pop photo got it right, canikon should be scared of the a77

This has been one of the more interesting comparisons that I have seen, but I do not trust this comparison tool. For out of camera jpegs it might be worthy, but there are just too many factors that go into converting images to make these tools reliable. I think at the end of the day we will see that the a77 is a great camera with compromises that make it the best for some and not so good for others. That's kind of how it goes with technology when improvements become small steps like we see now. The difference between manufacturers is small enough to allow us to see what we want to see. I am more interested in improvements to AF speed, accuracy, and tracking as well as reliability of the exposure. IMHO, improvements are still coming at a faster pace than is IQ.
--
Zeiss taste...Beercan budget!

mzd said:

Well, these guys are using Canon 500/4, 400/2.8, 600/4, Nikkor 400/2.8, 500/4 and 600/4. I do not know any third party that makes better lenses that these top of the line from Canon and Nikon. We are shooting in conditions were high ISO must be clean, lenses must be fast and VR must work well. The guys that had Sigmas got Canon and Nikon top of the line.
--

Click to expand...

Ok but I will never be able to spend the kind of money that those lenses cost so for old sods like me it's a moot point.

--
Tom

Look at the picture, not the pixels

http://www.flickr.com/photos/25301400@N00/

mzd said:

mzd said:

mzd said:

Last weekend I was taking bird pictures with about 20 other guys and we talked gears, everyone agreed that the a77 was an attractive camera for birding, but the main issue was no lens to put on it.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Well, these guys are using Canon 500/4, 400/2.8, 600/4, Nikkor 400/2.8, 500/4 and 600/4. We are shooting in conditions were high ISO must be clean, lenses must be fast and VR must work well.

Click to expand...

If a person is willing to buy used lenses and not worry about warranties or breakage, the Minolta APO prime series of lenses are spectacular bird lenses, covering just those ranges you mention - 300mm F2.8, 300mm F4, 400mm F4.5, and 600mm F4 - and an excellent pair of high-end matched APO II TCs. They're built like tanks, and all mechanical/screw drive with very hardy bits - so rarely experience problems and can take abuse. I often shoot among many birders with similar lenses, and my Minolta lens fits in just fine, and my camera can handle the high ISO fine as well - and the stabilization in body performs wonderfully even with the long focals. I would have loved to see the A77 also as capable at 3200+, but at least initially it just seems tuned much better to work at the lower ISOs with excellent resolution.

I fully accept the argument some may raise about not wanting to buy used, uncovered or warrantied lenses, and would love to see Sony bring all of these lenses from Minolta back to life, alongside the 500mm F4 which I'd love to see.

--
Justin
galleries: http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg

tbcass said:

tbcass said:

Well, these guys are using Canon 500/4, 400/2.8, 600/4, Nikkor 400/2.8, 500/4 and 600/4. I do not know any third party that makes better lenses that these top of the line from Canon and Nikon. We are shooting in conditions were high ISO must be clean, lenses must be fast and VR must work well. The guys that had Sigmas got Canon and Nikon top of the line.
--

Click to expand...

Ok but I will never be able to spend the kind of money that those lenses cost so for old sods like me it's a moot point.

--
Tom

Look at the picture, not the pixels

http://www.flickr.com/photos/25301400@N00/

Click to expand...

You're right but you should always remember that there are plenty of people that do buy these type of lenses. And that these guys will always go Nikon or Canon.
--

Madness is when you start talking about the a77 EVF lag but you've never used the camera once.

zackiedawg said:

mzd said:

zackiedawg said:

zackiedawg said:

Last weekend I was taking bird pictures with about 20 other guys and we talked gears, everyone agreed that the a77 was an attractive camera for birding, but the main issue was no lens to put on it.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Well, these guys are using Canon 500/4, 400/2.8, 600/4, Nikkor 400/2.8, 500/4 and 600/4. We are shooting in conditions were high ISO must be clean, lenses must be fast and VR must work well.

Click to expand...

If a person is willing to buy used lenses and not worry about warranties or breakage, the Minolta APO prime series of lenses are spectacular bird lenses, covering just those ranges you mention - 300mm F2.8, 300mm F4, 400mm F4.5, and 600mm F4 - and an excellent pair of high-end matched APO II TCs. They're built like tanks, and all mechanical/screw drive with very hardy bits - so rarely experience problems and can take abuse. I often shoot among many birders with similar lenses, and my Minolta lens fits in just fine, and my camera can handle the high ISO fine as well - and the stabilization in body performs wonderfully even with the long focals. I would have loved to see the A77 also as capable at 3200+, but at least initially it just seems tuned much better to work at the lower ISOs with excellent resolution.

