About to Buy -- What do you think ?

Started Apr 13, 2013 | Discussions thread
123Mike Veteran Member • Posts: 4,643
Re: Sony provides so much more!

Says who? It's *great* for sports!

Says DPR...

Why would they say, and where did they say, that the A57 is bad for shooting sports... it makes no sense. It does 12 fps cropped and 10 fps full res. It allows you to capture what you would miss with the competition.

Last page of their review at the bottom end "not so good for...."

Some guy's opinion. Some people are even in denial, like you are.

AF for video I never brought up, and 24p gives a much more relaxing look 60p and up is nice if you want to slo mo.

60p is smooth. 24 is not. Neither is 30.

High bursts for hdr and the camera does 3 frames, so Sony is missing a point here.

My point is that it can construct a combined image from multiple shots that are as close in time as possible. 1/10th of a second apart.

1/10 ok?

Better than what, 1/4 is it? Besides, DOES it do HDR at all? If it does, good for you. But it's less flexible because the shots are further apart.

Like I said i don't like EVF's i got a 100% 1.0 mag. OVF and that's what I want.

And you can't make out the scene in too dark conditions, and you can't gauge what the sensor sees before you take the shot. Actually.... do you have live view? But then you lose phase based focusing not?

Are the midtones worse or equally good?

There are no problems with the midtones when taking photos. The photos come out very good.

Where is 4fps comming from? A 60D does 5.3 till 16 max. and buffer needs to be cleared.

5.3. Ok, that's better than 4, and it's not bad, and in fact might be good enough. 10 and 12 fps is still faster though.

Facts please, I don't like EVF's can you accept and respect that?

But a new comer should learn about all the facts. And that's what I've done. I've listed a bunch of facts. Anti Sony people here are just trying to downplay it all.

Again read the reviews, DPR is pretty bold in this case.

The jpegs from this camera are as least as good as the competition's. The DPR tests prove this.

What are they trying to point out with their critique about the jpegs in your opinion?

You can run the comparisons yourself. Do you see any issues with any of them?

No I don't admit it's an attractive package because I don't think as a system it is.

That's because you're religiously tied to what you're making excuses for in an effort to do damage control for what's bothering. What's bothering you is that the Sony is better.

Keep religion out of this, just make a point. Sony is a consumer brand and has for advanced and pro shooter to this point not that much to offer. I hope they will in the future just as I hope Pentax will kick some ass too again.

Nikon and Canon and Sony are all brands that produce both consumer and pro cameras. You're pretending that all Canikons are pro, and that's is not true. Fact is that with a Sony you get much much more for the same amount of money. In fact, to equate the Sonys, you have to throw a LOT more money at it.

But I won't trade that for my Canon 70-200 L.

You think you can't equate that on an Alpha?

Not yet.

You're wrong.
Minolta 70-210 f4

Nice but not a Sony

But perfectly well widely and easily available for Sony. Problem solved.

Sony 70-200mm f/2.8 G

Optically no match for the competition and expensive too.

That's your personal biased belief.

Throw in built quality of the body?

There is nothing wrong with the build quality of any of the Alphas. And a pro camera could easily include a popup flash without sacrificing build quality.

It would eat the battery

Nonsense. Batteries last pretty long these days, and batteries are a dime a dozen.

My flash eats the battery.

Then don't flash so much, and use it only a bit. Plus bring extra batteries. It's not a problem

,has a low GN and it's close to the lens and therefor for pro use fairly useless.

It's something at least.

Just try to understand that the camera you like may not be of any interest to somebody else.

Keep in mind that a new comer should consider the oodles and oodles of features the Sonys come with.

And focus on the wrong things, the focus is the system (imo lenses) not the body.

The body decides how focusing works. Not the lens.

The point is that it should work for you.

That I can respect.

Nobody said Sony is bad or anything

Most people here were trying to leave the impression that compared to other cameras, the Sony is bad.

That is a way of interpertation, nobody said a bad thing about Sony.

All I'm getting here is people downplaying Sony and denying all those features are good to have.

If you throw in features as in cam processing it's very likely that people are going to point out that is not the main reason for buying a body or brand.

Many newcomers choose Sony for good reason. It is a much more satisfying product.

There are many very experienced photographers here (Craig, Hank and Bjorn absolutely know what they are talking about). And if you wish you get all the support from them as well.

And there are many other experienced professional cameras that have Sony cameras as part of their mix. I'm sure that the ones that do, can perfectly well give good valid reason why they would do it again.

there is much more to photography than just a body, that is the point the other imo are trying to make.

You were the only one here, that is at least talking normally. Others quickly resort to insults like how am somehow a piece of crep because I have batteries in my gallery. I disagree with some of your reasoning though. I get this constant sense of denial around here.

It's not denial it's called a difference in opinion and you need to learn to deal with that not turning everything into an arguement.

The fact somebody disagrees isn't an insult or a personal attack, it can be anything, experience, ignorance, fanboyism. But whatever you think, be suttle with comment since the whole world can read this.

The thing is, is that when I point out a list of unique features, the response here was nothing but downplaying, ridiculing, and insults.

I am sure if you're be a bit more "politcal" and less adamant you get the respect you deserve and will make your point even clearer!

If people wouldn't be opposing alternatives and trying bully around the non-Canikon arguments, things would be a lot more civilized. I feel like I'm the one that needs to make a compromise. NO! I've pointed out a good list of unique features that new comers should consider. That list is real.

You are happy with your camera and that means only one thing: you made the right decision for you.

And your camera makes you happy, and that's good too. End of day, it's all about the artistic aspect that makes a good photo. I understand all that. What irks me in this entire thread, is that *I* am the one pushed around after I simply advertise that the Sony is a good choice. So, what got everything heated, was a shear amount of disrespect, and then others turn that around and try to con others into believing that *I* am the one that is being disrespectful. Every tactic in the book I tell you.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow