I don't have a Sony, but I do have in body IS... and it really is awesome. I have used it on wides yielding a handheld image at 1sec, and on long 500mm lenses for birding shots.I have been wondering how good the inbody IS would be over various focal lengths but cant find a decent answer. I did wonder if it would be better at wide than at long as the shake is magnified at longer lenghts etc.
I'll need to keep looking i think.
I read a review of in body IS that said it was superior for wider lenses but lens based AF was superior for longer lenses
just a review though, as I have had no experience with high end sony kit
it's pretty similar to that on a 40D &I believe that the 50D's is improved on the 40D's?Is the AF quick on the A700, whats it like on low light, fast moving things (my kids).
They both have their own pros & cons but imo overall in-lens & in-body give very similar results & in-body certainly works at ultra tele (500 & 600mm) focal lengths (albeit at those imo you really should be considering a tripod rather than handheld).I have been wondering how good the inbody IS would be over various focal lengths but cant find a decent answer. I did wonder if it would be better at wide than at long as the shake is magnified at longer lenghts etc."
P.S. "UBIQUE" - Sapper?
so long as you are not going to shoot over iso 400 the sony is a great camera
Im thinking of doing a swap from my 50D to a Sony A700 mainly for the inbody super steady shot. And some of the older KM lenses. Has anyone swapped going this way? Whats the general opinion on the A700 the reviews all seem good.
Cheers
Used to be yeah, been out 2 1/2 years now. you?
i shot a wedding on friday with my A700,and all the church shots were shot at ISO 1600.....and the noise is very acceptable IMO,although i cannot compare to the 50D,i wouldn't have thought it would have been a lot better,if any.
I have got the 17-55 then the 100-400 - Can't say that I have honestly noticed a gap. Perhaps I would if I'd always had something in between the two - They say you never miss what you've never had!!
trading a canon for a sony, LOL!
Purely because he's a fanboy... best ignore.why is that funny:shrug:
why is that funny:shrug:
trading a canon for a sony, LOL!
pointless troll type post, thanks for your input
Conduct towards other members
No offensive, rude or derogatory comments towards another member.
I suggest you read the rules Mister Moderator
basically calling me a troll, thanks :bonk:
but seriously I can't see the point of trading in good equipment, only to buy the same again; but worse
end/
Mister Administrator said:Staff decisions are final
thats Mister Administrator to you, sunbeam. :nuts: and I have read the rules, I had significant input into writing them the bit you might like to take note of is this bit
mmm, you may not have noticed that it isn't an A900 that he is considering ...not as good as the canon 5D2 or nikon D700 particularly in the chroma noise which gets all blotchy with the NR on.
quote from dpr "from iso 800 the Alpha 900 starts to fall behind the rest of the pack, with considerably more chroma noise and obvious noise reduction artefacts. There's no two ways about it; if you're looking for this kind of resolution at higher ISO settings the EOS 5D Mark II runs rings around the A900"