I can't speak for what you have seen. But so far you have claimed 36 MB for A77, which I hope you have seen?
Neither is my A55, which produces 16MB RAW and A77 produces 24MB RAW (it would produce 36MB RAW if it weren't cRAW).
And if you've really seen smaller than 43-44MB file out of A99, chances are, you have that option. Or, the RAW you may have seen might be out of crop mode.
The devil is in the details.
Is data transfer rate that selective, or applies at one place, but not the other? But, you could stick with buffer size and the rate at which it will clear. Unless one believes in virtually limitless rate.
You don't have to see it, you can calculate how much data is being sent to the processing chip from the imaging sensor for the image alone. The calculations (as shown before via a formula) are very straight forward. It is not that difficult to understand and figure it out.
Then the A55 is using a compressed RAW as its final output as well. It's uncompressed size that it is receiving from the sensor to the processing chip is 24MB. So what's your point?
If you go here, you can see that others are reporting the A99's file size as around 24MB:
Care to elaborate on what element we are missing here?
I asked that same question to EinsteinsGhost to figure out what he is talking about and per him it is everything.
You said this earlier: "If you are not doing the math, then you must have failed a lot of math classes."
THAT is my point, which is also applicable to A77, but NOT to A99.
Why do you think that is a credible source? For that matter, where exactly this number get pulled from?
Not necessarily. And even if were were to assume it is cRAW, it won't be less than (or even equal to) cRAW out of A77. No?
12-bit versus 14-bit
Clearly that is evident on your part. You are failing because you don't read the instructions. You are failing because you don't show your work. You are failing because you can't even do basic arithmetic.You said this earlier: "If you are not doing the math, then you must have failed a lot of math classes."
Let me add to it... doing the math doesn't guarantee a passing grade.
That is pure BS. A77 uncompressed is around 36MB. A99 is around 42MB uncompressed. It has been explained before but you can't seem to comprehend that. Compressed and the actual output of the files for the A77 are around 24MB and the A99 is also around 24-25MB. Both of these have been clearly stated before. I have never compared a compressed RAW file to an uncompressed RAW file. That is all on you.
I have even done just that and you flat out think it is bunk. I have compared its compressed RAW file size of 24MB (it's output file size) to that of the A99's output file size (which is also compressed) and comes to around 24-25MB in size. You dismissed it and then accuse me of pretty much making up numbers and unfairly comparing two different types of files. Again, I never did such a thing. But you are very guilty of doing that and pointing the finger.
1) At this point, I trust them more than I trust you.
14-bit can be compressed as well.
Where did we compare RAW directly against cRAW and assume it was an equal comparison? I have compared RAW sizes to RAW sizes and cRAW to cRAW. I have shown you...no, I have practically drawn a path in for you with Crayola crayons on even how to calculate RAW. It isn't math I made up, it is fact. A 5 second Google search will show the same results, and if you look close enough can find education articles about RAW and how to calculate it.
They have already proved it, so yes.
No, again your words. The A77 uncompressed is equivalent to 36MB of data being sent to the processing chip. The A99 it is around 42MB of uncompressed data. The final output for both is around 24MB for the A77 and around 24-25MB for the A99. Compression is a wonderous thing, isn't it?
Could there be other options than 300 or limitless ?
Sometimes my cynical side wonders if industry/marketing is not just playing a game with consumers. Do they always give us the best they have at the time, or do they give us just enough to compete/win in the market place, leaving headroom for the next iteration which they pretty much have in the bag already, and maintaining the desired profit margin?
Excuses. The D7k is 14 bit, so is the K5, and the K5 is 7fps. A77 is 24mp and @ 12fps. The pixels on the D4 are much bigger than the a99, and D4 is 11fps. The real reason is sony limited the a99, period. Sony plays games with camera features, same reason (if my information is correct) the a57 has video focus peaking and the others do not. It's a ploy to sell multiple cameras to each person in order to get all things. If they smacked 14fps in the a99, you wouldn't need to buy an a77 for sports, and a99 for landscape.
Clearly that is evident on your part. You are failing because you don't read the instructions. You are failing because you don't show your work. You are failing because you can't even do basic arithmetic.You said this earlier: "If you are not doing the math, then you must have failed a lot of math classes."
Let me add to it... doing the math doesn't guarantee a passing grade.
That is pure BS. A77 uncompressed is around 36MB. A99 is around 42MB uncompressed. It has been explained before but you can't seem to comprehend that. Compressed and the actual output of the files for the A77 are around 24MB and the A99 is also around 24-25MB. Both of these have been clearly stated before. I have never compared a compressed RAW file to an uncompressed RAW file. That is all on you.
It is funny how you accept my math for the A99 raw files being around 42MB (no one has mentioned that as a size of the actual file) yet you refute my math for everything else because it doesn't fit your idea. That actual output files are around 24-25MB in size. Aside from the 14-bit vs 12-bit, the sensors are the same resolution. Did you honestly think the files would grow by leaps and bounds?
I have even done just that and you flat out think it is bunk. I have compared its compressed RAW file size of 24MB (it's output file size) to that of the A99's output file size (which is also compressed) and comes to around 24-25MB in size. You dismissed it and then accuse me of pretty much making up numbers and unfairly comparing two different types of files. Again, I never did such a thing. But you are very guilty of doing that and pointing the finger.
1) At this point, I trust them more than I trust you.
2) It matches closely to the A99 RAW file sizes I have seen.
3) It matches the A99 RAW file sizes posted here:
http://www.quesabesde.com/noticias/sony-a99-analisis-fotos-muestras,1_9088
Check it out for yourself before you claim I am wrong again. But if you have a sucky connection, be prepared to wait awhile. The files I have downloaded come in at about 24.1MB a piece for the A99.
14-bit can be compressed as well.
Where did we compare RAW directly against cRAW and assume it was an equal comparison? I have compared RAW sizes to RAW sizes and cRAW to cRAW. I have shown you...no, I have practically drawn a path in for you with Crayola crayons on even how to calculate RAW. It isn't math I made up, it is fact. A 5 second Google search will show the same results, and if you look close enough can find education articles about RAW and how to calculate it.
They have already proved it, so yes.
No, again your words. The A77 uncompressed is equivalent to 36MB of data being sent to the processing chip. The A99 it is around 42MB of uncompressed data. The final output for both is around 24MB for the A77 and around 24-25MB for the A99. Compression is a wonderous thing, isn't it?
I have been doing my best to be on my best behavior, but you seriously have no clue. You read only what you want and pick stuff here and there and combine it to how you see fit. You take every bit of information I give you and you twist it into something that is just incorrect gibberish.
Educate yourself, provide proof, don't twist other people's words.
--
Paul
Are you a Jimmy Buffet fan?
You've got to be kidding me, right? No...no, seriously. This is just some cruel joke, isn't it? Is Ashton Kutcher hiding somewhere on this forum waiting to jump out and say, "You've just got Punk'd!"?
Do you know? I can only speak from what I see, and everything points at where everybody seems to be stopping as of now.
The A77 has focus peaking in video and it works fantastically well!
And you are stupid, read the opening post.
I am sorry einstein you completely misunderstand virtualmirage.Math is useless if you don’t include all the variables. Regardless of whether you get it, or not, don’t go pushing around the idea that RAW files out of A77 are 36MB while that out of A99 will be 24MB. You have been doing that, but without ANY evidence to support the claim.
But if that floats your boat, be my guest.
Clearly that is evident on your part. You are failing because you don't read the instructions. You are failing because you don't show your work. You are failing because you can't even do basic arithmetic.You said this earlier: "If you are not doing the math, then you must have failed a lot of math classes."
Let me add to it... doing the math doesn't guarantee a passing grade.
That is pure BS. A77 uncompressed is around 36MB. A99 is around 42MB uncompressed. It has been explained before but you can't seem to comprehend that. Compressed and the actual output of the files for the A77 are around 24MB and the A99 is also around 24-25MB. Both of these have been clearly stated before. I have never compared a compressed RAW file to an uncompressed RAW file. That is all on you.
It is funny how you accept my math for the A99 raw files being around 42MB (no one has mentioned that as a size of the actual file) yet you refute my math for everything else because it doesn't fit your idea. That actual output files are around 24-25MB in size. Aside from the 14-bit vs 12-bit, the sensors are the same resolution. Did you honestly think the files would grow by leaps and bounds?
I have even done just that and you flat out think it is bunk. I have compared its compressed RAW file size of 24MB (it's output file size) to that of the A99's output file size (which is also compressed) and comes to around 24-25MB in size. You dismissed it and then accuse me of pretty much making up numbers and unfairly comparing two different types of files. Again, I never did such a thing. But you are very guilty of doing that and pointing the finger.
1) At this point, I trust them more than I trust you.
2) It matches closely to the A99 RAW file sizes I have seen.
3) It matches the A99 RAW file sizes posted here:
http://www.quesabesde.com/noticias/sony-a99-analisis-fotos-muestras,1_9088
Check it out for yourself before you claim I am wrong again. But if you have a sucky connection, be prepared to wait awhile. The files I have downloaded come in at about 24.1MB a piece for the A99.
14-bit can be compressed as well.
Where did we compare RAW directly against cRAW and assume it was an equal comparison? I have compared RAW sizes to RAW sizes and cRAW to cRAW. I have shown you...no, I have practically drawn a path in for you with Crayola crayons on even how to calculate RAW. It isn't math I made up, it is fact. A 5 second Google search will show the same results, and if you look close enough can find education articles about RAW and how to calculate it.
They have already proved it, so yes.
No, again your words. The A77 uncompressed is equivalent to 36MB of data being sent to the processing chip. The A99 it is around 42MB of uncompressed data. The final output for both is around 24MB for the A77 and around 24-25MB for the A99. Compression is a wonderous thing, isn't it?
I have been doing my best to be on my best behavior, but you seriously have no clue. You read only what you want and pick stuff here and there and combine it to how you see fit. You take every bit of information I give you and you twist it into something that is just incorrect gibberish.
Educate yourself, provide proof, don't twist other people's words.
--
Paul
