Sony a99 specs

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 17:00:23 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2012.08.30 06:15 , R. Mark Clayton wrote:
Snip

I'm curious, what glass do you own?

17-35 Cosina
50 f1.4 Minolta
35-70 Macro Minolta
70-200 f4 Sigma
28-200 f4 Tokina (superseded the about two that came with the back)

And I am after a 500mm AF f8 Reflex Minolta, having passed up a manual focus
600mm some years ago.

The most interesting lens Minolta ever made was the 250mm MD reflex - a
shame it was not adapted for AF use as this would keep the weight of the kit
down!

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
Sony fanbois should enjoy their brief moment of satisfaction as it
will probably be very brief indeed.

Nikon's D600, using the same Sony sensor, will effectively replace the
D7000 in the Nikon range with a full frame camera. The key to the
Sony A99's success, or likely lack of it, will be the image quality
and the price.

In the past, other manufacturers using Sony sensors have gotten better
IQ than Sony has ever managed to. The A99 needs to buck that trend.

Then there is the price. One of my colleagues who went to a Sony
dealer seminar where the A99 was top of the agenda said that there was
consternation among the audience when the price was announced. The
verdict was "It will never sell against the D600."

There is time for Sony to reconsider its pricing policy before
Photokina. Let's hope they use that time well. Otherwise, the A99
will remain an expensive trinket that is only attractive to the
ever-diminishing number of Minolta/Sony Alpha fanbois.

Within a few months, Pentax will introduce a full frame DSLR using the
same Sony sensor. In the past, Pentax and Nikon have produced
outstanding image quality from Sony sensors, whereas Sony has lagged a
long way behind both.

It would be sad indeed for Sony if Pentax continued to sell more
camera bodies than Sony can with the same sensor.


Surely anybody who already has a few lenses simply buys the body brand that
fits their lens system. I'd want a *very* good reason to buy all new lenses,
flash guns etc. And how many complete newcomers start with an A99 or D600 I
wonder?

Trevor.

On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 22:38:27 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2012.08.30 20:42 , wrote:

I'm curious, what glass do you own?

All FF

20 f/2.8 Min Very good

I have a Sigma 24mm f1.8, not a bad lens I guess but rarely use it.

50 f/1.7 Min Good+

I just got a 50mm f1.4 since I sold my 50mm f1.8 I had for ages...

100 f/2.8 macro Min Excellent
135 f/1.8 Sony/CZ Excellent+++
28-70 f/2.8 Min Very good
80-200 f/2.8 Min Excellent

That's the line-up I want!!

I used to have the Sigma 28-300 but gave it to my nephew (part time pro!) and
then I got the 28-300 Nikkor VR for a walk-around lens. It's not too bad with
the correction in ACR... but it isn't anything near to 300mm at close range...
more like 170mm at 20'.

My other lens is a Sigma 50-500 which is actually very sharp, I can read fr.
tags on the antennas on towers!


Lust: 85mm (Sony (former Minolta design) or Sony/CZ version);
135 f/3.5 [4.5] (Sony - former Minolta design).

You want another 135mm?

Sony/CZ is a Carl Zeiss design manufactured by Sony.

I've had others, not very notable except the 300 f/2.8 which I sold.
Excellent lens but I didn't use it much. A good offer later...

Sounds expensive!

I have lots of Nikon and Sigma but mostly cheapees, the 2 lenses I have that are
good are a 105mm f2.8 VR macro and a 16-35mm f4 VR, both FF.

I think you mean 105mm f/2.8 VR micro. Excellent. Almost as sharp as
the Minolta 100 in fact. (very narrow difference).

Yes, they call it 'micro'... I had the 60mm micro before but sold it when I got
a FF camera... now that's gone as well!

I don't have an FF camera anymore but will get one, and then I plan on getting
the 24-70mm f2.8 and maybe the 70-200mm f2.8.

I never ever considered APS-C glass even when I had the Maxxum 7D. I
held out that there would be a FF and IAC was still using my film camera
a lot.

The only aps-c lenses I have are the kit lenses that I got with my D70 and D60,
an 18-55 (useless zoom really) and an 18-70.

Hey I still have a Sony A 18-200mm!

On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 13:42:01 +0100, "R. Mark Clayton"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 17:00:23 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2012.08.30 06:15 , R. Mark Clayton wrote:
Snip

I'm curious, what glass do you own?

17-35 Cosina
50 f1.4 Minolta
35-70 Macro Minolta
70-200 f4 Sigma
28-200 f4 Tokina (superseded the about two that came with the back)

And I am after a 500mm AF f8 Reflex Minolta, having passed up a manual focus
600mm some years ago.

What is a Reflex lens? Is it like the mirror (telescope style) lens that I think
Nikon used to make?


The most interesting lens Minolta ever made was the 250mm MD reflex - a
shame it was not adapted for AF use as this would keep the weight of the kit
down!

On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 14:26:56 +1200, Me wrote:

-snip-

Aren't you referring to Nikon lenses?
Wait a couple of weeks, Nikon will release the "D600".
This is rumoured to have 24.5mp FX sensor - possibly the same as the one
used in the Sony a99 - but a "serious amateur" feature set more similar
to the Nikon D7000 than the more pro-featured D300/700/800 range. If
the rumour is correct that the price will be below US$2,000, I expect
that the only problem may be keeping up supply - these will be out of
Nikon Thailand plant, not Japan - unlike all of Nikon's other FX models.

I've heard about the 600... have to decide if I want it or the 800...

Need to do some Serious Thinking....

(I used to have the D700, a Very Nice camera!)

On 8/31/2012 7:39 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 13:42:01 +0100, "R. Mark Clayton"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 17:00:23 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2012.08.30 06:15 , R. Mark Clayton wrote:
Snip

I'm curious, what glass do you own?

17-35 Cosina
50 f1.4 Minolta
35-70 Macro Minolta
70-200 f4 Sigma
28-200 f4 Tokina (superseded the about two that came with the back)

And I am after a 500mm AF f8 Reflex Minolta, having passed up a manual focus
600mm some years ago.

What is a Reflex lens? Is it like the mirror (telescope style) lens that I think
Nikon used to make?

Yup!



The most interesting lens Minolta ever made was the 250mm MD reflex - a
shame it was not adapted for AF use as this would keep the weight of the kit
down!




--
Peter

On 1/09/2012 11:41 a.m., wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 14:26:56 +1200, Me wrote:

-snip-

Aren't you referring to Nikon lenses?
Wait a couple of weeks, Nikon will release the "D600".
This is rumoured to have 24.5mp FX sensor - possibly the same as the one
used in the Sony a99 - but a "serious amateur" feature set more similar
to the Nikon D7000 than the more pro-featured D300/700/800 range. If
the rumour is correct that the price will be below US$2,000, I expect
that the only problem may be keeping up supply - these will be out of
Nikon Thailand plant, not Japan - unlike all of Nikon's other FX models.

I've heard about the 600... have to decide if I want it or the 800...

Need to do some Serious Thinking....

(I used to have the D700, a Very Nice camera!)

It's too early to do serious thinking...
Serious waiting is required in the meantime, to see what the actual
price and full specs are.

Bruce wrote in
:

Rich wrote:
Alan Browne wrote in
om:
From two sources.

Apparently will be announced on Sept. 12 / Available in late Oct.

Highlights:
FF 24.3 Mpix
14 bit ADC (finally!)
10 fps (for those who like that sort of thing)
ISO 100 - 25600, 50 with lower DR

Lightest FF body is intriguing.


Sony fanbois should enjoy their brief moment of satisfaction as it
will probably be very brief indeed.

Nikon's D600, using the same Sony sensor, will effectively replace the
D7000 in the Nikon range with a full frame camera. The key to the
Sony A99's success, or likely lack of it, will be the image quality
and the price.

Two things, I don't know how reliable the Sony's are, according to some,
not very. Secondly, I doubt the replacement for the (D7000 which only
costs $1100) for the body now will cost as much as the Sony as the A77
was more expensive than the D7000, at least in Canada.

