Sony A77 Video

Posted this myself in the Sony users thread.:D....Glad to see some actual footage of it and it looks pretty big as well.
 
DEANSUPREME said:
Posted this myself in the Sony users thread.:D....Glad to see some actual footage of it and it looks pretty big as well.
Click to expand...
Sorry Dean missed that, I'm quite looking forward to getting my mits on one, specs look pretty good :)

24.3 MP Exmor HD CMOS sensor
19 points AF sensor with 11 cross sensors
Micro AF tuning
ISO 100-16000, with expandable ISO 50 option
1920 x 1080 60p/24p AVCHD 2.0
P/A/S/M manual controls while recording video
1200 zone metering
Completely new developed Bionz processor
12 fps
1/8000 shutter speed
TrueBlack 921k 3-way tilt LCD
3 million dot OLED viewfinder
Smart teleconverter function with 1.4x and 2.0x option
Built-in flash
Built-in GPS
Battery life with over over 500 shots (in LCD mode. More in EVF only mode!)
Magnesium alloy body
Dust and Moisture proof
Multi Frame NR
SD card (no CF!)
 
Last edited:
Yeah will deffo be going down to camera store to test one out.Then convince the missus that I need one.:lol:
 
Wow. WOOT! Glad the smart teleconverter has made a return as I rather liked that on my 350. Build quality looks like it might be much better than the 580 as that is a bit squeaky and cheap to be honest. 350 feels better built.

Wonder how much it will cost?
 
I'm hoping its true about it taking the same batteries as the A700 as I have 3 of them.
 
SussexBlue said:
Are you watching Canikon, playing catch up this time :lol::lol::wave:
Click to expand...

24MP in a crop camera? pffft that's not something to catch up to that's just spec willy waving. 24MP is way too high resolution and only serves to give needlessly big image files and more noise than necessary.
 
Wow, caught two already, both Canon users as well :D
Now do I need fresh bait or re-cast :lol:
 
Ksanti said:
24MP in a crop camera? pffft that's not something to catch up to that's just spec willy waving. 24MP is way too high resolution and only serves to give needlessly big image files and more noise than necessary.
Click to expand...

I'm sure I thought 1meg files were huge once and lets leave the criticism until we have proof regards the output ref noise
 
I've got high hopes for this :)

Hopefully with a really good higher end SLT on the market, other brands will start looking at ditching the conventional mirror on all models.

Also I hope other brands also start using tilty screens on higher up bodies. They really are very useful. Even if you don't use it for photography you can just use to protect the screen when not in use.



SussexBlue said:
Wow, caught two already, both Canon users as well :D
Now do I need fresh bait or re-cast :lol:
Click to expand...

Nah, a master baiter such as yourself surely doesn't need fresh bait ;)


(sorry, I've wanted to use that one for a while)
 
Last edited:
squishy said:
I've got high hopes for this :)

Hopefully with a really good higher end SLT on the market, other brands will start looking at ditching the conventional mirror on all models.

Also I hope other brands also start using tilty screens on higher up bodies. They really are very useful. Even if you don't use it for photography you can just use to protect the screen when not in use.





Nah, a master baiter such as yourself surely doesn't need fresh bait ;)
Click to expand...
i dont think they will ever ditch the conventional mirror.
the downside to the slt is dust on the mirror and sensor showing in pics, but it will be interesting to see how the sensor performs, sony have had some good sensors of late, k5/d7000/and which other sony model they use it in.
i personally dont like the look of the sonys, i had an a350 for a week and the noise over iso 400 was terrible.
 
scottthehat said:
i dont think they will ever ditch the conventional mirror.
the downside to the slt is dust on the mirror and sensor showing in pics, but it will be interesting to see how the sensor performs, sony have had some good sensors of late, k5/d7000/and which other sony model they use it in.
i personally dont like the look of the sonys, i had an a350 for a week and the noise over iso 400 was terrible.
Click to expand...

Oh, I'm in no way saying they should all use SLT systems like sony (I've had a play with an A55, found the EVF horrendous), but now screen technology and processors have advanced far enough I hope brands other than sony will start taking note of the advantages it can give.
And if sony do a good job with this, it could open the flood gates.

BTW, the A350 was back when sony were using CCD's instead of CMOS sensors.
 
scottthehat said:
i dont think they will ever ditch the conventional mirror.
the downside to the slt is dust on the mirror and sensor showing in pics, but it will be interesting to see how the sensor performs, sony have had some good sensors of late, k5/d7000/and which other sony model they use it in.
i personally dont like the look of the sonys, i had an a350 for a week and the noise over iso 400 was terrible.
Click to expand...

Odd that. My a850 is a traditional SLR and I find sensor dust to be more of an issue than with my a55, where the sensor is protected by the mirror.

Even so, they have these things called rocket blowers these days... :-)
 
squishy said:
Oh, I'm in no way saying they should all use SLT systems like sony (I've had a play with an A55, found the EVF horrendous), but now screen technology and processors have advanced far enough I hope brands other than sony will start taking note of the advantages it can give.
And if sony do a good job with this, it could open the flood gates.

BTW, the A350 was back when sony were using CCD's instead of CMOS sensors.
Click to expand...

i like the idea of the tilty screens as its great to turn around when not in use.
 
Johnd2000 said:
Odd that. My a850 is a traditional SLR and I find sensor dust to be more of an issue than with my a55, where the sensor is protected by the mirror.

Even so, they have these things called rocket blowers these days... :-)
Click to expand...
does your mirror on your a850 not protect the sensor,
and rocket blowers are the spawn of satan.
 
SussexBlue said:
I'm sure I thought 1meg files were huge once and lets leave the criticism until we have proof regards the output ref noise
Click to expand...

They might be able to get decent noise performance out of it, but if they'd dropped the pixel count they could get better noise performance out of it. Just an inherent part of how the technology works.

I was originally considering waiting for the a77 when rumours went around, and I only just hopped onto Canon. 24MP is just needlessly high as, like I've said before, that sort of pixel pitch is sharper than any lens currently available can focus light.

I'm not saying 24MP files are too big for all purposes, but when the extra file size gives no increase whatsoever in image quality it becomes pointless and to me just looks like spec willy waving.

Things like 12FPS and phase detection video are big pluses to me, but I'll remain sceptical about the sensor until I see proof of its high ISO performance, because 24MP usable up to ISO 800 isn't worth the tradeoff against, say, the D7000's sensor or an update of that.
 
scottthehat said:
does your mirror on your a850 not protect the sensor,
and rocket blowers are the spawn of satan.
Click to expand...

Not completely. Like any camera. The SLT mirror is bigger so I haven't yet had to lift it to blow the sensor.
 
Ksanti said:
24MP is just needlessly high as, like I've said before, that sort of pixel pitch is sharper than any lens currently available can focus light.
Click to expand...
it's only a small increment over Canon's 18Mp on a smaller sensor.
http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2011/07/22/the-truth-about-24-megapixels/
& of course the rumours have the next Canon & Sony FFs as middling 30'sMp.

& whilst you may not need 24Mp on APS-C there are people who do in the same way that I don't need ISO 6400 or above (but there are people who do).

I agree about waiting to see what it's actually capable of before making up our minds though. :)
 
I never did get why people worry about sensors out-resolving lenses. Surely that's what you want, to get the maximum resolution that the lens can deliver. I'd rather have the bottleneck at the lens (which can be upgraded) than at the sensor (which can't).

I'll eat my hat if the a77 sensor doesn't beat the 16mp a55/a580/d7000 sensor for high ISO noise. High ISO performance is every bit as effective a sales point as high pixel count, particularly at this point in the market. Sony know this, as demonstrated by the huge strides they've made in the last couple of sensors released.
 
don't really see that - dust on a sensor subtends a larger area than the same dust further away from the sensor.
The SLT mirror looks easier to clean than a sensor.
users who have both SLT & flipping mirror bodies report that they have more problems with dust in images on flipping mirror types.
 
Last edited:
heidfirst said:
don't really see that - dust on a sensor subtends a larger area than the same dust further away from the sensor.
The SLT mirror looks easier to clean than a sensor.
users who have both SLT & flipping mirror bodies report that they have more problems with dust in images on flipping mirror types.
Click to expand...

I don't know much on the matter, but my guess is that dust on the mirror affects images in an SLT camera, whereas in an SLR it only affects the viewfinder image?
 
Ksanti said:
I don't know much on the matter, but my guess is that dust on the mirror affects images in an SLT camera, whereas in an SLR it only affects the viewfinder image?
Click to expand...
yes, but if the mirror in an SLT intercepts that dust from getting on the sensor (& assuming that it remains uncleaned) then it will affect the image less than if that dust had got onto the sensor (& remained uncleaned).
 
heidfirst said:
yes, but if the mirror in an SLT intercepts that dust from getting on the sensor (& assuming that it remains uncleaned) then it will affect the image less than if that dust had got onto the sensor (& remained uncleaned).
Click to expand...

Well yes, but dust is more likely to land on the mirror as most of the movement in the lens setup happens while the mirror is down, surely?

Dust on the sensor will make a bigger difference but depending on the lens, the mirror in an SLT is likely close enough to affect the image.
 
Ksanti said:
Well yes, but dust is more likely to land on the mirror as most of the movement in the lens setup happens while the mirror is down, surely?
Click to expand...
but movement in the lens setup isn't necessarily likely to be the cause of most dust on your sensor is it (perhaps noticeable exceptions like 100-400 L IS) ?
I would have said that most of the dust movement occurred due to the mirror banging up & down which of course occurs during the exposure which is when your sensor is exposed ...
 
Last edited:
scottthehat said:
look here.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/1507977@N21/discuss/72157627375587808/
Click to expand...
That post says that dust on the mirror in an SLT is more of a problem than dust on the sensor - it doesn't say that dust is more (or less) of a problem overall than in a DSLR.
What it does do is go along with what I've been saying - dust on your sensor is lessened with the SLT design because some of it is intercepted by the SLT mirror & there is no mirror banging up & down to stir it up.
& the SLT mirror is more accessible (& ultimately replaceable) than the sensor.
 
Last edited:
scottthehat said:
the dust on the mirror of his slt is more of a problem than on a dslr sensor
so dslt has a mirror that collects dust that can be seen in photos and a sensor that also shows dust, a dslr has a sensor that shows dust so alot less chance of dust in pics.
Click to expand...
no, no, no. :bang:
Assume same amount of dust in both DSLR & SLT:
mirror banging up & down in DSLR is far more likely to move dust around in the body cavity when shutter is open > higher likelihood of ending up on sensor
dust on sensor will be more noticeable in images than dust on SLT mirror (further away from sensor so fewer pixels covered)

The corollary on a SLT is that a % of dust will end up on the SLT mirror rather than the sensor - but there it is less of a problem than if it was on the sensor (& easier to clean - Sony don't advise users to touch the sensor either).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top