Sony Alpha 900, Contender or pretender?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Doug, Sep 18, 2008.

  1. Doug

    Doug

    Jan 17, 2006
    East TN
    Wow, I got to admit, magnesium alloy body, FF, 24.6 megapixels, 3" lcd, in camera image stablization. It looks like the bar is being raised by the 3rd wheel... all for 2999.99?

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Just too bad it doesn't have movie mode. :biggrin:

    The bar is being raised. It's a good thing.
     
  3. mood

    mood

    Jun 27, 2007
    suburbia, ny
    agree Doug
    impressive

    you would think out of everyone, Sony would be first with a video function in camera

    who makes their lenses?.
     
  4. wgilles

    wgilles

    Apr 25, 2008
    NJ
    Doesn't sony make our sensors?

    It also has 100% viewfinder coverage which is nice. Doesn't the D700 only cover 97% or something?
    The focusing screen is user replaceable, which is kinda interesting

    Only thing, I dunno about you guys, but the optional grip looks absolutely FUGLY!
    [​IMG]
     
  5. rotxlk82

    rotxlk82

    Jul 20, 2007
    UK
    Umm, I know this is kinda off topic and I'm sorry...

    However am I only one who thinks this camera is a bit ugly?
     
  6. Depends what your definition of ugly is. If it handles well ergonomically, the aesthetics will disappear.
     
  7. cotdt

    cotdt

    Jul 14, 2007
    Bay Area, USA
    the camera looks OK without the grip. i want one!
     
  8. Lurker

    Lurker

    Jul 21, 2007
    NJ
    Let's put it this way: do you think Minolta is a brand that has a long tradition in making innovative cameras?

    Most of what you see on that camera is Minolta; the sensor and the brand name are Sony's biggest contributions.

    It might not be the prettiest camera but keep in mind that body aesthetics rank pretty low on the list of contributing factors of image quality.

    The Minolta 135 STF is -when it comes to bokeh- one of the best lenses ever made (yes it will even outdo the 85/1.4 cream machine) and Sony displayed some good sense when they reintroduced this manual focus lens back into their line up. Put that lens on the camera and you can make some shots that are pretty hard to eclipse with either Canon or Nikon.

    Unfortunately the alpha line is not taken serious by many, also many Minolta owners (including me - I switched!), and Sony deserves a lot of credit for the effort they are making with it. After a slow start they really seem to be gathering speed now, which is good - more innovation on the market is never a bad thing.
     
  9. The grip looks very well designed and usable for vertical shooting. I think with a different lens design the camera would look better. But if it works the looks would not bother me.
     
  10. rotxlk82

    rotxlk82

    Jul 20, 2007
    UK
    I agree, allthough it looks a bit ugly (IMHO, of course) time has obviously been put into ergnomically crafting the body and grip

    I guess the true value of this crafting cannot really be measured until they're actually out in the customers hands and being used however
     
  11. It should be interesting how the camera fares in a customers hands. If you look at what the kit I am using now. I probably won't be the person measuring that. I am still stuck in the 1980s and early 90s.
     
  12. wgilles

    wgilles

    Apr 25, 2008
    NJ
    Won't make me change to a Sony. I don't know, for some reason I feel like if I used a Sony DSLR I would be considered a real "amateur"
    I don't know how to explain it...I'm sure Sony SLRs are real nice cameras, but I would just feel like I could be doing better. I just can't see how Sony glass measures up to Nikon glass. I mean Sony makes TVs, mp3 players, Blu-ray stuff, etc. Nikon makes glass...
     
  13. Lurker

    Lurker

    Jul 21, 2007
    NJ
    You're forgetting that it is not Sony glass... It is Minolta glass. It might have a Sony label on it, but it is still manufactured in Minolta plants by Minolta workers. If I remember correctly Sony didn't even get those plants - they just have contracts with Minolta for delivery of the lenses. Development of the cameras, in similar fashion, is done by Minolta engineers.
    Minolta used to make glass for Leica. Which should indicate that they're not too shabby at it. The Minolta 135 STF beats the crap out of the Nikkor 85/1.4 when it comes to bokeh, for instance - and we know how good the cream machine is!
    In similar fashion, the Sony 70-200/2.8 G is just as good as the Nikkor version. There are various good reasons to prefer Nikon over Sony when it comes to choosing an SLR - commitment, variety of the lens program, the flash system - but not the lenses. The quality of the "G" lenses is outstanding and just as good as Canons "L" lenses or Nikons gold rings.
     
  14. marioni

    marioni

    808
    Jan 22, 2006
    Old school prism makes it look a bit funny.

    I think it's overpriced - you can buy it for $2,999 right? And what's the price for a new 5D Mark II?
     
  15. I'd be willing to bet that Canon shooters should be thanking Sony for their 5D mkII's $2,699 price tag. They want to have that stand out when people are comparing the 3 big compact FF DSLRS(D700, A900 and 5DII), so after the A900 Canon most likely dropped the price a bit to help overshadow the other hype. "Why buy that, when you can shoot Canon and pay $300 less?"

    As for glass, a bunch of Sony's top lenses are Carl Zeiss glass, with more to come.

    And Nikon and Canon are huge companies that make quite a bit more than just cameras also. However, as a recent Nikon transplant who switched from the Sony A700, I agree with the fact that while the Sony cameras do stand up well, the brand name just has an amateur appeal right now. That's half the reason I switched. I was a Minolta shooter who switched when Sony came along, and was for about 2 years. One of the reasons I switched was because of the weird looks I'd get from clients when they asked what type of camera I shoot with.

    So far I don't miss anything about Sony, EXCEPT the in-body stabilization. It really does a phenomenal job of turning all of your lenses into stabilized lenses. If that's a priority for you, then Sony has great options.
     
  16. Doug

    Doug

    Jan 17, 2006
    East TN
    Interesting discussion folks, thanks for keeping it on track too. I was just a little surprised when I Saw this one, but admitedly, I was behind the loop on the Canon 5DII as well in terms of knowledge when I posted this. Now I have learned, it's not the only high mpx player in a small body. I do say Come on Nikon, match it sometime. :)

    I shot Minolta years ago, but never built a collection of lenses, I was a 50mm prime only shooter I think it was. My zoom was my feet. I still have a X700 at home gathering dust, well actually in a case, so not gathering dust. :-O

    Doug
     
  17. wgilles

    wgilles

    Apr 25, 2008
    NJ
    Didn't know that, thanks for correcting me!:wink: