Sony a99 for landscapes

Michael Batten

Michael Batten

Messages
761
Name
Michael
Edit My Images
No
Good morning,

Has anyone any experience of the a99 for landscapes? I currently use the a77 and and wondering if upgrading to the a99 is a good option.

For the avoidance of doubt I am not considering changing to Nikon or Canon.

Thanks for stopping by.
 
14 stops of DR what more could you ask for?

I've just upgraded so maybe biased! Dont forgot you can remove the transulencent mirror for manual focus lenses, but given you'll be at base iso not really needed!
 
Switching to the A99 increases your available dynamic range and give you full FOV on any FF lenses you have, so is a good option for landscape.

Of course, it does depend on your current lens line-up.

Any APS-C lenses (such as the Sony 16-50 f/2.8) will need replacing with a FF equivalent (EG For 16-50 get a FF 24-70), and this switch can be expensive.

An alternative is the A7R (plus LA-EA4 adaptor), which is arguably an even better camera for landscape - higher resolution, no AA filter, greater dynamic range. etc.
 
I might be wrong but the A99 is likely to use the same (or similar) Full Frame 24mp sensor as both the Nikon D600 and D750 which are awesome, I know there are queries about the higher ISO capability of the Sony SLT's (I found the A77 fine though!) but for landscapes that shouldn't matter too much.

As Faldrax says though the A7r would also be a good shout! Particularly as prices seem to have taken a bit of a tumble in the last week or so.
 
a sigma dp1 would give you slightly better pics, but limited to 28mm

a7r would be another good choice, or wait for a99 replacement
 
a7r over a7. Although I shoot Nikon D610 and D800 which bar minor differences use the same sensors the DR is slightly better on the D800, the extra cropping ability due to the large files handy. Not huge differences, but IMHO one is better than the other
 
Thanks for all your comments so far, it's certainly interesting to consider both the a99 and a7r.
 
Michael Batten said:
Thanks for all your comments so far, it's certainly interesting to consider both the a99 and a7r.
Click to expand...

I have an A77 and if you'd asked me 18 months to two years ago I'd have said I expected to go FF with the A99 or its successor by now. However it has turned out rather differently.

With regard to pingu666's suggestion:

I've ended up with three Sigma DPMs. When I carry about the DPMs with the A77 for landscape then I've found the A77 hardly ever gets taken out of the bag. So often I leave it behind and use small bag to carry the DPMs and some filters and spare batteries. Carrying just the DPMs and a tripod (especially if it's a light tripod) and walking any distance is quite liberating compard with carrying the A77 + large tripod + lenses.

The DPMs are quirky and not for everyone (slow handling - different workflow requirements - ISO 100/200) but I think the image quality is outstanding for the money - particularly the DP2M and DP3M lenses. I lost the urge to go FF after I bought and used the first one.

My experience with using lighter smaller cameras would tend to predispose *me* towards the smaller mirrorless A7 / A7R rather than a larger DSLR type setup such as the A99 or Canikon equivalents for landscape use if going FF. (Or perhaps even look at the Sony RX1 as alternative.)
 
Yeah with dp you quickly filter out there range from a competing camera unless you need 1.4 or something
So 10 20 fisheye 85mm 1.4 or 70 200 is what I take for my a77 or pick from

Ricoh do a good wide angle lens adapter that'll go on dp1 too, I've got a cheaper Panasonic option
 
Dryce said:
I have an A77 and if you'd asked me 18 months to two years ago I'd have said I expected to go FF with the A99 or its successor by now. However it has turned out rather differently.

With regard to pingu666's suggestion:

I've ended up with three Sigma DPMs. When I carry about the DPMs with the A77 for landscape then I've found the A77 hardly ever gets taken out of the bag. So often I leave it behind and use small bag to carry the DPMs and some filters and spare batteries. Carrying just the DPMs and a tripod (especially if it's a light tripod) and walking any distance is quite liberating compard with carrying the A77 + large tripod + lenses.

The DPMs are quirky and not for everyone (slow handling - different workflow requirements - ISO 100/200) but I think the image quality is outstanding for the money - particularly the DP2M and DP3M lenses. I lost the urge to go FF after I bought and used the first one.

My experience with using lighter smaller cameras would tend to predispose *me* towards the smaller mirrorless A7 / A7R rather than a larger DSLR type setup such as the A99 or Canikon equivalents for landscape use if going FF. (Or perhaps even look at the Sony RX1 as alternative.)
Click to expand...

Hi Andrew, I had looking into the Sigma DP range as they are crazy cheap with amazing spec. I think that due to the odd file format and them not being compatible with LR5 I then lost interest.

Might be odd but I like the weight of the DSLR and lenses, I purchase a Sony Nex about 3 years ago and it just felt like a cheap toy. At least the a7r has a proper viewfinder rather than just an LCD screen.
 
Michael Batten said:
Thanks for all your comments so far, it's certainly interesting to consider both the a99 and a7r.
Click to expand...
If your using native emount FE lenses I would say that would probbaly be a good shout for landscapes.

Lenses when used on an adaptor dont always have as tight tolerances as when used direct to the mount. I was only looking at an A99 vs A7 and LAE4 the other day and the same lens had significantly softer corners on the A7. I can link to that thread later if you like but it was a no brainer for me to go A99 as I have a huge stack of A mount glass and the native mount gives better IQ.
 
IF your using sony then capture one pro at 23quid ish would be a thing to look into (full featured, only opens sony raw files, but should take any other random tiff or jpg :) )

as for the sigma's the workflow tends to be SPP > TIFF > Other program for edits if a shot needs local retouching or manipulations

they are marmite, but i do love mine, really amazing detail in shots. the very best shots from my a77 get nearish in quality, but only those near perfect shots where everything comes together really well. sigma just beats it so easily most of the time its silly.
 
daugirdas said:
a7r if you must stay with EVF-only (eww) sony. It is time to sell off those A-mount lenses as they won't be making those any more soon. E-mount is all I'd invest in.
Click to expand...
You do know Sony have announced 3 A mount lenses this year?
You do know any full frame canon has less DR than a sony compact?

Your full of fear, perhaps stick to your canon threads and worry more about them. :)
 
Brazo said:
You do know Sony have announced 3 A mount lenses this year?
You do know any full frame canon has less DR than a sony compact?

Your full of fear, perhaps stick to your canon threads and worry more about them. :)
Click to expand...

You can quite me when A mount is history. I bet you those 3 will be [some of] the last ones that see the light of the day. They were developed before E mount was reality and it made no sense to scale them back when there is so little E glass. But the tide is quickly turning. Why would anyone in their sane mind buy A99 over A7/r? Why would anyone with A7 buy A glass if E version exists? See where I am getting at.

You do realise what utter nonsense you are spouting against Canon and that it was completely uncalled for? Good, because I am fed up once and for all with comments like yours. Ignore button is about to be deployed.
 
daugirdas said:
You can quite me when A mount is history. I bet you those 3 will be [some of] the last ones that see the light of the day. They were developed before E mount was reality and it made no sense to scale them back when there is so little E glass. But the tide is quickly turning. Why would anyone in their sane mind buy A99 over A7/r? Why would anyone with A7 buy A glass if E version exists? See where I am getting at.

You do realise what utter nonsense you are spouting against Canon and that it was completely uncalled for? Good, because I am fed up once and for all with comments like yours. Ignore button is about to be deployed.
Click to expand...
Then we'll both be happy, I have bit my tongue so many times on your constant unwanted and most importantly ignorant and unfounded comments in sony threads and yet when you get a little back you throw a paddy? Don't let the door bang into you on the way out.
 
daugirdas said:
a7r if you must stay with EVF-only (eww) sony. It is time to sell off those A-mount lenses as they won't be making those any more soon. E-mount is all I'd invest in.
Click to expand...

The EVF is fantastic in my humble opinion but that's all it is.

Personally I have no time for bashing Nikon or Canon or anyone else. I prefer Sony SLT's and the range of lenses for my photography is fine regardless of whether the A mount continues or not.
 
The plus side is a mount lenses can be adapted, if Sony abandoned e mount, the flange distance is very short, so there is that.

Given the cost of current adapter, I think id rather either go full E mount, or E mount camera with adapter just using mostly A mount glass

And what's happening to Sony (with e mount focus) will happen with canon or Nikon at some point, and the rumours are of eos m mount being junked
 
I've got the A77 & I've considered the same question. The A99 has better dynamic range, but the difference is rather small at lowest ISOs. It has more finely graded shadow detail, but you won't notice that unless you lift the shadows quite a bit. Which if you'd known you wanted to do at the time of the shot you could have used some HDR, either in camera or post processed. In short there's things you can do with the A77 that with a little extra trouble reduce the effective final look-at-the-print differences between the A77 & A99 for landscapes.

Have you tried ISO 50 on your A77? It's usually sneered at as a "false" ISO of lower dynamic range than ISO 100, but it does give you more finely graded shadow detail.

I suppose the big question is whether you'd get more landscape IQ difference from the A99 or a lens of equivalent cost on the A77. Of course depends what lenses you have already. For me the answer is that by the time I'd saved up for the A99 the A77mk3 would probably be a better buy anyway :-)
 
chris malcolm said:
Have you tried ISO 50 on your A77? It's usually sneered at as a "false" ISO of lower dynamic range than ISO 100, but it does give you more finely graded shadow detail.

I suppose the big question is whether you'd get more landscape IQ difference from the A99 or a lens of equivalent cost on the A77. Of course depends what lenses you have already. For me the answer is that by the time I'd saved up for the A99 the A77mk3 would probably be a better buy anyway :)
Click to expand...

I have used ISO for long exposure to really increase the shutter speed and it does work very well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top