Sony A77 rumoured specs

lemoon said:
Sounds Good and looks very promising, however, until it is officially announced by Sony it's all rumor and speculation to me from here on out. Me personally, I'm counting the days till I can order it. ;)
Click to expand...

Not much rumour left really. Sony have officially leaked almost all information and official photographs as a marketing strategy to get the fanboys excited.

Anyway, the official announcement is tomorrow.

For me, not that exciting since it is an SLT not an SLR camera so a large tradeoff for serious photographers.
 
Seems like a nice bit of kit - I look forward to the previews turning into reviews eg

DPReview
[URL="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sony_a77_first_impressions.shtml]Luminous Landscape[/url]
 
D.P. said:
Not much rumour left really. Sony have officially leaked almost all information and official photographs as a marketing strategy to get the fanboys excited.

Anyway, the official announcement is tomorrow.

For me, not that exciting since it is an SLT not an SLR camera so a large tradeoff for serious photographers.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the hateboys eh?
 
Just been reading through the specs and it looks a superb bit of kit.
My brother has the A55 and I really do like it.

Great handling, superb image quality and priced reasonably. There's no reason the A77 wont continue that trend.

Will still be out of my price bracket though.
 
These TMT camera's are really intriguing to me, shame Sony have no good lenses to choose from.

Or rather, they have some okay super budget lenses, and some great uber expensive lenses, but there's a serious lack of choice and quality in the medium budget ranges.
 
Was checking out the significantly cheaper A65, which spec wise is almost exactly the same as the A77 (less movability on the swivel screen on the A65 and less AF points being the only difference)..
But then found out the A65 has deliberately had support for grip's and 'top end flash guns' removed. Disappointing :(

Its basically the same camera with Sony endorsed crippling
 
Last edited:
It looks like the 12fps isn't with constant AF though. The ISO1250 examples don't look to great either.
 
You have to wonder what Nikon do to make their sensor's so much better considering both they and Sony use the same sensor out of the factory.
Nikon's attempt has better detail at higher ISO's with less aggressive noise reduction (retaining more detail) compared to the Sony camera's.
 
Rojin said:
It looks like the 12fps isn't with constant AF though. The ISO1250 examples don't look to great either.
Click to expand...

I agree. I have been looking at some sample pictures and then looked at some peoples impressions, e.g. Thom Hogan has commented ons ample images he was given from friends. As predicated their is a noise problem and Sony seems to apply liberal noise reduction in the jpeg engine to remove the noise resulting in visible smearing and loss of detail. I.E, the 24Mp sensor wont be giving 24MP of detail when all is said and done.

This is a little worrying becuse Nikon may aim to use the same sensor in a D400 type camera. But there are some important points to realise.
  • All sampel images are on pre-production firmware. Even the sensor ahrdware amy get some tweaks.
  • All shots were jpeg as there is no RAW support yet. Perhaps Sony's jpeg engine is especially poor with this type of sensor detail. People shooting RAW may do much better.
  • If one downsamples the A77 RAW output down to 12-16MP one should be able to remove much of these issues.

Also to note if Nikon do use a variant of this senor Nikon often do a lot of tweaking. E.g. the D3x sensor is very similar to the Sony A900, but Nikon's tweaks handle noise much better. Also Nikon is very firm about not producing cameras that chase the MP race and need a balance of DR, noise perfortmance and resolution. A tweak of the sensor in the current D7000 will still be an amazing sensor and make the best crop sensor body out there just like the D300 dominated in its heyday. Importantly, the linear resolution difference between a 16MP and 24MP sensor is very little, a smidgen over 20% under optimal conditions.


This is where Sony's marketing and MP race strategy is counterproductive to generating the best camera. The SLT has many advantages and disadvanatges, one of which is less light hitting the sensor, thus to combat this one should optimise a sensor for low noise. The SLT ddesigne allows high FPS shooting making it suitable for sports, except again in fast acation people want great nosise performance, not resolution.



Hopefully the production cameras are better, or the sampel we have seen are sub standard.
 
Alpherah said:
You have to wonder what Nikon do to make their sensor's so much better considering both they and Sony use the same sensor out of the factory.
Nikon's attempt has better detail at higher ISO's with less aggressive noise reduction (retaining more detail) compared to the Sony camera's.
Click to expand...

Nikon do a lot of tweaking on some of their sensors. E.g, the D3 to D3s tweaks gained around 1 stop of high ISO noise perfomance. Much of this comes by improving amplifiers, ADCs, readout circuits etc. Their jpeg processing has always been very good at making a balance of noise and detail, usually removing the distracting coloured noise but being less aggressive on the luminance noise which helps maintain the details. This results in more natural film like grain without excessive smearing. Even with some of Nikons earlier sensors their artificial noise measurements were often higher than competitors, but when printed the Nikon noise was not any more objectionable, and sometimes less so.

If you shoot RAW then you can do better at noise reduction than the jpeg engine in most cameras.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom