Just Posted: In-depth Sony SLT-A77 review

+1 to gl2k (i almost wanna write Glock)

ya, with all those faults, why would you willingly buy the A77 then?? is some actually holding a gun (a GLOCK!!!) to your head?? or do you plan on buying top-notch Zeiss glass for it and finding a shop to print 60x90 size prints and admiring them from a foot away?

Oct 28, 2011permalink

Wolfgang Fieger

Not quite the sort of discussion I would have expected from a photo forum...

Oct 28, 2011permalink

I have the same thoughts as Wolfgang. The camera is very appealing. Magnesium body, improved auto-focus, external flash contact, electronic viewer (although I'm not quite convinced yet), auto-focus help-light, better ergonomics.
With the developing of this camera I'm sure the Sony engineers had a Canon 7D and Nikon D7000 to beat on the table.
Then why those noisy 24 mp's ? Why ...why...?

Oct 28, 2011permalink

(unknown member)

I assume you are invested in the Sony system, which makes you feel there is no other option for upgrade. I agree 24mp is a bridge too far at this sensor size. It seems to me more pixels for the sake of more pixels. Virtually useless.
I have bought and sold so much Nikon equipment over the years, just trying new things for the fun of it, that I firmly believe there is no reason to feel locked in to anything. Full frame Nikon cameras are the best, IMO, but they are just too large for my taste. I would like to see something like the D7000 with a better focus system, and I hope the D400 will be just that. But rumors are it will have a 24mp sensor, and if it does I would not buy it on a bet. I am invested in Nikon, and it is the only brand DSLR I have used for years, but I don't feel locked in. If I thought there was something I would enjoy more I would go to it. I certainly would not buy a Nikon I didn't want for any reason.

Oct 30, 2011permalink

+1 to that. i've also been a Nikon user since i bought the F70 back in... i dunno, the mid-90s i think? bought and sold but stayed with Nikon. but today, if Canon or Sony offered a better combination of bodies & lenses for my purposes, i'd jump ship. which i am doing :P no reason to stay with a brand and be myopic and buy just because it's whatever "my brand" just came out with and it would be blasphemy to say "um, no, i think this is going the wrong way, i'll try my luck with these other guys"

Oct 30, 2011permalink

Dustinash

I actually sold out of my last camera brand and bought into sony to get be able to get this camera. Its sweet.

Nov 1, 2011permalink

fransams

Most interesting is the (kit?)lens, 16-50mm f2.8, but not a word about it in the review.
Price (Body only / with 16-50mm F2.8)
• US: $1399 / $1999
• UK: £1149 / £1599
• EU: €1350 / €1900

Oct 28, 2011permalink

Setev

Hi guys

If you want to know how good the camera is in real world use by an experienced photographer then check out Kilpatricks 10,000 word essay about the A77 at www.photoclubalpha.com It's really thorough.

Oct 28, 2011permalink

jim9756

I don't even have a camera yet but Im looking at the A77 because I have a couple of Minolta lenses from years ago and thought it might be a good camera to buy, I have no experience at all with cameras but still want one, but after reading the review and reading what everyone on here has to say about the jpegs which is all I would use are they really that bad, I really would like to be able to get some 20 X 30 posters made at some point or would it be wiser for me to get something like the Pentax K5, thanks for any advice

Oct 27, 2011permalink

here's the thing - if you do print a 20x30, are you going to look at it from only 2 feet away, or are you gonna stand back a bit more? realistically, a big print is meant to be viewed from further away, so absolute resolution isn't needed simply cuz the print is bigger. and if you do make prints 20x30 or so, hopefully they have more interesting subjects than sheer pixels in them to look at :P

if you have a gorgeous gf or model, a bit of smearing of the skin texture (bumps, tiny wrinkles, etc) would probably be a good thing anyways.

do you like your old Minolta lenses? if so, maybe stick with them and check out the A65 instead - same sensor and all but at 30% less price (a few features removed, but 95% of the time you'd probably not even notice them being missing)

Oct 28, 2011permalink

The "interrupted" liveview problem in the A77 and its brethren is caused by a shortfall in processing power. Moore's law has a history of dealing with such problems quite successfully. The similar "interrupted" liveview in conventional SLRs is caused by the flapping mirror. This is a design problem that can never be fixed without re-designing the system to eliminate the moving mirror, which Sony did.

Whatever you think of this particular camera's several shortcomings, it is a signpost to the future. Ten years from now moving mirror cameras will be collector's items, you won't be able to buy a new one. If we think about them at all it will be to wonder why it took so long to implement a better idea.

Oct 27, 2011permalink

ya, someone should invent something like a TLR maybe. full-time live-view. but wait, someone will surely b1tch about the parallax then, or that they have to buy TWO lenses. nothing will ever be perfect - until they discontinue it (like Kodachrome). actually, KR64 sucked in some respects too...

maybe the ideal solution will be a transparent sensor, so that the sensor is in front of the mirror / prism for the AF module. that way, live view, no loss of light through an SLT, etc etc etc.

ok, can someone please go out and invent a transparent sensor? it would have to be ultra-low noise (photon-counting quality), full frame, 40Mpix, and of course cheap cuz nobody wants to actually PAY for it.

Oct 27, 2011permalink

jmmgarza

Sony SLT-A77... big and fun. Not much of a change in form factor from a 1952 SLR. Now, if I had Sony's NEX 5 or 7 camera, that would more contemporary.

On my little NEX camera, I would barely (yes, barely) have a small lens attached. I wouldn't like anything bulbous distorting my camera's feng shui. This Sony combo would be a great travel companion. No, I am not Ansel cruising the desert in my SUV, taking pix with my trusty 8x10 Deardorff.

Actually and not surprisingly I rarely use a zoom and never a telephoto. Maybe, just maybe a basic pancake lens would be okay. Since I am an ol' skool kinda guy, I convert most of my color to B-dub anyway. Wouldn't that be a fun and surreptitious way to go?

I am sure the pix would be fine for exhibition and publication. What more do you want?

Oct 27, 2011*permalink

opek

They were using Sony 50/1.8 lense! :)

Is this a JOKE !!??

Canon(Nikon): 50/1.4 Fullframe glass (like Nikkor 50/1.4G)
VS
Sony cheapest "cropped" prime !

Ok, now tell me why not Sony 50/1.4 ??
Why not similar optical quality and benefit from "sweet spot" like rivals?

I smell some money behind the scene... ;)

Oct 27, 2011permalink

LOL! usually the 50/1.8 versions are sharper than the 50/1.4 versions - though they're not quite as bright wide-open. and a 50/1.4 would suck wide-open anywhere outside of the central 4 pixels anyways.

Oct 27, 2011permalink

The lead image in the article shows a 50/1.4 mounted. Where does it say they used a 1.8 for the tests? Actually I think DPR should always state at the beginning of their tests which lens they are using.

Oct 27, 2011permalink

opek

19. high iso raw
"The same lens was used: Sony's 50mm f/1.8 SAM..."

23. 24. 25. Studio comparison:
Below crop images, in right bottom corner, when you move mouse over something like "settings" icon, you can see all image settings. What you can read for example is:
- for Sony A77 picture - 50/1.8 lense
- for Nikon D7000 picture - 50/1.4G lense
- for Canon EOS 7D - 50/1.4 lense

Oct 27, 2011permalink

opek

GregR1 wrote:
"...the 50/1.8 versions are sharper than the 50/1.4..."

So now I'm more confused - why using in review worse Nikon[Canon] 50/1.4 FF instead of better cheap 50/1.8 cropped ?

Nov 16, 2011permalink

When you in the analog days wanted a higher quality picture, you didn't reach for a finer-grain filmtype (= more smaller pixels), but a larger film format: 6x6 or 4"x5". So I wished Sony had improved their cameras instead cramming more noisy and smaller pixels on a half 135 film area (APS). I nowadays make higher quality pictures with my 10 Mp APS digital camera than with my analog Hasselblad and Rolleiflex cameras in the seventies.

Oct 27, 2011*permalink

For improved qualirt I used Velvia with finer grain... for further improvement you can still switch to FF and 645, so not that much has changed. I do still dare to bet your Hasselblad with modern Portra film far outresolves your 10 MP APS, unless you had a real lemon :)
Incidentally Velvia with its finer grain also had high iso issues ;)

Oct 27, 2011permalink

I'm talking about max 50 x 60 cm prints viewed from a distance of about 1.5 m and I see better digital prints (APS 10 Mp).

Oct 27, 2011permalink

tesch

Another unbiased review brought to you by......CANON.

Oct 27, 2011permalink

Helena777

LOL

Oct 27, 2011permalink

Faisalee

Canon... Delighting you always :)

Oct 31, 2011permalink

man, what's with all the complaints and criticisms? does the 7D give live-view at 8fps, or 6pfs? do many others? etc etc etc. i think the biggest "boo" with the A77 are the JPEGs which don't seem to do the sensor justice. i'm trying to kick my Nikon D80 to the curb and replace it with something newer sharper with a flexi-screen, but the A77's image sharpness disappoints when compared against the T3i and similar. even at the A65's lower price, as cool and interesting and useful the other things are, those JPEGs are the only real downers.

i for one can't be bothered to shoot & tweak & edit each and every image in RAW just to get the inherent quality that SHOULD be showing up right from the get-go. if i did have that time, a Mamiya DM80 would be more sensible :P

Oct 27, 2011permalink

ARTASHES

One thing is a bit strange to me why this 24 mp sensor has not 25k iso option ?
For a77 it could be comprehensible (SLT system less light etc.) but nex7 hasn't it either

Oct 27, 2011permalink

GMaximus

Probably that's because if it had an ISO25000 option, it's NOISE level would not fit in DPReview's graph windows!

Oct 27, 2011permalink

diegocasale

Attention! A77 is NOT a D-SLR camera, the viwefinder is electronic, not an optical mirror type. SLT cameras have a mirror, but - unlike the one in DSLRs - it does not move, and it is semi-translucent, allowing the majority of the light to pass through to the sensor whilst reflecting a portion of it onto a phase-detection autofocus sensor, this way allowing full time phase detection auto focus.

Oct 27, 2011*permalink

diegocasale

So, A77 can not be the replacement for the A700. This has nothing in common with a SLT camera, two ranges of different types.

Oct 27, 2011*permalink

wetsleet

Well spotted Sherlock. That is why it is called "SLT-A77", and not "SLR-A77"

Oct 27, 2011permalink

ARTASHES

LOL

Oct 27, 2011permalink

HIScamera

Good thing diegocasale explained this in detail, otherwise a great mutitude would have been wallowing in their ignorance!

Seriously?

Oct 27, 2011permalink

Mrpower

I don't see the point in complainig about live view at 8 fps, if you realy use cameras at this speed like me you will know that you cant see much or do much at that speed and that seeing the photo just taken 1/8 of second back would not make that much difference than live view.

Oct 27, 2011permalink

balios

I see fine at 8 fps on my 7D and I can 'do much' at that speed. The fact the mirror blacks out 8 times a second is no more troublesome than waving your hand in front of your face rapidly.

1/8 of a second can be significant if you're tracking a fast moving object, especially if it is very close. I need only look at some of my images of this scenario and see that if the camera had been pointed where it was one frame ago, the framing would be completely wrong.

Basically, I would much rather have a flickering live image over an image from 1/8 of a second ago.

Oct 27, 2011permalink

I don't see much difference. With the A77 you base your framing on where you see the subject 1/8 sec ago. With your 7D you are basing your framing on where you remember the subject 1/8 sec ago. Either way I think you are basing your framing mainly on a mental prediction of subject motion formed before you pressed the shutter and adjusting on the fly. The A77 approach probably works just as well once you get used to it, have you tried it?

Oct 27, 2011permalink

kwatersr

Both cameras are capable of 8fps, but what is the actual blackout time on the 7D vs the A77?

I would argue that blackout time would be more impacting to any potential work you can do than the fps you're shooting.

Oct 27, 2011permalink

balios

This issue is how human vision works.

I have not used the A77 (I would like to), but based on the review and reported difficulty panning; I *assume* that every second you see 8 still images, each about 1/8 seconds long. A still image has no movement. You’re panning but not perceiving actual movement, rather changes in still images.

With the 7D, you're not remembering where it was 1/8 seconds ago; you are not seeing a series of still images. You are seeing what is happening, broken up by periods of blackness. While you do see the image, regardless of how short it is, you see natural movement at the maximum “framerate” of human vision. You’re essentially watching 8 short movie clips. Your mind easily ignores the black (the same way you don’t notice yourself blinking or can track an animal moving behind tall grass) and easily stitches them together and perceives natural movement. When your mind naturally perceives movement, it will naturally be able to predict movement.

Oct 27, 2011permalink

Mrpower

I agree with choochoo22, I have tried the 8FPS and it seems that I am not the kind of Super man that can notice AND make changes with in 1/8 of a second I can only predict and work accordingly it is only when the buffer starts to slow that I can make the changes and this probably after the critical moment I wanted the high speed for.

Oct 28, 2011permalink

Much has been said about how the lack of live-view in 12fps mode is a deal breaker, but what does that mean really? The Canon 1D mk4 is regarded as one of the best sports/action cameras available, let’s compare.
The LCD screen on the back of the A77 is not much use in 12fps, the 1D ditto (“a camera that has evolved to be used with your eye to the viewfinder”).

In 12fps the A77 viewfinder presents a series of stills (refresh rate not specified) so the shooter is looking at what the camera saw “a fraction of a second ago”. In the 1D an image is present in the viewfinder only when the mirror is down (percent of time not known). In between, when the mirror is moving or up during exposure, the shooter must remember what was seen in the viewfinder a fraction of a second ago. Sounds like the A77 has the advantage as the image is available to the eye longer but you would have to try both in practice to see which works best for you.

Oct 27, 2011permalink

Helena777

If this cam would put "Canon" or "Nikon" in a plate in this (remember, weather-proof) magalloy body ¿Would it be a Gold recommended cam? ;-)

I would be very happy if I could spend 1.800 euros to buy an A77, with "all" that ISO noise included :D

Oct 26, 2011permalink

twenty200

Exactly. If Canon or Nikon had made this camera, people would be falling over each other in a rush to heap praise on it. I'll be the first to admit, when the a33 and a55 came out, I was a doubter.

I do wish I could use my Nikkor lenses with my new a77, but you can't have everything.

Oct 27, 2011permalink

barri

HORRIBLE NOISE...
While the A77 seems largely a great camera, I am very disappointed about the sensor. What the heck was Sony thinking? 16 MP would have been more than enough. The high ISO noise on the A77 looks pretty horrible to me.
Wanted to buy the Nex-7 for my GF, but now I am not so sure any more about this sensor. Might better get the Nex-5n.

I also hope that next year's A99 is not going to have more MP than the A900. Otherwise I will not upgrade to it.

Oct 26, 2011*permalink

I find the noise no problem in actual use, but if you are really into high iso the 5n might be a better choice.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

twenty200

I've only been shooting with mine for a day, but my first impressions are pretty shocking (to me). The noise isn't an issue at all, especially considering that I never print or even scale to 100%. And the EVF exceeds my hopes and expectations. I can't believe I'm becoming a Sony guy... but... wow. I'm in love. I will say, the camera isn't exactly attractive, at least when compared to my soon to be sold Nikon. And Sony lenses are nowhere near as attractive looking as Nikons (except for the new E mount lenses. Those look slick, aesthetically). But, really... if THAT's my complaint?

To be fair, I'm only a hundred shots in so far... but wow. I'm really enjoying this camera. Actually, that's a lie. I'm LOVING this camera.

Oct 27, 2011permalink

Miwok

Get some sony Zeiss or G lenses. Believe me, your A77 + Zeiss 135 AF or 70-400 G, will make any Canikon owner thinking twice about smirking at you.

Enjoy your new toy!!

Oct 27, 2011*permalink

wetsleet

I'm guessing that if low-light performance is your thing, then throwing away a good part of what little light there is would not be a great strategy. But that is exactly that SLTs do.

Oct 27, 2011permalink

I can be wrong, but my expectation for this camera is that Sony did not aim at high iso as a key sales point (the Nex 5n is better targetted there). There are plenty of other excellent reasons to buy the camera (if they fit your shooting style)

Oct 27, 2011permalink

alexcam

I have been waiting for this but I really hoped for a sensor on-par with the rest of the bunch in term of noise. In real use and print, I agree it is not a big issue but I like to enjoy looking at photos 100% on a pc and cannot stand a sky that is not completely blue at 100 iso.

Oct 28, 2011permalink

twenty200

I've only had an evening with an a77, but in my opinion, the vast majority of reviews - including this one - are missing the big picture.

The specs and features are about what the camera is able to do. fps, iso, etc. Of course that stuff matters. But the real story here is what an electronic viewfinder in a camera of this caliber enables a photographer to do. These new Sonys are the biggest change in cameras since the dawn of digital SLRs. Change exposure compensation and you literally SEE the change as your viewfinder becomes brighter or darker. You can set up the viewfinder to automatically review the shot you just took, in the viewfinder. No need for chimping on the monitor (though you can do that too if you like). Want a level? You can have one laid over what you're seeing in the viewfinder.

The value of the a77's electronic viewfinder cannot be overstated.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

brianbxb

No mention of body and lens weather- proofing ; comments like "solid build" are too vague for a technical review

Oct 26, 2011permalink

http://g4.img-dpreview.com/D5473621F21F4F73875FAB9DEF77F7B3.jpg

If Sony comes with a 10 megapixel A77-b then thát will be my thing. Don't wanna make huge posters or Super-EXHD video. I want accurate autofocus, no-noise and sharp low light pictures, a big steady camera and a non-plastic body.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

brianbxb

So it turns out the Ricoh design for the GXR ( that marries the sensor to the lens not the body ) makes good sense for your requirements

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Faisalee

If Sony came out with a 10mp sensor... You will see comments like "Oh This is sooo 2005" etc.

This is a given that no matter what... there will alwas be complains. Some will even complain of the missing Microwave ot Dishwasher :)

Oct 31, 2011permalink

(unknown member)

The megapixel war claims another victim. There are actually laws of physics that come into play when resolving detail and the quality of the signal produced by the sensor. I'm looking forward to seeing samples from the 1D X, not just in terms of resolution and noise but also dynamic range.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

wildbild

an other victim, yes. and I am wondering how panasonic manages to get less noise with smaller pixels..

Oct 26, 2011permalink

BMWX5

Great review, number 1 in its category!

DP admin: why hyperlinks on this comment page is not working?

Oct 26, 2011*permalink

stevedigiphoto

The A77 certainly is an impressive piece of kit. I am looking to buy a high spec SLR for aviation photography having sold all my Nikon kit am not tied to anyone. Cameras under consideration are EOS 7D, A77 and D300s as need extra reach of APS-C. Very disappointed that live view effectively does not work with 8fps mode - for me that rules the A77 out as an action camera for fast moving subjects and leaves 7D as favourite. Hats off to Sony for producing what they have - just fatally floored for my use...

