julienA

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jul 26, 2006

Comments

Total: 31, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1444 comments in total)
In reply to:

ovlov: Too bad Sony has all but abandoned the A-mount lens wise.

@RubberDials

very nice comment, I say amen to that.

Makes me think that the bitterness around this review is due to people initially hoping that the 99II would restart the A-mount among pros - it won't but it will be a camera to be remembered.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2017 at 15:54 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1444 comments in total)
In reply to:

ovlov: Too bad Sony has all but abandoned the A-mount lens wise.

The current glass can't be all you need when it obviously cripples the camera AF-wise.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2017 at 07:20 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1444 comments in total)
In reply to:

julienA: short version: you don't turn a 1970 chevy into a ferrari just by changing the driver.

long version: the AF issues are due to the A-mount lens designs, not to the body. Using both A and E taught me that E-mount lenses have far better AF design (smoother, more decisive and confident, more precise, silent). Even A-mount SSM (the top of the line AF-tech) feels hesitant and laggy compared to the E-mount linear actuators.

I suspect that the better performance of the A7RII in the AF departement is mostly down to these better designs, since the body hardware is largely the same as the 99II.

I agree Ralf, but there is a some logical problem here. If I buy a camera that advertises 5 fps and superb continuous AF, I expect 5 fps and superb continuous AF, no less, no more. If I now buy a camera that advertises 12 fps and superb continuous AF, then again I expect 12 fps and superb continuous AF, no less, no more.

The problem here is that the 7RII appears to do what it says on the tin, not the 99II (according to this review). The problem is the difference between what is advertised and what is the real performance, not really the level of performance per se.

Same goes for -4 eV focussing. It appears that the 99II does not fully live up to this advertised spec, which is worrysome.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2017 at 22:12 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1444 comments in total)
In reply to:

julienA: short version: you don't turn a 1970 chevy into a ferrari just by changing the driver.

long version: the AF issues are due to the A-mount lens designs, not to the body. Using both A and E taught me that E-mount lenses have far better AF design (smoother, more decisive and confident, more precise, silent). Even A-mount SSM (the top of the line AF-tech) feels hesitant and laggy compared to the E-mount linear actuators.

I suspect that the better performance of the A7RII in the AF departement is mostly down to these better designs, since the body hardware is largely the same as the 99II.

@thoth22: you're free to have your own beliefs, but there are beliefs on the one hand, and facts on the other hand. The 7R2 passed DPR's bycycle tests with a far better hit rate than the 99II. And, as DPR says, the bycycle test with center focus point is not especially stressing for the camera.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2017 at 22:00 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1444 comments in total)

short version: you don't turn a 1970 chevy into a ferrari just by changing the driver.

long version: the AF issues are due to the A-mount lens designs, not to the body. Using both A and E taught me that E-mount lenses have far better AF design (smoother, more decisive and confident, more precise, silent). Even A-mount SSM (the top of the line AF-tech) feels hesitant and laggy compared to the E-mount linear actuators.

I suspect that the better performance of the A7RII in the AF departement is mostly down to these better designs, since the body hardware is largely the same as the 99II.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2017 at 20:16 UTC as 143rd comment | 11 replies
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1444 comments in total)
In reply to:

ovlov: I find it interesting that Sony continues to keep the A-mount on life support. What's really needed is a revamped lens lineup. I left the A-mount for the EF-mount years ago partially because scrounging ebay for used Minolta lenses gets old. Some of the issues that required service visits to Laredo got old too.

All these years later Sony still doesn't seem to have a road map for the A-mount.

@MarkAllen

Yeah, so these are imports from HK/Japan, used, and you should add shipping/handling and import tax. Which brings us in the $500-$600 range for a used A-mount 35/2, the usual going price. And you have to get it on evil bay.

The Nikon 35/2 is in stock, brand new at B&H for $350. Nuff' said.

Link | Posted on Feb 11, 2017 at 18:22 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1444 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hunting light: Interesting to see the full review, when ready. It will hopefully be a good camerahouse, but still waiting for the result of the lowlight-testing. Video is not my cup of tea, and don`t bother if you are locked on F3,5, or whatever.
The old A99 produced noice after iso 800, so I expect above 12800 before noice is a problem.

That said - Sony needs a new lineup for A-mount lenses. Particular bigger lenses for sport/action, before I decide to drop my Nikon again.
Sony need a new zoom above 400, let`s say a 100-500, F5,6. Also a prime 500/600, which normal working people can buy.

@bernarte: Shooting video at f1.4 is actually much easier than shooting stills at f1.4. The focus accuracy constraints are much less stiff at common 1080p resolution. You get nice bokeh + AF tracking, nice.

Link | Posted on Feb 10, 2017 at 12:00 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1444 comments in total)
In reply to:

ovlov: I find it interesting that Sony continues to keep the A-mount on life support. What's really needed is a revamped lens lineup. I left the A-mount for the EF-mount years ago partially because scrounging ebay for used Minolta lenses gets old. Some of the issues that required service visits to Laredo got old too.

All these years later Sony still doesn't seem to have a road map for the A-mount.

@brendon1000

There are a few diehard A-mount defenders here that take the effort to reply to EVERY comment made on this article. Arguing with them just makes their life a bit harder but won't change their opinion. Most of their points are fine, except the point about the A-mount lens collection being fine. It is not. Most of these lenses are found only second hand, after a lot of e-bay search, or are deeply backordered in most serious camera stores. Want a Minolta 35/2? There is one. I have one. Good luck for finding one.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2017 at 18:48 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1444 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hunting light: Interesting to see the full review, when ready. It will hopefully be a good camerahouse, but still waiting for the result of the lowlight-testing. Video is not my cup of tea, and don`t bother if you are locked on F3,5, or whatever.
The old A99 produced noice after iso 800, so I expect above 12800 before noice is a problem.

That said - Sony needs a new lineup for A-mount lenses. Particular bigger lenses for sport/action, before I decide to drop my Nikon again.
Sony need a new zoom above 400, let`s say a 100-500, F5,6. Also a prime 500/600, which normal working people can buy.

@osv

people using this camera don't shoot hollywood movies. But they'd like to use AF to shoot their kids.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2017 at 18:38 UTC
In reply to:

kobakokh: this is one of the best camera in the world now. EVF is great, speed is great, not too much noises at high iso (but not too few)... Lenses are not many and stupid expensive but has highest quality. Sony say its a good camera for sport, but why is not art photography? for still photography? Of course, yes. Price is little high. But again, great camera...

Yeah, 400 A-mount lenses, but not a store where I can find the 300/2.8 in stock. We're find with the greatest camera in the world but that's a bit short if we don't have the lenses.

Link | Posted on Feb 6, 2017 at 16:06 UTC
On article Sony SLT a99 II Review (1444 comments in total)
In reply to:

Smokymtnhiker: No I will not buy into a dinosaur of a lens mount.

@tbcass:

Don't confuse the comment section of this article with the A-mount forum. Here anyone is entitled to express his own opinion without you chasing them in the corners, like you do routinely in the A-mount forum.

And BTW I agree with Smokymtnhiker. Several aspects of the A-mount are antique, like screwdrive AF for many key lenses, mechanical aperture lever for all lenses, limited number of lens IDs implying doublets. Optically also, A-mount lens designs are not up to the sharpness of the A99II.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2017 at 19:32 UTC
On article Adobe Creative Suite 6 has been officially retired (348 comments in total)

Lightroom 7 outside CC looks even further away now.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2017 at 19:28 UTC as 85th comment
On article Leica M10 real-world sample gallery (345 comments in total)
In reply to:

JeanPierre Thibaudeau: Very nice gear, for sure but I'm not too crazy about the colour rendition. Weird colours on the cold side of the spectrum. Anyone agrees on this?

The weather was also on the cold side of the spectrum. Sorry could not resist :-)

Link | Posted on Jan 23, 2017 at 11:01 UTC
On article SLT strikes back: Sony a99 II real-world sample gallery (272 comments in total)
In reply to:

J A C S: Sony greens...

@J A C S: I'm not too surprised that threads where you explain your "theories" reach 150 posts. Actually that's quite logical, there's quite a lot of stuff to correct in your statements.

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2017 at 06:31 UTC
In reply to:

FLruckas: I'd like to see DXO scores for Blackmagic cameras, Canon C series, and for video from cameras that are reviewed here.

DxOmark is not intended at evaluating video quality. If anything, the Dxomark of a HD or 4K image with DR crammed into 8bit for compression will be very low.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 20:22 UTC
On article SLT strikes back: Sony a99 II real-world sample gallery (272 comments in total)
In reply to:

J A C S: Sony greens...

@J A C S: if, instead of lecturing people, you started to really investigate that topic that you pretend to know, you'd quickly find out that color matrices encapsulate enough of the spectral sensitivities for the rest to be irrelevant to photographers.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2017 at 06:56 UTC
On article SLT strikes back: Sony a99 II real-world sample gallery (272 comments in total)
In reply to:

J A C S: Sony greens...

@J A C S: I do not refer to the DxO score, but to the full color matrix available in the "color response" tab of the dxomark data. And contrary to what you say, this data is available for all the sensors that they have tested. It's just not there when you're in "compare" mode - you have to look it up in single sensor viewing mode.

And this data says that recent Canon and Sony sensors have basically the same raw color response. JPEG images differ but this is the jpeg engine and no one forces you to use it.

Your cultural horizon about Dxo seems to end at the dxomark score. This is weird for someone who pretends to know them and interact with them.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2017 at 20:15 UTC
On article SLT strikes back: Sony a99 II real-world sample gallery (272 comments in total)
In reply to:

J A C S: Sony greens...

Look, we'll leave it be if you want to believe that your canon would have done better. We support peace in the world.

But like I told you in another thread, a canon 5DIV sensor and the A99II/A7R2 sensor have almost exactly the same raw color response (source is DxO sensor color tab).

I'd say the more worrying thing about this Sony is the A-mount. Not much glass fully supporting the body capabilities, and not much glass looking to be released.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2017 at 19:29 UTC
In reply to:

Mateus1: I expected better colours than Panasonic but they are even worse, and far behind Fuji, Panasonic, Sony.

IQ dissapointed.

@J A C S: obviously there's no point in going on here (and no one reading, either). Still waiting for your facts, though.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2017 at 18:23 UTC
In reply to:

Mateus1: I expected better colours than Panasonic but they are even worse, and far behind Fuji, Panasonic, Sony.

IQ dissapointed.

@J A C S: for someone supposedly in the knowledge, you wrote kind of a weird reply. Color matrices are a model of color response, this is what physics is all about, building models! Since you invoke your credentials, I'll invoke mine. I am a researcher in physics since 20 years, and like DxO I do not try to "beat physics". We just DO physics!

And as for further facts (which you still do not provide): I just replicated camera A with camera B by developping Imaging Resource RAW samples of the 5D4 and A7RII. They are undistinguishable when using the same settings for both in Lightroom (including Adobe Standard color profile). Of course Lightroom provides the "camera" color profiles too, under which you can approach the distinct JPEG looks of either camera.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2017 at 15:55 UTC
Total: 31, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »