I miss the Canon and Nikon bodies for stills, the GH's are very slow for still photography. Though the GH1/2 are excellent for video, and I don't miss my 7D for that.
Sony A77 release very soon - is this the 5D/7D/GH2 killer?
- Thread starter shorty15
- Start date
Ian-T
Veteran
Hopefully the info in this thread pans out.
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?260042-Rumor-Fast-Panasonic-Zooms-coming-in-2012
Stephen Mick
Totally Usable
Agreed, 100%.
Samuel H
Major Contributor
* sony has brought out a 16-50 f/2.8 for the alpha mount, and it seems to be the kit lens for the A77 (not for the A65)
* that vimeo A77 sample video posted by John Caballero in page 16 looks good: I see no aliasing/moire
* @squig: I think that's not a fair way to compare noise: you have to downsample the bigger image to the megapixel size of the smaller one (and it's not only me saying that: that's what DxOmark does, for example)
and just for fun: I ran some "empirical" tests that showed me that I'm getting more noise from an 15Mpix APS-C sensor thant I'd get by downsampling to that size an image taken with a theoretical 120 Mpix APS-C sensor; it's not noise, but things like DR, speed and heat (and uselessness of such increased detail given what my lenses can do) that prevent me from actually wanting that 120 Mpix sensor (yet):
http://www.similaar.com/foto/mpix/mpix.html
* that vimeo A77 sample video posted by John Caballero in page 16 looks good: I see no aliasing/moire
* @squig: I think that's not a fair way to compare noise: you have to downsample the bigger image to the megapixel size of the smaller one (and it's not only me saying that: that's what DxOmark does, for example)
and just for fun: I ran some "empirical" tests that showed me that I'm getting more noise from an 15Mpix APS-C sensor thant I'd get by downsampling to that size an image taken with a theoretical 120 Mpix APS-C sensor; it's not noise, but things like DR, speed and heat (and uselessness of such increased detail given what my lenses can do) that prevent me from actually wanting that 120 Mpix sensor (yet):
http://www.similaar.com/foto/mpix/mpix.html
John Caballero
Veteran
And you can tell the person shooting it did not have much experience with the cam and how to tweak it. Probably had it for a few minutes before shooting. It looks like it was a Sony event with a bunch of photographers. I also didn't see much or any jello or rolling shutter effect. I am confident that when these cameras come out they are going to look excellent in both the video and stills side. Sony has a lot on the line with this huge roll out.
Stephen Mick
Totally Usable
That was the thing that really struck me on this video. Yes, it's poorly exposed and the shutter is set too high and the operator really wasn't ready to "shoot video." But I thought the lack of jello was surprising, especially since shooting on fast moving boats is something I've done quite a bit.
John Caballero
Veteran
Must be the in-camera stabilization. That is a big plus if it is efficient.
RichardVClark
Well-known member
I am honestly not impressed by any of the footage that I've seen(so far). Does anyone have a piece of raw footage that is at least decently lit (or exposed correctly), in focus and wb'ed to mess around? The camera, at least in the introduction video, looks well designed and even rugged. Although, something about saying Sony consumer and the rugged in the same sentence feels wrong haha... I am trying to decide if I am going to spend the 300 and change on the lpf hack for my mkII or head in a different direction.
I doubt that the Sony will hold its value... Pure speculation
I doubt that the Sony will hold its value... Pure speculation
J Davis
Veteran
good to know. Is it decent?
Stephen Mick
Totally Usable
John Caballero
Veteran
There is nothing out there worth downloading yet. The A77/65 won't be out until October. So at least a month and a half away before better footage maybe. I am glad Photo Plus is happening in NYC in Oct. The perfect place to check them all out and ask plenty of questions..
Re: The still image quality of the Sony A77. Last night I was browsing and came across a RAW conversion someone had done on dpreview of an ISO 800 version of the Imaging Resource studio shot that I had originally looked at. They had the noise reduction turned right off. I compared it to the JPEG version and it was immediately obvious that it was the noise reduction and JPEG engine which was the problem. On the material swatches on the standard studio shot, lots of the patterning on some colours was smeared. Yet on the RAW conversion with the noise turned off, not only was the material pattern clear, but the weave of the material. I also found other JPEG samples and comparisons with less smearing. So overall I think the potential of the stills from this sensor are much better than I initially thought, as for stills I always use RAW. The problem appears to be that there are a number of different firmware versions in the A77s Sony sent out to reviewers, and it may also be due to different JPEG parameter settings. It's only after the final production firmware and proper RAW converter support that it will be possible to make a proper evaluation, but I think that the potential of the still image quality is probably quite good. As long as the noise performance is comparable to the best 16-18mp APS-C sensors when downsized it's more than good enough.
The main problem for me about the Sony is the gaps in the lens range that I tend to use. It's not just gaps in Sony's lens range, but Sigma don't provide many of their best lenses in Sony mount. Whilst my lens needs are different than others, they are pretty standard for nature photographers. Choices in the long macro range - 150-200mm - and affordable high image quality lenses in the 300-400mm range are very limited.
The main problem for me about the Sony is the gaps in the lens range that I tend to use. It's not just gaps in Sony's lens range, but Sigma don't provide many of their best lenses in Sony mount. Whilst my lens needs are different than others, they are pretty standard for nature photographers. Choices in the long macro range - 150-200mm - and affordable high image quality lenses in the 300-400mm range are very limited.
I think the NEX-5N model is the only one worth considering for videos.
I found this original good 60p sample. The camera definitely resolves more details that the other sonys/nikons/canons but unfortunately still shows moiré and aliasing (very visible in this video – look at the house red bricks at the bottom). So the GH2 with the same MP remains still unbeaten. After this sample I don’t think there’s any reason to believe the other models (with more MP!!) and the vg20 with the same sensor would be any different…but remember the nex-5n (to my eyes) still performs better than canon and nikon! It could be a “middle” product.
ftp://rawdata.slrclub.com/body/sony/1108_nex5n/mov/00008.MTS
Unless those sample are ALL from preproduction cameras and a firmware updates will change the story
I found this original good 60p sample. The camera definitely resolves more details that the other sonys/nikons/canons but unfortunately still shows moiré and aliasing (very visible in this video – look at the house red bricks at the bottom). So the GH2 with the same MP remains still unbeaten. After this sample I don’t think there’s any reason to believe the other models (with more MP!!) and the vg20 with the same sensor would be any different…but remember the nex-5n (to my eyes) still performs better than canon and nikon! It could be a “middle” product.
ftp://rawdata.slrclub.com/body/sony/1108_nex5n/mov/00008.MTS
Unless those sample are ALL from preproduction cameras and a firmware updates will change the story
Just an update on the still image quality of the A77. I've downloaded this version of RawTherapee for Windows found on the link below, and it will allow you to do RAW conversions of the A77 RAW file samples found on sites like Imaging Resource on the link below that. Even if you don't bother doing any RAW conversions it will allow you to view the RAW sample files that are around, and you can immediately see how much better the image quality looks, without this horrible smear vision noise reduction the manufacturers now seem to think is essential. I can't for the life of me understand who wants this in camera noise reduction on more capable stills cameras. You can understand it on point and shoots, because your average user just wants to press the shutter and get an image, without being bothered about post-processing. But if someone can't apply post-processing noise reduction, which is in a completely different league to in camera noise reduction, I don't see why they would be interested in a camera like the A77.
http://www.visualbakery.com/RawTherapee/Downloads.aspx
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/AA77/AA77A7.HTM
It's a few years since I used RawTherapee, and I've never used it as my main RAW converter, because I use Lightroom. So I'm a bit rusty on all the settings for optimising it. All I did was to correct the white balance, save as a TIFF, then adjust levels in an image editor, apply noise reduction with Topaz Denoise 5.0 (because I didn't apply any noise reduction on the RAW conversion), and finally apply a small bit of sharpening. All that horrible smearing on the JPEGs disappeared, and Topaz Denoise does a much, much better job than any in camera noise reduction for removing noise and leaving detail. The detail is very impressive, and even at ISO 800 I was able to remove most of the noise, without destroying much texture. There was a few maze patterns in some colours you could only see at high magnification, but that's par for the course with untuned RAW converters, and won't be a problem with the tuned versions which will come out soon. I have to say I'm very impressed with the potential image quality, as there's more detail than I've ever previously seen in an APS-C file. I don't think Sony has done themselves any favours by letting so many reviewers take a lot of samples with a not very well tuned JPEG engine, because it's given a misleading impression of the stills image quality potential. I can't really comment on the video as I'm not experienced enough to properly evaluate it. The footage I've see appears to be quite variable, and the only general thing that my untrained eyes have noticed is that there seems to less skew than on other DSLRs.
http://www.visualbakery.com/RawTherapee/Downloads.aspx
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/AA77/AA77A7.HTM
It's a few years since I used RawTherapee, and I've never used it as my main RAW converter, because I use Lightroom. So I'm a bit rusty on all the settings for optimising it. All I did was to correct the white balance, save as a TIFF, then adjust levels in an image editor, apply noise reduction with Topaz Denoise 5.0 (because I didn't apply any noise reduction on the RAW conversion), and finally apply a small bit of sharpening. All that horrible smearing on the JPEGs disappeared, and Topaz Denoise does a much, much better job than any in camera noise reduction for removing noise and leaving detail. The detail is very impressive, and even at ISO 800 I was able to remove most of the noise, without destroying much texture. There was a few maze patterns in some colours you could only see at high magnification, but that's par for the course with untuned RAW converters, and won't be a problem with the tuned versions which will come out soon. I have to say I'm very impressed with the potential image quality, as there's more detail than I've ever previously seen in an APS-C file. I don't think Sony has done themselves any favours by letting so many reviewers take a lot of samples with a not very well tuned JPEG engine, because it's given a misleading impression of the stills image quality potential. I can't really comment on the video as I'm not experienced enough to properly evaluate it. The footage I've see appears to be quite variable, and the only general thing that my untrained eyes have noticed is that there seems to less skew than on other DSLRs.
jambredz
Veteran
all of this footage sucks point blank...to me. Not the camera...the footage. i dont see why its so difficult to give a professional shooter with experience and a good record with hdslr's to shoot something worth watching. all of this home video shaky ass crap footage is less than appealing and is not in the slightest in the best interest of the camera. just my opinion.
Last edited:
Unfortunately, it seems to be a tradition with stills camera manufacturers to provide crap image samples from new cameras, and to only give them to reviewers who are crap photographers. I don't know why they don't learn, because the same thing happens year after year. The samples come out, and everyone wails how bad the image quality is, or they get the idea that it's much better than it actually is. It's only after the camera's been out a while and some half decent photographer get's their hands on one, that you get to appreciate the potential of the camera in the hands of someone that actually knows how to use one. It looks like the tradition has been continued with video. A lot of the footage appears to have come from a launch event Sony had in Greece for camera reviewers. Sony laid on speedboats, jetskis, fireaters, and drinks, but it looks like the one thing they forgot was tripods. It amazes me that the big international companies that produce these cameras, can't seem to figure out how much better it would be to give the cameras to those talented enough to know how to use them. I'm sure it would be a lot cheaper than inviting all the camera reviewers for an expensive knees up in an exotic locations, and a lot more useful
jambredz
Veteran
the sad part is with all this opportunity to explore our creativity with these exceptionally affordable high quality imaging systems...we still have crap stories, crap lighting, crap set design, crap acting ect. If we put 1/2 the effort we do into those things we wouldn't be clamoring for the latest camera high. ah well. I mean i love the latest thing as much as the next guy but we can do so much with what we already have if we spent some time developing ourselves.
ryan brown
lOwEr CaSe Member
Who's we?? sounds like you're just generalizing a LOT of people. There's plenty of people on this forum, and even participating in this thread, that put out top notch projects. Either way, statements like that in a thread dedicated to a new camera and technology really don't add anything helpful to the discussion.
jambredz
Veteran
Ya i did generalize .. and thats my opinion. You will have yours...thats the beauty of this. I'm FULLY aware of the people putting out good work on the site and in the thread, trust me. Still doesn't negate my point.