Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Tue Sep 02, 2014 1:07 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 1:47 pm 
if you look at dxomark test, the noise quality between A700-A200 does not make a lot of difference. It might be 1/2 stop cleaner or less.

So, fast lens make more difference.

Btw about your noisy image, my suggestion is to convert it to BW, usually it make the image more classier.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 2:15 pm 
The difference probably isn't that much but from the images I've seen, they look better. Its not like the A300 has dastardly bad noise, far from it. I have been able to get some good shots at ISO800+ once I have a scene that is not too heavy with the shadows, so generally, overexposing slightly does give better performance (I think this is true for all digital sensors, but I could be wrong).

Personally, I love BW, more than 60% of my pics are BW, but for various reasons some of the work I've done, the client has insisted on not having any BW images (you should have seen my face, priceless!), mostly because Hindu weddings are very colourful and the colours are actually part of the ceremony, i.e. they actually mean something.

*** Side Note ***
I've noticed that if you set your camera to shoot in BW and you shoot RAW, the RAW files can sometimes be up to 5 MB smaller than usual! I attribute this to probably the smaller filesize for the embedded JPEG preview. I doubt any quality is lost, as the image shows up with RBG channels and still registers as 10mp.

*** End Note ***

Also. it won't save you all the time (not that you were implying that, just saying), though it really does help if you have the option and it improves the image in other ways (i'd rather have a good noisy shot than a bad clean shot anyday).

I am worried that if I go with the A200 option, I might have to upgrade to the A700 for some quality or handling reason, and then I'll end up with 3 bodies when I only need 2 and spend 500.00 I could have put towards getting an additional lens or flash.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 3:06 pm 
From DPreview. I didn't post the direct link because i know DPR is not so friendly with CL and vice versa..

Original post by Agorabasta

Quote:
I have recently found that 'zone matching' setting affects high-ISO noise of in-camera JPEGs far more than it could be expected. Essentially, setting zone matching to a negative value moves the contrast 'center' higher up the curve, so the contrast in the shadows is reduced along with the noise - but the actual effect is enormous compared to expectations. Of the reasons of such an effect I may only speculate but, it seems to me the in-camera curve adjustment happens before demosaicing, hence far less demosaicing-induced noise gets into the final image.

So far, I'm getting some truly amazing results with the following custom settings:

base mode 'standard', saturation +1, sharpness +2, brightness -2, zone matching -1; DR+; high ISO NR 'high'. (Here DR+ compensates darkening from low brightness and from the zone matching; sharpness up to +3 somehow doesn't look ugly at all.)

Shooting with NR off with further Noiseninja NR makes ISO 3200 look like ISO 400; most bright shots look great without any NR at all; ISO 6400 with NR is good for A4 print.

I'd say that the overall results are better than anything processed from RAW with further NR, no matter what the converter software.


Almost everyone out of the 7 page comments agree that it give alot better performance at high iso...
Maybe Bjorn can try it out and give us his thoughts :D


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 10:24 am 
Enche Zein wrote:
if you look at dxomark test, the noise quality between A700-A200 does not make a lot of difference. It might be 1/2 stop cleaner or less.

So, fast lens make more difference.

Btw about your noisy image, my suggestion is to convert it to BW, usually it make the image more classier.


I disagree. I have an A200, and I'm scared to go past 400, and even there there's a fair bit of noise in the shadows. I recently came across a DSLR group on ephotozine, and while it was a pretty poor test in terms of keeping all variables equal between tests, the images from the A700 at high ISO were outstanding. In a different league from what I'm getting out of my A200.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 12:39 pm 
I've slept on it, and all things remaining constant, I think the A700 option is the better way to go. Feel free to disagree, comment and call me an idiot (with justification of course :lol: )

My reasons are as follows:

- If I get the A200, I'll still end up buying an A700 as I do think it is a superior tool (especially with the vertical grip) and has many practical improvements that would help a lot in a wedding/event setting. No point in delaying the inevitable and spending $500.00 dollars that I don't need to spend and have 3 bodies when I only need 2.

- I can buy the Sigma around Christmas. So, since my most urgent need is a second body, I think buying a good body first, and then the lens is a good idea.

- The 50mm is a good lens to have. F1.4 would really help in dark dressing rooms and I'm actually looking forward on how to use a prime. Sure, I wouldn't use it much at the event itself, but dressing room shots take up about 20-30% of what I put in the album, so, that's a good return I think.


** Does anyone know if you write simultaneously to the CF and Memory stick when shooting? ***


Again, if you think I missed out on something, let me know.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 1:01 pm 
Good choice mate.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 3:18 pm 
oh good! a700 is cool!!! :D but you mentioned lenses what i can't affor for now but its good to know we will have a comon camera''' :D


Top
  
 
 Post subject: a200vs A700
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2009 8:18 pm 
I would go with the A700 pro over the 200. In fact if you can find an A350 body, I would go with that over the A200.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2009 8:51 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:30 pm
Posts: 6953
Location: The Netherlands, Ridderkerk
TLDR at this time of day, so I only read your first and last post. The A700 option is the best way to go. A 50 mil is an essential lens in any photogs bag (didn't believe it myself back when I didn't have one) and the A700, even though some say it's replacements is way overdue, is still a great camera!

Good choice!

- Bjorn -

_________________
Street and documentary photographer | Google+ | Twitter

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 01, 2009 6:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 11:14 am
Posts: 150
Location: Sydney, Australia
Between α200 and α700, I would go for α700 for two good reasons: bigger view finder magnification on α700, and the support of tethered shooting.

_________________
AntBlog701 | SillyDog701
Apple: MacBook Air (11-in, 1.8GHz i7), Mac Pro (12-core 2.66GHz), MacBook Pro (15-in), iMac (21.5-in, Core i5), Mac mini Server (2.66GHz), iMac (24-in, C2D), PowerBook G4 (12-in, 1.33GHz), iMac G4 (1.25GHz)x2, PowerMac G4 (dual 1.44GHz).
iPhone: 5s, 5, 4S, 4, 3G
iPad: Air, Mini, 4, 3, 2, original (all models are 3G/LTE)
iPod touch: 5th gen x2, 4th gen x2 & 1st gen,
4 x AirPort Extreme, 2 x Time Capsule...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 01, 2009 11:33 am 
domk275 wrote:
Enche Zein wrote:
if you look at dxomark test, the noise quality between A700-A200 does not make a lot of difference. It might be 1/2 stop cleaner or less.

So, fast lens make more difference.

Btw about your noisy image, my suggestion is to convert it to BW, usually it make the image more classier.


I disagree. I have an A200, and I'm scared to go past 400, and even there there's a fair bit of noise in the shadows. I recently came across a DSLR group on ephotozine, and while it was a pretty poor test in terms of keeping all variables equal between tests, the images from the A700 at high ISO were outstanding. In a different league from what I'm getting out of my A200.


Same here, if I shoot at 400ISO I get very noisy images, at 800ISO its almost unuseable unless I over exp by at least 2 ƒ-stops.

Its so bad that I'll be changing over when I go full frame (next camera).


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 01, 2009 12:43 pm 
I also get noisy images with my A300, but only when slightly under-exposed (which I like to do sometimes especially if using off-camera flash). Typically, dark tones show far more noise than brighter tones

But, to be honest, I've seen a 5D mkII in person, and seen the images it does, and although significantly better than the A300 on a high res screen, at the resolution of print, you really can't tell the difference (although, the larger the print, the more obvious the noise will become). Might have needed more tweaking, but for print, the Sony High ISO might be acceptable (not great, but ok).

But yes, the A700 is a better deal for what I want, even though the A550 looks like a good camera, I still think the A700 has an edge in terms of build and viewfinder quality (which I really dislike on my A300).


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group