My inspection of the Sony A100 DSLR

Forehead

I stopped by the SonyStyle Store in the Stanford (CA) shopping mall. I only had 20 minutes to check out Sony's new DSLR (A100). I was also taking some macros of the camera, but had to stop when the sales staff came warning me thet THEY would get in trouble for letting me take pictures of something that takes pictures (I guess). :dunno

In that time, though, I was able to observe the following:

• It's bigger than I thought it would be but
• A person with large fingers would find it cramped between the grip and lens.
• It's definitely NOT a sports camera, as the burst mode--although described as "fast" by one of the sales guys--shot at 2 FPS (if that) but
• if the CF card's fast enough, the camera will keep shooting until it's full.
• The PLASTIC BODY construction was a bit disturbing, being used to the die-cast magnesium body of my Nikon E5400; squeezing areas of the body had fortunately no damaging effect or the utterance of creaking, cracking noises (I wonder how weather resistant it is).
• Though the body is plastic, the two main command knobs appeared to be metallic. I guess Sony's more worried about knobs breaking off than bodies cracking!
• The power switch is located on back, upper left hand corner. I don't mind that, as I've had too many instances of my camera powering up when I didn't want it to (with that switch being AROUND the shutter button).
• The CF card slot is covered by a door that requires two motions to open it: first a straight pull backward with your thumb, then it swings to the right. And no little tab to get caught on anything, unlike my camera that has a little tab on the door that sometimes gets caught on a strap or something and swings open (almost broke it off a few times that way). So it looks like Sony's put a little extra thought in a little thing that might otherwise be a big headache!
• Another D-grinner described the mirror slap as being "noisy". I concur, and having a plastic shell around doesn't help. Don't take this camera for quiet wildlife shooting as you might piss off a bunch of ELK, for instance!
• But f/36 aperture! I'm not used to apertures so tight!
• The DOF preview button is located on the bottom right of the lens mounting ring (alright, bottom LEFT if looking from the front!), and it's rather TINY. But this is definitely a feature I haven't enjoyed since I lost my Yashica FX-1 film SLR (and three lenses) on a train in Germany almost 30 years ago already.
• The 2.5" LCD screen is bigger than I'm used to, but that size is getting pretty much standard (right?).
• The expert marketing team at SonyStyle failed to supply a CF card in their floor model, so I can't comment on in-camera processing, how images actually look, etc.
• I couldn't take the lens off to look at the mirror or sensor, due to the security clamp they had on it.
• The view finder has a diopter adjustment knob that's a bit SMALL for my liking, which doesn't help our large-fingered friends any--especially the way it's mounted: recessed and almost flush with the body. Try not to poke your eye making this adjustment!
• I thought that the ultrasonic dust-buster for the sensor was that: ULTRASONIC. So why can I feel the vibrations (?) and they DON'T feel even close to being ultrasonic to me!
• Anyway, the kit offered by SonyStyle (Palo Alto, anyway) comes with a Sony (not a Zeiss) 18-70mm lens, for $999 and change. Don't forget the taxes and TIP!

My final assessment: though the plastic body construction would take some getting used to, the capabilities of this 10.2MP camera are tantalizing enough that I'm not ready to "shake my hands and walk away" just yet and foresake any further consideration of the A100. I gotta see the pictures it shoots before I can decide further on a Yay or Nay vote.

ziggy53

Steve,

A great assessment for such a short time with the camera. Also a wise decision at the end; wait for the photographic proof of quality.

I am concerned about high-ISO images based on the limited information we have so far. The new Nikon D80 seems pretty sweet by comparison.

Good stuff and thanks for following through,

ziggy53

Dee

Sony Style Stores
Ah, I live in the area and didn't realize there was a store at the Stanford, CA shopping center!

I'm curious about this camera too, since I have some Minolta lenses from my Minolta film days.

Forehead

Well, you'd better shinny on over there and check it out!!!

Dee wrote:

Ah, I live in the area and didn't realize there was a store at the Stanford, CA shopping center!

I'm curious about this camera too, since I have some Minolta lenses from my Minolta film days.

Forehead

Ahh yes: that new Nikon D-80. As I have had--and will continue to pursue--low-light photography opportunities, I would like as little noise as possible WITHOUT the loss of clarity that most noise-reduction algorithms produce.

I would very much like to try that D-80 out soon.

It sure was LOVELY at Stanford U today. Temps maybe in the mid-seventies (not like the brutal heat wave a few weeks back that afflicted the Bay area and elsewhere). I was too busy to take in any shots (didn't have my camera handy anyway), but one of the condensate return systems I had to sample was at the Deguerre (Avery) Pool, where there appeared to be some sort of international synchronized swimming meets going on.

It was there that I saw it: a Nikon D2X with a 500mm lens perched on a monopod rather precariously close to the edge of the pool. If that guy woulda dropped it, the camera would have gone down twenty feet.

TWENTY FEET, mind you!

I've never seen a Nikon D2X in real life before, but it looked a lot less bulky than the pictures I've seen of it have otherwise suggested. The lens alone was $1700, but I thought it would have been more than that. We won't EVEN go there about how much that body alone cost (right, AN-DYYYY??).

I wanted to hold it..TAKE it...RUN AWAY with it, but there was this other guy on a lift platform with a video camera that looked quite capable of spotting my features a half-mile away!:uhoh

Oh, and you're welcome, Ziggy!

ziggy53 wrote:

Steve,

A great assessment for such a short time with the camera. Also a wise decision at the end; wait for the photographic proof of quality.

I am concerned about high-ISO images based on the limited information we have so far. The new Nikon D80 seems pretty sweet by comparison.

Good stuff and thanks for following through,

ziggy53

erich6

Good rundown Steve. You've confirmed the plastic feel I noted when I checked this camera out at the Sony Store at the Suncoast Plaza in Santa Ana, CA. I didn't like the plastic feel but what was worse for me was the sluggishness of the shutter. The shutters also felt and sounded weak.

I've had and used plastic camera bodies (e.g., Canon Digital Rebel) and I think they are fine but this camera just didn't feel solid enough to me. I haven't looked at the images but they can't be that much different than what you can get from a Canon, Nikon, or even Fujifilm, or Pentax.

Erich

badtz

Just to say it, ultrasonic means you shouldnt hear it. If you are holding something and part of it rapidly starts moving, only way you arent going to feel it is by damping the vibration in some kind of way.

Forehead

Im sorry, but that vibration felt like around 400 Hz. Ultrasonic frequencies start at 20 KHz (30 KHz for some asthmatics).

badtz wrote:

Just to say it, ultrasonic means you shouldnt hear it. If you are holding something and part of it rapidly starts moving, only way you arent going to feel it is by damping the vibration in some kind of way.

HeldDown

I'll admit to not reading the whole post, but here's my two cents...

Sony whisked myself and some of my coworkers off today to "wine and dine" us and spend the afternoon showing us the A100, all of the potential lenses, all the accessories, letting us take them all for a test drive (except the Zeiss glass, which doesn't actually exist yet) and telling us how great it is.
I came away REALLY unimpressed. Essentially it is an underbuilt, overpromoted 10 megapixel body with a LOT of flash gimmicks. Sony's claim of 3.5 stops from their "Super SteadyShot" is exaggerated at best; in most situations, fiction. The eye-start autofocus is a nightmare and incredibly obnoxious. The sensor IS the same one as the D200's, which means the same relatively poor performance at high iso's -- even the Sony reps themselves aid anything above ISO 400 is "pretty unusable." The "Anti dust" feature is an absolute joke, doing little to clean the sensor from my tests, and realistically adding unneccesary wear to the IS servos. Blah blah blah...

In the end, the Alpha's not going to be hurting much of Canon or Nikon's margins -- their target consumer is amateur photographers who won't notice the quality difference (that's almost a verbatim quote.)

Enjoy!

ziggy53

HeldDown wrote:

I'll admit to not reading the whole post, but here's my two cents...

Sony whisked myself and some of my coworkers off today to "wine and dine" us and spend the afternoon showing us the A100, all of the potential lenses, all the accessories, letting us take them all for a test drive (except the Zeiss glass, which doesn't actually exist yet) and telling us how great it is.
I came away REALLY unimpressed. Essentially it is an underbuilt, overpromoted 10 megapixel body with a LOT of flash gimmicks. Sony's claim of 3.5 stops from their "Super SteadyShot" is exaggerated at best; in most situations, fiction. The eye-start autofocus is a nightmare and incredibly obnoxious. The sensor IS the same one as the D200's, which means the same relatively poor performance at high iso's -- even the Sony reps themselves aid anything above ISO 400 is "pretty unusable." The "Anti dust" feature is an absolute joke, doing little to clean the sensor from my tests, and realistically adding unneccesary wear to the IS servos. Blah blah blah...

In the end, the Alpha's not going to be hurting much of Canon or Nikon's margins -- their target consumer is amateur photographers who won't notice the quality difference (that's almost a verbatim quote.)

Enjoy!

HeldDown,

Thanks for that "no holds barred" assesment. I appreciate an honest, no BS opinion. It's too bad that there is so much "hype" associated with the first of the Sony Alpha line, because the photographic community really could use more competition to drive innovation and keep prices in line.

I do believe that there may be minor differences in the actual imaging chip. The Nikon D200 has 5 FPS operation, apparently partly because of more communication channels from the chip to get the image information off of it faster.

"Incorporates high-speed 4-channel data output that contributes to 5fps continuous shooting performance..."

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0511/05110104nikond200.asp

"Image sensor features high-speed 4-channel data output..."

http://www.nikonimaging.com/global/products/digitalcamera/slr/d200/index.htm

"Furthermore, 4-channel output allows the D200 to adopt the advanced image-processing engine of the D2x that combines color-independent preconditioning prior to A/D conversion with advanced digital image processing algorithms to deliver fine color gradations with satisfyingly smooth, consistent transitions."

http://www.nikonimaging.com/global/news/2005/1101_01.htm

Both the Alpha 100 and the Nikon D80 apparently have 2 channel communication with the image processor.

ziggy53

Forehead

Features for tiny fingers only
Here's one of the shots of the Sony A100 I got before I almost got (the floor salepeople) in "trouble".

This is the diopter adjustment knob. Not exactly the handiest design:

Forehead

...and here's that eeny-weeny little DOF preview button:

Forehead wrote:

Here's one of the shots of the Sony A100 I got before I almost got (the floor salepeople) in "trouble".

This is the diopter adjustment knob. Not exactly the handiest design:

ballentphoto

Forehead wrote:

...and here's that eeny-weeny little DOF preview button:

Well people have been saying that if anyone could foul up a good camera it would be Sony. and did I understand you correctly with the f/36 good night Irene CoC airey disks defraction limits hello just because one Twinkie tastes good does not mean that you should eat the entire pallet. Well the D80 hopefully will be a better machine ( my $$ is on Nikon )

smhs.images

According to a review in pc photo it shoots 3fps. They gave it a big thumbs up. I shoot with the Sony F828 and other than the fixed lens I love it. I am thinking that the A100 is just the beginning and I'll let other people work out the bugs and purchase the A300 when it comes around. I own a Nikon N70 33mm and absolutely HATE it. It does take great photos but I can't stand the design. So I guess I am partial to Sony now.