I never mentioned the D3X and never said it's high ISO output is better than the a900
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
A77 real info please
- Thread starter horseracingphoto
- Start date
Nordstjernen
Veteran Member
Fact is that real life results from cameras in the same league from different makers doesn't differ that much. An image that is acceptable with the best camera, will also be acceptable with the worst of the cameras.
It is truly refreshing to see a 1/2 dozen responders provide sincere, objective information to someone who is trying to decide what is best for his needs.
On the other hand I suspect the op can see through the typical reponses that go something like this:
The A65/A77 are as good or better than any camera on the market. All you have to do is:
1) Shoot raw, and with the aid of several different converters and post processors, you will be able get comparable results.
2) Give up on what really works, and just make adjustments for the new technology , you'll get used to it.
3) Use noise reduction software and/or downsample the image. You will get results as good as that low noise competitor.
p.s. I own an A65, and all my other gear is Sony as well.
On the other hand I suspect the op can see through the typical reponses that go something like this:
The A65/A77 are as good or better than any camera on the market. All you have to do is:
1) Shoot raw, and with the aid of several different converters and post processors, you will be able get comparable results.
2) Give up on what really works, and just make adjustments for the new technology , you'll get used to it.
3) Use noise reduction software and/or downsample the image. You will get results as good as that low noise competitor.
p.s. I own an A65, and all my other gear is Sony as well.
Nordstjernen
Veteran Member
Nobody have claimed anything like this here.
Actually, I have never seen any postulating something like this on the entire forum.
William Porter
Senior Member
I'm a bit surprised by this remark. I thought that sports were precisely the sort of thing that the A77 and A65 were supposed to be good at, due to the super-responsive shutter, good focusing and super FPS rate. If the A77 isn't great for motion sports, what ARE its strengths?
Will
Maybe not in those exact words Nord, but without a doubt that is the mindset of a number of people on this forum.
I'll be the first to admit, I am one of those people who view the glass half empty rather than half full when it come to the A77/A65, but I don't want my new cameras to be inferior and more work than my old ones.
Gavin 11
Senior Member
Nord come one , yes they have and in bucket loads!
--
"When I warned [the French] that Britain would fight on alone, whatever they did, their Generals told their Prime Minister and his divided cabinet: 'In three weeks, England will have her neck wrung like a chicken.
"Some chicken....Some neck!
Gavin 11
Senior Member
Yes all I have seen on this forum regarding the JPEG engine and high ISO performance of the A-77 is , don't pixel peep and shoot at 12MP! ;-)
--
"When I warned [the French] that Britain would fight on alone, whatever they did, their Generals told their Prime Minister and his divided cabinet: 'In three weeks, England will have her neck wrung like a chicken.
"Some chicken....Some neck!
Nordstjernen
Veteran Member
So those who agree with you are objective, and others are exaggerating their point of view? Lol!
So this is what people like me should think about the SLT/EVF cameras to be objective?
I would rather appreciate different point of view if I should make up my mind about a new camera. ;-)
Nordstjernen
Veteran Member
Oh, don't spoil this now when I am arguing a bit over the top ...
Gavin 11
Senior Member
Nord I have a question for you.Oh, don't spoil this now when I am arguing a bit over the top ...
I use an EOS 5D for studio work and personally own a A-700, is it ok for me to pixel peep with the EOS 5D to check critical focus , but apparently it's not allowed on the A-77 , why is that ? ;-)
PS: when being sarcastic add a ;-)
--
"When I warned [the French] that Britain would fight on alone, whatever they did, their Generals told their Prime Minister and his divided cabinet: 'In three weeks, England will have her neck wrung like a chicken.
"Some chicken....Some neck!
sye46
Senior Member
I'm really curious if the people suggesting the 7D actually used or own both cameras?
TrojMacReady
Veteran Member
There's a few that switched from the 7D to A77. Let's see if Gary joins the discussion as he also has extensive experience with both and has used the A77 under floodlight conditions while panning sports.
Nordstjernen
Veteran Member
Go ahead, but don't tell anybody! ;-)
Sure! ;-) ;-) ;-)
;-) ... just practising!Gavin 11
Senior Member
Good lad, just waiting for the fan boys to engage! ;-)Go ahead, but don't tell anybody! ;-)
Sure! ;-) ;-) ;-)
--
"When I warned [the French] that Britain would fight on alone, whatever they did, their Generals told their Prime Minister and his divided cabinet: 'In three weeks, England will have her neck wrung like a chicken.
"Some chicken....Some neck!
TrojMacReady
Veteran Member
Amateur Sony Shooter
Veteran Member
I think you made the right call. I do some wildlife/birding after I tested A65 (same image quality and viewfinder, but less AF system than A77) I bought 7D instead. I have to say 7D offer very fast, reliable AF tracking than anything I have used from Sony (I have used 4 different bodies).
Jim Funston
Senior Member
Will, the a77 has plenty of strong points. Sports/action is one of them but not in low light. Daylight tennis, baseball, football, etc.... No problem. If the light is such you are having to shoot at 1600 ISP or higher then I am sure there are better choices out there.
I bought my a77 for wildlife and with a 24 mp crop sensor it gives me dirt cheap additional reach with my 70-400G while still maintaining good IQ. For this it works great. I also have been doing more landscapes with this camera at 50 ISP with what I feel is exceptional results ( and this was not what I wanted the a77 for but find I am using it more and more for it rather than my NEX and legacy glass). I carry 3 cameras in my field kit. A NEX5 with a complement of legacy glass, a a33, and a a77 with 7 alpha lenses. I am primarily a land and seascape photog shooting wildlife I may happen upon along the way. Between the three cameras I have all my bases covered for what I usually encounter afield. The a77 took the place of my KM7D and it has done nothing but impress me in the areas I bought it for.
I bought my a77 for wildlife and with a 24 mp crop sensor it gives me dirt cheap additional reach with my 70-400G while still maintaining good IQ. For this it works great. I also have been doing more landscapes with this camera at 50 ISP with what I feel is exceptional results ( and this was not what I wanted the a77 for but find I am using it more and more for it rather than my NEX and legacy glass). I carry 3 cameras in my field kit. A NEX5 with a complement of legacy glass, a a33, and a a77 with 7 alpha lenses. I am primarily a land and seascape photog shooting wildlife I may happen upon along the way. Between the three cameras I have all my bases covered for what I usually encounter afield. The a77 took the place of my KM7D and it has done nothing but impress me in the areas I bought it for.
Hughesnet
Senior Member
The opinions of the above post are rather inflated. Deafening above 1600? Hardly. Unusable tracking? Hardly.
garykohs
Veteran Member
Let me also say that I appreciate the honest comments most have posted on this thread. That's a lot different from what you would get in a similar thread on a Canon forum.
Here's my take. At ISO 2,000 there's really no difference between the A77 and the Canon 7D in either noise or in resolution - this is about where the A77's extra resolution meets the extra noise reduction, even in raw. It's so close that it is a virtual tie.
What won't be the same is the AF performance. Depending on the lens you may well see faster focus acquisition with the Canon - most of the Canon lenses are just faster. Once focus is acquired the Sony will track focus with greater consistency across a burst, assuming a lens that can keep up.
I'm confident that the OP will be better served with the A77 than with the 7D at this ISO. Do I think the difference is worth changing systems to get the A77? No, I don't.
If the OP does decide to get the A77 and invest in some good alpha mount glass I'm confident that the A77 will be his camera of choice while shooting in these circumstances.
I'd use my A77 over my Canon 1D4 for these pictures.
Gary
Here's my take. At ISO 2,000 there's really no difference between the A77 and the Canon 7D in either noise or in resolution - this is about where the A77's extra resolution meets the extra noise reduction, even in raw. It's so close that it is a virtual tie.
What won't be the same is the AF performance. Depending on the lens you may well see faster focus acquisition with the Canon - most of the Canon lenses are just faster. Once focus is acquired the Sony will track focus with greater consistency across a burst, assuming a lens that can keep up.
I'm confident that the OP will be better served with the A77 than with the 7D at this ISO. Do I think the difference is worth changing systems to get the A77? No, I don't.
If the OP does decide to get the A77 and invest in some good alpha mount glass I'm confident that the A77 will be his camera of choice while shooting in these circumstances.
I'd use my A77 over my Canon 1D4 for these pictures.
--
Gary
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum