New Sony tests (A99, RX1, Pancake zoom and Rokinon).
Focus Numerique (translation here) published the detailed A99 ISO test. You can compare the A99 vs Nikon D600 comparison images here:
ISO 100: A99 vs D600
ISO 200: A99 vs D600
ISO 400: A99 vs D600
ISO 800: A99 vs D600
ISO 1600: A99 vs D600
ISO 3200: A99 vs D600
ISO 6400: A99 vs D600
ISO 12800: A99 vs D600
ISO 25600: A99 vs D600
As we learned from other tests take those comparisons with a grain of salt. But there looks to be a different noise handling between the two cameras. The A99 is a bit more aggressive while the Nikon seems to retain a tiny bit more of detail. What are your thoughts?
More reviews:
RX1 hands.on pics by Photographybay.
First day with sony alpha slt-a99v at RodKar.
16-50mm pancake test by John on Flickr.
Rokinon 8mm for NEX review at SonyAlphaLab.
ZPk!Qg~~60_35.JPG)
Santiago
8 months ago |I think that RAW should be compared and not JPEG. Sony’s JPEG engine isn’t great. You can clearly see much more detail on D600 :/
JMi
8 months ago |Huuuuuuuge barel distorsion at 16mm on the Sony pancake zoom
ihur
8 months ago |sadly, d600 is superior
anthony
8 months ago |extremely marginal and only at pixel peeping
my a99 is kicking ass and taking numbers atm and in print was no diff between taht and teh d800E i tried the week before at 8×10 both printed beautifully
Mike
8 months ago |Spare us with the pixel peeping argument. The D600 is better at 3200 than the A99 at 1600 ISO.
Sadly, I have to agree. The A99 is inferior by more than 1 stop. This basically confirms what I have seen in earlier tests.
Steve
8 months ago |+1
Maybe RAW’s will be better
I only use RAW anyway
Dirk
8 months ago |Ok, let’s assume this impression will be technically confirmed.
What about real world usage?
You take a D600 with a Nikkor 24-70 and I take my A99 with the Zeiss 24-70.
Now we are going into low light condition and you shoot at ISO 6400, where do only need ISO 1600 because my camera body is IS.
Got it?
The Lotus Eater
8 months ago |“Spare us with the pixel peeping argument. The D600 is better at 3200 than the A99 at 1600 ISO.
Sadly, I have to agree. The A99 is inferior by more than 1 stop. This basically confirms what I have seen in earlier tests.”
There is a huge amount of bollocks spouted on this site from time to time, but that not only takes the cake, it rams it down its throat at lightning speed and takes another huge slice to devour.
theZAE
8 months ago |Take a look at the lower left corner of the shots. (At least in 6400ISO) The Sony’s focus is closer than the Nikon, as evident by the words Kodak being much more clear than the D600.
The comparison only works when comparing two shots focused at the SAME distance!
Kevin
8 months ago |The A99 image is little bit not that bright like the D600, but take a look at the text and the face on the bill, at 3200 or above, the A99 pic still retains more detail.
Gordon
8 months ago |Anthony’s point is about the printed results. I believe him. I am sick and tired of each person saying their brand is better than someone else. It reminds me of children playing with marbles on the playground. Photography is not about being better than someone else. It is about being totally amazed at our beautiful world and its various subjects. I believe that there is no one on this planet in a blinded test could tell the difference between printed pictures taken with a D800, D600, MD3 or a99. The differences people see is blinded by prejudice and not seeing a blinded test. Everyone needs to remember the testing methods of science. All tests must be blinded from the tester. Pick your tool and go use it. Get inspired and love your images. My favorite pic that I ever took was of a surfer on the OR coast taken with a Kodak 10x super zoom. I have gone back year after year with much better equipment and never gotten a better shot. Sometimes it is the moment that makes a great shot which may never repeat again.
Dave Cox
8 months ago |Man, this is so true! The negativity on this forum is simply astonishing sometimes. I honestly wonder whether some of the contributors actually ever have time to take a photo!
