Any Sony FF users?

*pingflood* · 10-26-2009, 10:26 AM

Considering getting an A850 -- anyone here have experience with it or the A900? No speculation from non-owners please; only post if you actually have used one.

One thing that has me curious is that I can't find a glassless OM->Sony adapter. The registration distance on the OM mount is a full 1.5mm longer, so what's up with that?

*KungPOW* · 10-26-2009, 09:29 PM

I'm also interested in any first hand comments from those that have used the A850.

The only forum member that I know of that went Sony was ThePiRatE, and I have not seen him post since May. If I recall corectly, he had a slight obsesion with image quality and bokah.

I wonder if that says anything about his choice of the A900.

Just by the spec sheet for the A850, it is what I would have expected Pentax to have made as a FF camera.

It is also the only camera that is FF with sensor based SR. This really is what has me interested.

*LeDave* · 10-26-2009, 10:29 PM

They had one of these at National Camera Exchange not too far from where I live. I was playing around with it, and oh boy is that thing really nice. Their body feels very solid and heavy, it was awkward to hold probably because it's my first time holding a full frame, but the camera was soooo niiice.

jct us101 · 10-26-2009, 10:40 PM

I hate to bring it up, but a used 5D classic can be had for $1000 now. I just don't see the point in getting the Sony camera.

Gooshin · 10-26-2009, 10:42 PM

Originally Posted by jct us101

I hate to bring it up, but a used 5D classic can be had for $1000 now. I just don't see the point in getting the Sony camera.

Zeiss glass.

http://www.zeiss.com/photo

85 f1.4, autofocus

135 f1.8, autofocus

16-35 f2.8, autofocus

24-70 f2.8, autofocus

jct us101 · 10-26-2009, 10:50 PM

I can't click the link due to my half broken internet, but I think that I get what you mean.

*LeDave* · 10-27-2009, 12:16 AM

Originally Posted by Gooshin

Zeiss glass.

Welcome to Carl Zeiss Camera Lenses

85 f1.4, autofocus

135 f1.8, autofocus

16-35 f2.8, autofocus

24-70 f2.8, autofocus

Yes it's Zeiss glass, but... It's just Zeiss glass. If they didn't badge it Zeiss, would it be any different? I don't know, but as far as I know the Canon the equivalent of those lens will probably just be as good if you don't take the name in consideration.

Gooshin · 10-27-2009, 12:40 AM

Originally Posted by LeDave

Yes it's Zeiss glass, but... It's just Zeiss glass. If they didn't badge it Zeiss, would it be any different? I don't know, but as far as I know the Canon the equivalent of those lens will probably just be as good if you don't take the name in consideration.

hence the debate...

Maffer · 10-27-2009, 04:57 AM

Now where is Distagon 21mm for alpha mount? Or 18, 25, 28 and 35 for that matter? Dumb Sony...now the 21mm was introduced for EOS but nothing for Alpha. Okay yea, plenty of EOS users wanting 21mm means lotsa money, but should the priority be alpha mount first? At least now when Sony is trying to gain foothold amongst FF users.

*pingflood* · 10-27-2009, 09:01 AM

Originally Posted by jct us101

I hate to bring it up, but a used 5D classic can be had for $1000 now. I just don't see the point in getting the Sony camera.

Twice the pixels, microadjust, far far better LCD, fantastic Zeiss AF glass, better autofocus, in-body stabilization, better viewfinder... that reason enough?

The 5D is a great camera but it's received some sort of cult status and people are forgetting that technology DOES move ahead and things improve.

Whether you NEED what the Sony bodies offers or not is another matter, but there's no arguing that there aren't clear advantages and benefits picking an A850 over a 5D....

libbyh · 10-27-2009, 09:38 AM

I had a chance to play extensively with one and found it to be a nice handling camera. There's a few gripes, but none that I would have perceived to be a complete deal breaker - especially given the price.

Body felt very solid and well balanced. top LCD is a little quirky in that sometimes you can't figure out what it means due to the limited space. Would have preferred if the memory slots were CF + SD instead of CF + memory stick, but that's a sony thing i guess.

AF was fairly responsive although all the points seem to be in the centre area of the frame - would have preferred that it covered a larger area. The one function i really liked was that pressing in the joystick automatically focuses and meters on the centre AF point. Great for focus and recompose type of shooting. Lack of live view isn't a big deal, but can come in real handy for landscape work on a tripod.

Shutter sounded fine, but the mirror slap sounds like my old Pentax 67. I wouldn't call it particularly offensive per se, but it is loud - not a problem if you're doing studio work i suppose.

I'd have reservations about going the Sony route. I would agree with another poster here in that if I were to switch or carry a second system, i'd want it to be one of the big boys where there is abundant support (ie rental equipment available etc). Sony just isn't there yet and their proprietary hotshoe shape is a pain. Zeiss glass is nice, but i don't know that it would justify the price it commands when the equivalent Sigma's are also very good performers at half the price. But then you're left with using completely 3rd party lenses.

I think it's just a matter of time before the other big boys come out with their 'entry level' pricepoints for FF.

Marathonianbull · 10-27-2009, 11:14 PM

Originally Posted by libbyh

I'd have reservations about going the Sony route. I would agree with another poster here in that if I were to switch or carry a second system, i'd want it to be one of the big boys where there is abundant support (ie rental equipment available etc). Sony just isn't there yet and their proprietary hotshoe shape is a pain. Zeiss glass is nice, but i don't know that it would justify the price it commands...

I love my Sony A700, not only for the one Carl Zeiss lens that I own, but also for all the other great Sony & Minolta ones (for instance, my cheap albeit warm "Beercan" 70-210 F/4; my cheaper-than-cheap yet oh-so-luminous Minolta 50mm F/1.7; the stunning Sony 16-105mm or Sony 70-300mm G, my two razor-sharp Sony 100 F2.8 Macro or Sony 50mm F1.4, etc.! Above all, this camera and its bigger brothers the A850 or A900 feel just amazing in my hands: sturdy, logical, buttons all well located, etc. The viewfinders are large and clear, same for the 920000 LCD, their AF are super fast and ALWAYS precise, moreover their WB works well inside or outside (in other words, big advantage here for Sony), and last but not least their dynamic range capabilities and tonal/color sensitivities are as strong as Nikon's D300 (same Sony sensor) / better than Canon's 40D-50D.

The reason why I have decided to write here was rather inspired by your comment regarding a SECOND SYSTEM... How many people here do that, i.e. get another system in order to experiment something else instead of simply buying a same-family 'sidekick' as a backup? Since you already know that I am well equipped and quite happy with Sony, would you suggest that I get my dream camera (the K20) or rather that I go straight to a good Nikon dealer nearby (there's one at every corner indeed)?

Gooshin · 10-28-2009, 09:07 AM

Originally Posted by Marathonianbull

I love my Sony A700, not only for the one Carl Zeiss lens that I own, but also for all the other great Sony & Minolta ones (for instance, my cheap albeit warm "Beercan" 70-210 F/4; my cheaper-than-cheap yet oh-so-luminous Minolta 50mm F/1.7; the stunning Sony 16-105mm or Sony 70-300mm G, my two razor-sharp Sony 100 F2.8 Macro or Sony 50mm F1.4, etc.! Above all, this camera and its bigger brothers the A850 or A900 feel just amazing in my hands: sturdy, logical, buttons all well located, etc. The viewfinders are large and clear, same for the 920000 LCD, their AF are super fast and ALWAYS precise, moreover their WB works well inside or outside (in other words, big advantage here for Sony), and last but not least their dynamic range capabilities and tonal/color sensitivities are as strong as Nikon's D300 (same Sony sensor) / better than Canon's 40D-50D.

The reason why I have decided to write here was rather inspired by your comment regarding a SECOND SYSTEM... How many people here do that, i.e. get another system in order to experiment something else instead of simply buying a same-family 'sidekick' as a backup? Since you already know that I am well equipped and quite happy with Sony, would you suggest that I get my dream camera (the K20) or rather that I go straight to a good Nikon dealer nearby (there's one at every corner indeed)?

if you can get a D700 you will not be disappointed

*nostatic* · 10-28-2009, 09:37 AM

WHy is a K20d your "dream camera"?

The main reason to get a second brand is if there is particular glass you want to use that isn't offered by your main system. Or if there is some feature that you really want/need. I'm shooting Canon right now and if I had spare money around would get a D700 and a few lenses just for shooting stupid low light. I still want a "small" system and really none of the Canon crop bodies send me so I'll end up with either u4/3 or mirrorless APS-C unless I decide to get a Kx and a ltd prime lens. But I have specific needs/goals that I'm trying to fulfill.

libbyh · 10-28-2009, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by Marathonianbull

I love my Sony A700, not only for the one Carl Zeiss lens that I own, but also for all the other great Sony & Minolta ones (for instance, my cheap albeit warm "Beercan" 70-210 F/4; my cheaper-than-cheap yet oh-so-luminous Minolta 50mm F/1.7; the stunning Sony 16-105mm or Sony 70-300mm G, my two razor-sharp Sony 100 F2.8 Macro or Sony 50mm F1.4, etc.! Above all, this camera and its bigger brothers the A850 or A900 feel just amazing in my hands: sturdy, logical, buttons all well located, etc. The viewfinders are large and clear, same for the 920000 LCD, their AF are super fast and ALWAYS precise, moreover their WB works well inside or outside (in other words, big advantage here for Sony), and last but not least their dynamic range capabilities and tonal/color sensitivities are as strong as Nikon's D300 (same Sony sensor) / better than Canon's 40D-50D.

The reason why I have decided to write here was rather inspired by your comment regarding a SECOND SYSTEM... How many people here do that, i.e. get another system in order to experiment something else instead of simply buying a same-family 'sidekick' as a backup? Since you already know that I am well equipped and quite happy with Sony, would you suggest that I get my dream camera (the K20) or rather that I go straight to a good Nikon dealer nearby (there's one at every corner indeed)?

Agreed, ergonomics play a big part, but of the lenses you listed, there isn't really a viable option in the wide to short tele zoom that is not DT currently (although Sony will be announcing some new SAM consumer grade lenses). That will hopefully help with a more reasonable lens selection for FF and help shave quite a bit of weight at a nominal sacrifice to IQ.

Originally Posted by nostatic

WHy is a K20d your "dream camera"?

The main reason to get a second brand is if there is particular glass you want to use that isn't offered by your main system. Or if there is some feature that you really want/need. I'm shooting Canon right now and if I had spare money around would get a D700 and a few lenses just for shooting stupid low light. I still want a "small" system and really none of the Canon crop bodies send me so I'll end up with either u4/3 or mirrorless APS-C unless I decide to get a Kx and a ltd prime lens. But I have specific needs/goals that I'm trying to fulfill.

The K20D is an excellent camera and in fact I prefer it's image to that of the K7 and can be found for about half the price at the moment. I have just purchase a used D200 to experiment with Nikon. It's the only other system whose ergonomics seem to feel intuitive to me, and i need to evaluate longer term how much an advantage their AF offers. My other reason for going with one of the big 2 as I'd alluded to was support. While most of my photography is geared to landscape and portrait work I can't justify shelling out for fast glass at the tele end. Having a widely supported brand however opens up the door to a ton of rental gear that lets me explore areas of photography that would otherwise have a high cost of admission.

I wouldn't hesitate for one moment to urge you to take the K20D, provided it met your needs and filled those 'holes' that you feel are currently missing from the Sony system.