Please if some owner of A5xx camera can tell me about AF accuracy on this new models. A200 and A700 had some serious AF issues (maybe also other Alpha models but i didn't tried them). What's happening when you use wide to medium wide lens (12-28mm), large aperture and you need to focus on some subject which is not very large. Does new models mis focus so often like older models?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Are A5xx cameras really "poorly featured"
- Thread starter Danel
- Start date
Danel
Senior Member
You think. Based on what? I'm not saying the D40 is faster or not because I don't know for sure. I doubt you do either, but that won't stop you from proclaiming it as a fact if it supports your desire to bash anything that isn't an A700.
I'll bet a lot more people bought the 40D than bought the A700. There, by your reasoning I just proved that the 40D is MUCH better than the A700. All YOU need to do is research the sales figures. Apparently, this type of reasoning makes sense to you, somehow.
The truth is that the D90 is much better in some ways and the A5xx cameras are much better in others. I get that this type of concept is hard for you to get your head around with your arrogant single approach thinking.
People who respond to you in kind are all either children of fools. You must get tired carrying that huge ego around.
Okay, and all of the other camera companies are in business strictly for altruistic reasons, right? Look, I understand that you are disappointed to not receive exactly what you wanted when you wanted it. Some times life works that way. You've got three choices, be patient and hope Sony gives you what you want, sell off your Sony stuff and go with someone else who will give you what you want, or try to make yourself feel better by being ridiculing users of the new Sony cameras who are having fun with them. Too bad you've chosen the last option.
SonyandShare
Active member
Don't even bother with barry, he's a miserly troll on a mission.. his argument is a logical fallacy and has been picked apart time and time again..
barry's argument can be used to make the point that despite the fact nikon and canon are huge they still do not offer a complete solution (with all the options he wants plus decent liveview) so where he can use the argument of sales volume to say live view isn't that important it still doesn't mitigate the fact that canon and nikon do not have a solution... which is as much as a mistake on their part as omitting features on models is a problem for sony.
barry's argument can be used to make the point that despite the fact nikon and canon are huge they still do not offer a complete solution (with all the options he wants plus decent liveview) so where he can use the argument of sales volume to say live view isn't that important it still doesn't mitigate the fact that canon and nikon do not have a solution... which is as much as a mistake on their part as omitting features on models is a problem for sony.
SonyandShare
Active member
So basically, all the features that are better than others are irrelevant and only the features you miss are important? give us a break.
It is plain that you are not the analog for the broad DSLR market, otherwise people would actually give a crap about the things you say.
SonyandShare
Active member
However, for a different photographer, the lack of MLU, DOF and other features might be peripHeral to the features included in this model.
What I am seeing here is a difference in application. Why should your photography take precedence over anothers? Why should anybodies? It is a flawed argument to say that simply because you find a feature good or bad means it actually is.
which is fine, but you insinuate with your phraseology that those who don't agree with you are not worthy of a real opinion..
SonyandShare
Active member
yet have better high ISO performance which might be of importance if you shoot a lot in low light?
Spot on - Amirk was just one of his several previous aliases
Jim, yes his most recent name was Amirk. His hatred of the A700 gives him away everytime he comes back with a different name. Beakydave is very good at spotting him quickly.
You used to be on here with a different name, didn't you? I seem to remember a poster here who made similarly inane comments before he disappeared.You seem to care a lot since you are whining to him that he should have bought an A700 instead of "A550." He also said that he owns D90, too, by the way.
I know. It says I am smart
Are you that guy? You sure sound like him.
Since you don't own A700 either, your hatred of A700 must mean you are Amirk twin brother then?
If I was Amirk's twin, I would sue my parents for defamation of character. I don't hate the A700. I just don't have a need at this time for it. I update cameras when I feel my skills warrant the change.
Danel
Senior Member
Agreed. The above are just software options and there is really no reason not to have them.
No big deal on dropping 1 of the creative styles, at least not to me.
Yeah, well the big things for me are the two LV AF options, fast fps, greatly improved high ISO performance, in camera hdr, A700 level DRO, the fact you can shoot all day because of the battery life, a somewhat better OVF, speedy auto focus and of course the body based stabilization system. I'm also really liking the IQ I'm getting from the camera. To me that is always number one. Perhaps the most telling thing about these cameras is every user that I have seen who has one seems to just love it. They are a different type of camera that much is certain. I do agree with what you have said before that Sony does need a more traditional Sub $1000 DSLR to complement these models.
Strangely, with these models they seem to be behind by choice in that dept. I have no doubt that they could have included almost all of the traditional features you and others would have wanted, plus the above list, for maybe a grand total of $50 extra. They just chose not to. It is a bit of a head scratcher to say the least.
Not a head scratcher really. Sony probably didn't want A5xx to compete against upcoming A700 replacement. If you add Quick Navi, MLU, DOF, to A550, the incentive to pay $500 extra for A750 would have been much lower.
Why bother hiding your identity?
The answer is obvious, really - DPR keeps banning him, requiring new IDs. They're dragging their heels over 'Tuputam', but it's only a matter of time ........
vaughanbb
Leading Member
Thats the reason....all manufacturers do this, its very common in the car industry, sometimes base models lack things like cruise control, or a line in for an ipod, it would cost nothing to include them, but they need you to have an incentive to buy up.....its obvious really
--
The photographer formerly known as Kodakuser
Sony A330/kit lens samples here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/35161694@N03/sets/72157622495084386/
Yes, indeed. IQ on higher models is not really better than lower models (take for example $700 D5000 vs $1800 D300), so the manufacturers need to find other incentives. Apparently Sony has decided to do it by taking away MLU, Dof preview, Quick Navi, ISO 100, program shift, etc. In three months there will be an A700 replacement (and I am 90% certain it will have the same 14 MP sensor), with these and other missing features. Those who want these "features" will pay extra $500 to get it, along with weather sealing and metal body (I won't).
Or maybe Sony might sweeten the new A7xx by improving smeary jpegs, add video, and come up with new improved AF too. I might be interested then.
Please, if somebody knows something about AF accuracy in new Alpha models? I would really like to know cause this was main reason I didn't buy A700 although it had such a nice other features. If the same AF issue shares A5xx models too than Sony need to do something about this.
Maybe this sounds like trolling but It's not. I use both Sony and Nikon cameras and although Alphas have some advantages what's most important is how many OOF (out of focus) images I have at the end of the day. Other things like more or less noise are not so important, if metering screws this can also be checked on camera, but critical sharpness is hard to see without coming home and checking it at bigger screen.
Maybe this sounds like trolling but It's not. I use both Sony and Nikon cameras and although Alphas have some advantages what's most important is how many OOF (out of focus) images I have at the end of the day. Other things like more or less noise are not so important, if metering screws this can also be checked on camera, but critical sharpness is hard to see without coming home and checking it at bigger screen.
Sony claims AF is faster and more accurate than lower A2xx/A3xx models. In comparison to A700/A900, there was already a thread on this topic and we had contradictory opinions, see
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1037&message=33777402
junMel
Leading Member
I believe that if Sony badged it as A400, everyone would fall dead silent.
Thank you, but that topic was about AF tracking speed accuracy. What I'm interested is AF accuracy when you are using less than 35mm lens range and need to focus on still subject which is not big enough to occupy whole central metering area. A200 and A700 have very huge problems to focus properly in such circumstances. A100 was good and didn't share same AF problem. It would be nice to see if Sony did something in newest models.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum