What made you buy an Alpha over the other brands? (tua-pau, nikon, etc)
- Thread starter shadowoflight
- Start date
shadowoflight
New Member
Jumper from C camp
1. steady shot..
2. Fast and accurate AF
3. Minolta lens.. cheap & good... build to kill. wahaha :bsmilie:
4. Bang for buck.
welcome to the bright side wahaha
Lazymuf
New Member
goodness u anyhow choose any yours pics of flickr damn solid sia...u learn along the way or u got previous exp?
neway your pics inspires ya...cheerios
For me personally, I tested Canon and Nikon at first, was leaning towards the Nikon until I passed a Sonystyle and tried the A100. The ergonomics were fantastic, the test pictures were razor-sharp. Did some research, saw that it has in-body anti-shake and works with all old Minolta AF lenses (my first ever camera was a Minolta XG1) and the price was right; plus, Sony makes almost all the sensors for Nikon, so it was like getting it "straight from the source". I took the A100 up Mt Kilimajaro and it went through all the dust, hail, rain, cold weather, hot weather, etc, without a complaint.
Right now I still have to find a combo that beats my A900+ Carl Zeiss 135mm f/1.8 AF lens. I just get dang good pictures, great tonality, sharpness, dynamic range. To me, and this is where everyone's opinions differ, it meets my needs for a great, ergonomic, pure photographic tool.
But like I said, everyone's needs and opinions will differ.
Right now I still have to find a combo that beats my A900+ Carl Zeiss 135mm f/1.8 AF lens. I just get dang good pictures, great tonality, sharpness, dynamic range. To me, and this is where everyone's opinions differ, it meets my needs for a great, ergonomic, pure photographic tool.
But like I said, everyone's needs and opinions will differ.
Hi..Rashkae,
How would you yourself balance the noise control in Alpha systems as compared to canon & nikon? I do see quite a big difference under similar conditions and canon and nikon seems to have quite an upper hand on this.
Anyway, this is purely for sharing, every brand has it's own problems. So hope everyone reading my post don't stick by your brand blindly and bomb me here. In my case, I do shoot at 1600 or 3200 at times. And this could be the only obstacle currently for me to switch to the alpha system.
How would you yourself balance the noise control in Alpha systems as compared to canon & nikon? I do see quite a big difference under similar conditions and canon and nikon seems to have quite an upper hand on this.
Anyway, this is purely for sharing, every brand has it's own problems. So hope everyone reading my post don't stick by your brand blindly and bomb me here. In my case, I do shoot at 1600 or 3200 at times. And this could be the only obstacle currently for me to switch to the alpha system.
dormy
New Member
Hi, have you seen the hi iso test shots of the a5xx series?
the 40d
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E40D/FULLRES/E40DhSLI3200.HTM
compared to a a500
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/AA500/FULLRES/AA500hSLI03200_NR_1D.HTM
and the a500 costs about $800 less
Canon clips highlights and loses detail. Nikon uses an AA filter that gives tighter noise grain, but has poorer color separation. Sony, using the same sensors as nikon (except for the D700, D3 and D3s) actually has the *same* noise level as the nikon counterparts, but prioritized color separation, which results in more chroma noise. But when printed, the color separation advantage makes a difference to me.
When the canon 500D was reviewed, it was compared to the Sony A200, which easily was right behind the Canon (beating the Nikon counterpart). Now with the A500/A550, (the A500 uses the same sensor as the D90), sony has easily caught up in the "ISO noise" race. but honestly, I don't quite see the point. Most people resize their image for posting on the web, in which case noise is no longer an issue.
I almost never shoot above ISO 800. But if you were always shooting at ISO 1600 or 3200, and that was the majority of your shots, I'd recommend a D700 or D3.
Price was one major factor for me. I was thinking of getting the Canon 500D at first, but swayed by the salesman into getting a Sony.
I actually regretted it at first - Noise was one of the issues, but I realized that:
1. Noise won't be much of an issue scaled down for web-viewing, which is what I do.
2. I rarely go above ISO 400/800. Though noise creeps in, it's still a non-issue.
Not to mention the in-body stabilization system as well as in-body AF motor... hah. Although I still gripe about (the lack of) places to rent stuff (and no battery grip, WHYYYY), I'm very happy with my camera.
I actually regretted it at first - Noise was one of the issues, but I realized that:
1. Noise won't be much of an issue scaled down for web-viewing, which is what I do.
2. I rarely go above ISO 400/800. Though noise creeps in, it's still a non-issue.
Not to mention the in-body stabilization system as well as in-body AF motor... hah. Although I still gripe about (the lack of) places to rent stuff (and no battery grip, WHYYYY), I'm very happy with my camera.
Depends on what you want to rent... Camera rental centre has some sony stuff, and many of the senior sony people on here rent stuff too.
if yr work constantly require u to shoot at high iso, then the existing canon and nikon system are definitely a good choice,however having said so, i also have a friend who owned a D3 and 2xD300s for his work.
He sold away his D3 for 2 D300s and eventually sold both D300s for A500....
Reason being the A500 noise ctrl at iso 6400 is actually quite comparable without compromising too much and at half the asking price of his previous system also.
If u do a check in Pnp sub forum, let said if 95% of the contributor are nikon and canon users, u can see 75% of the pics are quite mediocre......these group of people are already having problem getting proper pics at base iso... how much do u think they can do in higher iso?
Last edited:
No, because the A380 was not designed to accept a battery grip, it does not have the contacts for it. The A380 was designed for point and shoot consumers. if there was a chance that it would have a battery grip, sony would have released it when the camera came out. The A500 series was designed for the enthusiasts who may also want a battery grip.
Personally I don't see much of a problem with shooting @ high iso on the alpha system. I typically shoot in cRAW & process from there on so none of the noise issues from jpeg outputs annoy me. Might be a long winded process but the results speaks for itself.
Guess what's ISO used for the below shot.
6400.
Nope. Shot @ 3200 with in cam NR set to Normal.
lol. Way off in my guess. Heh.
Similar threads
