...From a personal perspective I am strongly considering purchase this year or next of a DSLR and welcome every bit of valid information I can get on the subject to guide me on how to best spend my hard earned money...
Sandy, I don't know it you have an arsenal of lenses for Canon or Nikon bodies, but if you don't I'd suggest that you definitely consider Sony Alpha 900 or the next full frame model from them:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra900/
Features are very good, price is even better...
I have the little brother A700 (along with a 17-50 2.8 Tamron) and I'm very happy with it (especially after the latest firmware upgrade)...
Regards,
Loris.
Loris,
Thanks for your comments.
The only thing I have in the way of 35mm film cameras at this time is an older Nikon FG and a couple of zoom lenses so I could go for the Sony just as easily as a Nikon or Canon. I have read some good things about the Alpha 900 but have not had a chance to actually see and hold one.
Sandy King
interesting as i have people ask all the time about what to buy and basically i really lean toward companies that are know as camera "makers"; Sony not being one of them. Just goes to show.
i will certainly keep this in mind for people who already have Minolta lenses that would fit.
Ray and Marko,
If you bother to take the time to read through the dxomark.com Q&A section all of these questions are addressed.
The technology developed by DxO Optics is globally accepted as the industry leader in measuring image quality. That technology is licensed and used by companies and organizations such as Kodak, Olympus, and NASA. If their findings aren't adequate or acceptable for your own use and questions then I suppose no information source will be.
Don Bryant
On the other hand, perhaps my question should be can the full sensor DSLR compete in quality with my Fuji GA645zi (6X4.5 cm) since this is what I would probably replace.
Sandy
Question is, since I shoot MF primarily for B&W prints, could any full sensor DSLR compete with my Mamiya 7II outfit? I have a Canon G9 so am well aware of the creative possibilities of digital with color, but I think I would be trading a lot of detail with digital.
On the other hand, perhaps my question should be can the full sensor DSLR compete in quality with my Fuji GA645zi (6X4.5 cm) since this is what I would probably replace.
These questions are closer for me than for others since I am able to scan MF at 5080 spi with drum scanner quality.
Sandy
The 24 mp Sony A900 costs more than I was expecting to spend. Looks like it is about $3000 USD for body alone so you would need to about double that for a two-lens outfit.
Right now I could pick up a 12.8 mp Canon EOS 5d with, which is full sensor, with a couple of Canon lenses for less than $1500.
...My opinion, for what it's worth, is that you would need to go to the Canon 5D MarkII or the Sony (both over 20mp and full frame) to really be satisfied.
I've done no testing, just an opinion.
I agree, what I've read about A900 says that it outresolves many lenses; a crude calculation will reveal that you need a lens with resolving power of ca. 80lp/mm to match the resolution of A900's sensor -> that's a pretty serious figure
Loris, you're right about the 80 lp/mm, but I don't think this is a major challenge or issue with most top quality lenses. The Alpha 900 certainly did not "outresolve" my Minolta F1.7 50mm lens, it was just a very fine match. If it started outresolving anything, it was actually the 60x90 cm large test chart, as it was capable of resolving almost all detail in that chart. A major feat of the Alpha 900!
But you tested w/ JPEG -> RAW performance and JPEG are apples and oranges and you can bet I won't use JPEG with such a camera unless I'm shooting family snapshots and suchPlus, have you turned off NR? (Probably couldn't, because A900 does noise reduction on JPEGS whereas it's optional / can be turned off for RAWs - or was that in case of A700? I'm not sure anymore...) NR does very nasty things in terms of "detail".
BTW nice page / effort...
Regards,
Loris.
Hi Sandy,
Well, I think it comes awfully close, but that is also highly depended on the film you're using...
After the release of the new Ektar 100 film by Kodak, and picking up a roll at the Photokina, I decided to try to test it along side Velvia 100, Tmax 100, Porta 160VC and... a Sony Alpha 900!
Although I am not a professional tester, so don't expect DxO level of testing facilities, I have given it my utter best using an Imacon Flextight scanner for scanning the film, and shooting a test target poster picked up at the Photokina as well.
You can read more about it here, and download the full sized files for all film types and the Sony Alpha 900... and yes, that last one looks impressive, but so does at least one of the films.
So here it is (Ektar 100 link for you to follow):
http://www.boeringa.demon.nl/menu_technic.htm
Marco
The 24 mp Sony A900 costs more than I was expecting to spend. Looks like it is about $3000 USD for body alone so you would need to about double that for a two-lens outfit.
Right now I could pick up a 12.8 mp Canon EOS 5d with, which is full sensor, with a couple of Canon lenses for less than $1500.
Question is, since I shoot MF primarily for B&W prints, could any full sensor DSLR compete with my Mamiya 7II outfit? I have a Canon G9 so am well aware of the creative possibilities of digital with color, but I think I would be trading a lot of detail with digital.
On the other hand, perhaps my question should be can the full sensor DSLR compete in quality with my Fuji GA645zi (6X4.5 cm) since this is what I would probably replace.
These questions are closer for me than for others since I am able to scan MF at 5080 spi with drum scanner quality.
Sandy
Don, I am not questioning the sense of it all as regards to the parts of the test setup that I have seen and read about. I do think that much of that makes perfect sense and that DxO is doing a much better job than many others. However, that same reason makes it all the more baffling to me that they DO NOT specify clearly what lenses they are using, or, if I understand the Q&A section correctly, that in fact they do not use lenses at all (Am I right here, Don?) If you spend so much time on standardization and document so much, how could you forget to clearly include it, or state clearly you don't use lenses / optics at all... :confused: . I just don't get it...
But apart from that huge oversight, the website does make some sense.
Anyway, the FAQ is also terribly difficult to find, after going through a dozen or so pages in the "Technologies" pages section, where I would have expected to find it, or even better, straight in the main menu next to the other main topics like "Technologies" / "News", i finally discovered a Q&A in the "News" section... of all places!
Well, I think they are better in testing than in webdesign
Hi Sandy,
Well, I think it comes awfully close, but that is also highly depended on the film you're using...
After the release of the new Ektar 100 film by Kodak, and picking up a roll at the Photokina, I decided to try to test it along side Velvia 100, Tmax 100, Porta 160VC and... a Sony Alpha 900!
Although I am not a professional tester, so don't expect DxO level of testing facilities, I have given it my utter best using an Imacon Flextight scanner for scanning the film, and shooting a test target poster picked up at the Photokina as well.
You can read more about it here, and download the full sized files for all film types and the Sony Alpha 900... and yes, that last one looks impressive, but so does at least one of the films.
So here it is (Ektar 100 link for you to follow):
http://www.boeringa.demon.nl/menu_technic.htm
Marco
I agree with Loris. Comparing JPG output is not an objective comparison. WIth JPEGS there is too much in camera processing at play regardless of the selected ISO.Eeeeh Loris, did you actually take the time to have a look at the images??? I think the XFine JPEG images just look fantastic. How much more do you want? You can even see the fine paper structure in the grey area's of the 60x90 cm test chart, all the details in the cobbles...... that's just unbelievable!
And as much as I read about NR and the Alpha 900 (which isn't that much I admit), it shouldn't kick in at 100 ISO, that would be ridiculous. But truth to be told, I didn't go through the entire manual to find out how to switch it of. Anyway, I still don't see the point, if the images look just fine in XFine JPEG setting...
If even this can't satisfy you, than nothing will!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?