I got the Sony A900

Furono

A couple of days ago I got my new A900 and today I used it a little outside with my 50 1.4.
It was a big difference from my A700.

Here is my first day observations:

The viewfinder is really nice - bright, big and easy to frame.

Shooting with a full frame camera and the smaller depth of field takes some getting used to. It was a cloudy day and I had no tripod. So sometimes in order to get the DOF I wanted and still keep the speed I needed I had to bump up the aperture and thus the ISO. On a cloudy day sometimes that meant hitting 1600 (which the A900 has no problem with). Sometimes rarely it would mean 3200 ISO plus, like under a tree and cloudy, so a tripod is going to be needed way more or my flash.

I like my primes more now, they just seem better with a wider view. More my style.

My photos are looking exceptional coming straight from RAW.

I have no speed or compatibility issues uploading the huge raw pictures to my computer on a PC. I use Lightroom 2.1 and Photoshop CS3 in Windows Vista and XP.

Once I get some photos that are taken correctly (lots to learn on it) I'll post some samples. Also going to take my 135 STF out for a spin.

Steve

ziggy53

Steve,

Congratulations.

I am looking forward to more of your personal observations and examples from the camera.

Art Scott

ziggy53 wrote:

Steve,

Congratulations.

I am looking forward to more of your personal observations and examples from the camera.

me also.....I am interested in what it can do with low light and high iso.....it might be worth staying with sony if it does nearly as well as the new Nikons with high ISO .....

swintonphoto

Congrats! Looks like a really amazing camera.

Tango

congrats!

sherijohnson

I would be very curious to hear about your experience with this camera. I had read that at high ISO this camera doesn't produce all that well. Would love to hear if you can prove that theory wrong, and if you can't I would want to know that too.

Furono

This is directed at the high ISO people:

Some people really want high ISO and need it for for the type of pictures they take. I really don't shoot above 1600, maybe 3200 if I really need to. I found the A900 is awesome at 1600 and very acceptable at 3200.

If shooting 3200 ISO and above is required then don't get a Sony because the other cameras out are going to do it better. With NR turned off in camera (which I have off all the time for high ISO pictures because I use software to do it) at 1600 ISO it is the same as all the rest and sometimes better if you take in the fact that you have more detail with the A900.

A good new review of mostly A900 ISO comparison is here at AmandTech http://anandtech.com/digitalcameras/showdoc.aspx?i=3442&p=1

And link here is good too: http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2008/10/23/the-alpha-900-as-a-high-iso-body/

The A700 version 4 firmware greatly increased high ISO quality with in camera NR and I think the A900s will be updated the same way. AmandTech : "Many consider output of the Sony A700 with v4 firmware finally to be competitive with the well-regarded Nikon D300."

Quote to pay attention to in the AmandTech article:

"if you look closely at the amount of detail in the A900 crops and pixel peep the full images, you will see the A900 captures more detail than the D700 - even at high ISOs when noise begins to intrude in the A900 images."

That amazing detail is really apparent when I viewed my pictures just on the screen. Maybe won't show up on a little 4x6 print out but it's there.

Unlike the results from whats been previously posted on the above review sites, mine have been more like these posted here A900 keeping up with D700- EXHIBIT-A

The reviews are coming out and the camera was just released so take them all with a grain of salt and make your own judgments.

Steve