New Camera!
- This topic has 10 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated Aug 28, 2008 at 1:44 am by
.
-
Posts
-
Well I studied the A700 vs the D300 and pretty much came to the same conclusion that a lot of web reviews did. They are really pretty much the same camera
Some interesting lenses with the Sony name on them as well –
www.dsaphoto.com
A picture is thousand words that takes less than a second while a thousand words is a picture that takes a month.
Glad to see you are investing in all of the most up to date gear for your clients sake. Nothing like fishing with a well stocked guide…. 😀
The Zeiss prime lenses get rave reviews and I have a 16-80 Zeiss that’s a dandy little zoom but the real jewels are the old Minolta lenses that can be had for a lot less jingle. The 55mm 2.8 is a prime example of a really great lens for under $300. I think Leica was involved in the making of that one. Then there is the 55mm f1.4 that works wonders in low light and can be had for around $100.
I was really on the fence about going ahead and buying a Cannon or Nikon but I‘ve already invested so much in lenses and strobes and I wasn’t ready to just give those away just to buy into a name. I’ll stick with Sony until my skill improves beyond my camera which I doubt will happen anytime soon.
Todd we’ll need to test it out on you pretty soon.
I think that’s cool your using that with nice lenses, Sony has always made nice sensors and I understand they aren’t messing around with the new line up. Â
If you still find yourself bothered by the noise levels you should look into one of the dedicated noise removal programs/plug ins. Â I was about to pull the trigger on a d300 because noise was pissing me off but then I started messing around with Noise Ninja and decided to spend the money on some new glass instead.
That’s impressive Carter. The 700 is supposed to be a lot better at high ISO settings. I’ll post some stuff after I get it and we’ll see just how well it works.
I’ve had the A700 a week now and I’ve played with it a little. What I will say is that it’s nothing like my old A100. Everything about it seems to be a major improvement. One thing I love is the big high resolution screen. If you mess up something on a shot it’ll be visible on this screen. The next major improvement is the low noise at higher ISO. There is some noise that starts around 800 but from 800 to 6400 it really doesn’t seem to get much worse. I’ll say that so far it has met and even exceeded my expectations where high  ISO and noise are concerned. Another big improvement is the focus speed. This one doesn’t search near as much in low light and the speed seems about the same as any other DSLR I’ve played with in this price range.
Something I just found last night was a separate conveniently placed button that releases the AF motor so you can go to manual focus without moving the camera away from your face. Great idea and really handy for low light macro!! All the buttons like ISO, WB, Drive, AE lock are also easy to get to and remember. These features are also available on the screen menu which is huge and I haven’t spent enough time going through all the menu options yet. As far as button placement and user friendly menu options I have zero complaints, its very user friendly.
Most of what I have shot has been on the 2.8 Macro lens. The IQ on the Macro shots so far is very impressive. I played around with some Turkey a few days ago with the 400mm Sigma 5.6 APO and they are better then I’ve been getting, but still not as good as I want. I’d love to hand this lens to John B. and see if he can make it come alive. I shot these birds from about 100+ yards away. Is that too far to get detailed crops with that lens?? Maybe I’m expecting it to do something it just can’t do?? I’m sure it’s just a nut loose behind the lens.
The one negative I’ve found so far is that it eats the battery much faster then the A100 did but that must be due in part to the big screen. Needs a top view LCD like Nikon.
That’s all I got so far. I’m sure as I continue to learn and use it I’ll find more but right now I’m very, very, happy with this purchase.
I’ll also add that if your in the market for a DSLR and aren’t already married to Canon or Nikon,,, consider Sony. TheA350 is a hell of a camera for the price and the 700 is cheaper then others in the same catagory!! There is some great older glass from Minolta, and  Sony and Zeiss are making some very high end optics as well. I spent hours and hours and more hours comparing the D40, D300 and the A700. And though I really want to own Canon (like owning a Sage rod) I couldn’t see selling all my stuff for what on paper is a lesser camera in a lot of categories but defiantly not all. The D300 appears to be the king in this category (until the D50) but to switch to Nikon would have cost me an extra $400 for the camera alone, plus reacquiring all the flash and lenses would be another big expensive pain in the butt.
So for now at least I’m satisfied with my camera. I’m considering auditing a class at the local college so that I might be able to use this thing to its full potential someday. I’ll post some stuff as it comes. I plan to do a hiking trip this weekend since the falls should be looking good now. Can’t wait to see what turns up.
Nice to hear Mike.
Re Birds.
100 yards would be too far. For birds I like to atleast fill 20-25% of the frame. Depending on the size of the bird that then means getting fairly close. Thats why birders will always say you can never have enough reach, no matter how much you have..Birds are small 🙂 . With Turkeys and when using my 400mm I like to get about 30-50feet away for frame filling images. If I want more enviroment/less Turkey 75+.Different lenses resolve differently. With wildlife and birds in particular you want to see and preserve detail ( feathers).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.