I fully accept the argument some may raise about not wanting to buy used, uncovered or warrantied lenses, and would love to see Sony bring all of these lenses from Minolta back to life, alongside the 500mm F4 which I'd love to see.

--
Justin
galleries: http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg

Click to expand...

The thing is that it is easier to go to buy a Nikon or Canon lens than the Minolta ones. These are not available everywhere. It is really hard to find them. Most of the guys I know are not keen on using TC's. And the Minolta 600 is bigger and heavier. The Canon users I talked to recently are already waiting for the lighter new generation of 500 and 600 lenses. So in this area Sony will not be able to match Nikon and Canon. So saying that the a77 is going to kill Canikon is just a loud dream. It ain't going to happen. And specially not with one camera.
--

Madness is when you start talking about the a77 EVF lag but you've never used the camera once.

I don't doubt that but compared to the market as a whole those types of lenses make up a very tiny portion. Since Sony's market share is so much smaller to begin with it would mean such lenses would lose money for them. You won't see those expensive lenses until Sony's market share grows. Introducing such a lens now will not result in increased camera sales.

--
Tom

Look at the picture, not the pixels

http://www.flickr.com/photos/25301400@N00/

The Nikon is more than capable with a little sharpening. Nikon dslr settings tend to be ligh on sharpening, but they take it well. Here is the crop from the D7k sharpened, it shows more detail than the sony in your post.

I have no doubt that such lenses will be a loss for Sony as they are not so many Alpha owners that would buy them. There are more Canon and Nikon owners that will buy them and do buy them because these two brands customers base is bigger than Sony's. And also most of the guys into birding and wildlife pictures where long telephoto lenses are required use Canon and/or Nikon.

And going back to the point of the a77 going to kill Canikon, it is just a dream.
--

Madness is when you start talking about the a77 EVF lag but you've never used the camera once.

sandy b said:

The Nikon is more than capable with a little sharpening. Nikon dslr settings tend to be ligh on sharpening, but they take it well. Here is the crop from the D7k sharpened, it shows more detail than the sony in your post.

Click to expand...

Are you sure about that?





BTW did you sharpen the dpr ooc jpeg or go from raw or acr jpeg with that shot?
--
IQ is not judged exclusively by high iso noise performance

sandy b said:

The Nikon is more than capable with a little sharpening. Nikon dslr settings tend to be light on sharpening, but they take it well. Here is the crop from the D7k sharpened, it shows more detail than the sony in your post.

Click to expand...

As would the A77 if that was sharpened further...this is a comparison of out of camera jpegs at default settings...what's your point. The OP is just saying that (at last) Sony seem to also have a great jpeg engine...and now with the new ACR and Lightroom updates we can see what can be done with A77 RAWs too. I've downloaded all the DPR RAWs and am very impressed with how they process.

mzd said:

And going back to the point of the a77 going to kill Canikon, it is just a dream.
--

Click to expand...

Of course no one camera can do that. It will take a long sustained effort by Sony to get to Canikon status but don't bet against it. I can remember when Minolta and Pentax outsold Canon and Nikon was the professional choice.
--
Tom

Look at the picture, not the pixels

http://www.flickr.com/photos/25301400@N00/

Hi Mike, it was converted from raw in PS. Increased sharpening to 30 and pushed contrast a small bit.

Mike said nothing about OOC jpgs, he was talking about IQ. I am impressed with the A77 too, as my posts indicate. I am not impressed with mikes statements like "but if it wipes the floor with the D7000 and 7D up to and including at least iso1600 then I'm happy. And anyone who makes the claim that the 7d and d700 are better at high iso better have a good explanation for these shots."

fact is, according to DXO and all samples posted here, the 16 mp chip is better at high ISO, without a doubt. How much so remains to be seen. IMO, it is more than made up for by the resolution increase at lower ISO. That resolution increase disappears at higher ISO, hence my post to rebut mikes assertion that the 24 mp wipes the floor with the 16 mp sensor. It certainly does not.

sandy b said:

Hi Mike, it was converted from raw in PS. Increased sharpening to 30 and pushed contrast a small bit.

Click to expand...

That's cheating! I was exclusively comparing OOC jpegs, since the RAW converted jpegs for the A77 are based on an alpha version of ACR and SUCK .

Check like for like OOC jpegs as I did and you see the D7000 is mullered by the A77 at iso3200. You can cry in your cornflakes all you like, but it doesn't change this simple observation.
--
IQ is not judged exclusively by high iso noise performance

sandy b said:

Mike said nothing about OOC jpgs, he was talking about IQ. I am impressed with the A77 too, as my posts indicate. I am not impressed with mikes statements like "but if it wipes the floor with the D7000 and 7D up to and including at least iso1600 then I'm happy. And anyone who makes the claim that the 7d and d700 are better at high iso better have a good explanation for these shots."

fact is, according to DXO and all samples posted here, the 16 mp chip is better at high ISO, without a doubt. How much so remains to be seen. IMO, it is more than made up for by the resolution increase at lower ISO. That resolution increase disappears at higher ISO, hence my post to rebut mikes assertion that the 24 mp wipes the floor with the 16 mp sensor. It certainly does not.

Click to expand...

I expressly used ooc jpegs in my OP, you're confused. At this point the DPR raw conversions of the A77 are totally unindicative of the true IQ of the A77 so I didn't use them.

Nikon's dirty little secret is that they use terrible smeared NR in high iso OOC jpegs, and the A77 whups its little but ...

Compare OOC jpegs, thats what this thread is about, no raw conversions.

Final point, irony is most nikon users probably shoot jpeg and think the smeared out details are the best thing you can get in IQ... I'll be posting an example shortly on their forums to given them a little eye opener on what the score really is. The truth will out!

--
IQ is not judged exclusively by high iso noise performance

Not a dream...it is happening but it might take a while

"Canon and Nikon’s combined share of the Japanese market has fallen by 35 percent , while Sony’s share has doubled , according to estimates at research firm BCN Inc.'

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-07/canon-clinging-to-mirrors-means-opportunity-for-sony-cameras.html

tbcass said:

mzd said:

And going back to the point of the a77 going to kill Canikon, it is just a dream.
--

Click to expand...

Of course no one camera can do that. It will take a long sustained effort by Sony to get to Canikon status but don't bet against it. I can remember when Minolta and Pentax outsold Canon and Nikon was the professional choice.
--
Tom

Look at the picture, not the pixels

http://www.flickr.com/photos/25301400@N00/

Click to expand...

You didnt say anything about OOC jpgs in your initial post. and anyway, if you turn up the default sharpening for OOC jpgs, the results are very close to the raw.

Where do you mention OOC jpgs? At any rate crank the default sharpening up, turn off NR (which can be done with D7k, unlike the A77), and it pretty closely matches the raw jpg conversion. How do I know this? I have one.

"Many people continue with the myth that the canon 7d and nikon d7000 high iso is better than the A77; this is simply not true as the picture below shows. It's from the dpr comparometer, jpeg iso1600.

You can see great detail in the A77 shot, particularly under the chin, detail which is utterly missing from the 7d and d7000. How anyone can look at this and conclude anythin other than the a77 has superior IQ to these cameras is beyond me, yet we see this time and time again. It's simply not the case, the A77 is killing the canikon cameras.

Secondly look at the 5n; great detail, but not as fine as the A77; the resolution is hlding up at high iso, an observation also made by popphoto: 2620 lines at iso1600 compared with 2720 at iso100. The resolving power of the A77 at iso1600 is higher than the canon 7d at iso 100, and it shows...

I was pretty worried about the performance of the A77, but if it wipes the floor with the D7000 and 7D up to and including at least iso1600 then I'm happy. And anyone who makes the claim that the 7d and d700 are better at high iso better have a good explanation for these shots.

sandy b said:

Where do you mention OOC jpgs?

Click to expand...

sandy b said:

sandy b said:

"Many people continue with the myth that the canon 7d and nikon d7000 high iso is better than the A77; this is simply not true as the picture below shows. It's from the dpr comparometer, jpeg iso1600.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

it might be a wake-up call, and that's good for the entire industry. C&N still hold some major advantages for photographers who want to have more control over their photography, IMO, not even including the fact that they're supported by a wealth of third-party options ... but Sony's definitely more aggressive - and they have to be.

--
Rich

http://philosurfer.zenfolio.com/