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Eleson

So, which camera will you opt for, that has 8 fps and liveview?
Oh, if aviation is your thing, maybe pdaf tracking is nice to have in liveview? of when shooting video?

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Eleson

To all Nikon Lovers!
I can only agree , D7000 is smoother ;)

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/5639653565/photos/1499620/a77reviewcomparison

But why did Nikon take all the details out of the picture in the process???

Oct 26, 2011*permalink

Eleson

My simple jpeg upload doesn't make the smoothness full justice, bring it up on your own screen to see how much irritating details, like the structure to the left, you don't have to look at on the best-in-class pictures.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Managarm

In these comparison shots the focal planes of the cameras are once again on different positions. So the whole comparison of details is useless.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

ARTASHES

Eleson
Compare the shadow areas where Son'y agressive sharpening can't do anything with more difficult details than linear textures
Anyway comparing the jpeg of 2 semi-pro cameras to see which one has better details/IQ is not very reasonable especially when Nikon's jpeg are known for being smooth (even some P&S cameras are sharper at base ISO than Nikons)

Oct 27, 2011permalink

ramsys

where is the original lens for the Sony A77 ??????

http://www.pixmania.com/maquinas-fotograficas-digitais-sony/ptpt1_1_1_1661_49_0_0_00_sg.html?sPageInfo=1_10

Oct 26, 2011permalink

ramsys

Good morning friends .... someone can tell me what is going on with the lens sony dt 16 -50, .... in Portugal, the pre purchase orders A77 kit comes with 18 dt. 55 !!!!! ..... what is this scam?? Tanks ...

Oct 26, 2011permalink

imlammothion

Hi! I'm from Portugal too. It's no scam. There are 3 available options for the A77. Just body; with 18-55 lens and with 16-50 lens. On Portugal most suppliers are opting for the 18-55 kit because it's cheaper. You will soon see the 16-50 kit option available too.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

ramsys

Espero que sim ...só encontro na Alemanha por mais 400 euros ... 2300€ ...penso logo na candonga dos espectaculos ..... se souberes de alguma coisa ....avisa. Companheiro Fernando Filipe no facebook ou fernando.filipe@gmail.com

Oct 26, 2011permalink

imlammothion

Arranja-se mais barato. Facebook request send!

Oct 26, 2011permalink

feedmatekill

I have a remark on "12fps af tracking"...
You say only frame 5 is sharp.....it isn't really, is it?
and why is that? - because 1/1000 @ f5.6 isn't enough for action that fast AND camera is clearly shaken. If You look more closely You'll see that nothing in frame is sharp, whole picture is slightly blurred, nothing on the picture is really sharp. There is no DOF line of sharpness on the ground or anywhere else....

So, it isn't AF's fault - it's a bad photographer :)

P.S.
on frame number 5, the object was braking - slowing down. so that's why only that frame was sharp enough.... I'm very surprised dpreview missed something so obvious.

Oct 26, 2011*permalink

gl2k

dpreview also didn't mention that even at Canon & Nikon only the most expensive pro lenses are fast enough for motor sports.
So the questions raises : Did dpreview used a dedicated pro lens suitable for sports action ?

Oct 26, 2011permalink

feedmatekill

they used pretty slow performer 70-300 f4.5-5.6....
I don't get this at all.....this is NOT glass for this kind of testing....what's wrong with using 70-400 f4-5.6 or eve 70-200 f2.8....
I'm very disappointed with this testing approach.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

sravpes

I guess, I'm gonna get one...

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Peter K Burian

I have tested the a77 and it produced GORGEOUS high ISO JPEGs. All you need to do is use the Multi-Frame Noise Reduction feature (accessed via Auto ISO) OR the similar Handheld Twilight Scene mode. (The template form of reviews and comparison photos does not seem to lend itself to a testing of unusual features such as this.)

See one of my ISO 5000 JPEGs at https://picasaweb.google.com/110698711952841559844/SonyA77ISO500FABULOUS#

The camera snaps six photos very quickly. The Bionz processor micro-aligns them to minimize the effect of any camera shake, allowing for sharp shots at surprisingly long exposures. It then composites the six captures into one, discarding most of the noise data for clean photos even at very high ISO. (My ISO ISO 5000 photos resemble those made at ISO 800 without this feature).

The fully-automatic Handheld Twilight Scene mode is identical but overrides are not available when this mode is used; the camera controls all aspects of the image.

Oct 26, 2011*permalink

Tom Bird

- the linked pic is just softened til the noise is gone.
- no uncle bob would ever go deep in the menu to get multi-frame noise reduction et al before shooting. bad layout.
- snaps 6 photos very quickly? that explains the softness and only works within churches, maybe. no wind, no people, nothing moving.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

pauly6734

Looks terrible!

Oct 26, 2011permalink

ageha

Actually the shadow areas are very grainy and the biggest issue is that it works only with JPGs.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Tomas_X

If you summarize more frames into one picture, you can simply make one exposure with the sum of times of all frames and you can get lower ISO for such longer time. :-)))

Oct 26, 2011permalink

NK777

No noise, but no thin detail :(

Oct 26, 2011*permalink

HowaboutRAW

Peter K,

And what if the subject of the photo, say a person, is moving in that lowlight picture--really 6 pictures--how does that work well?

And jpgs? Really?

Oct 26, 2011permalink

gingerbaker

It looks very impressive for handheld shot! You folks, you have to click on the magnify glass symbol to see the detail. Then, use the zoom. Yes, there is some noise in the shadows.. But for a handheld ISO 5000 shot - very good indeed!

Oct 26, 2011permalink

HowaboutRAW

gingerbaker,

No actually it doesn't look real good, for example the bad noise on the stand or lectern front centre right is distracting.

Where did you get the idea that this jpeg is handheld?

Oct 27, 2011permalink

Peter K Burian

The full size JPEG looks gorgeous!! considering it's at ISO 800. The special Multi-Frame NR feature does not soften the JPEGs.

The camera snaps six photos very quickly. The Bionz processor micro-aligns them to minimize the effect of any camera shake, allowing for sharp shots at surprisingly long exposures. ***It then composites the six captures into one, discarding most of the noise data for clean photos even at very high ISO.*** (My ISO ISO 5000 photos resemble those made at ISO 800 without this feature).

The fully-automatic Handheld Twilight Scene mode is identical but overrides are not available when this mode is used; the camera controls all aspects of the image.

Oct 31, 2011permalink

Peter K Burian

This JPEG photo of the church IS handheld ... it is my photo ... I took the shot in Quebec city, hand-held.

Oct 31, 2011permalink

Fish Tank

I am really confused. Live colour balance, electronic spirit levels, a bazillion stats in the EVF, best in dslr video (with no jello effect), electronic first curtain... shall I go on?... and the review doesn't give it a full "excellent" for features? Put all other categories aside - have you ever tested another camera more packed full of features? Seriously confused. Sad thing is my rant will change nothing :-/

Oct 26, 2011permalink

mpgxsvcd

It is kind of like cell phones. Smart Phones now can surf the net, play games, text, and use apps. However, they don't make calls as well as they used to.

This camera has every feature I have ever wanted except for the most important feature to me which is being able to take decent low light photos and videos.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Robert Hoy

Can you show a camera that Dpreview gave a "full" excellent to in any category? Ratings are relative to its current competitors. Who cares if a rating is a 10 or a 9 or an 8 if its competiting models are 6 7 and 8's? And they have to leave room for the future as more features are added in new models.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Fish Tank

Should it not be judged on feature set at the very moment? This thing has everything you could ever want (save for mpgxsvcd's point) TO THIS DATE. Guessing whether on not mind control and voice activation will be a future feature set really isn't giving it its due. Who cares about feature scores? People that care about getting features you can't have in any other camera I guess ;-)

Oct 26, 2011permalink

mpgxsvcd

How does the camera with the worst low light performance in its class finish first in its class? I thought we all wanted to take better pictures not faster pictures.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

It does take better pics than the rest where most pics are taken, ISO 100-800

Oct 26, 2011permalink

mpgxsvcd

Great so if I have to shoot with more than ISO 800 I might as well get out my point and shoot? For this kind of money the camera absolutely has to be great at everything.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Your p&s shoot takes pics like that between ISO 100-800? Want to post a comparison to back up that claim?

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Robert Hoy

For one, its competitors in its "class" are all at least a year old. Ratings are a combination of many factors. If you want to buy on image quality alone, do so.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

A slight issue with DPR shots:

A77 receives less light than all other cameras? That would make noise look worse than the rest

Nikon D7000
Exposure Time: 1/640
F Number: 9
ISO Speed Ratings: 3200

Canon 7D
Exposure Time: 1/640
F Number: 9
ISO Speed Ratings: 3200

Pentax K-5
Exposure Time: 1/640
F Number: 9
ISO Speed Ratings: 3200
Metering Mode: Pattern

Sony A77
Exposure Time: 1/1000
F Number: 8
ISO Speed Ratings: 3200

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Agreed and let's include one more:
Sony A55
Exposure Time: 1/500(!)
F Number: 9
ISO Speed Ratings: 3200

Oct 26, 2011permalink

The lens is stopped down a third of a stop less though.

Still poor performance though seeing it is 1-1½ stop noisier overall.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Boissez, that's at pixel level. Downsample it to 16 MP and it's 1/2 stop worse than A580 and equal to A55.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Robert Hoy

Only a 1/3 stop less exposure for the a77. Dpreview has said they sometimes adjust exposures so that the over all light captured is the range they are going for. For instance f9 may have introduced too much diffraction on the pixel packed aps-c 24 megapixel sony sensor.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

In the comparison tool the A77 received 2/3EV LESS light than the A55 at equal indicated ISO's. Ofcourse it's going to look a lot noisier then, especially if you compare at pixel level, rather than normalized output.....

Oct 26, 2011permalink

No, it received only 1/3 EV less light (the lens isn't stopped as much down)

Still a poor showing for a sensor to only have a slight resolution advantage and significantly poorer noise performance than it's 2 year old sibling.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

It's 2/3 EV, because *BEFORE* taking into account the F stop difference it's actually 1 EV....
In other words, you're better off comparing for example ISO 6400 from the A55 with ISO 3200 from the A77 as that's only 1/3 of a stop difference, this time favoring the A77. At equal output, they are essentially the same, noise wise and below ISO 3200 you can have more detail. And btw, the A55 and its sensor are *one* year older.

Oct 26, 2011*permalink

Uhmm.... no. The F-stop on the 7D and other is F9, while it's F8 on the Sony, so more light to the Sony right there. (and I meant it's Canon sibling, the A580/A55 are on a different level)

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Did you even read my post that you replied to? I was talking about the A77 vs the A55, not the other cameras. Which is important if you make claims about the 16MP sensor being "better" than the 24MP sensor.
If you want to talk about Canon cameras, try another thread.

Oct 26, 2011*permalink

Oops... my apologies. I looked at a glance and thought the A55 was shot at the same settings as the Canon 7D and others. My bad.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

MikeRan

I have no problem with the review, however, in the pro and con section, I find it interesting that limited control in 12FPS mode is listed as a con.. Shouldn't the fact that this camera has a limited control 12FPS mode (at 24MP and with AF) be listed as a pro?

Also, I believe the 8FPS mode with full control and full AF is quite rare in a camera of this class, no?

Oct 26, 2011permalink

You don't have full control @ 8 fps as the live view is *off*. That is a deal-breaker for anything sports related IMO.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

MikeRan

And that is properly listed as a con (no argument). Still I think credit is deserved for the 12FPS mode. Anyway, JMHO.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

balios

They're not saying the 12 fps is, by itself, a con. The con is the limited control, limited buffer, and no live view while in 12 fps mode. They're just making sure that potential purchasers are aware of the downside of the advertized 12 fps mode.

The 8 fps mode is also limited by the buffer and by the lack of live view, compared to the equally priced 2-year old Canon 7D (which does 8 fps, and at high-quality jpg you can basically fill your card).

Realise that cons are just a list of things that the reviewer thinks people should be aware of. If a person bought this camera with no research, these are the things they *might* find annoying, and would perhaps have wished they'd known prior to purchasing.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

I'm a little confused. My last SLR was a film camera where liveview was a non-issue. What does one see in the viewfinder of a 1D mk4 while shooting 10 fps? It would seem one can't see much with the mirror flipping up and down every 1/10th sec.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

MikeRan

With all due respect to the author of the review, I would have listed the 12FPS mode (with it's caveat) as a Pro, not the caveat (tied to the 12FPS mode) as a con. That is all...

And I agree. I don't think you'd get much looking through a traditional SLR viewfinder shooting at 12FPS but I don't know since I've never got my hands on such a camera. (Even though there are so many to choose from...) (Sorry for the sarcasm... Couldn't help myself.)

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Tom Bird

i had an a77 with 16-55 f2.8 for 1 day:
cheap built, no raw converter at hand --> dull jpgs, noisy. no straight easy handling. always compared to nikon d7000. the nikon is better in nearly every important regard, not to say: it's a brillant cam for the price.
sold it.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

4 Canon/Nikon users liked this ^ post :-)

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Archer66

16-55 ?

I bet you are just trolling.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

BMWX5

Excellent 2.4 million-dot OLED EVF
Versatile full-time live view system
Very high-resolution 24MP CMOS sensor (but see caveats in 'cons', below)
Exceptionally 'deep' feature set including Auto HDR and Sweep Panorama
Class-leading video resolution
*Solid, well thought-out ergonomics*
Fast and responsive operation
Very good continuous shooting performance (particularly with UHS-I memory card)
Efficient SteadyShot INSIDE image stabilization system
In-camera GPS
Good battery life

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Jarda_Houdek

I guess someone introducing himself as BMWX5 cannot have valuable opinion.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

The problem is that your pentax 16-55/2.8 lens will not fit properly, so quality will be bad (Sony does not make one). I would have given you some credit were it not for the cheap built quality remark, its rock solid and the 2.8 kit is a solid lens as well. But enjoy your Nikon and your trolling.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Iso1975

I think people are forgetting one really important point: BATTERY LIFE!
Only about 500 pictures is nothing!! With my Pentax K10D I get much more than a 1000, and believe me that when shooting a concert or some kind of event, you will easily fill a 16Gb card with more than 900 pictures and keep shooting on a new one (at least I do). I can't imagine going out of batteries in the midle of an important event.
Idreamed about this camera for a long time, but when it came out, the IQ and short battery life were like an anti-climax. What a huge disapointment!

Oct 26, 2011permalink

dbo

But you know that an apple is different of a peach?

The K10D is non-Liveview with ovf. These two indications are making it logical that a battery with equal capacity would last longer in the K10.

If you are an event shooter where you are permanently using the camera, than buy the battery grip and/or some additional batteries.

I'm just a hobby photograph, and there are two things i always check begore leaving the house - having a charged spare battery and a spare memory card with me.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Iso1975

What you say is true, the A77 has differente consumption needs. Nevertheless it should have a matching battery that would deal with those needs. This is the same that happens with the Panasonic G3-an excelent camera but with a astonishing poor battery life. Nikons and canon's dslr's also match the 900-1000 shots per charge. It makes no sense for a top notch DSLR to have such a poor battery life. Besides, having an extra battery means more weight and time lost changing batteries.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Tom Bird

exactly: just playing around with the cam for about 4 hours, trying out this and that, drained the battery completely

Oct 26, 2011permalink

The fact that no other user has the same report and that you mentioned an non-existent Sony lens in another comment hints that you've never actually had the camera. Can you prove otherwise?

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Cy Cheze

A spare battery weighs less than a second lens. 4 hours will run down just about any battery. Frequent 10-second video shoots over a 20 minute period will cause some batteries to suffer a "cramp," even if enough charge remains to go on taking stills.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

I'm at 600 images, two movies at 1080p and battery is at 53%. Still it seems a bit more power hungry then the a700, so my 2 spares come in handy. The number given is using a standard test, if you use a proper flash (hvl58), not too uncommon for this class camera, you get more out of it.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Miwok

You guys must spend tone of time ediiting. I (very) rarely take 500 shots... per week!
But I'm from the time when each shot was costing money, so you was better to take care of your composition.

Oct 27, 2011*permalink

Angus Smythe

Through a serendipitous fluke, I was able to acquire a brand new USA retail packaged model Sony A-77 Friday night in NYC. It came with the v1.03 software update preinstalled. It is amazing, responsive, the glass is crazy sharp, and the updated software has this camera doing everything fast and like it should. No lag when switching between the eye finder and the screen. Seemingly noise free at 1600 iso. I'm a very happy camper. I can also affirm that Lightroom has an update to handle the A77's raw files and it works flawlessly.

Oct 26, 2011*permalink

gl2k

This is the ultimate semi-pro cam for studio sessions. Especially beauty and fashion photography. 24MP for a really low price.

But quite funny that a 2007 D300 does better overall when it comes to high speed shooting. 8 fps without any limitations at all.
The quirks with aperture and AF on the A77 is very strange.

Other than that ... well done Sony.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

The A77 would have been the ultimate semi-pro cam for studio sessions with a freely movable CDAF point and tethering support. Both are missing.

What limitations does the A77 have in 8 fps mode? How can you tell that the D300 performs better in AF-C when no-one ever bothered to test it? And by test, I'm referring to something like this: http://snurl.com/afctest ...not to subjective impressions.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

pruus

Good review! The A77 gets really good points. The RAW handling and the high ISO score is not good enough, yet. Perhaps an FW-update makes somethings better. But be real; if i want to shoot in the dark and i earn my money with it, sure i would choose a night beast. It's all about compromises. The A77 is a good camera, but not for all.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

At what print size and viewing distance the "A77 is not good enough" and another APS-C camera is?

Oct 26, 2011permalink

pruus

It's not good enough on it's outer limits: high iso.
So what? If you don't come in those areas, then it will be fine. i own a A77 just e few days and i find the most negative point is the bad, very bad manual! I upgraded from a A350 and exploring the A77.
I would like to make better A2 prints.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

What APS-C camera *is* good enough for those A2 prints? Have you verified it by printing the same test subject from the A77 and from that camera? The samples from dpreview.com and imaging-resource.com would allow you to get a very good picture regarding the actual print usability of the A77 versus the competition.

My hunch is that with proper processing and typical viewing distance (for A2), you won't be able to tell the difference.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

dbo

For prints up to A3 any newer APSC is good enough up to ISO1600. And as Prognathous mentioned, the proper viewing distance is important.
Good self test: Take a picture which annoyes you at 100% on a screen with high noise or unsharpness. Now step back to double distance to screen and watch again. Surprise...!!

@Pruus, if you'd be a night shooter, than you need something better than a high featured, high-pixel APSC. You choose your camera based on your needs. These Prosumer cameras like a77,c60D,nd7k are capable alrounders. You have to aware their weaknesses and work around them.

Oct 26, 2011permalink

Cy Cheze

Aren't the best night shots (stars, etc) done with relatively low ISO, but slow shutter speed?

Oct 26, 2011permalink