A800... Hmmm
- Thread starter Timber Wolf
- Start date
- Status
APS-C and Full Frame Sensor different by quite a bit when come to details and depth.
After using A-900 for a while, when look back on A-700 image, it always seems to miss some depth there.
A-900 has its weakness but once you are used to A-900, nothing else on Sony line up seems to be up to the job.
Sure, A-700 is great by its own.
I am not sure if market needs another FF unless of course, Sony manage to produce ISO 3200 noise level at the current ISO 800. Then I will be the first one to queue up again...
If the A800 is 15+MP FF and lower noise by at least 2 stops, it will be interesting to see how well it performed. But APS-C, just won't give enough confidence in noise level at 15+MP.
After using A-900 for a while, when look back on A-700 image, it always seems to miss some depth there.
A-900 has its weakness but once you are used to A-900, nothing else on Sony line up seems to be up to the job.
Sure, A-700 is great by its own.
I am not sure if market needs another FF unless of course, Sony manage to produce ISO 3200 noise level at the current ISO 800. Then I will be the first one to queue up again...
If the A800 is 15+MP FF and lower noise by at least 2 stops, it will be interesting to see how well it performed. But APS-C, just won't give enough confidence in noise level at 15+MP.
do you think Sony will come up with a D700 equivalent? a good FF with 12-14MP and superb noise control at high ISO? if yes...i will also queue up for it if it is below 3.5k....:heart:
Why? Sony has the A900, which beats the D700 in quite a few ways. DR and tonality are far better than the D700. Noise? Minor difference. Price? A900 is cheaper.
Don't you see? There's NO NEED to go backwards and develop a lower-MP sensor, if the only result of that would be sony competing with itself.
Sony is targeting the landscape and studio photogs - and the A900 beats the tar out of the D700 there. Where exactly do you think the D700's slightly cleaner ISO noise has an advantage? When you're using it as a PnS at night in a disco?
I don't see what's supposedly so "special" about the D700 that everyone is asking for a similar sensor:
http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2008/10/23/the-alpha-900-as-a-high-iso-body/
A lot of people seem to think the D700 sensor is really good. It's not.
Why do people think they need 3200, 6400 ISO???
Mike, I think not all people will use ISO 800 n above.
However, as I shoot exclusively available light, iso1600 is quite a common teritory.
I am talking when f1.4 ISO 1600 at 1/40s isn't fast enuf to stop movement and u want sharp image. Sure A900 works for studio and most application. But having a lownoise version will be beneficial at least for my use.
Cost is secondary but are a900 is great.
However, as I shoot exclusively available light, iso1600 is quite a common teritory.
I am talking when f1.4 ISO 1600 at 1/40s isn't fast enuf to stop movement and u want sharp image. Sure A900 works for studio and most application. But having a lownoise version will be beneficial at least for my use.
Cost is secondary but are a900 is great.
Hart, you must shoot in the dark a lot.
However, if we're talking about noise and image detail, you will actually get worse noise/less detail off the D700 sensor than the A900 in that example. So why do people still want Sony to take that step backwards?
Ah well. Let's see what the backlit technology can do.
Relax bro. it is a matter of preference just as the last argument that split the alpha users' views (i.e. live view). It is not that we think it is really that good or something. It is just that some people like me will prefer high iso performance to the big MP performance. In return, the same can be said of high-MP, why do anyone need 25MP images? to print bill-board size images? It is all a matter of usage and preferences.
High ISO usage is not restricted to pns usage in disco. High ISO allows good pictures to be taken in extreme low-light situations (e.g. concerts, stage performances, etc) where flash is not allowed and fast shutter speed is desired. For me, such usage is frequent enough for me to desire such a function rather than repeatedly post-process the images for noise-reduction.
On the contrary, low-MP FF does not compete with high-MP FF when they target different segments of the market. studio and landscape photographers need high MP more than high ISO performance but low-light event photographers prefer high ISO performance to high MP.
Hart, you must shoot in the dark a lot.
However, if we're talking about noise and image detail, you will actually get worse noise/less detail off the D700 sensor than the A900 in that example. So why do people still want Sony to take that step backwards?
Ah well. Let's see what the backlit technology can do.
u r right in this sense, there is a compromise always to be made...we can't have our cake and eat it too. If i am not wrong, 12MP on a FF sensor size will generally have less noise problems than a 12MP on a APS-C sensor size or a 25MP on a FF sensor size. (can't remember...think something to do with pixel pitch or pixel density. don't shoot me on this...haha)
for me, i dun need the 25MP images. I am thus willing to sacrifice some detail to achieve usable and cleaner ISO 3200 and 6400 shots that capture the moment in that extreme low-light situations. It is better if it comes with FF view.
Anyway, we dun necessary need the D700 sensor. We just need one that has high ISO-performance with decently clean images... at least for me...:sweat:
i dunnoe what this backlit technology can do...but if it can give good clean ISO 3200 or 6400 images at 25MP with FF view.....why not? but the cost will be real real high.....:sweat:
its just a personal preference lo. u like u take it. dun like leave it. find something that suits u best is most important.
why do people think they need 25 megapixels???
anyway in my opinion, you cant have the best of both worlds ah.
look at the
1Ds MKIII.. high resolution, not so good ISO performance.
D3.. lower resolution, outstanding ISO performance.
anyway bro, why get so worked up about what people think.. doesnt really matter if majority of people think the D700 sensor is good.. or the A900 is crap.
what matters is what you think is best and suitable for you.. your photographs are either for self satisfaction, or for commercial satisfaction.. not to prove other users that your system is the best.
No offence bro..
Cheers
the a900 is not only about mp, its about the joy of FF. Fullframe all the way! :lovegrin:why do people think they need 25 megapixels???
anyway in my opinion, you cant have the best of both worlds ah.
look at the
1Ds MKIII.. high resolution, not so good ISO performance.
D3.. lower resolution, outstanding ISO performance.
anyway bro, why get so worked up about what people think.. doesnt really matter if majority of people think the D700 sensor is good.. or the A900 is crap.
what matters is what you think is best and suitable for you.. your photographs are either for self satisfaction, or for commercial satisfaction.. not to prove other users that your system is the best.
No offence bro..
Cheers
why do people think they need 25 megapixels???
anyway in my opinion, you cant have the best of both worlds ah.
look at the
1Ds MKIII.. high resolution, not so good ISO performance.
D3.. lower resolution, outstanding ISO performance.
anyway bro, why get so worked up about what people think.. doesnt really matter if majority of people think the D700 sensor is good.. or the A900 is crap.
what matters is what you think is best and suitable for you.. your photographs are either for self satisfaction, or for commercial satisfaction.. not to prove other users that your system is the best.
No offence bro..
Cheers
true....
A900 for all its wonders (trust me..i have seen what pictures A900 is capable of...especially when paired with 70200G or CZ24-70 f2.8!!!) does not appeal to me yet coz i need high iso performance...
but when i am crazy about landscape and studio work.....A900 is the one man!!:thumbsup::thumbsup: (now..if anyone wanna sponsor me one, i wun reject too..haha:sweatsm
in love with the A900 shutter sound~ :lovegrin:
sounds so............ solid....... compared to the cleeeeck of A200/300/350....
and of course its built like a tank. :sweatsm:
sounds so............ solid....... compared to the cleeeeck of A200/300/350....
and of course its built like a tank. :sweatsm:
- Status
Similar threads
