The camera also offers 27 shots continuous in Large/Fine JPEG mode
at 3 fps. This is only 73 shots less than the Nikon D80, and circa
200-500 shots less than the Alpha 100
From:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/nikond80/
Nikon D80 offers 23 JPEG or 6 RAW frames at 3 fps. Canon 400D
offers 27 JPEG or 10 RAW frames at 10 fps. Sony's continuous
shooting speed is all a lie, with speeds ranging from 1 to 2.8 fps.
Yes, the Nikon does 23 shots, that's why Phil's sound test shows 90 frames continuous at 3 fps, and that's why Nikon themselves state 100 frames. The 100 frames is a cut-off point they impose themselves. Sony's continuous shooting speed is just as much a lie as anyone else's - it is quoted, like Canon's, on the basis of a a shutter speed over 1/250th using manual exposure and focus.
I guess you read my own tests on the Alpha 100 posted here in other threads, but specifications need to be taken with a pinch of salt. It works both ways. Sony do not claim much by way of RAW sequence shooting, but in practice the situation is much better than the on-paper specs. Here's an extract from f2 Aug/Sept:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RAW yielded a continuous burst of 92 shots in 40 seconds, before the first signs of slowing down. Again, this is not 3fps – it’s 2.3fps – but AF was enabled, and watching the attached lens, was operating between frames. SSS anti-shake was turned off. The buffer was cleared in under 2 seconds from taking my finger off the shutter, wondering just how fast the camera would continue. A second test with a more detailed view yielded 33 frames before slowing down, and a third test with AF turned off ran close to 3fps for a similar yield.
In JPEG Large Fine mode, the A100 said the 1Gb card would shoot around 240 images. In fact the JPEGs compressed down to 1.9Mb and the card filled up 515 shots – three frames short of totally full, with 6.4Mb to spare, but the A100 stopped and brought up a message on the menu screen saying ‘The camera is overheating, allow to cool down before continuing’…
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(that's why Nikon force the D80 to cut out at 100 frames, I suspect)
Another thing, both Nikon D80 and Canon 400D will have usable ISO
800 and 1600 images, unlike the Sony.
Anything else you want to compare?
I'll have plenty of opportunity as I'm down on Canon's list as of half an hour ago, already on Nikon's and just hope they have review samples available in 2 weeks as expected. Sony has not released all its review samples in the UK. Having bought a 'first delivery' A100, I'm keen to see whether the 'press kit' body has improved high ISO noise.
ISO 800 is fully usable, it's only 1600 which is an issue. I've been using 800 a bit more, and find that ACR 3.4 with max colour noise reduction and some luminance noise reduction works well. It's certainly no worse than, for example, a Canon 300D file at 800.
Full size:
http://www.pbase.com/davidkilpatrick/image/65679469
Fuji today announced higher sharpness in the their 9600 replacement for the 9500, together with Hyperutility bundled, to enable users to shoot raw and extract more info from the 1600 speed files (which are excellent, but heavily mushed in JPEG form). Olympus announced a 10 megapixel mju yesterday. This story of high megapixel count and high ISOs is going to run and run.
David
