Trusted Reviews report on Alpha WITH sample shots

Meryl Arbing

Senior Member
Messages
1,835
Reaction score
66
Location
Toornto, CA
The village shot on page 10 was supposedly taken with a 100-400mm telephoto zoom, but I don't see that lens listed. Is it one Sony intends to come out with later in the year? Also, would that be the actual mm or eqivalent mm?

Rodger
 
How can it be 8? What outher camera can produce features like the alpa. If image qual. is 10 the features should be 12 or something!!

In general I think it was a bad review....even if I liked alot of the things I read:).
 
The village shot on page 10 was supposedly taken with a 100-400mm
telephoto zoom, but I don't see that lens listed. Is it one Sony
intends to come out with later in the year? Also, would that be
the actual mm or eqivalent mm?
They used Minolta lenses in the tests.

--
Misha
 
Maybe some pro features just like 1/16000s shutter, 1/500 f-sync, gps, wireless

and maybe some consumer features like laser af, live preview/hologram, rotatable LCD, video clips, radio, mp3 player, psp, movie player...
 
Point taken...but I think sss alone is a bigger feature than all the extra features comperable camera have.
 
The colours in the test shots are interesting. They just don't seem to punch - however that maybe due to the light and the dust. But the greens - they seem to remind me of Canon greens.
 
I agree with you. In fact I think you were "charitable".
I would describe them as "lousy" pictures.

I hope these are due to photographer error and poor web posting. Not a good show. Just awfull display.
 
I don't care if they give it the highest rating.
This is a masquarade review. Not worth reading. Just awfull.

Anyone interested in this camera should just wait a little for the most commonly trusted sites to post images.
 
Under the lighting conditions they were taken, I would say the images are outstanding. There wasn't a single blown highlight that I could see. Had I taken these shots with any of my Canon dSLR's I can about guarantee you that I would have had to underexpose or I would have had blown highlights. These were trying conditions for a camera and I'd say this one performed very well.

Lin
I agree with you. In fact I think you were "charitable".
I would describe them as "lousy" pictures.

I hope these are due to photographer error and poor web posting.
Not a good show. Just awfull display.
 
The problem is you do not know the lighting conditions. You were not there!
The camera may have operated properly, but the pictures are LOUSY.
There is nothing in this review to show how the camera can take GREAT pictures.

If a reviewer wants to show how a camera can overcome particularly difficult lighting conditions, I certainly would appreciate this. But this was not done here, except for flipping comments.

Show me some GREAT pictures first, then show me how a camera can overcome difficult lighting conditions.

This review is not doing Sony any favor. I don't expect any reviewer to do any favor to any camera manufacturer, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with a reviewer showing GREAT pictures taken under good light conditions. Then, if you want to show me something else, fine. But show me some GREAT pictures first.
 
The problem is you do not know the lighting conditions. You were
not there!
I wasn't there, but I know who "was there" and I trust his opinions completely. When he says the lighting conditions were brutal I would have to assume he is absolutely correct. I've been to Morocco during the same time of year many times and it would be difficult "not" to have brutal lighting conditions.
The camera may have operated properly, but the pictures are LOUSY.
There is nothing in this review to show how the camera can take
GREAT pictures.
There doesn't need to be. That wasn't the purpose. Photo Journalists were given production Alpha 100's to test under the conditions they normally shoot and their opinions were that the cameras performed very, very well. That's good enough for me.
If a reviewer wants to show how a camera can overcome particularly
difficult lighting conditions, I certainly would appreciate this.
But this was not done here, except for flipping comments.
Show me some GREAT pictures first, then show me how a camera can
overcome difficult lighting conditions.
This review is not doing Sony any favor. I don't expect any
reviewer to do any favor to any camera manufacturer, but there is
absolutely nothing wrong with a reviewer showing GREAT pictures
taken under good light conditions. Then, if you want to show me
something else, fine. But show me some GREAT pictures first.
Well, there are many more images from the cameras available and more coming every day. Reviewers at very trusted review sites are all singing the praises of the image quality, especially at lower ISO.

Best regards,

Lin
 
Sorry, but I don't buy anything you said.
The review was not written for "photo journalists".
This is a review of a camera.

And if it was written by a photo journalist for photo journalists then you are the judge since you are a photo journalist and you can decide.

I am not a photo journalist, but I have been in Morroco twice and took pictures there.

This was an amateurish review with flip comments, I will not comment on how the last image is "35 mm slide like" Wow!
 
Do I have to get back to posting his post? If you want to see how I am answering to him, just go to it. Are we in grade school here? Do I have to give you pointers to follow the conversation?
 
Sorry, but I don't buy anything you said.
The review was not written for "photo journalists".
This is a review of a camera.
And if it was written by a photo journalist for photo journalists
then you are the judge since you are a photo journalist and you can
decide.
I am not a photo journalist, but I have been in Morroco twice and
took pictures there.
This was an amateurish review with flip comments, I will not
comment on how the last image is "35 mm slide like" Wow!
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top