On 2012.08.31 19:35 , wrote:
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 22:38:27 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2012.08.30 20:42 , wrote:

I'm curious, what glass do you own?

All FF

20 f/2.8 Min Very good

I have a Sigma 24mm f1.8, not a bad lens I guess but rarely use it.

50 f/1.7 Min Good+

I just got a 50mm f1.4 since I sold my 50mm f1.8 I had for ages...

I'd rather the 85mm (Min or Sony CZ).


100 f/2.8 macro Min Excellent
135 f/1.8 Sony/CZ Excellent+++
28-70 f/2.8 Min Very good
80-200 f/2.8 Min Excellent

That's the line-up I want!!

One at a time and you'll get there.


I used to have the Sigma 28-300 but gave it to my nephew (part time pro!) and
then I got the 28-300 Nikkor VR for a walk-around lens. It's not too bad with
the correction in ACR... but it isn't anything near to 300mm at close range...
more like 170mm at 20'.

As a general guide avoid zoom ratios greater than 3:1. (For 'walkabout'
lenses, greater is fine until you find that subject that you'd like to
spend some time on and the good lenses are back home).


My other lens is a Sigma 50-500 which is actually very sharp, I can read fr.
tags on the antennas on towers!


Lust: 85mm (Sony (former Minolta design) or Sony/CZ version);
135 f/3.5 [4.5] (Sony - former Minolta design).

Oops - that should be f/2.8 [T4.5].


You want another 135mm?

They are two very different 135 mm lenses. The [T4.5] has an
apodization filter resulting in very, very smooth OOF characteristics.
Also a very sharp lens. It's great for portraits, esp. outdoor, natural
light (say subject in open shade, a touch of flash and a brightly sunlit
background). I've also seen a lot of nature photography taken with it.

The Sony/CZ 135 f/1.8 is just a big fast brute force sharp lens.

Sony/CZ is a Carl Zeiss design manufactured by Sony.

I've had others, not very notable except the 300 f/2.8 which I sold.
Excellent lens but I didn't use it much. A good offer later...

Sounds expensive!

It was. I bought it used in good condition. I made some nice photos
with it, but that required a tripod and patience. (Oddly I also did
some portraits with it as well that turned out quite nice). But it was
big and heavy and beast and I didn't use it often enough. So I sold it.
(Along with the 1.4 and 2.0x TC's that I got with it originally).


I have lots of Nikon and Sigma but mostly cheapees, the 2 lenses I have that are
good are a 105mm f2.8 VR macro and a 16-35mm f4 VR, both FF.

I think you mean 105mm f/2.8 VR micro. Excellent. Almost as sharp as
the Minolta 100 in fact. (very narrow difference).

Yes, they call it 'micro'... I had the 60mm micro before but sold it when I got
a FF camera... now that's gone as well!

I don't have an FF camera anymore but will get one, and then I plan on getting
the 24-70mm f2.8 and maybe the 70-200mm f2.8.

I never ever considered APS-C glass even when I had the Maxxum 7D. I
held out that there would be a FF and IAC was still using my film camera
a lot.

The only aps-c lenses I have are the kit lenses that I got with my D70 and D60,
an 18-55 (useless zoom really) and an 18-70.

Hey I still have a Sony A 18-200mm!

Too much ZR.

--
"C'mon boys, you're not laying pipe!".
-John Keating.

On 2012.08.31 19:39 , wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 13:42:01 +0100, "R. Mark Clayton"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 17:00:23 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2012.08.30 06:15 , R. Mark Clayton wrote:
Snip

I'm curious, what glass do you own?

17-35 Cosina
50 f1.4 Minolta
35-70 Macro Minolta
70-200 f4 Sigma
28-200 f4 Tokina (superseded the about two that came with the back)

And I am after a 500mm AF f8 Reflex Minolta, having passed up a manual focus
600mm some years ago.

What is a Reflex lens? Is it like the mirror (telescope style) lens that I think
Nikon used to make?

Yes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minolt...mm_Reflex_lens

Notably the later Minolta/Sony designs are AF. Usually such lenses are MF.


--
"C'mon boys, you're not laying pipe!".
-John Keating.