RSS Feeds
Cameras
Hands-on with the Sony Alpha 900
Posted by Mark Wilson at 1:32 AM on October 2, 2008
There's something about the 24-megapix Sony Alpha 900 DSLR, which hits stores in Japan on October 23rd for about 330,000 yen ($US3,150), that feels great. It might have been the two lovely models in Hawaiian wraps that the electronics giant had posing for shutterbugs at CEATEC outside Tokyo, or it might be the 900's 35mm full-frame CMOS Exmor sensor and the tester's Carl Zeiss Sonnar 135/1.8 lens, a combination which delivered outstanding performance. I found myself uttering the word "amazing" several times while shooting with it.
After all, this is the highest resolution DSLR in its class on the market. The dual Bionz processors allow 5 frames per second burst, but the enormous file sizes can eat up memory on your cards—you'll fit only 105 RAW images on a 4-gig compact flash card. Another great feature is that the SteadyShot anti-vibration feature is in the camera—not the lens—which helps if you're using older Minolta lenses on it. I also liked the large, comfortable eyepiece—it makes my ancient Nikon D70 feel like a pinhole camera—and the very bright,100% coverage viewfinder. The controls around the 3-inch, 270dpi LCD screen were quite intuitive. A handy preview function activated with the depth of field button allows you to adjust white balance and other aspects before taking the actual photo. But make no mistake, this camera is a brick—the magnesium alloy body and rubber housing alone (minus batteries and accessories) weighs 850 g, and will strain your arms if you're not used to lugging heavy lenses and bodies. Still, the Alpha 900 should win over some film die-hards who have been waiting for full-frame sensors in DSLR cameras.
Sony Alpha 900 full specs available here.
Photos and story by Tim Hornyak.
Comments (AU Comments · US Comments)
There are currently no AU comments for this post.
cpthook
Posted 2:07 AM 2/10/08
@hykos: Uh, Canon has had a full frame body out for over 5 years now...
cpthook
daftrok
Posted 1:58 AM 2/10/08
Can it shoot 1080p video?
daftrok
hykos
Posted 1:58 AM 2/10/08
"Still, the Alpha 900 should win over some film diehards who have been waiting for full-frame sensors in DSLR cameras."
Canon has had a full frame DLSR for 2 years now. Not to mention the 1D and D3, or the D700 which is out now.
24mp is still too many pixels in that size frame.
hykos
bung
Posted 1:43 AM 2/10/08
Wow! You got a shot of Scott Thompson testing the camera!
bung
floydian
Posted 2:52 AM 2/10/08
How about some pics of "two lovely models in Hawaiian wraps"?? You call this journalism? :(
floydian
clockradio
Posted 2:43 AM 2/10/08
Can it play Crysis?
Yeah I said it..
clockradio
JoyceHornet
Posted 2:04 AM 2/10/08
no. Its a camera, not a camcorder. Its made for professionals who shoot mostly studio and dont need/want video
JoyceHornet
Cobol_Mongol
Posted 3:25 AM 2/10/08
Hey! I close my right eye and focus with my left. What about you guys? Can we have a poll? My site:
www.flickr.com/photos/ashwinmudigonda
Cobol_Mongol
hykos
Posted 3:21 AM 2/10/08
@WiwiJumbo:
The unfortunate performance is due to the megapixels. They would have been better off not pandering to the ignorant megapixel loving masses.
hykos
hykos
Posted 3:18 AM 2/10/08
@cpthook:
I was referring to the 5D. Hence the "not to mention the 1D" you seemed to have missed. I was taking into consideration the class of camera. The A900 and 1D are not the same class so I didn't feel the need to use it as an example.
hykos
WiwiJumbo
Posted 3:09 AM 2/10/08
From what I've seen of the sample shots it falls apart at ISO 800 and above: [www.dpreview.com]
ISO 800: [www.dpreview.com]
ISO 1600: [www.dpreview.com]
ISO 3200: [www.dpreview.com]
With the latest from Nikon and Canon, that's a unfortunate performance. Tho I guess it tries to make up for that with the MegaPixels.
WiwiJumbo
Oryx
Posted 3:07 AM 2/10/08
@daftrok:
Yeah, that's video thing is pretty cool. I think I saw some press guys at the last NFL game shooting video with the Alpha. Ohnowait....
Oryx
PastorDoodah
Posted 4:13 AM 2/10/08
High speed? Kodachrome performance sucked at 800 also I seem to remember. Well that's what the big glass is for as well as the IS. Night photography is not as important as day photography for most people in any event. If you're shooting in coal mines and opium dens a lot you want all the speed you can get I guess. Good price point.
PastorDoodah
Ghung
Posted 3:53 AM 2/10/08
WiwiJumbo, those shots are jpeg, not RAW, and Sony has a ways to go with their jpeg algorithms. However, when shooting RAW, this camera is as good as it gets. The A900 has in-body IS, class leading resolution, 5fps, 100% viewfinder, 1/250th flash sync, AF assist lamp, autofocus Zeiss lenses...all stats which beat the Canon 5dii. However, the 5Dii has...video? Who cares. I guarantee that if this camera was released by Canon, most pro photographers would choose it over the 5Dii. Either way, this is a solid release from Sony.
Ghung
WiwiJumbo
Posted 4:16 AM 2/10/08
@Ghung: Interesting, I wasn't aware of that. Do you have any links to raw files which have been better processed to jpeg?
I'd like to see a comparison of a straight to jpeg and a raw to jpeg.
At least it's not memory stick only, I refuse to purchase anything that takes that. (Not that I'm likely to buy this.... but still. :)
WiwiJumbo
Scaramanga
Posted 4:59 AM 2/10/08
@PastorDoodah:
Film sucked in general for low-light; people don't remember this. Even at ISO400 you had noticeable grain, ISO800 looked horrible by today's standards.
I used to shoot with medium-format during the 80s and early 90s, back then shooting with ISO50 for the old Velvia's because I thought the ISO100 was far too grainy. You started to get noticeable grain around ISO200 when blown up to 8X10. This is with a huge-lens and film mind you.
man, I sound old; get off my lawn, etc.
Scaramanga
Scaramanga
Posted 4:51 AM 2/10/08
@WiwiJumbo: @WiwiJumbo:
It looks comparable to a Canon 1Ds MarkIII in terms of noise, and by no means "falls apart". Clearly an ignorant statement. In fact it actually looks good for a 24MP sensor.
In fact, the performance is on par with most cameras aside from the D3/D700 and soon the 5DII.
The pixel density for a full-frame sensor at 24MP is around 10MP in 1.5 crop. So it has larger photodiodes then most APS-C sized dSLRs.
Scaramanga
RoswellDawhoa
Posted 4:14 AM 2/10/08
Ghung: The camera falls apart at higher ISOs. If you need to shoot with low available light this is NOT the camera to get.
RoswellDawhoa
WiwiJumbo
Posted 5:29 AM 2/10/08
@Scaramanga: Well that's kinda my point. The 1Ds MarkIII was announced in Aug. 2007. [www.dpreview.com]
As they've been saying "the game has changed" since then. Both Nikon and Canon have announced/released models which handle high ISO better, for only slightly less MP. That's the market that Sony is entering this camera and I think they might have been caught by surprise.
Maybe it's as Ghung says, that it's only the jpeg conversion in camera. But, I can only go on what I see.
WiwiJumbo
Scaramanga
Posted 5:57 AM 2/10/08
@ RoswellDawhoa
The camera does NOT fall apart at high-ISOs, seriously, I don't know where you pull this out of. Its true this ain't a Nikon D3/D700, its not meant to be. We'll see this sensor in the rumored Nikon D3X. Its really a competitor to the 1Ds.
From Imaging-resource:
"Sony A900's High ISO noise reduction versus that of the 1Ds ... Overall, the 1Ds comes out on top with greater detail, but it's darn close. What's sure is that the Sony A900 is a fit rival for Canon's best camera, which costs $5,000 more."
"First, the Sony A900's image quality is truly awe-inspiring. Opening a file in Photoshop and hitting Command + to get to 100% reminds me of that scene in Blade Runner when Deckard uses the Esper photoanalysis machine. If you know the film, you'll remember that he finds tremendous detail in the print photograph from the year 2019: "Enhance 57 to 19. Track 45 left. Stop. Enhance 15 to 23. Give me a hard copy right there." In the end, he's found a reflection in the mirror that gives him an important clue."
Scaramanga
UbertoVerres
Posted 1:56 AM 2/10/08
The anti-vibration is not only for old Minolta lenses!! It is for all lenses. Even the newest ones. There is no IS Sony lenses. It is useless with the in-body one.
UbertoVerres
Ghung
Posted 6:59 AM 2/10/08
Scaramanga is right. Add to that the fact that you can downsize an A900 file to 12MP to match the Nikon D3/D700, and the high ISO is very close.
Ghung
EricAlder
Posted 7:29 AM 2/10/08
Lessee...
105 images @ 5 frames/second
= 21 seconds to max out a 4G card
Better buy a lot of cards!
(But if you can afford the camera in the first place, a few extra cards should be no problem)
EricAlder
cpthook
Posted 7:41 AM 2/10/08
@hykos: ok... well in that case, the 5d is 3 years old, not 2. The point is any 35mm diehards who haven't switched because of quality issues are retarded. The technology has been here for 5 years, 3+ if you didn't think the 1ds was good enough.
cpthook
Kevin337
Posted 2:40 AM 2/10/08
I guess it's safe to assume that the $3,150 does not include that lens.
Kevin337