Camera Labs

That's quite a patronizing generalization.
Clearly, the new Alphas are aimed at the beginner consumer market. For a beginner, the features are quite innovative with fast liveview, flipout screen, etc. ISO is not a cardinal concern of their's when looking for a new camera. It could be better, yes, but its not. And quite frankly, it's damn fine to use high in practice, as illustrated by WestCoast.

_________________
a900 | D700

I admit that t I was incorrect about the magnitude of the price difference, the Nikon kit sells for $1230 and the Sony kit $850, making the difference about $400 once the 5% sales tax is calculated in. This still puts the D90 well out of the price league of the a380. Shifting my ground? Absolutely not! I am not saying at all that the 380 is excused from comparison, but at least do it to cameras in the same price range.

Trolling? Sure give it a name and accuse me of it, fine with me. I just saw something that was wrong wrong wrong, and felt I needed to let you know.

(edit) I am sorry to say as I read back, it is pretty clear to me you still did not really understand what I said, and that may well be because of the way I said it.

I am sure if we were sitting at the same table and having this discussion over a beer or two, I would be better able to explain my point. The truth is, I HATE these forums but in SPITE of that I still wanted to get my point across, that is how STRONGLY I felt about this.

point taken, but i did only say "in that respect" as in "will limit people more as far as high iso is concerned". I wasnt talking about the camera as a whole. And i think noone can argue that that performance of the new alphas is (still) very poor compared to the competition. Westcoasts shot looks ok but its mainly bright colors, its small and maybe enhanced with a good PP noise reduction tool...

_________________
Canon EOS 5D Mark II | Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM | Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM | Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM
...and a lot of lighting stuff. -> complete list of equipment

Website
Blog

Hi skylightphotos, did you read my earlier comments on this thread and the text which went with the comparison? I used the D90 because it had the same sensor and imaging pipeline as the D5000, and the latter goes directly up against the A380.

So the images you saw from the D90 are exactly the same as if I'd used a D5000, and since the lenses were set at f8 and cropped from near to the middle, it also pretty much eliminates any optical differences too.

The reason I didn't use a D5000 is becuase Nikon couldn't get one to me in time, so I used a D90 instead becuase the quality - which is what I was comparing there - is identical.

Simple as that.

Sony noise performance is fine if you're willing to shoot RAW and you've invested in a decent RAW converter and noise reduction software. Have a look at popo's comparison of a 50D and A350 noise handling here and pay particular attention to my edits to the Sony RAW file on page 2. After shooting with it for over a year, I never felt limited by the Sony A200's noise handling.

It's slightly disingenuous to claim that ISO 800+ shooting is rarely done. Please don't do that.

_________________
PhilipGoh.com

Gordon, could you also compare output from RAW, preferably when using the same converter? DCRaw could serve well here, as it's updated often and it doesn't try to hide sensor imperfections.
The reason I ask is that many people are raw shooters these days and DCRaw seems to be good enough for a fair comparison.

Hi Slapo, I always include some RAW results in my reviews, but I won't be doing full sets of results in RAW except for perhaps the top-end pro models like the Nikon D3x.

My policy is to test the cameras as most of their owners will use them, and while enthusiasts like our forum members will generally shoot in RAW, the vast majority of the people buying this kind of camera and reading my reviews will not. That's why I always go for default JPEG settings and kit lenses for most of my tests, although again I do also include some RAW results and where possible those with a better lens to satisfy the higher-end folk out there!

I remember you saying that before, but that is to the disadvantage of people who are on a budget who want to get the most out of their cameras, e. g. students, techies, people who want a DSLR particularly because of a big sensor, RAW, interchangeable lenses and other advantages they offer.
They might be a minority, but that's why it might be more difficult for them to get samples the way they'd be using the cameras.
Then again, bandwidth and time are always worth saving, so maybe it could be left to users to do that, although the photos wouldn't be that well comparable as if they were made by you.
I'm not trying to be pushy, I'm just trying to make a point.

16TH AUGUST UPDATE! FULL REVIEW NOW POSTED:

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Sony_Alpha_DSLR_A380/

Gordon

Yeah, i too can't find a good way to hold the grip... I really dislike it gordon!

The Alpha range must be going through it's teenage years and having difficulty figuring out what it wants to be when it grows up.

- Over achieving muscle bound freak? A900
- Capable, quiet and competent? A700
- Part of the in crowd? A200/A300/A350
- Purse wielding, skirt wearing weirdo? A380

That's a great analogy primitive.

Good work Gordon, that's another great review!

- Bjorn -

_________________
Street and documentary photographer | Google+ | Twitter | Blog | Tumblr

Leica M9-P (my article on Camera Labs) | Leica D-Lux 5 | 50mm Summilux

Good review Gordon...

Could you make again the Outdoor Resolution with the CZ 16-80??
I think this lens could offers a better comparation between D90/D5000 and a380...

That CCD is excellent with a good lens.

_________________
Samsung NX100
18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 OIS
iFn 20-50mm f/3.5-5.6 ED
iFn 20mm f/2.8 (coming soon)
30mm f/2
50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED OIS
Sony VAIO CR140F White

I am using a A300(which has pretty much the same ISO performance) and i don't feel limited. I must be a nobody then =X

Well i think judging high ISO performance at 100% zoomed in is over-rated.
I recently made a 12x8"(which i think is the biggest i'll ever print, being a hobbyist) and a few 9x6" prints for my school Taekwondo club They were VERY happy with the pictures because they never had shoots like these because they were using tiny P n S cameras.

The average joe(like me) wouldn't be printing huge posters with an A330, or A380 so the ISO performance of these cameras are fine.
If you're still not happy but don't want to shoot raw then shoot JPEG with NR off and clean it up with a Noise remover software with Batch Edit(Noise Ninja is really good, and fast too) so you only have to click the files and press ok.

Here are the pictures from the taekwondo grading held in my school. All taken at ISO 1600




It happened so fast that the two guys are still "holding" the plank of wood..




I made the 12x8" print with this photo

I'll throw in the EXIF for good measure
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nigelchuah ... 7548/meta/

Happy Shooting

_________________


Tamron 17-50mm F2.8
Tamron 70-300mm F4-5.6
Sony F58
My Flickr

You are correct Gold_Fish!, most people will certainly not print that large and I do believe the noise issue becomes more pronounced at larger print sizes.

I have a A300, and I am straying into the fringe territory of large prints (and heavy cropping as well) and noise has become more of an issue, particularly if the image is slightly underexposed, given a "normal" exposure or filled with areas in shadow with detail. Overexposing slightly actually shows less noise at higher ISO.

But, to be fair, I am moving into a commercial state, and these cameras were really not designed to accommodate that. So, anyone who does plan on doing large printing from heavily cropped photos, maybe an upgrade to the A700 should be on the cards just to have the better noise control.

P.S. Those pieces of wood look well cut, almost pre-cut ... just kidding, those guys look like they mean business!

_________________
I wish there was a way to randomly cycle through click-able thumbnails of my most recent images :'(

http://www.laroygreen.com (under construction)