Previous news story    Next news story

Sony SLT-A77 studio comparison samples

By dpreview staff on Sep 26, 2011 at 20:48 GMT
Buy on GearShopFrom $798.006 deals

We have just posted studio test samples from the Sony SLT-A77. In the process of working on the forthcoming in-depth review of the A77, we have shot our standard studio test scene. To allow easy comparison with its peers, we have now added these shots to our comparison tool, found in our existing reviews. The A77 can now be selected from the pull-down list within any review or our standalone comparsion tool.

Click here to use the comparison tool (now with Sony SLT-A77 samples)

568
I own it
108
I want it
67
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 226
12
MdC64
By MdC64 (Sep 27, 2011)

Compare the A77 to the A35 and 5N, particularly at high ISO. More pixels are not necessarily better. I suspect that I won't like the NEX-9 pictures better than the 5N's or even the C3's, although the 9's EVF and controls are certainly nice.

2 upvotes
MdC64
By MdC64 (Sep 27, 2011)

Ahem...I meant NEX-7.

1 upvote
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Sep 27, 2011)

They already came out with the Nex-9? Nex 7 is not even on sale yet.

0 upvotes
MdC64
By MdC64 (Sep 27, 2011)

I meant the NEX-7 and my rationale is that the NEX-7 and SLT-A77 should use the same sensor.

0 upvotes
MdC64
By MdC64 (Sep 27, 2011)

...although I didn't account for the light loss through the pellicle mirror of the A77, which the NEX-7 won't have.

0 upvotes
lucidOne
By lucidOne (Sep 27, 2011)

Although I'm not overly impressed with what I've seen in these test images - the jury is still out on the Nex-7. It could prove to be a performer. And if so - I can not for the life of me understand why Sony didn't leave enough room for mirror lock up with contrast detect auto-focus.

0 upvotes
Sosua
By Sosua (Sep 27, 2011)

Newsflash - a 24MP APS-C SLT is not a high ISO pixel peepers wet dream... surprise, surprise.

The NEX-7 will have half a stop on this, plus once reduced to a common viewing size will for all intents and purposes the same at high ISO as the superb D7000 / NEX 5N.

Not bad really when you throw in all the other benefits.

ACR and Lightroom also have excellent algorithms for removing a bit of colour noise as well.

I'm not interested in the A77 but really, its not so bad if you want / need the resolution at low ISO.

1 upvote
MdC64
By MdC64 (Sep 27, 2011)

Big IF. I'd rather have the ISO advantage. In any case, APS-C beats M43, which will probably beat Nikon 1 (CX) in high ISO performance. I'm thinking long term about what system to invest in (i.e. lenses). Sensor advantage is obvious. Sony did a great job of miniaturizing the camera body, so equivalent Nik1, PEN and NEX models are the same. Lens weight is about the same for Nik1 aned PEN, somewhat heavier for NEX (except the pancake). Hmmm...

0 upvotes
thx1138
By thx1138 (Sep 27, 2011)

looking at those samples downrezzing will not save the A77. It's pretty woeful above ISO 1600 and even after downrezzing I'd say it'll be still worse than 7D and D7000. Sony has not defied laws of physics, and I think it was nothing more than a headline act to go to 24MP in APS-C. They would have been far better sticking to 16MP or 18MP at most.

Why will the NEX-7 be 1/2 a stop better than the A77? Sounds like a wild guess.

1 upvote
MdC64
By MdC64 (Sep 27, 2011)

I think the half-stop advantage is due to not losing light through the pellicle mirror of the A77, which is not needed on the NEX-7.

1 upvote
thx1138
By thx1138 (Sep 27, 2011)

That will be true if for the same aperture and ISO setting the NEX-7 shutter speed is the same as the A77. However, if it is shorter they should have the same noise.

0 upvotes
Sosua
By Sosua (Sep 27, 2011)

Correct - no light loss. I would also expect the NEX-7 to show more detail as well, the NEX series have typically had lighter AA filters (Olympus have shown the benefits of that with the EP1 to EPL1 as well as the E5).

If the NEX-7 is performing essentially half a stop or so worse at High ISO than the 5N or D7000, i'd be just fine with that - try telling them apart in a 16x24" print.

0 upvotes
rishi o'
By rishi o' (Sep 27, 2011)

Looks like ISO 1600 on A77 = ISO 6400 on nex 5n. We're talking about a $500 camera performing way better than a $1500 camera from the same company. Great job Sony. I think there is a reason why Fuji x100 is 12mp, Nikon d700 is 12MP, Nikon 1 system is 10mp, and some point and shoots backtracked from higher mp to lower mp. If sony wants to get marketshare from the likes of Canon and Nikon - they aren't going to do it with this camera. Unfortunate because I have the nex 7 on preorder.

1 upvote
Ugo78
By Ugo78 (Sep 28, 2011)

You're definitely right: who needs 24Mp if they are usable only below 400Iso?! In addiction, 24Mp on a APS-C sensor need a very rare lens resolution, so that with most of glasses you waste at least 6/8MP, obtaining similar result of Canon 7d and Nikon d7000...

0 upvotes
Hannu108
By Hannu108 (Sep 27, 2011)

Hmmm... Looks like my little E-PL1 beats this big Sony at ISO 800-1600 in both jpeg and RAW!! These ISOs are very important for real life shooting.

2 upvotes
Peter Sills
By Peter Sills (Sep 27, 2011)

Well, the 5DMII continues to impress.

However, if you are using the A77 as an equivalent image for the NEX-7 (same processor and sensor) then the Oly E-P3 appears to best it by about 1/2 - 1 stop in noise. Very interesting...

2 upvotes
lucidOne
By lucidOne (Sep 27, 2011)

Hell - the 7D continues to impress! :)

4 upvotes
photo_rb
By photo_rb (Sep 27, 2011)

It is hard to compare resolution when the focus is different between the cameras. For example in the a77 image the playing card is sharp and closer objects are soft...opposite in the 5DII.

2 upvotes
Miwok
By Miwok (Sep 27, 2011)

Bad week for Nikonians ;)

2 upvotes
RedFox88
By RedFox88 (Sep 27, 2011)

Why is that? The a77 seem 1 stop noisier than the d7000 from ISO 400 and higher IMO. Enlarge a d7000 photo and it will look very similar in detail to a77.

2 upvotes
AmaturFotografer
By AmaturFotografer (Sep 27, 2011)

Maybe he/she is referring to the disappointment over the announcement of 1 system rather than a DSLR.

0 upvotes
RedFox88
By RedFox88 (Sep 27, 2011)

What I'm seeing, RAW is at ISO 400 and above the a77 is 1 stop noisier than the d7000 and 7D/60D/T3i and 2 stops noisier than the 5D2 and a900. Maybe the official release of the a77 in ACR will improve noise in a77 RAW.

0 upvotes
Ugo78
By Ugo78 (Sep 28, 2011)

Not 2 stop noiser than a900, that is a bad camera under the aspect of noise

0 upvotes
benvision
By benvision (Sep 27, 2011)

could dpr please test the cameras from a tweekers point of view... ie shoot the sample jpgs with the sharpening and NR set to its weakest settings. since the defaults are almost useless... especially for sony in camera jpgs.

also shoot ETTR for the raw files... the raw samples seem underexposed by almost a stop.

i think moving forward with these things will help the beginners and the advanced users alike. testing should be done at the limit of the cameras capability... maybe one of the staff members can create a dedicated section in each review for this type of testing.

1 upvote
RedFox88
By RedFox88 (Sep 27, 2011)

turning everything down for JPGs would gve a result nearly like the RAW result. JPG engine results are important to show too.

As for RAW, I believe they've said their goal is to get the same overall exposure (amount of light recorded) which is why shot settings might differ slightly from camera to camera. They've said a studio test scene takes a long time to setup and perform.

1 upvote
obeythebeagle
By obeythebeagle (Sep 26, 2011)

Ivanaker makes some good points. All the major brands are making incredible equipment. Nikon and Canon might have a slight edge in glass, and Nikon in low light, but credit Sony for pushing new fun stuff. The latest releases from all three deliver huge performance increases priced less than previous models. The consumer is the winner!

2 upvotes
JPMontez
By JPMontez (Sep 26, 2011)

According to dpreview "The visualisations of RAW data (and the accompanying downloadable JPEGs) are based on a standard development process using Adobe Camera Raw".

Since when there is support for the Sony A77 in ACR?...

1 upvote
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Sep 27, 2011)

It's a non-public pre-release version of a forthcoming build. We know a guy who knows a guy... ;)

4 upvotes
JPMontez
By JPMontez (Sep 27, 2011)

Thanks for the reply! So, improvement in RAW noise is not something to expect...

0 upvotes
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (Sep 27, 2011)

When we process the images in Adobe ACR we set all noise reduction to 0, which is why the converted RAW images tend to be noisier than the corresponding in-camera JPEGs. The aim is to show sensor performance rather than processing (although we know that ACR still applies some noise reduction, even when set to 0)

2 upvotes
Ralf B
By Ralf B (Sep 27, 2011)

What a mess. First Sony releases samples with unfinished firmware to review sites and now DPReview takes pride in that they know someone who knows someone at Adobe to get a pre-release RAW conversion (see post below by DPReview staff).

Thanks but no, thanks.

3 upvotes
Almeida
By Almeida (Sep 27, 2011)

I'm sure they got it by aproved channels, like dozens other sites.

1 upvote
lizardmech
By lizardmech (Sep 27, 2011)

The Dpreview "RAW" comparison appears somewhat misleading, unless Adobe are providing the source code to DPR there's no way to be sure there's no noise reduction going on besides the user selectable ones.

The A700/A900 looked dramatically different in various versions of ACR, in early versions anything above 400 ISO was near unusable in any of the adobe products.

Looking at the 3200 ISO studio shots from the A77 and various other cameras in Raw Therapee leads me to believe A77 support is either very poor in ACR or some some cameras receive chroma NR by default.

1 upvote
putomax
By putomax (Sep 26, 2011)

regarding DP Sony SLT-A77 studio comparison samples
and in the modest mode of my semi-blind sight:

* AT BASE ISO fine detail appears okay and shadow details (seems
natural evolution on new aps-c sensors) is very good. :-)
more noise tan expected - raw and jpeg - look middle right of the bottle,
over the green feathers :-(

* from iso 1600 on, jpeg noise is unbearable . queen? ja ja ja
what massacre of fine detail, oh here's some blood...
specially complicated being luminance noise... look at the diagonals
of the clips, completely pixelated and those artifacts...
how much did you say this new sHony wasH?

* from iso 1600 on, raw is swallowed by chroma noise.
ay virgensita!!!

* aparte, i drooled (again) over canon 5d mark II detail.

buenas noches
desde acá

gashô

2 upvotes
jlamesa
By jlamesa (Sep 26, 2011)

Just look here:

http://www.marimbadisseny.com/A77_GH2_6400ISO.jpg

0 upvotes
putomax
By putomax (Sep 26, 2011)

okay ilooks yours and you look mine ;-)

http://i306.photobucket.com/albums/nn276/putomax/metadata/sony77iso1600.jpg

1 upvote
jlamesa
By jlamesa (Sep 27, 2011)

Not relevant... too dark. Show me me another area.

1 upvote
rsf3127
By rsf3127 (Sep 26, 2011)

Surely A77 beats all the other APS-C regardisng detail and color reproduction. However, we can notice that beyond iso 800 things get messy because canikon apply a lot of sharpening in-camera.
It not on par with the FF cameras. But it is a USD 1k camera!!! That is where the advantage resides.
Real life shots made by this camera or one of the top FFs would be indistinghishable in most situations.
Fundamentalists may attack this statement but I prefer my money in my pocket or in lenses than wasted in an obsolete FF body.

1 upvote
RedFox88
By RedFox88 (Sep 27, 2011)

No, the a77 sells for $1400 in the U.S., not $1,000.

And larger camera format will always provide more and clearer details than smaller. Saying 35mm is obsolete is like saying a 16 MP P&S camera makes the 16 MP d7000 or 12 MP d700 obsolete which is does not. Want more and clearer details? Shoot a larger format camera such as 35mm or even better yet, medium format digital or film.

Real life shots will show sharper, clearer details with the a900/5D2/d3x compared to the a77.

0 upvotes
rsf3127
By rsf3127 (Sep 27, 2011)

As I said before: A77 is not on par with FF bodies.
But for most photographers in most situations, having this camera instead of a FF won't perceptibly render worse results. BUT if you - and the most pixel peeper of the wedding photographers - demand immaculate FF quality, then go for it and spend USD 2,5k + loads of money in glass (yeah, on the CZ and plus price target), and carry 10 lbs of equipment.
I am talking about bang for buck here. And no one can beat this camera for the moment.
Best regards.

1 upvote
RedFox88
By RedFox88 (Sep 27, 2011)

Hmm "most photographers, most situations". The sun isn't shining "most times" so I'm going to bet that "most photographers" are going to be needing to use higher ISO such as ISO 800 and even ISO 3200+ where the a77 is 1 stop noisier than the d7000, 7D/60D/T3i, and k5. What good is this new 24 MP image sensor if you have to downsize the images to 16 MP for higher ISO to be on-par with its competition?

0 upvotes
CarVac
By CarVac (Sep 26, 2011)

The A77 looks rather backfocused, judging by the focus ramp at the bottom. None of the other three cameras that appear by default (including the 5Dii, which should have decreased DOF), show any significant blurring on the ramp, but the A77 does. Is the A77 shot at a wider aperture to reduce diffraction impacts?

2 upvotes
Ivanaker
By Ivanaker (Sep 26, 2011)

And how does this affect our ability to make good composition and lighting? This arguing which is better d7000, a77, 7d... is pointless.
this is the latest camera, d7000 is a year old, 7d is ancient in digital terms but 7d and d7000 are confirmed great cameras, maybe this one will be also.
anyway, if you have any nikon (d40m anything) and you like it there is a little chance you will trade for sony, same goes for canon, and very soon will be for sony.
i have never heard: ``wow, this is a very nice shoot, but was shoot with nikon, if it was shoot with canon it would be great shot`` (or vice versa).
24mp is nice, but its just 142% crop over any 12mp camera, and 200% crop over 6mp camera. that is not a lot. mp dont matter any more, iso doesnt matter. almost every camera in the world is solid at 3200 iso, and with good 2.8 or faster lens that is quite enough. mp and iso are just some silly numbers, nothing else.
go out and make some great shots with any camera.

6 upvotes
putomax
By putomax (Sep 26, 2011)

<almost every camera in the world is solid at 3200 iso>

don't agree... at least regarding this one

1 upvote
walfaro
By walfaro (Sep 26, 2011)

It is too bad we cannot compare to Nikon D3X in this webpage....

1 upvote
RedFox88
By RedFox88 (Sep 27, 2011)

Use the Sony a900 instead. It will be close to the d3x (raw) but the d3x will be a little bit better (more detail with less noise).

1 upvote
thx1138
By thx1138 (Sep 26, 2011)

The only fair way to compare cameras of different resolution is to resize them to the same size. I prefer the approach of resizing to a midpoint ie downsize the highest res cameras and uprez the lowest res cameras. This way gives a much better idea of noise. You cannot look at per pixel noise at 100% views to say one camera is better or worse. Think about making prints from two cameras with much different resolution. The higher resolution camera may have more per pixel noise, but if you make equal sized prints you will see in fact there will be much less difference and the higher res camera will most likely have better detail. For example a D3x produces better 12MP images from downrezzing it's 24MP than a D3s does natively at 12MP. dpreview seems to fail to understand this.

3 upvotes
ARTASHES
By ARTASHES (Sep 26, 2011)

In this case (of a77) the difference is big enough (at high ISO) to say (for chrome noise thought)

0 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Sep 26, 2011)

Check out the digital rev review on youtube. According to them the camera has sluggish controls and if you turn the dials to fast you have wait for the camera to catch up. To me , if true, this is the cameras biggest shortcoming.

One thing is clear. We are seeing the future in this camera. In 10-15 years I would not be surprised if EVF, mirror-less/translucent mirror cameras replace DSLRs. Especially with Nikon's new on sensor AF.

0 upvotes
JPMontez
By JPMontez (Sep 26, 2011)

Sony A77 JPEGs are better than Nikon D7000 and Canon 7D at least up to 1600 ISO.

5 upvotes
ARTASHES
By ARTASHES (Sep 26, 2011)

It depends what is your priority, there is no better jpegs than Nikon's one for reds for example

0 upvotes
JPMontez
By JPMontez (Sep 27, 2011)

My priority is... all colors! Although I'm a Benfica fan... ;-)

1 upvote
ARTASHES
By ARTASHES (Sep 26, 2011)

A77 supposed to be also a sports camera which means it had to be a good high ISO performer, those samples proves that it is not or not as good as Nikons, Canons etc. so complaining about that do make sens, history about resizing is the last argument resting but even D3x with resizing wasn't as good as D3 (from DPR testes) and I am sorry but no resizing can't get the details that just isn't there anymore
just for fun compare 12k iso raw fils from a77 to pentax kx's ones

0 upvotes
futile32
By futile32 (Sep 26, 2011)

fair point about the Pentax, but does it not look like there is NR in the RAW of the pentax. Somethings a bit amiss there.

0 upvotes
ARTASHES
By ARTASHES (Sep 26, 2011)

it does :) actuallt there is NR in pentaxs raws above 1600 iso but even with that which NR will make A77 raws looks like kx's ones and have as much details ?

0 upvotes
futile32
By futile32 (Sep 26, 2011)

here is a banded example of the 1600,3200,6400 iso from the A77 DPR samples. RAWs processed through Sony's IDC (only non-beta A77 Raw processor). I think the results show a different story:

http://thepixelbox.smugmug.com/photos/i-QJJNrxr/0/O/i-QJJNrxr.jpg

Thanks DPR for the RAWs.

1 upvote
ARTASHES
By ARTASHES (Sep 26, 2011)

Thanks for your comparison, I have compared 6400 iso part to kx raw and still see more details especially at the reds in pentax samples but thats what I see

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Sep 26, 2011)

No point comparing to the Kx because it's a known fact that the Pentax cameras apply quite a bit ofRAW NR above ISO 3200.

0 upvotes
ARTASHES
By ARTASHES (Sep 26, 2011)

I said that too lol just read all my messages still not above 3200 but from 3200 iso (above 1600) and still for me there is more details, better colors a higt iso in kx's samples so who cares if there is NR

0 upvotes
whtchocla7e
By whtchocla7e (Sep 26, 2011)

100% is not a good comparison. The A77 image is magnified too much compared to the D7000 and D7. Resize them, then compare.

6 upvotes
CM WORKS
By CM WORKS (Sep 26, 2011)

Finally someone makes sense! Good post jl_smith

1 upvote
jl_smith
By jl_smith (Sep 26, 2011)

News flash people - ISO isn't the END ALL BE-ALL of camera performance. Kinda funny people bash Canon for being tunnel-visioned for megapixels, yet everyone here swears up and down by ISO performance and nothing else.

I own both Nikon and Sony systems (not interested in A77 though) and I will say I'd give up a bit more noise performance for Sony's color response any day over Nikon - the pictures just look "better". Also, do yourself a favor and compare JPEG output (I know, I know, JPEG is the devil) vs the other cameras - the Sony JPEG output kicks the crap out of D7000 and 7D.

3 upvotes
hammerheadfistpunch
By hammerheadfistpunch (Sep 26, 2011)

I agree with you on ISO performance, but it certainly makes a difference for people who needs every low light advantage they can get, and the A77 falls flat here big time, even against the 4/3rds GH2.

The main reason I wound't buy it, however, is the same reason you might. I never have liked the "color" that sony adds to the image in their JPEG processing, its too....fake. It feels very artificial and over saturated, and as awesome as their noise algorithm is, i don't like the end result.

3 upvotes
futile32
By futile32 (Sep 26, 2011)

Its funny but many will argue to the death that sony's is a more natural reproduction. Just saying.

0 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Sep 26, 2011)

Besides the differences in noise performance between them isn't really enough to worry about.

0 upvotes
Julio
By Julio (Sep 26, 2011)

I don't know if we're looking at the same thing but the only thing I see kicking the crap out of anything else here is 5D MkII... RAW or even better in JPG and the direct APSC competitor, the 7D has cleaner images.

Sony makes good sensors as we all know so I was expecting their 2011 flagship sensor to produce less noise than 2009 sensors from any major brand. But they seem to have gone for resolution at the expense of noise. I thought the name of the game in DSLR improvements was to increase resolution while maintaining or improving upon the previous sensor.

Yes, high ISO is not everything but I certainly don't expect worse high ISO noise 2 years down the line.

3 upvotes
futile32
By futile32 (Sep 27, 2011)

Perhaps their aim was to move the performance of the A700 and A900 flagships forward, rather than focusing on competition.

I would find that a little narrow minded though.

Looks like a 2 stop improvement over the A700 to me, so I'm pretty happy. Funny thing is in the time I've had the A700 (from release) I only have a handful of images above iso800.

I guess I'm who this is aimed at.

0 upvotes
ARTASHES
By ARTASHES (Sep 26, 2011)

I am sorry to say that but in shadow noise the D7000 is about 3/4 step better than this all the way long

2 upvotes
Eugene Powers
By Eugene Powers (Sep 26, 2011)

The New King of APS-C DSLRs???????????????
Not on this planet!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

3 upvotes
jlamesa
By jlamesa (Sep 26, 2011)

Buy some new glasses guy, and maybe you' ll see the moon !

2 upvotes
dylanbarnhart
By dylanbarnhart (Sep 26, 2011)

Here's a comparison at ISO6400

http://lumitouch.com/pic/a77.jpg

The word "Paul Smith" on the watch is not legible on the A77, while all three other cameras are good.

On ISO 100, the 24MP resolution on the A77 definitely shows more details, such as at the feather area.

My conclusion is that the A77 is better in good light, but worse in low light than its competitors.

1 upvote
futile32
By futile32 (Sep 26, 2011)

The missing clock hand is more of a concern for me. Could be a difference in lighting though.

I processed some of the Imaging-Resources RAWs through Sony's IDC raw processor last night. I found iso3200 comfortable, although I'll admit that I'm not sure of the possible better offerings elsewhere.

Here is a stripped composite of 1600,3200,6400 repeated:
http://thepixelbox.smugmug.com/photos/i-Ccc2B4M/0/O/i-Ccc2B4M.jpg

0 upvotes
Marcin 3M
By Marcin 3M (Sep 26, 2011)

Why do I see more noise and less or equal details than with D700?

2 upvotes
jlamesa
By jlamesa (Sep 26, 2011)

Everywhere and at every ISO till 6440 , me eyes sea that A77 wins.

5 upvotes
RedFox88
By RedFox88 (Sep 27, 2011)

Wins what? And against what? and JPG or RAW?

1 upvote
jlamesa
By jlamesa (Sep 27, 2011)

Jpegs are all better, Just Jpegs. Raw converters seems to be not ready for the A77 , and it seems clear , that the PP applied by DPreview is not as good as it should be.

