A99 - A glass half full or a glass half empty?

As the year is coming to a close I thought I would look back at the anticipation of the A99, what is the reality and how it seems to be viewed.

Before it appeared, much of the speculation was reasonable, although many hoped for a maintained OVF (which was always unlikely) and predicted the 36MP sensor as used in the Nikon D800. There was certainty about it having video, although not wholly welcomed. The change in hotshoe was mooted too.

The launch, when it finally came, brought everything from great acclaim to wails of disbelief, even before a sample was at hand to test. Certainly the price was hefty and higher than many had hoped, especially in light of the Nikon D600 (but more of that later).

However, as to the camera, how it is performing and whether those initial opinions were justified:

Probably the most difficult to judge, as it is predominantly down to personal taste, is the viewfinder. There is no doubt the A900 had one which was a pleasure to use, but Sony have made a bold decision to follow the EVF route and I am happy with the benefits that brings. There are downsides, but for most situations they are small.

As to image quality, despite the howls about the SLT mirror, I have found it better in every respect than the A900. Of course, much of the time the difference will be barely discernible, but the measurements of sensor performance cannot be denied and it shows in real use, particularly as regards noise, DR and smooth tone.

Then there is performance. Again, this exceeds the A900 and is accompanied by much greater flexibility with the articulating screen, custom buttons and focus depth.

Some critics will say the A99 is not as good as the D600 in low light and is more expensive, is not as high resolution as the D800 and is not as fully featured as the 5DMkIII ,so is a poor camera. These are ‘glass half empty’ people.

Ultimately, I see what we have here is a camera that is the equivalent of a Canon 1DMkIII, a Sony A900 and a Panasonic GH3 all rolled into one. Definitely a glass more than half full!

No, it isn’t perfect with some curious niggles (why can’t you automatically switch from one full card to another and why is the central controller so difficult to press straight???), but I think it is a tour-de-force of a machine and worth every penny.

--
2012 : My new year's resolution -
To be decided...

I don't know about all this hype stuff but it's been a joy to use. My first shot after charging.

The glass is about 95% full (and I'm almost always a pessimist as my constant whining about A77 noise have proven to many here).  My only real complaint is how Sony couldn't be bothered to make their own wireless system work without significant delay with a camera that costs this much and has real fast electronic processing.  If only they had put the A77 pop-up flash in the camera if anything just to act as a controller for the Minolta system (and they probably should have upgraded that pop-up to the new flash commander protocol). For some reason, the delay with the A77 pop-up flash is acceptably good.

So far, for everything else, the camera is wonderful. Yes, it is not quite as good at high ISO as the competition, but it's plenty good enough for me!  It's the camera I had hoped my A77 would have been.

Big hats off to Sony for the improvements in their pellicle mirror which have eliminated ghosting as well as resulted in indiscernible image degradation.

EFCS and no flip-mirror have produced cameras that work really well with my microscope.

I'm not a pro, and do not sell photos.  I like owning and using a nice camera that I can always grow into, and high ISO performance is a big part of that. Just this once, I decided to go FF, and I think the money was well spent.  I will always buy FF from now on, and the prices should just keep coming down in the years ahead.

I did come damn close to switching to the Nikon D600 though!

--
Steve W weather photos: http://home.comcast.net/~scwest/atmo/

Pretty much where I'm at. My only complaint is when Sony neglect the buyers where there are things that need to be addressed in the current system where many can be addressed in firmware updates. The A77 (A900 and A850) as you mentioned is a prime example where I feel that Sony plug there ears. You listen to your consumers. They're the ones that are putting money in their pocket.

I like the A99. Happy with it, but think that they can give us a bit more clean in the high iso. Similar to what was done with the firmware in the old A700.

I love this camera. I am having more fun with this camera than should be allowed..:)

Anyone not pleased with the a99 should quit taking pictures and take up knitting.

For me there are 2 showstoppers: 1) very small area of AF sensors and 2) lack of builtin flash for remote control and rare emegency cases. Everything else, even video mode, seems pretty decent to be good enough even 5 years from now.

Actually, the price is also not very competitive, but it's not a showstopper, it's just an opinion.

How different we can look at a camera!

For me the narrow AF area is excellent, since I shoot a lot of moving subjects.
For slower work I can just push the AF button on the lens/back of the camera to activate peaking for an ultimate last-second focus check.

A built-in flash isn't useable for much in my world, hardly for trigging another flash.

My two complains:

1. EVF lag

2. Slow 1/160 sync via hot shoe  or PC cord.

--
-sv2012

To say that is to say you shoot predominately static subjects.  The downsides are huge with the EVF delay when shooting moving subjects. And yes, I have had a chance to try the a99 on moving subjects (slow moving) Nothing in the EVF makes up for that.  Especially with the slow flash activation and other slowness of the a99.

The improvements as a still photographer's camera in the a99 could for the most part have been done with a OVF viewfinder, at least for experienced photographers.

A good much of what's praised has little to do with actual photography. Is not necessary.

At least it will need a couple more generations to get up to being a average SLR in all the ways it fails now.  And since Sony has jumped off in still another direction and has cancelled the direct followup for the a99, it's start over time yet again with them.

You do know the the D lenses have a very fast focus on fast moving subjects? That's been mentioned often. Sadly it's on those lenses that have it. Point here is, the EVF isn't slow when it comes to fast moving subjects. The part in bold is subjective. I don't need a popup flash. But for others is a necessity.

You really nailed the focus on the eyes in this one.  Well done!

Oh please, my IIs could focus just as well in low light and would likely have similar iso performance The a99 is a good stills camera nonetheless.

Get out before I find you!

Always having fun with photography
http://www.lucaspix.smugmug.com/

Nord, i think I need to be educated on this. How can a narrow AF layout be good for moving subjects? Are not cameras geared for sports and photojournalists even bird shooters have complex AF layouts? I am not familiar with Sony but are you trying to say that the 61 pt of 5DMKIII/1DX, 51 AF points of D4, D800, D700, D300s are just marketing ploys and not necessary? A99 is a good camera but on this point it falls short and I dont think there is nothing wrong to admit that. i dont know whether you have shot with those other bodies to make comparison, but reviewers have critised the A99 on this very point. Some have even gone ahead to downplay the a99 as a sports camera because of its AF and high ISO. Accepting these facts dont make the a99 a bad camera at all.

I shoot with a D600 and D7000. They have similar af layouts and there is no way I would say that the smaller af point coverage on the d600 is more helpful than the way it is spread on the d7000. It is not a deal breaker on the D600 but there are several times I wish the AF points wre spread out a little bit more. The A99 has even much smaller coverage than d600 so i would not call that helpful by all means.

What's this about Sony canceling future development after the A99? Are they abandoning full-frame again? Matters a lot to me because I am expecting delivery of my A99 in a couple of days. And for me this isn't a one-camera decision: it's a system matter.

I prefer the EVF and the A99's other advantages.  Sony is innovating like crazy — I love that — but they also seem to be all over the place. But moving from the A77 to the A99 is going to be another system upheaval for me — and it won't cost me much more to switch to Nikon at this point than to Sony full-frame. At least I'm sure that Nikon and Canon aren't going to announce tomorrow that they're going to stop making cameras and concentrate in future on making wrist watches that can record 3D video.

The Nikon D600 in particular looks very nice — assuming the dust problem gets fixed — and I'm confident that money invested in Nikon won't be wasted. Even the Canon 6D looks okay.

So, to be honest, I'm in a bit of panic here.

Hoping somebody can give me a virtual slap in the face and calm me down. Or failing that, give me some better idea of what I can expect in the future, to the extent anybody can know.

Will

Welcome to the wonderful world of A-mount! Since Sony took over from Minolta in 2006 there has been a huge amount of FUD stating that Sony is about to pull the plug. Some people feel that Sony have "betrayed" them as the latest cameras are not Minolta clones and are very bitter about it.

Reality is Sony have saved the system and have made huge strides over the years. Sony are now the acknowledged leader in sensor technology. Sony now have highly advanced cameras, with feature sets no other camera makers have. I have every confidence that the A-mount is here to stay, despite thwashers of the gloom and doom merchants.

Walt, we know that you are experienced, make no mistakes and prefer OV. No need to repeat soooo many times.

--
jvb

...comparing to the previous GEN it's two strikes....

Kind Regards,

--
Michel J
« Having the latest gear is nice, but great photographers don't have to have it. They can shoot good stuff with anything »

In this short thread (as with so many before) the views as to a camera's merits seem extremely polarised and without loading a camera with every conceivable option that would make it outrageously expensive (indeed, that is already a criticism!) I don't think Sony could possibly address the issues and keep everyone happy.

It seems to me like they have appreciated this from the beginning and have made some bold, if difficult, decisions.

What is certain, if you look at the development from the KM7D to the A99, while introducing the NEX and RX1/100, Sony have innovated like never before. It is quite odd the complaints and worries expressed when you look at these changes over a few short years!

The A99 is going to be a superb tool for me for the foreseeable future, but I'm really optimistic about what may be coming down the line, even if it means I have to change some preconceptions and ways of working.

--
2013 : My new year's resolution -
To not post anything negative. If I don't have positive advice or support, even if I'm wrong. I won't say anything at all!

I don't understand why you put into your post the KM7D. Sony didn't develop it.