# Sony Alpha 57 is no joke Canon and Nikon folks!!



## jason324

Coming from a Canon 5d Mark II owner I must tell you the Sony a57 is a quality
 product that is totally capable of pro photography results in my opinion!! 

I've written a series of articles for those interested in seeing what this camera can do, and here is a few pics of the a57.






















Sony  A57 is in the Lab and I have some High Res Photos and HD Video of the  Camera and 24-70mm f/2.8 Carl Zeiss Lens!! | SonyAlphaLab.com

Image quality is very good!!

Sony A57 - Sample Photos w/ 100% Crops using the 24-70mm f/2.8 Carl Zeiss Lens!! A57 Firmware Update!! | SonyAlphaLab.com

The AF is also awesome and better than the A77 pre-firmware update in my  opinion. The 12fps feature not only works, but it works incredible  well!!

Sony A57 12fps Feature Tested using New Firmware!! Sample Pics w/ 100% Crops!! | SonyAlphaLab.com


The Sony A57, Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD lens, and the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM Lens!! Artsy Product Shots in BW:

Sony A57 and the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Lens and the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM Lens!! | SonyAlphaLab.com

I also have a ton of Sample Photos from our Family Vacation!! 

Sony  A57, Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM Lens, Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II  Lens, and Sesame Place and Crayola Factory Family Vacation!! |  SonyAlphaLab.com

AutoHDR with the A57!!

Sony A57 and the AutoHDR Feature Tested - Sample Photos and 100% Crops!! | SonyAlphaLab.com

If you have any questions or requests, please feel free to fire away 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Best,
Jay


----------



## Patriot

I believe it's good to have a third competitor enter the field dominated by Canon and Nikon. Sony might bring some fresh ideals in their cameras


----------



## jason324

Patriot said:


> I believe it's good to have a third competitor enter the field dominated by Canon and Nikon. Sony might bring some fresh ideals in their cameras


 I agree, and Sony makes the best Sensors!!


----------



## jason324

I just finished the Hands on Review if anybody is interested  

Sony Alpha 57 (SLT-A57) - Hands on Review Using Multiple Lenses!! | SonyAlphaLab.com

Best,
Jay


----------



## 2WheelPhoto

Has Sony finally made a full frame camera?


----------



## gsgary

12fps only works in auto, i have used an A55 in the studio and its a pain in tha arse


----------



## belial

Patriot said:
			
		

> I believe it's good to have a third competitor enter the field dominated by Canon and Nikon. Sony might bring some fresh ideals in their cameras



Not really. Two competitors is good. Three actually tends to hold the market back.


----------



## Kolia

Yes because Minolta slowed everybody down when they came out with the first AF system...

Do you guys read your comments before posting them ?  Lol


----------



## DiskoJoe

belial said:


> Patriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe it's good to have a third competitor enter the field dominated by Canon and Nikon. Sony might bring some fresh ideals in their cameras
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not really. Two competitors is good. Three actually tends to hold the market back.
Click to expand...


You should be an economics professor! My professors were completely wrong. Duality in a market does seem like such a better way to go then multiple competitors.


----------



## jason324

2WheelPhoto said:


> Has Sony finally made a full frame camera?



Nope, it's in the works and called the A99. The Full Frame Translucent mirror was apparently giving them challenges and the Thailand flood delayed everything from Sony that I work with. 

Best,
Jay


----------



## jason324

gsgary said:


> 12fps only works in auto, i have used an A55 in the studio and its a pain in tha arse



The A55 sucked in the studio because the EVF was garbage 1st generatiopn. The A57 has a second gen EVF that is much much better. It also has an option to turn off the exposure simulation which is key for the Studio. I don't recal if the A55 had that feature right this second, but I don't think it did. 

Best,
Jay


----------



## hockeybum

The a900 which has been around for a little while, is a full frame camera.


----------



## Kolia

hockeybum said:
			
		

> The a900 which has been around for a little while, is a full frame camera.



It was discontinued some time ago.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto

LoL...   This thread delivers, but i'm not running out and buying to Sony just yet


----------



## gsgary

yegan said:


> spamquote removed - mod



I hate Sony products


----------



## o hey tyler

I used an A57 the other day... First impression after picking it up was "Is this a joke? This feels like a toy." The viewfinder tearing and refresh rate gave me motion sickness, and I have NEVER had an issue with motion sickness. 

IMO, I'd take my 5D2 any day of the week over the plastic children's toys Sony produces. But then again, that's just how I feel.


----------



## Kolia

Lol

Most people would probably find a camera 3 times the price "more better" ! 

A57 with lens is 750$
5D2 is over 2,000$ and full frame...

Compare the A57 with a Rebel T3i instead.


----------



## kassad

Kolia said:


> Lol
> 
> Most people would probably find a camera 3 times the price "more better" !
> 
> A57 with lens is 750$
> 5D2 is over 2,000$ and full frame...
> 
> Compare the A57 with a Rebel T3i instead.



It's best to just ignore him.  He's just trolling.


----------



## Kolia

Tyler usually has good comments. 

I give him credits to have at least gone and held the A57 in his hands.


----------



## o hey tyler

My biggest complaint that I had with the Camera was the EVF. I just can't get past that. Some people can, but having used SLRs/DSLRs my whole life, I can't "do" the EVF. It gives me a headache and makes me feel dizzy. It could have also been the light indoors, and the fact that it had a kit lens. 

Having held the A57, the T3i, and just the T3, I can say that the Sony felt most comparable to the T3 in my hands, judging by my memory. 

Also, Kassad... I think I'm allowed to have an opinion. Thank you very much. I've used and compared a lot of cameras. Not trolling, just stating how I feel about a particular product. Deal with it.


----------



## Crollo

Kolia said:


> Compare the A57 with a Rebel T3i instead.



So here we are, making claims that the A57 _isn't_&#8203; a joke, then saying it's only comparable to a T3i. Nice.


----------



## Kolia

Crollo said:
			
		

> So here we are, making claims that the A57 isn't&#8203; a joke, then saying it's only comparable to a T3i. Nice.



What metric would use to select competitor camera if not new sales price ?

If one is on the market for a DSLR and has a 750$ budget, the Rebel T3i is an option, so is the D5200 and the A57.


----------



## Crollo

When I hear that a camera isn't a 'joke' I don't care about pricing or name brand, I'm looking for professional design and features. 
An entry level camera, is in fact a 'joke', if it's to be labeled anything. 

This camera doesn't so much as have a top mounted LCD, has cheap build quality and etc. I'll take my 12 year old E10 over a T2i [\any entry level camera] simply because I've already taken my E10 in places where the T2i would fall apart and literally cease to function due to it's poor build quality. But, not everybody abuses their cameras like me, so for many people an entry level camera is fine.


----------



## Overread

Crollo said:


> An entry level camera, is in fact a 'joke', if it's to be labeled anything.



My 400D just wants you to know that it no longer likes you anymore 

Honestly yes entry level is entry level, but why does that make a single camera a "joke". Yes its a joke compared to something up to 8 times its price on the market - but we are not comparing it to something 8 times the price, but something comparable in price. Its daft to compare things to those miles above the product line unless your intent is to show something that is superior to the items priced far higher than it.


----------



## Alex_B

I have very bad experience with Sony customer service ... and very good experience with Canon and friends had very good experience with Nikon.

The lenses for sony might be very good, if they are real Zeiss lenses, wich I did not check yet.

But in any case, it is just a camera ...


----------



## jason324

Thanks for all the comments an input guys   Everybody is intitled to their opinion, and the fact that you held the camera gives you some crediability so no worries from me  

In any event, this camera is not a joke in my opinion. I reviewd the Canon T3i and it was a nice camera, but feature wise it's not even comparable. Build quality is also not much better in my opinion. The 60D or 70D I agree has a better build quality and is more Proffesional by design. That is what the A77 is for though?? 

For example the New T4i just came out and what does it really have over the T3i that is worth a dam?? Now compare the T4i specs to the A57 specs which is also $200 dollars less mind you!!! 

It blows it out of the water in amost every way if you look at with an open mind and objectivley. If you go into it saying "all Sony Products suck" then your clearly not open minded enough to atleast consider other products in my opinion. 

That being said, Sony makes the New Nikon 36mp Sensor and it's the best Full Frame sensor to date!!! Check it out: DxOMark - Nikon D800

Sony does do a few things well, no doubt!! 

Jay


----------



## unpopular

DiskoJoe said:


> belial said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Patriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe it's good to have a third competitor enter the field dominated by Canon and Nikon. Sony might bring some fresh ideals in their cameras
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not really. Two competitors is good. Three actually tends to hold the market back.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You should be an economics professor! My professors were completely wrong. Duality in a market does seem like such a better way to go then multiple competitors.
Click to expand...


This is a fascinating assertion, and I would guess this likely has much more to do with American culture and thinking than it does to do with any factual basis. 

It simply does not make sense that two competitors competing with only one another will out inovate multiple competitors each trying to out inovate one another. Several thinking bodies will always come to more solutions to a technological problem than two; if two heads are better than one, three heads are better than two.

Perhaps Nikon and Canon will fair better as corporations without several competitors, but as a consumer, I couldn't care less about the pocketbooks of Nikon/Canon CEOs. Neither should you.


----------



## Designer

Strange how just this morning I was looking at my old Minolta stuff.  Can't give the camera away, but I've got three lenses; two zooms and a 50 prime.  Not great lenses by any means, but who knows, perhaps someone in my family is considering a new Sony body.


----------



## unpopular

I think the only Sony bodies worth getting are used and discontinued ... the 50/1.7 isn't bad. The bokeh can get a bit swirly.


----------



## gsgary

unpopular said:


> I think the only Sony bodies worth getting are used and discontinued ... the 50/1.7 isn't bad. The bokeh can get a bit swirly.



A900


----------



## unpopular

a700 or a900, a850 if you can find a good deal. Everything else is kinda "meh". Not bad, really, just not great.