1 upvote
CM WORKS
By CM WORKS (Sep 26, 2011)

Yeah but when you print it. it looks great. Ant that's what matter.

0 upvotes
BMS1
By BMS1 (Sep 26, 2011)

POPULAR PHOTOGRAPHY: Sony's A77 Is The New King of APS-C DSLRs

http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2011/09/lab-test-sony-a77-new-king-aps-c-dslrs

3 upvotes
chiumeister
By chiumeister (Sep 26, 2011)

PopPhoto tables confirmed what DPReview's studio shots showed.
The Canon 5DM2 with over 2800 lines resolution, is a tad sharper than the Sony A77. The noise at over ISO3200 is where PopPhoto showed the A77 start having issues. Still, the utter speed of the A77 in the graphs is amazing.

1 upvote
RedFox88
By RedFox88 (Sep 27, 2011)

PopPhoto says great things about every new camera they "review" or "test".

0 upvotes
keeponkeepingon
By keeponkeepingon (Sep 26, 2011)

Regarding all the "wipes the floor" comments.

Backing up that camp: PP just crowned the A77 as the king of the APS-C DSLRs ranking above the 7D etc.

0 upvotes
RedFox88
By RedFox88 (Sep 27, 2011)

PopPhoto says great things about every new camera they "review" or "test". They are after headlines to get readers.

0 upvotes
tonywong
By tonywong (Sep 27, 2011)

PopPhoto says great things about every new camera they "review" or "test". They are after headlines to keep advertisers.

-Fixed that for you.

0 upvotes
Rob Rossington
By Rob Rossington (Sep 27, 2011)

Anybody else think this is typical sony?
They come out with a reasonably good product, then its successor or the next body in the line is usually a complete failure (think A200->A230 etc.)
They have even done it with the PS3 to a certain extent, each new version of the console sheds a different feature in the name of advancement, when in reality they are going backwards.

At least they didn't bother to replace the A900 with something rubbish.

Bring back Minolta I say!!!

0 upvotes
Allan Ostling
By Allan Ostling (Sep 26, 2011)

Is there information on which lens was used, for each of the cameras being compared?

0 upvotes
Auke B van der Weide
By Auke B van der Weide (Sep 26, 2011)

d3 still looks better at iso3200

0 upvotes
mikiev
By mikiev (Sep 26, 2011)

I should -hope- that D3/D700 would look better at iso3200, and that D3S should look even -better- than D700/D3.

2 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Sep 26, 2011)

I would hope it looked better in all iso's. Is that not the case?

0 upvotes
SteB
By SteB (Sep 26, 2011)

There's a lot of chroma noise on the RAW samples. Even by ISO 800 the Panasonic GH2 is clearly performing much better, and is closer to the better APS-C DSLRs, than the A77 is to it. By ISO 1600 it looks rather rough. I don't know if this is a RAW converter issue or not. There's too much smearing on the JPEGs to judge from them where it stands.

1 upvote
jlamesa
By jlamesa (Sep 26, 2011)

Just look here,( sorry for my previuos malfunctioning links) :

http://www.marimbadisseny.com/A77_GH2_6400ISO.jpg

0 upvotes
schmegg
By schmegg (Sep 26, 2011)

ROFL!

"Interesting to see that even with the penalty of the translucent mirror the A77 wipes the floor with the APS-C competition"

Seriously?

3 upvotes
CM WORKS
By CM WORKS (Sep 26, 2011)

If you guys stop pixel-peeping you can see the light. Click on the 3200iso and print out a 13x19 and let me know what u think. Also clients are not going to look at picture on the screen at 100% and say wow this image is great. They want to look at it full (25%-50% depends on screen).

1 upvote
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Sep 26, 2011)

But then why do you need 24MP? I can do that from my 4yo D80 at 10MP.

1 upvote
PicOne
By PicOne (Sep 26, 2011)

Viewing an image at 25% from a 24mp file is bigger than viewing at 25% from a 10mp file.. not sure what your asking.

25% on screen is roughly equivalent in physical size to a print sent to a printer at 300dpi.. Hence why 25% view is often recommended when tweaking sharpness settings for print.

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Sep 26, 2011)

Seems like the same weird problems in ACR that we saw with the A35. Btw, the RAW files are not available for download. Seems like a fix is required there.

0 upvotes
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (Sep 26, 2011)

sorry about this, should be fixed now!

2 upvotes
futile32
By futile32 (Sep 26, 2011)

Thanks for the RAWs very kind of you guys. Gonna have a tinker and see how the look for myself. Much appreciated.

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Sep 26, 2011)

Thanks Lars.

0 upvotes
Carsten Saager
By Carsten Saager (Sep 26, 2011)

Interesting to see that even with the penalty of the translucent mirror the A77 wipes the floor with the APS-C competition - the 5dmkII only does a little bit better (thanks to its full-frame sensor)

Good job Sony! Curious what Canikon have up in their sleeves to counter that - though it won't last for long. In 5 years I'll find myself hard pressed to add to my Nikon gear if Sony can keep up this innovation speed (and in 10 years Canikon will become just nostalgia)

4 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Sep 26, 2011)

I compared it to the Olympus E-5. Should be a slam dunk for sony; but i almost found the results from the E-5 better. Is this because of the near perfect 50mm F2 Macro? (I tried it from Iso 100-1600)

0 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Sep 26, 2011)

Are you seeing the same images as I am? There are problems with ACR, I'm not saying it's the sensor, but even at low ISOs I see some noise destroying fine detail

0 upvotes
FuzzTheKingOfTrees
By FuzzTheKingOfTrees (Sep 26, 2011)

Really? That's not what I see, I see noise. I see it from 400 ISO. Of course we're looking at pixel level here so not sure what it will be like once those pixels are downsampled for viewing on screen or printing.

If Nikon put this sensor in the D300 replacement performing like this people will laugh at them.

0 upvotes
CDMc
By CDMc (Sep 26, 2011)

Not sure where you are looking? not seeing that at all

I compared to the GH2 in RAW and JPG at 1600 and 3200 - a pixel too far?

0 upvotes
msusic
By msusic (Sep 26, 2011)

E-5 with just 12mp looks much better at pixel level which is to be expected, but it's funny how even 24mp doesn't give any real advantage in terms of detail - you just get a bigger and blurrier photo.

1 upvote
lucidOne
By lucidOne (Sep 26, 2011)

Really... Raw ISO1600 doesn't seems a little concerning.

0 upvotes
RedFox88
By RedFox88 (Sep 27, 2011)

Not what I see at all. a77 is 1 stop noisier than other current aps-c dSLRs from ISO 400 and higher and is 2 stops noisier than the 5D2.

0 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Sep 26, 2011)

Doesn't look too good in ACR. Is that definitive from Adobe for the A77?

0 upvotes
SkyTamer
By SkyTamer (Sep 26, 2011)

Can we expect similar results on the Nex-7?

1 upvote
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Sep 26, 2011)

Nex 7 should have much better High ISO results since it does not have a mirror in the way. (about half of a stop better)

2 upvotes
RedFox88
By RedFox88 (Sep 27, 2011)

Much better? Probably not. Should be about 1/3 stop better, that's all and that's all the light the translucent mirror blocks.

0 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Sep 26, 2011)

Score first post! So is the mirror like a natural ND filter? Does it effect any other quality aspects aside from High ISO IQ?

0 upvotes
futile32
By futile32 (Sep 26, 2011)

we'll have to wait for the full review, but indications are this 2nd gen mirror has a better coating that prevents the problems originally seen with the A33 etc.. I'm sure DPR will stress this area in their review, as the A77 success is pivotal on the SLT tech working!

0 upvotes
Total comments: 226
12