaps there is an element of illusion to the statement 

...but really, could it be so? The images I have seen on the net seemed to show otherwise: a new crispness and tonal range which I didn't see with a900 (I own one) be it hi or low ISO.

Comments?

A long lived myth. He asked to have his account closed for he didn't feel he was treated right.

th