----------



## jason324

I disagree, the older models were really nice, no question. The Sony came out with the A55 which although revolutionary in technology, the build quality was poor for sony's standards. SInce the A55, we are now on the Next gen and the A57 has very good build quality!! Not quite Canon 60 or 70D, but certainly equal or to the $200 dollar more expensive Canon t4i. 

Best,
Jay


----------



## unpopular

Oh, IDK if 'revolutionary' is the right word for it. Not saying SLT doesn't have it's advantages, it does not realy change how we photograph or see photographs. It's not like digital, color reversal or dry plate. SLT is revolutionary from a manufacturing POV, I suppose. The technology is much less expensive to manufacture.

Still, the build quality just isn't up to par with the a700 and a900. At the same time these cameras were geared for a different user as well. I have no doubt that with the a99 and rumored a1S we'll start seeing build quality in line with teh a700, a900 and NEX7.

Sony can build great cameras, excluding the 7, they just haven't in a while.


----------



## bhop

If the A57 only has an EVF and no optical viewfinder, then it's useless _*IMO*_.  No matter the specs..


----------



## mjhoward

jason324 said:


> The Sony came out with the A55 which although revolutionary in technology, the build quality was poor for sony's standards.



Sony didn't develop any revolutionary technology with the A55!  The "Translucent" mirror, also known as a Pellicle Mirror, was first used by CANON in 1965!  They went on to produce several bodies using this 'revolutionary' technology when in 1976 NIKON started using it.  It was only 45 YEARS AFTER CANON developed it that Sony started 'borrowing' the idea.


----------



## DiskoJoe

bhop said:


> If the A57 only has an EVF and no optical viewfinder, then it's useless _*IMO*_.  No matter the specs..



I wish it could have both like the x-pro. I thought that was a good move by fuji.


----------



## unpopular

yes. but you can't with an SLT because the viewfinder would be too dim. I think the only thing you really gain with an SLT over a mirrorless is phase detect AF.


----------



## unpopular

mjhoward said:


> jason324 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Sony came out with the A55 which although revolutionary in technology, the build quality was poor for sony's standards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sony didn't develop any revolutionary technology with the A55!  The "Translucent" mirror, also known as a Pellicle Mirror, was first used by CANON in 1965!  They went on to produce several bodies using this 'revolutionary' technology when in 1976 NIKON started using it.  It was only 45 YEARS AFTER CANON developed it that Sony started 'borrowing' the idea.
Click to expand...


Though I think the implimentation with an EVF is kind fo a different approach, and that Cannon's pellicle was eally nothing other than a bad idea with no advantages.


----------



## ConradM

unpopular said:


> yes. but you can't with an SLT because the viewfinder would be too dim. *I think the only thing you really gain with an SLT over a mirrorless is phase detect AF.*



That and how fast it is at least when talking entry level. The 7fps combined with the AF is probably my favorite thing about the A33.


----------



## Kolia

Revolutionary or not, once you get used to EVF you won't want to go back to OVF. 

The ability to display all the information you want,  better low light performance and finally the return of a view finder that is manual focus friendly makes it very useful.


----------



## mjhoward

Kolia said:


> Revolutionary or not, once you get used to EVF you won't want to go back to OVF.



Yes I will.  In fact I did.  I had a point and shoot with an EVF for a several years prior to getting my DSLR and hated it.  It wasn't because it was a point and shoot either.  I never find myself shooting photos by looking at the live view screen on my current body either.  I would much rather look through an OVF.


----------



## jason324

Some good points all, but I still think Sony took the translucent mirror and made something of it. As said, the version from 30 years ago sucked and died off quickly. 

As Kolia said, the distinct advantage to the EVF is seeing your photo's result before you shoot it. In other words, you see your white balance settings and exposure comp setting live as you look through the EVF in real time. This allows for incredible accurate WB, especially if you don't have a gray card. In addition to that, the zooming in ability with manual focus using the EVF is also extremely useful in sunny conditions.

With that being said, I did not like the EVF when I first used it either on the A55. That was my first experience with it, and it looked like a crappy TV for the lack of a better word. The New EVF's and OLED's are much better though, and I honestly prefer the new EVF/ oled over the optical vf on my 5D mark II.

Jay


----------



## ConradM

jason324 said:


> Some good points all, but I still think Sony took the translucent mirror and made something of it. As said, the version from 30 years ago sucked and died off quickly.
> 
> *As Kolia said, the distinct advantage to the EVF is seeing your photo's result before you shoot it. In other words, you see your white balance settings and exposure comp setting live as you look through the EVF in real time. *This allows for incredible accurate WB, especially if you don't have a gray card. In addition to that, the zooming in ability with manual focus using the EVF is also extremely useful in sunny conditions.
> 
> With that being said, I did not like the EVF when I first used it either on the A55. That was my first experience with it, and it looked like a crappy TV for the lack of a better word. The New EVF's and OLED's are much better though, and I honestly prefer the new EVF/ oled over the optical vf on my 5D mark II.
> 
> Jay



I always forget that that's not just a normal thing for all DSLR's. :lmao: 

Serious question, with an OVF, do you basically have to guess WB and Exposure? I mean with enough experience you would know what works for a given situation... But does someone new to DSLR's have to guess that stuff?


