Hey - the Sony A900 is here!

swintonphoto

kini62 wrote:

The only things Sony has going for it is price and inbody IS.

Pretty tough to compare this camera with a camera that costs almost 3 times as much. You could have the Sony and some great lenses before you even get to the body price of the Canon. A better comparison would be to the D700 or whatever lower end 5D comes out. (I bet Canon will bring out a sub $2000 FF body soon)

Harryb

So far the 900 looks pretty good. The only cause for concern from the review at IR that I can see is the ISO performance. This has been a weak point with other Sony releases.

k2c1959

Harryb wrote:

So far the 900 looks pretty good. The only cause for concern from the review at IR that I can see is the ISO performance. This has been a weak point with other Sony releases.

you are correct in the iso performance, i bought into the A700 and boo-koo's of KM lenses only to be disappointed, i took the hit and sold everything and went back to Canon, where i plan to stay..period end of story!

Furono

A900 price here in Japan starting at 328,000円 which is almost $3000 american dollars.

Internaut

Here you go:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra900/

Lots of information in there and, at the time they did the review, the latest beta of ACR does indeed work with the Sony raw files. If you're a prospective buyer, its a good read and will give you some insights into the strengths, weaknesses and compromises in the design of the camera.

Izzy wrote:

i cant seem to find the info im looking for, maybe you all can help?

sony a900 output can only be converted from raw by using sony software? will ACR ever be able to convert sony raw files?

does the sony software come with the camera?

is it like nikon where you get the free converter, but if you want the better converter that acually gives you controls it going to cost you $$$.

thanks for any info...

swintonphoto

I think this looks like a fantastic camera. If wasn't already dedicated to a system this would sure be tempting. I know everyone makes a stink about its noise, but thats when you look at it at 100% which for 24MP is really a strange thing to do. I think you could get beautiful large prints out of this camera at 1600.

Looks nice. Glad to see others making a statement, even though Canikonians will dismiss this camera as sub-par, it looks fantastic.

Internaut

More importantly, the trade off for the noise at high ISO seems to be that at low ISO, Sony's offering has near class leading dynamic range and a JPEG engine that can take advantage of it.

swintonphoto wrote:

I think this looks like a fantastic camera. If wasn't already dedicated to a system this would sure be tempting. I know everyone makes a stink about its noise, but thats when you look at it at 100% which for 24MP is really a strange thing to do. I think you could get beautiful large prints out of this camera at 1600.

Looks nice. Glad to see others making a statement, even though Canikonians will dismiss this camera as sub-par, it looks fantastic.

swintonphoto

Internaut wrote:

More importantly, the trade off for the noise at high ISO seems to be that at low ISO, Sony's offering has near class leading dynamic range and a JPEG engine that can take advantage of it.

That's a really good point. If I was primarily a landscape photographer this camera would amazing. Enormous dynamic range - which is great for landscapes. Plus, most landscape photographers use tripods or shoot in good light, so, shooting above 1600 is negligible. In my opinion - this is the best landscape DSLR on the market.