Let me see your ISO 400 full frame crops please

Dee

OK, I always said that when I could use my favorite film lens, a Tokina zoom 35-200mm 1.4-5.6 AF lens with a digital SLR I'd get the camera.

So now there's a camera I can use my lens with. I went to Frys in Palo Alto to the camera department (dim with flourescent lighting) and tried my lens on the Sony Alpha. Lo and behold, and much to my surprise, the darn thing worked! The patient saleslady had to get a battery, and put on the lens for me, and help me find out which direction to put my CF in the camera.

I'm concerned about noise (naturally) but -- am a bit wondering why everyone uses Noise Ninja (et al) if their cameras are so noise free.

I know the lens does make a difference, but I'm on an extremely limitied budget. The camera will be a gift for my birthday.

So my quandry is -- is the lens good enough, is the resolution and noise good enough.

I shoot anything and everything that catches my eye... but mostly nature and outdoors, and people. I don't do "club scenes" or serious sports (just surfers) and if I plan to do night shots I bring my tripod. I occasionally like street scenes and enjoy taking photos of unusual architecture. I also like shooting flying birds (like seagulls and pelicans).

I am aware that my 35-200 lens will be more like 70-300, so that means I lose the wide angle. I can either buy or not buy the kit lens.

I like Sony color, and Nikon color balance best, but if I have to buy a zoom lens for the camera it's a huge $$$ deterent. So I'm leaning toward the Alpha, but I haven't made a firm decision yet.

I like to have one walk around lens on the camera that will shoot from Macro to the longest zoom I can get. I'm always at the far end of my Sony f828 zoom (200mm) and always needing more. Interpretation: if it doesn't fit in my purse (which is large) I'm not carrying extra stuff around. I don't want to lug a camera bag, or use a backpack. I prefer to travel light and inconspiciously.

I also do "studio type" shooting, but since this is at home I feel better about using different lenses. I'm not sure which of our old Minolta lenses will work since some of them are really old. But the "standard" lens that came with the Minolta is available. We have some sort of extension bellows or something for studio macros. We have used different Minoltas (hubby and I) throughout the decades, so there are a lot of lenses hanging around. I really don't know what they are at this point. I have to get them all together and sort stuff out.

I also have a tendency to shoot around sunset time into early dusk.

I will say I was very impressed with the 100% resolution, the resolution was incredible. I did think the photos were a little soft, but better soft than too sharp. My photos were taken on AUTO... I don't even know if image stabilization was on or not.

The Alpha is a 10 megapixel camera -- and YES I do need that much resolution for my needs.

Holding the camera with the lens I found it heavy and a bit awkward, but I haven't used my film camera in ages. I had no idea what the flashing red box meant in the viewfinder. I thought the colors were accurate, and the skin tones accurate but I did think the depth of field very shallow. If I were actually shooting under those lighting conditions I'd use a muted flash and would have probably gone to manual settings. So, these images aren't really a good sample, I'm sure, of what the camera can do.

So now that that is confusing enough, let me see some of your 100% area crops at ISO 400 -- the straight out of the camera stuff.

I just want to see "real, out of the camera" crops -- from real life users, not some testing site.

Here are some links to some of the images we took. I've turned on Original size for those interested -- but the two photos of us (Rayna and I) are crops only -- to protect anyone from seeing the rest of some really bad lighting portraits taken under the worst possible conditions.





The others are here: http://deegolden.smugmug.com/gallery/2004103/1/102433317

Harryb

Here's a 100% crop from a recent shot. D2X camera and the 500mm F/4 Nikon lens at ISO 400.

Andy

Dee wrote:

am a bit wondering why everyone uses Noise Ninja

Never touch the stuff. But then again, I shoot Canon

Dee

Thanks Harry
That's pretty darn good too!

Resolution at 100% has clearly improved.

Andy

Dee wrote:

that's nice! what's it like at 1600? 3200? Did you try?

Dee

Hmmmmm

Andy wrote:

Never touch the stuff. But then again, I shoot Canon

You probably also have enough sense and experience NOT to shoot in the worst of conditions as I did

And don't show me your Sting photos! -- or do, at 100%

Dee

Heck no...

Andy wrote:

that's nice! what's it like at 1600? 3200? Did you try?

I was pushing my luck using my own lens and CF card at Frys...

I mainly wanted to see if my lens would even work.

I may go back after I read the review on dpreview to learn how to work the camera!

I did read that above 800 -- forget it!

Harryb

Hey Dee,

If you are going to go the DSLR it would be beter taking a good hard look at the systems offered by each brand. Sonner or later you will be adding glass and flash, etc to your initial buy.

The extra resloution you will be getting with 10mp is a double edged sword. In addition to giving you fantastic details it will also clearly show the strengths and weaknesses of the glass that's put on the camera body.

I would be leery of going with Sony right now. The A100 is a fine camera but so far the two Sony lenses I've been able to price are priced much higher than comparable lenses from other manufacturers.

Right now any one of the DSLRs out there will give you more than acceptable image quality. To me the choice would come down to handling (whats fits best in your hands) and the system that come swith the camera..

Good luck with your decision.

Dee

Hey Harry

Harryb wrote:

Hey Dee,

If you are going to go the DSLR it would be beter taking a good hard look at the systems offered by each brand. Sonner or later you will be adding glass and flash, etc to your initial buy.

The extra resloution you will be getting with 10mp is a double edged sword. In addition to giving you fantastic details it will also clearly show the strengths and weaknesses of the glass that's put on the camera body.

I would be leery of going with Sony right now. The A100 is a fine camera but so far the two Sony lenses I've been able to price are priced much higher than comparable lenses from other manufacturers.

Right now any one of the DSLRs out there will give you more than acceptable image quality. To me the choice would come down to handling (whats fits best in your hands) and the system that come swith the camera..

Good luck with your decision.

I know this is a tough decision, especially with so many new dSLRs out there now.

I already have several Minolta lenses -- they work with the Alpha, so with the gift of the camera, I already have lenses, I'd just have to buy my 5 year warranty, and probably new filters, and a new spare battery.

It's true, probably my Sunpak 383 (?) won't work, and that is a bummer.

Rayna (my daughter) will be getting the Sony f828, and Ed will get her (my old) Sony f707.

I will desparately miss the swivel lens. I use that A LOT, and, I'll miss the live preview a lot.

But, I was impressed with the resolution of the Alpha -- my next choice would be the Nikon family I think.

I also don't know anything about the Pentax, and other dSLRs out there.

I only want a good walk around lens as I hate carrying a bunch of stuff with me.

I don't think I can go wrong, putting off the decision to get a "pro" camera at this time.

It's too bad my camera buddy lives so far away, because if I could borrow her Canon for a day, using my CF it would be easier to compare and test things out.

I find it difficult judging things by picking them up in the store.

I have large hands for a female, so the bulkier (not heavier) the camera the more comfortable I am with it. In fact we all have large hands and all of us hate those credit card cameras.

Thank you for your input... it is a tough decision and I genuinely appreciate all the input.

I would probably use third party lenses, due to cost, anyway.

I checked Phil's review of the new Canon, and looked at the comparisons. It's pretty amazing how the cameras are pretty similar, especially using RAW. I don't like a lot of in-camera processing, but I do want the image to look good straight out of the camera too.

Did I mention I want it all, for the least cost? There's that NY in me there!

Harryb

If you already have Minolta lenses and don't plan on buying more glass (I have never seen this happen, lens lust has always struck but maybe you will be the exception :lol) then the A100 is a no-brainer. It will get you a fine camera for a minimal initial outlay.

I miss the swivel lens more and more as I get older. :rutt I was really tempted by Brett's post putting his 717 up for sale but Linda would kill me if I bought another camera.

Dee

You're younger than me!

Harryb wrote:

If you already have Minolta lenses and don't plan on buying more glass (I have never seen this happen, lens lust has always struck but maybe you will be the exception :lol) then the A100 is a no-brainer. It will get you a fine camera for a minimal initial outlay.

I miss the swivel lens more and more as I get older. :rutt I was really tempted by Brett's post putting his 717 up for sale but Linda would kill me if I bought another camera.

I would probably invest in one of those angle viewers... they are expensive but for me would be worth it. Not nearly as nice as the swivel, but at least they'd keep your knees out of the swamp!

BigAl

Here is a 100% crop taken with a Canon 350d and Bigma at ISO400. You can see the grain clearly in the bg, but the bird itself looks good:




Full pic

BTW, the BG you've shown in your first pic prolly won't show noise.

I have a boxful of Minolta lenses, but they don't work with the current Minolta/Sony cams :cry

Dee

Thanks Al

BigAl wrote:

Here is a 100% crop taken with a Canon 350d and Bigma at ISO400. You can see the grain clearly in the bg, but the bird itself looks good:




Full pic

BTW, the BG you've shown in your first pic prolly won't show noise.

I have a boxful of Minolta lenses, but they don't work with the current Minolta/Sony cams :cry

Hmmm, I think "grain" is different from "noise." Your pic is pretty good with detail and lack of "noise."

I think dSLRs have come a long way from point and shoots! These images are a long way from my Mavica FD-91.....

System

ISO 1000 ~ 100% crop ~ handheld 70-200 f/2.8L

Dee

Canon non-noise
drool.....

I've been reading loads of reviews, and the Nikon D80 really stands out, but all the reviewers say you can't go wrong with either the Sony Alpha, Canon 400D or the Nikon...