----------



## jason324

ConradM said:


> jason324 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some good points all, but I still think Sony took the translucent mirror and made something of it. As said, the version from 30 years ago sucked and died off quickly.
> 
> *As Kolia said, the distinct advantage to the EVF is seeing your photo's result before you shoot it. In other words, you see your white balance settings and exposure comp setting live as you look through the EVF in real time. *This allows for incredible accurate WB, especially if you don't have a gray card. In addition to that, the zooming in ability with manual focus using the EVF is also extremely useful in sunny conditions.
> 
> With that being said, I did not like the EVF when I first used it either on the A55. That was my first experience with it, and it looked like a crappy TV for the lack of a better word. The New EVF's and OLED's are much better though, and I honestly prefer the new EVF/ oled over the optical vf on my 5D mark II.
> 
> Jay
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I always forget that that's not just a normal thing for all DSLR's. :lmao:
> 
> Serious question, with an OVF, do you basically have to guess WB and Exposure? I mean with enough experience you would know what works for a given situation... But does someone new to DSLR's have to guess that stuff?
Click to expand...


Another huge advantage to the translucent mirror is the phase detection AF works while recording HD video.  So you get super accurate focus while recording video unlike any of the competition. Video may not matter to you, but if it does, this is a huge benefit in my opinion. 

People that are new to photography struggle with white balance. Auto WB sucks a lot of the time, so yes guessing takes place and white balance is fixed in post processing for a lot of people. I'm not saying you or I would be guessing, but a newbie would be on AWB 90% of the time. That is until they realize how important wb is. 

Also, speaking from experience chimping is often frowned upon, but you see wedding photogs doing it all the time. It's when they shoot then look at the screens histogram etc.. and then make adjustments and re-shoot. In theroy, that could be avoided with the EVF. Again, I'm not speaking to you all that understand this stuff inside and out, it's for the guys that don't get it as much. Sony's current line is mostly priced and geared towards that very market, so it makes sens to me.  The Pro grade stuff is still in the works.


----------



## DiskoJoe

Just a side note. A custom white balance can be set using just about anything that is solid white. Not exactly the same as a gray card but its pretty close. And I love my live view. My landscape shots went to a whole new level after I got it. There is no substitute for being able to see the actual render of a photo before hitting the shutter. So say what you want but its silly to not take advantage of good technology.


----------



## unpopular

jason324 said:


> do you basically have to guess WB and Exposure?



No. Not at all. There are color meters, but nobody really uses them. More important though is exposure. The problem is that there is no such thing as a "proper exposure". However, you can understand how the meter reflects data recorded, and make informed decisions about how an exposure is made to better represent the subject. I don't feel there is any guesswork at all. I know that my camera will produce a given luminance value at a given exposure within the specified spot meter region.


----------



## Kolia

Just learned that my father got rid of his old Pentax SLR last month without letting me know...  It was 40+ year old and had a needle meter for exposure in the view finder that you turned on and off when needed.


----------



## ColtenJWeaver

I own the a65 and all I can say is I'm very impressed with it. Amazing quality for an affordable price. Sony is on its way to being a top marketer in the dslr market.


----------



## belial

ColtenJWeaver said:
			
		

> Sony is on its way to being a top marketer in the dslr market.



Never going to happen


----------



## unpopular

belial said:


> ColtenJWeaver said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sony is on its way to being a top marketer in the dslr market.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never going to happen
Click to expand...


Sony will likely continue to be popular amongst it's target. Frankly, it makes no sense for Sony to try to compete with Nikon and Canon for the pro market. For one thing, the soccer mom market is immensely larger.


----------



## chuasam

belial said:


> Patriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe it's good to have a third competitor enter the field dominated by Canon and Nikon. Sony might bring some fresh ideals in their cameras
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not really. Two competitors is good. Three actually tends to hold the market back.
Click to expand...

Plus there's no real pro support for Sony.
i.e. no rental houses, no pocketwizards, no real heritage.


----------



## Sw1tchFX

chuasam said:


> there's no real pro support for Sony.
> i.e. no rental houses, no pocketwizards, no real heritage.



This is why Sony cannot be seriously considered by any pro worth anything. 


They're a total joke, and waste of time in the pro dept.


----------



## DiskoJoe

Sw1tchFX said:


> chuasam said:
> 
> 
> 
> there's no real pro support for Sony.
> i.e. no rental houses, no pocketwizards, no real heritage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is why Sony cannot be seriously considered by any pro worth anything.
> 
> 
> They're a total joke, and waste of time in the pro dept.
Click to expand...


Pocket wizard makes a sony compatible model. All sony cameras can do wireless flash too if you buy the minolta or sony brand flash. The technology is good. Nikon uses Sony parts for their pro level cameras too. The 850 and 900 are comparable to canon 5d mark ii which is what they were designed to compete with, the prosumer market.  Now they do not have a full dedicated pro line yet but are coming out with it. A99 is going to be a full frame body designed to compete directly with the nikon d800. 

sonyalpharumors | Blog | The A99 24 Megapixel sensor is completely new designed.


----------



## chuasam

DiskoJoe said:


> Sw1tchFX said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> chuasam said:
> 
> 
> 
> there's no real pro support for Sony.
> i.e. no rental houses, no pocketwizards, no real heritage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is why Sony cannot be seriously considered by any pro worth anything.
> 
> 
> They're a total joke, and waste of time in the pro dept.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Pocket wizard makes a sony compatible model. All sony cameras can do wireless flash too if you buy the minolta or sony brand flash. The technology is good. Nikon uses Sony parts for their pro level cameras too. The 850 and 900 are comparable to canon 5d mark ii which is what they were designed to compete with, the prosumer market.  Now they do not have a full dedicated pro line yet but are coming out with it. A99 is going to be a full frame body designed to compete directly with the nikon d800.
> 
> sonyalpharumors | Blog | The A99 24 Megapixel sensor is completely new designed.
Click to expand...

Pocketwizard® - Wireless transmitters and receivers nope...still no Sony.
Sony is strictly an amateur's camera. When you're at events, do you see a Sony booth? Does Sony have a professional system for still cameras like CPS or NPS?


----------



## unpopular

I really don't think sony has an interest in the professional market. I think that all they are interested in is making their cameras look and feel professional enough that consumers will buy them with confidence.

Whether this works out, we'll see.


----------



## DiskoJoe

chuasam said:


> DiskoJoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sw1tchFX said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is why Sony cannot be seriously considered by any pro worth anything.
> 
> 
> They're a total joke, and waste of time in the pro dept.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pocket wizard makes a sony compatible model. All sony cameras can do wireless flash too if you buy the minolta or sony brand flash. The technology is good. Nikon uses Sony parts for their pro level cameras too. The 850 and 900 are comparable to canon 5d mark ii which is what they were designed to compete with, the prosumer market.  Now they do not have a full dedicated pro line yet but are coming out with it. A99 is going to be a full frame body designed to compete directly with the nikon d800.
> 
> sonyalpharumors | Blog | The A99 24 Megapixel sensor is completely new designed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pocketwizard® - Wireless transmitters and receivers nope...still no Sony.
> Sony is strictly an amateur's camera. When you're at events, do you see a Sony booth? Does Sony have a professional system for still cameras like CPS or NPS?
Click to expand...


You just need an adapter. And most people dont need a flagship camera. Do you need a 1dx or a d4 to do what you do? But they are making steps in the right direction. Sony make good options and the competition will only make your camera brands have to sell there bodies for less. So you would still benefit here. So whats the problem?


----------



## cgipson1

DiskoJoe said:


> chuasam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiskoJoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pocket wizard makes a sony compatible model. All sony cameras can do wireless flash too if you buy the minolta or sony brand flash. The technology is good. Nikon uses Sony parts for their pro level cameras too. The 850 and 900 are comparable to canon 5d mark ii which is what they were designed to compete with, the prosumer market.  Now they do not have a full dedicated pro line yet but are coming out with it. A99 is going to be a full frame body designed to compete directly with the nikon d800.
> 
> sonyalpharumors | Blog | The A99 24 Megapixel sensor is completely new designed.
> 
> 
> 
> Pocketwizard® - Wireless transmitters and receivers nope...still no Sony.
> Sony is strictly an amateur's camera. When you're at events, do you see a Sony booth? Does Sony have a professional system for still cameras like CPS or NPS?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You just need an adapter. And most people dont need a flagship camera. Do you need a 1dx or a d4 to do what you do?
Click to expand...


Wow.. $99 just for an adapter (Sony Brand) to use Pocket Wizards? And only in full manual mode, No TTL compatibility? Seems expensive....


----------



## DiskoJoe

cgipson1 said:


> DiskoJoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> chuasam said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pocketwizard® - Wireless transmitters and receivers nope...still no Sony.
> Sony is strictly an amateur's camera. When you're at events, do you see a Sony booth? Does Sony have a professional system for still cameras like CPS or NPS?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just need an adapter. And most people dont need a flagship camera. Do you need a 1dx or a d4 to do what you do?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow.. $99 just for an adapter (Sony Brand) to use Pocket Wizards? And only in full manual mode, No TTL compatibility? Seems expensive....
Click to expand...


Most people use manual for multiple flash anyway. And $99 is not that bad when you saved $499 on the body.

My a580 takes pictures identical to your d7000.


----------



## cgipson1

DiskoJoe said:


> My a580 takes pictures identical to your d7000.



I understand it uses the same basic sensor.. so I would assume it is capable of similar quality on the images.


----------



## bhop

cgipson1 said:


> Wow.. $99 just for an adapter (Sony Brand) to use Pocket Wizards? And only in full manual mode, No TTL compatibility? Seems expensive....



That's why I don't like Sony stuff (except ps3), you need an adapter to use practically anything with their hardware.


----------



## chuasam

DiskoJoe said:


> You just need an adapter. And most people dont need a flagship camera. Do you need a 1dx or a d4 to do what you do? But they are making steps in the right direction. Sony make good options and the competition will only make your camera brands have to sell there bodies for less. So you would still benefit here. So whats the problem?


Nope but I use a D700 with an eye on upgrading to a D800 when I am able to. Why take a step on the wrong direction if you will end up having to ditch the entire system once you go pro? The "image quality" of a camera is a tiny part of the whole equation. Most cameras get very similar image quality. 

Saving a few hundred to get a Sony is a great way to waste thousands later if you plan to go pro. Most people don't need a flagship camera. Most people aren't pro. Telling the Nikon and Canon folk that a Sony Alpha can keep up is ridiculous. My brother uses a NEX-7. He gets great results in a small camera...but is he pro? No. The Camera is a small toy that he brings out when he wants to have fun. Does it take great pictures? Yes. Can it be used in a professional context? No.


----------



## chuasam

bhop said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow.. $99 just for an adapter (Sony Brand) to use Pocket Wizards? And only in full manual mode, No TTL compatibility? Seems expensive....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's why I don't like Sony stuff (except ps3), you need an adapter to use practically anything with their hardware.
Click to expand...

I like the PS3 too. I also like their mirrorless system. But do they cater to the pro market? No.


----------



## unpopular

I don't really know what the big deal is with this pocket wizard stuff. All the sony TTL's are wireless, as are the Metz, certain Sigma units and Nissin. 

Why do you need an overpriced pocket wizard when Sony inherited Minolta's wireless TTL protocol? Is there something I'm missing?


----------



## belial

I don't see where sony's actually even save money. Really all you get extra is fps. Most shooters don't need high fps.


----------



## Kolia

Who cares about pro anyway ?!?

Do you guys plan to one day drive an F1 race car while you drive your Corolla ?

Is Iron Chef in your future when you grill your burgers ?

Once family, bills, house and real job shows up, 3,000$+++ FF camera become pretty hard to justify for the average Joe.

Assuming that everybody is like you and has dreams of FF bodies is very narrow minded...


----------



## Kolia

belial said:
			
		

> I don't see where sony's actually even save money. Really all you get extra is fps. Most shooters don't need high fps.



Look at prices...


----------



## mjhoward

DiskoJoe said:


> My a580 takes pictures identical to your d7000.



It has the same sensor... the similarities end there.  BTW, your sensor also receives 2/3EV less light than mine.



Kolia said:


> Who cares about pro anyway ?!?
> 
> Do you guys plan to one day drive an F1 race car while you drive your Corolla ?
> 
> Is Iron Chef in your future when you grill your burgers ?
> 
> Once family, bills, house and real job shows up, 3,000$+++ FF camera become pretty hard to justify for the average Joe.
> 
> Assuming that everybody is like you and has dreams of FF bodies is very narrow minded...



Arn't you being just a little ridiculous?  By your analogy, we should all just use cell phone cameras and point-and-shoots.  After all, I don't plan on driving a Lexus or aspire to be Emeril Legasse so why even bother with an interchangeable lens body at all!  What a joke.


----------



## Kolia

All black or all white huh ?  Surprising coming from a photographer...

Well, once you start paying for your own living expenses and that of your household we can revisit the question. 

The majority of people who buy new cameras, the only ones that count for any company, are not interested in the pro equipment price.  

Sony has no FF body on the market for the time being yet they are always compared to FF and pro level competitors. I'd say they are good enough if they gather all that attention.


----------



## ConradM

belial said:


> I don't see where sony's actually even save money. Really all you get extra is fps. Most shooters don't need high fps.



Hmm, how about, phase detect AF, in body IS good for 2 - 4 stops... and the high FPS is wonderful. It's probably something of a crutch, but whenever I'm shooting something fast paced you bet that I switch to continuous and fire away. :lmao:

The AF and high FPS are good enough that I can hand my camera + a cheap tamron zoom lens to a buddy that knows nothing about photography and have him take decent pictures with it.


----------



## unpopular

OTOH - the IS is really the only thing keeping me with Sony, and was the only thing that I was looking at with Minolta.


----------



## belial

Kolia said:
			
		

> Who cares about pro anyway ?!?
> 
> Do you guys plan to one day drive an F1 race car while you drive your Corolla ?
> 
> Is Iron Chef in your future when you grill your burgers ?
> 
> Once family, bills, house and real job shows up, 3,000$+++ FF camera become pretty hard to justify for the average Joe.
> 
> Assuming that everybody is like you and has dreams of FF bodies is very narrow minded...



It's good to have a clear upgrade path when choosing a camera system. You never know how far you're going to go.


----------



## belial

Kolia said:
			
		

> Look at prices...



They aren't any cheaper. A mid range Sony is right around the price of a mid range Nikon or canon.


----------



## belial

The a57 kit is going for $750. That's right around the same range as other companies high entry level. The a77 is about the price of everyone mid range. Don't act like the cameras are such a steal because they have phase detection in live view. They aren't bad. If you love them great. I don't.


----------



## belial

Now I still see an older Sony in my future. Throw a beer can on it and I have a great affordable cheap but good quality disposable telephoto system.


----------



## kassad

mjhoward said:


> DiskoJoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> My a580 takes pictures identical to your d7000.
> 
> 
> 
> &lt;br&gt;<br>
> &lt;br&gt;<br>
> It has the same sensor... the similarities end there.  BTW, your sensor also receives 2/3EV less light than mine.&lt;br&gt;<br>
> &lt;br&gt;<br>
> <br>......
Click to expand...


The a580 was a traditional DSLR with a reflex mirror.


----------



## Kolia

Honestly, there is plenty of headroom to upgrade any entry level camera with either Canon, Nikon or Sony without needing to go to pro glass and body.  For the vast majority  of consumer, these will be good enough and way beyond their abilities.

It's the technique, not the gear right ?


----------



## ConradM

belial said:


> Kolia said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at prices...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They aren't any cheaper. A mid range Sony is right around the price of a mid range Nikon or canon.
Click to expand...

 


belial said:


> The a57 kit is going for $750. That's right around the same range as other companies high entry level. The a77 is about the price of everyone mid range. *Don't act like the cameras are such a steal *because they have phase detection in live view. They aren't bad. If you love them great. I don't.



I think in my case it is. I picked up my A33 with the kit lens for $550. No DSLR in that price range can touch it. But you're right, once you go beyond that prices start to level out.


----------



## ConradM

Kolia said:


> Honestly, there is plenty of headroom to upgrade any entry level camera with either Canon, Nikon or Sony without needing to go to pro glass and body.  For the vast majority  of consumer, these will be good enough and way beyond their abilities.
> 
> It's the technique, not the gear right ?



Agreed. I think it's funny so many non "pros" use that argument. Pro level equipment I would guess is a smaller market than consumer like anything else.


----------



## Solarflare

Kolia said:


> It's the technique, not the gear right ?


 Yes. A real pro can shoot action in low light with an iPhone !!! :lmao:

But yeah, if you give a great photographer an iPhone and a complete n00b a medium format highend camera, the photographer will come back with the much better pictures.


----------



## mjhoward

Kolia said:


> All black or all white huh ?  Surprising coming from a photographer...
> 
> Well, once you start paying for your own living expenses and that of your household we can revisit the question.



Black and white was your example, I was simply demonstrating how ridiculous your were being.  We can revisit the question now if you'd like.  I'm a degreed Electrical Engineer and Software Developer whom has owned his own home and cars for a while now... all paid for by me.  Way to not make assumptions.


----------



## Kolia

I guess having myself worked for an F1 team, the F1 example didn't feel so far fetched...

Regardless of the activity, pro level equipment are rarely appropriate for the average enthusiast. In photography in particular, I'll agree the pro gear is better and significant.  But as an engineer, you can appreciate the concept of "good enough" for a given application. 

Assuming that a path to FF and pro glass applies for everybody is wrong. Building up do FF through APS-C gear is actually a big waste of money considering the availability of used equipment.


----------



## chuasam

unpopular said:


> I don't really know what the big deal is with this pocket wizard stuff. All the sony TTL's are wireless, as are the Metz, certain Sigma units and Nissin.
> 
> Why do you need an overpriced pocket wizard when Sony inherited Minolta's wireless TTL protocol? Is there something I'm missing?


Yes...a broader view.
Light systems like Profoto Air series are PW compatible. Sony isn't even compatible with the Skyport system on the elinchrom. Metz, Sigma...and Nissin flashes Yeeech!
Why PW? Cuz it's the industry standard. You buy it once...and just use it for decades. It's even compatible with my Sekonic lightmeter.


----------



## unpopular

chuasam said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't really know what the big deal is with this pocket wizard stuff. All the sony TTL's are wireless, as are the Metz, certain Sigma units and Nissin.
> 
> Why do you need an overpriced pocket wizard when Sony inherited Minolta's wireless TTL protocol? Is there something I'm missing?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes...a broader view.
> Light systems like Profoto Air series are PW compatible. Sony isn't even compatible with the Skyport system on the elinchrom. Metz, Sigma...and Nissin flashes Yeeech!
> Why PW? Cuz it's the industry standard. You buy it once...and just use it for decades. It's even compatible with my Sekonic lightmeter.
Click to expand...


Back in my day, we used knobs! Dabnabbit all this new fangled technology!

Still, I think it's funny that people complain about Sony's proprietary stuff when dealing with Pocketwizard, which is a proprietary technology. Seems like there really should be an open protocol for this sort of thing.


----------



## DiskoJoe

belial said:


> I don't see where sony's actually even save money. Really all you get extra is fps. Most shooters don't need high fps.



Do some more research and then come back and you can add better insight to this debate.


----------



## DiskoJoe

unpopular said:


> chuasam said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't really know what the big deal is with this pocket wizard stuff. All the sony TTL's are wireless, as are the Metz, certain Sigma units and Nissin.
> 
> Why do you need an overpriced pocket wizard when Sony inherited Minolta's wireless TTL protocol? Is there something I'm missing?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes...a broader view.
> Light systems like Profoto Air series are PW compatible. Sony isn't even compatible with the Skyport system on the elinchrom. Metz, Sigma...and Nissin flashes Yeeech!
> Why PW? Cuz it's the industry standard. You buy it once...and just use it for decades. It's even compatible with my Sekonic lightmeter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Back in my day, we used knobs! Dabnabbit all this new fangled technology!
> 
> Still, I think it's funny that people complain about Sony's proprietary stuff when dealing with Pocketwizard, which is a proprietary technology. Seems like there really should be an open protocol for this sort of thing.
Click to expand...


IKR!

Like Canon and Nikon dont want you to use their stuff instead of off brand.


----------



## DiskoJoe

chuasam said:


> DiskoJoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> You just need an adapter. And most people dont need a flagship camera. Do you need a 1dx or a d4 to do what you do? But they are making steps in the right direction. Sony make good options and the competition will only make your camera brands have to sell there bodies for less. So you would still benefit here. So whats the problem?
> 
> 
> 
> Nope but I use a D700 with an eye on upgrading to a D800 when I am able to. Why take a step on the wrong direction if you will end up having to ditch the entire system once you go pro? The "image quality" of a camera is a tiny part of the whole equation. Most cameras get very similar image quality.
> 
> Saving a few hundred to get a Sony is a great way to waste thousands later if you plan to go pro. Most people don't need a flagship camera. Most people aren't pro. Telling the Nikon and Canon folk that a Sony Alpha can keep up is ridiculous. My brother uses a NEX-7. He gets great results in a small camera...but is he pro? No. The Camera is a small toy that he brings out when he wants to have fun. Does it take great pictures? Yes. Can it be used in a professional context? No.
Click to expand...


Speaking about 4/3

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/0...ess-including-14mm-F2-0-for-Micro-Four-Thirds


----------



## unpopular

DiskoJoe said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> chuasam said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes...a broader view.
> Light systems like Profoto Air series are PW compatible. Sony isn't even compatible with the Skyport system on the elinchrom. Metz, Sigma...and Nissin flashes Yeeech!
> Why PW? Cuz it's the industry standard. You buy it once...and just use it for decades. It's even compatible with my Sekonic lightmeter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Back in my day, we used knobs! Dabnabbit all this new fangled technology!
> 
> Still, I think it's funny that people complain about Sony's proprietary stuff when dealing with Pocketwizard, which is a proprietary technology. Seems like there really should be an open protocol for this sort of thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> IKR!
> 
> Like Canon and Nikon dont want you to use their stuff instead of off brand.
Click to expand...


All of this could be done with OSC. Heck. Everything could be done with OSC. Lens control and feedback, flashes and strobes, TTL, light meters, remote camera control. Everything could be interconnected in a non-proprietary way over multiple network modes. Lenses could be connected to cameras via USB. Flashes via Bluetooth or Wi-Fi.

But then everyone would know that Pocketwizard radios cost about $60 in retail parts, and that what you're paying for is the privledge of using their protocol.


----------



## belial

DiskoJoe said:
			
		

> Do some more research and then come back and you can add better insight to this debate.



I don't need more research. There's absolutely no real reason to own a Sony.


----------



## belial

Kolia said:
			
		

> Honestly, there is plenty of headroom to upgrade any entry level camera with either Canon, Nikon or Sony without needing to go to pro glass and body.  For the vast majority  of consumer, these will be good enough and way beyond their abilities.
> 
> It's the technique, not the gear right ?



To a degree. I can't agree with you in glass. Everyone needs pro glass. But other than that none of it matters that much for the average user


----------



## 2WheelPhoto

unpopular said:


> DiskoJoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> 
> Back in my day, we used knobs! Dabnabbit all this new fangled technology!
> 
> Still, I think it's funny that people complain about Sony's proprietary stuff when dealing with Pocketwizard, which is a proprietary technology. Seems like there really should be an open protocol for this sort of thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IKR!
> 
> Like Canon and Nikon dont want you to use their stuff instead of off brand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All of this could be done with OSC. Heck. Everything could be done with OSC. Lens control and feedback, flashes and strobes, TTL, light meters, remote camera control. Everything could be interconnected in a non-proprietary way over multiple network modes. Lenses could be connected to cameras via USB. Flashes via Bluetooth or Wi-Fi.
> 
> But then everyone would know that Pocketwizard radios cost about $60 in retail parts, and that what you're paying for is the privledge of using their protocol.
Click to expand...


comparing sony to PW isn't realistic.  just the PW hyper sync feature that allows warp speed shutter with any manual studio strobe or manual flash/speedlight at full power alone prevents one from comparing PW to sony.

on a side note and without going through this whole thread, are we talking a pro sony camera that came out FF, or no?


----------



## unpopular

I didn't say anything about the Sony/Minolta wireless flash protocol, OSC is not Sony, though Sony uses OSC to communicate with PS3 controllers. I think though that OSC could be adapted to flash photography in a similar fashion as MIDI was adapted to DMX for stage lighting.

I believe it would be fast enough for any shutter speed sync, though I could be wrong.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto

ah i was confused I thought I saw a PW comparison, gotcha' thanks


----------

