Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Sony A900 Field Report
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 5:19 pm    Post subject: Sony A900 Field Report Reply with quote

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/a900-nr.shtml


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 5:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

And still the old 5D holds it's own in some respects after three years. Laughing


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 6:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The Sony specs also indicate a two step noise reduction system, one before a/d conversion and one after. This first step is not user controllable and I see very subtle smudging of fine detail which may be connected to this

welcome point & shot quality
smudge that cannot be removed, coded in raw
I hope Canon will not make the same mistake
it will be a gift for all dslr using Sony sensor


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

poilu wrote:
Quote:
The Sony specs also indicate a two step noise reduction system, one before a/d conversion and one after. This first step is not user controllable and I see very subtle smudging of fine detail which may be connected to this

welcome point & shot quality
smudge that cannot be removed, coded in raw
I hope Canon will not make the same mistake
it will be a gift for all dslr using Sony sensor
It 's odd they're capable of making great sensors (e.g. D300) but when they put them in their own cameras they can't get noise control quite right.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 7:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Based on what I have read (I am no expert) handling of digital noise does not only depend on the sensor but also on the processor(s).


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 7:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

raw should be straight from the sensor
user should decide if and how to remove noise
Sony decide to remove noise before writing the raw
if you don't like the created smudge, no way to remove them
look the tree and grass on the Sony samples (with NR off )
this remind me the quality of my first point & shoot


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

poilu wrote:
raw should be straight from the sensor
user should decide if and how to remove noise
Sony decide to remove noise before writing the raw
if you don't like the created smudge, no way to remove them
look the tree and grass on the Sony samples (with NR off )
this remind me the quality of my first point & shoot


Be careful poilu, it's LL after all:

Quote:
There is one ray of light however; if I turn off all sharpening and NR in both software suites, the files look equally 'bad'.


This means that those examples came out from sharpening and noise reduction in the raw converter programs (ACR for Canon, proprietary one for Sony).

Another good reason why I find LL a pretty unreliable source of info in the net: using sharpening and noise reduction without use of masks and layers is precisely what a point and shoot would do.

I'd take a look at the 100% images in the DPreview review http://www.dpreview.com/previews/SonyDSLRA900/

About the pre recording NR this explains things a lot better than LL (strange eh? Rolling Eyes )
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/AA900/AA900NR.HTM

For people not wanting to read it all basically they says that the NR applied before recording the RAW is the noise coming out from the sensor electronic signal itself.
Just like in many cameras you shot a black frame and it is then automatically subtracted from the final image (I think the Sigma has this system for high ISO or long exposure shots and for sure there are various programs and plugins that do the same process).


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2008 6:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think attention shout be on the fact, that this "test" are made with a premodel.

Firmware update to A700, came out the same day Sony official presented A900. One of the new features was a possibility to turn NR completely off. Rumours are that Nikon has given advise, and the first test images shows that NR now gives results close to D300. Not that there was a problem before it is more the way A700 now handles NR.

I think/hope that the same feature "NR off" will be on A900, anyway I am looking forward to see the first real tests.

Edit: What is worse is that it is impossible to use M42 lenses on A program. Only on full manual program.

Anyway it is to expensive to me, maybe in about 2 years when it hits second hand marked.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2008 7:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

lahnet wrote:
I think attention shout be on the fact, that this "test" are made with a premodel.

Firmware update to A700, came out the same day Sony official presented A900. One of the new features was a possibility to turn NR completely off. Rumours are that Nikon has given advise, and the first test images shows that NR now gives results close to D300. Not that there was a problem before it is more the way A700 now handles NR.

I think/hope that the same feature "NR off" will be on A900, anyway I am looking forward to see the first real tests.

Edit: What is worse is that it is impossible to use M42 lenses on A program. Only on full manual program.

Anyway it is to expensive to me, maybe in about 2 years when it hits second hand marked.


Maybe only for the moment. If the A900 will be success we'll see on ebay Minolta A - M42 adapters with chip on it which might make available the Av mode , shake reduction, focus confirmation, etc.
Truth is that on ebay the Minolta A AF lenses were the less expensive AF lens (but not worst I think than Canon/Nikon/pentax ones).


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2008 1:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are already a number of chipped M42 adapters for the A mount. I have several. This is discussed in a thread on Dyxum:
http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/forum_posts.asp?TID=35781

/Erik