Comments on: Sony A850 and A900 Review http://www.photographybay.com/2009/12/31/sony-a850-and-a900-review/ The latest in digital photography and camera reviews, news and rumors for Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus and more. Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:07:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: tom http://www.photographybay.com/2009/12/31/sony-a850-and-a900-review/#comment-214217 tom Thu, 13 Jan 2011 09:20:42 +0000 http://www.photographybay.com/?p=9429#comment-214217 More of a hobby / holiday camera than a serious pro camera. Come on Sony. Produce a full frame camera that has Nikon Canon pro quality. I will buy one if you can produce it. More of a hobby / holiday camera than a serious pro camera. Come on Sony. Produce a full frame camera that has Nikon Canon pro quality. I will buy one if you can produce it.

]]> By: Blackriver Images http://www.photographybay.com/2009/12/31/sony-a850-and-a900-review/#comment-208951 Blackriver Images Sun, 14 Nov 2010 02:52:29 +0000 http://www.photographybay.com/?p=9429#comment-208951 Two other little known differences between the 900 and 850. One simply cosmetic difference is that the main dial has raised lettering on the A900. Just a little touch of class. Two the A900 has the ability to use the much cheaper and lighter HVL-F20AM to trigger other off camera flashes wirelessly. Oddly enough the A850 does not have this ability (which I've tested myself). Two other little known differences between the 900 and 850.

One simply cosmetic difference is that the main dial has raised lettering on the A900. Just a little touch of class.

Two the A900 has the ability to use the much cheaper and lighter HVL-F20AM to trigger other off camera flashes wirelessly. Oddly enough the A850 does not have this ability (which I’ve tested myself).

]]> By: john walker http://www.photographybay.com/2009/12/31/sony-a850-and-a900-review/#comment-201548 john walker Mon, 30 Aug 2010 00:58:47 +0000 http://www.photographybay.com/?p=9429#comment-201548 i own a sony Alpha 700 i use the sony reflex 500Af for wildlife and its perfect camera images are brilliant i own a sony Alpha 700 i use the sony reflex 500Af for wildlife and its perfect camera images are brilliant

]]> By: PS Digital http://www.photographybay.com/2009/12/31/sony-a850-and-a900-review/#comment-187845 PS Digital Sun, 24 Jan 2010 04:41:50 +0000 http://www.photographybay.com/?p=9429#comment-187845 I just recently bought a Sony a700 and love it so far. I can't wait to buy a FF camera soon. The thing I love about both of these cameras (850 & 900) is the large viewfinder. I tried the 850 with a 50mm Sony lens and it was amazing. I have also tried the Canon and although I liked it, the Sony's view through the OVF was way more impressive. I wear glasses and the Sony just works out better for me. I also tried the live view and video on the Canon models and was not so impressed. I think when Sony does put it on their cameras, it will be done right and will be a very useful feature. I just hope it doesn't mess with the large viewfinder. Right now I would be happy with the 850 model to go with my 700. As for the reason people would use JPEG's on a $2000.00 camera, there are many reasons. If you are shooting fine art, the RAW feature on these cameras can enhance the detail and works very well. There are also many situations where you would want to use JPEG though. Sometimes you need to get a job done quickly and don't have time to process RAW. I think the quality of Sony's JPEG's is as good as the others. I would put either of these cameras up against the competition for their price range. The BIGGEST selling point for Sony for me is the IN CAMERA Anti-Shake function or Super Steady Shot as it is called. EVERY lens is stabilized, not just the ones you pay a Huge price for like the competition offers. Wide angle, Macro, Telephoto, Zoom....all are covered! It saves you money and a larger number of "keeper" shots in the long run. I noticed that right away from trying the 850 in the store. The shots were very sharp and handheld under store lighting. The other great thing is the UNIQUE flash. It rotates for vertical shots! Why didn't someone think of this sooner? It can be rotated and swiveled for almost any angle you can imagine for bouncing the light. I used to be a Nikon user for years but not any more! I just recently bought a Sony a700 and love it so far. I can’t wait to buy a FF camera soon. The thing I love about both of these cameras (850 & 900) is the large viewfinder. I tried the 850 with a 50mm Sony lens and it was amazing. I have also tried the Canon and although I liked it, the Sony’s view through the OVF was way more impressive. I wear glasses and the Sony just works out better for me. I also tried the live view and video on the Canon models and was not so impressed. I think when Sony does put it on their cameras, it will be done right and will be a very useful feature. I just hope it doesn’t mess with the large viewfinder. Right now I would be happy with the 850 model to go with my 700. As for the reason people would use JPEG’s on a $2000.00 camera, there are many reasons. If you are shooting fine art, the RAW feature on these cameras can enhance the detail and works very well. There are also many situations where you would want to use JPEG though. Sometimes you need to get a job done quickly and don’t have time to process RAW. I think the quality of Sony’s JPEG’s is as good as the others. I would put either of these cameras up against the competition for their price range.
The BIGGEST selling point for Sony for me is the IN CAMERA Anti-Shake function or Super Steady Shot as it is called. EVERY lens is stabilized, not just the ones you pay a Huge price for like the competition offers. Wide angle, Macro, Telephoto, Zoom….all are covered! It saves you money and a larger number of “keeper” shots in the long run. I noticed that right away from trying the 850 in the store. The shots were very sharp and handheld under store lighting.
The other great thing is the UNIQUE flash. It rotates for vertical shots! Why didn’t someone think of this sooner? It can be rotated and swiveled for almost any angle you can imagine for bouncing the light.
I used to be a Nikon user for years but not any more!

]]> By: Theresa http://www.photographybay.com/2009/12/31/sony-a850-and-a900-review/#comment-187666 Theresa Wed, 20 Jan 2010 23:19:54 +0000 http://www.photographybay.com/?p=9429#comment-187666 I own the a850. I don't believe you would see any difference between the noise performance of the a850 and the Canon 5Dmk2 until the prints were very very big and even then wouldn't until at least above 1600 when color noise reduction was used. The Sony is much better made, see Luminous Landscape's report on their Antarctica expedition of about a year ago. In body sensor stabilization is a deal breaker for me as I have a tremor and need it for every lens. It makes it possible for me to shoot 3 stops slower than otherwise. I shopped for several months and I believe that the Sony was the best choice for me. If I didn't have a tremor and was a sports photographer, I abhor sports, and had a large income then a top of the line Nikon would have been more appropriate especially for capture speed. I think one of the things that makes the Sony look bad is its poor JPEG quality. I don't believe that anyone with a $2000 camera should be shooting anything but RAW but reviewers almost always compare JPEG quality. External noise processing programs, especially DXO, pretty much gets rid of noise with no perceptible loss of sharpness with ISO 1600 and below. I own the a850. I don’t believe you would see any difference between the noise performance of the a850 and the Canon 5Dmk2 until the prints were very very big and even then wouldn’t until at least above 1600 when color noise reduction was used. The Sony is much better made, see Luminous Landscape’s report on their Antarctica expedition of about a year ago. In body sensor stabilization is a deal breaker for me as I have a tremor and need it for every lens. It makes it possible for me to shoot 3 stops slower than otherwise. I shopped for several months and I believe that the Sony was the best choice for me. If I didn’t have a tremor and was a sports photographer, I abhor sports, and had a large income then a top of the line Nikon would have been more appropriate especially for capture speed. I think one of the things that makes the Sony look bad is its poor JPEG quality. I don’t believe that anyone with a $2000 camera should be shooting anything but RAW but reviewers almost always compare JPEG quality. External noise processing programs, especially DXO, pretty much gets rid of noise with no perceptible loss of sharpness with ISO 1600 and below.

]]> By: Bill O'Connor http://www.photographybay.com/2009/12/31/sony-a850-and-a900-review/#comment-186707 Bill O'Connor Sat, 02 Jan 2010 01:18:33 +0000 http://www.photographybay.com/?p=9429#comment-186707 Pretty nice review with some omissions that surprised me. First, the lenses available, while not too numerous, are stellar. The Zeiss 16-35 and 24-70, both constant 2.8's make buying this camera quite tempting, especially since the Canon 24-70 version is out of date and clearly outclassed by the Zeiss. Even the 70-400 Sony outclasses the Canon 100-400 pretty badly. Then, the flash, the swiveling head is unique. If a photographer uses flash on the camera a lot, then vertical shots are suddenly much more pleasing. My beef with Nikon--and I used to be a loyal user--are that they are usually drug kicking and screaming into innovation by other brands. Now, even Canon has seen another maker show them a few things about bringing much needed innovations to their lines. The lack of video would not be missed if we'd never had it. But, again, with Canon's 5D video so good it used for shooting professional video, one wonders when Sony will wake up. Pretty nice review with some omissions that surprised me. First, the lenses available, while not too numerous, are stellar. The Zeiss 16-35 and 24-70, both constant 2.8′s make buying this camera quite tempting, especially since the Canon
24-70 version is out of date and clearly outclassed by the Zeiss. Even the 70-400 Sony outclasses the Canon 100-400 pretty badly.
Then, the flash, the swiveling head is unique. If a photographer uses flash on the camera a lot, then vertical shots are suddenly much more pleasing.
My beef with Nikon–and I used to be a loyal user–are that they are usually drug kicking and screaming into innovation by other brands. Now, even Canon has seen another maker show them a few things about bringing much needed innovations to their lines.
The lack of video would not be missed if we’d never had it. But, again, with Canon’s 5D video so good it used for shooting professional video, one wonders
when Sony will wake up.

]]> By: Storyboardlife http://www.photographybay.com/2009/12/31/sony-a850-and-a900-review/#comment-186656 Storyboardlife Thu, 31 Dec 2009 19:48:20 +0000 http://www.photographybay.com/?p=9429#comment-186656 I used the a900 for a recent breast cancer photo shoot http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCYHe8Vb87o and although it took a little getting used to I really liked it. The main feature I didn't like was that you could only choose the number of mpixels if you were working on Jeps. Typically I don't need 24 mpixel for a headshot. I used the a900 for a recent breast cancer photo shoot http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCYHe8Vb87o and although it took a little getting used to I really liked it. The main feature I didn’t like was that you could only choose the number of mpixels if you were working on Jeps. Typically I don’t need 24 mpixel for a headshot.

]]>