Steven
8 months ago |Well said !
Dirk
8 months ago |+1
My all time favorite is a 16 year old APS photo of (a portrait during sunset) I captured at St. Pete Beach FL during my vacation there.
I think the point is that everybodies opinion is bound to be subjective.
Photos I like probably the next one doesn’t because it’s too noisy, too saturated, to unbalanced or too whatever.
You pointed it out. It’s mostly the moment that makes a great picture.
leonardo
8 months ago |1+
Thats so true , well said ….
I honestly dont know why all this people its talking about all this things in the diferent brands , sony this … nikon that … canon … everybody have excellent products for the lovers of the light , how do you use your gear its very relative , my best camera its an old hasselblad , i have took more than 700,000 shots with that body , amazing Zeiss optics , the same reason why im with Sony …. just for the Carl Zeiss glass …. the other topics are just the way I see the light , and thats the real thing ….
leon
8 months ago |I dont care about this kind of tests ….
buy a camera , take pictures ….. don’t think in the gear , try to think in the light …
its not the gear that you use or the gear that you want to use … its how you can use the light
the Nikon cameras are great tools , excelent perform nice glass nice image ….
to me a wether sealing body , with IBIS , nice Zeiss optics , a fine LCD screen , and a nice 60p full HD video sounds perfect just for say some of the good things that the new a99 have to offer ….
If there are some Nikon or Canon users thinking in …. my 5dm3 its great but that sony looks interesting … or the D600 its nice but the Sony its nice to its because Sony its pushing forward the industry …
john
8 months ago |Every time i hear the pixel peepers get their balls in a twist i have to refer them to this article written in 2009!
A must read for everyone in general
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/quality-vs-value.shtml
“I shook up (actually pissed-off is more like it) a lot of people late last year when I compared the image quality possible from a $500 15 Megapixel Canon G10 with a $40,000 Phase One P45+ 39 Megapixel back on a Hasselblad H2. My little test showed that on a selection of 13X19″ prints a panel of industry pros couldn’t differentiate between the two more than roughly 50% of the time. What the hell was that about?”
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml
I’d dare say the difference is even smaller in 2012
Gordon
8 months ago |Thanks for posting this article. It was very interesting. I agreed everyone should read it. Perhaps we can all remain sane during our love affair with photography.
Ncguy
8 months ago |They are comparing Jpeg outputs. Everyone can agree that Sony jpegs aren’t as good at high ISO compared to Nikon.
At the bottom, they compared a processed RAW file and a jpeg file. The jpeg file looks identical to the one displayed in the comparison.
Rory Cornelius
8 months ago |Shhhhhh, Gordon! You’re sounding like a photographer with your post! Gear-Heads have little interest in photography.
Dave Cox
8 months ago |Haha, brilliant.
I can’t wait for the petty pixel peepers to point out the error of your practical and sensible ways.
LEdgars
8 months ago |Most of people who intensively pixelpeeping all available online pictures just don’t have a time to take shoots.
A850 Tog
8 months ago |MOMENT, LIGHT, COMPOSITION……..the rest are just technicalities for (the most part) losers, gear heads and fan-boys. My new A99 is rocking my world, just like my A850 and D700 did when I first got them. If you’re worried about your cameras noise profie or shadow tonality in the dark then go find some f**king light
Peace Out.
Tanglefoot
8 months ago |a99 images look underexposed compared to the d600 which won’t help the a99 as noise is more pronounced in darker areas…
I wonder what lenses they used (too late for me to be bothered to read the article so sorry if it states it there;) ). The a99 looks to be even a little sharper than the d600 in the centre on some of the images (but that could be down to focal point variation), but on the edges the d600 images romp all over the a99 ones – look at the detail of the map in the corner – more readable on the d600 images at ISO6400 than the a99 at ISO100!!!
Mitsu
8 months ago |I think Andrea’s favourite phrase is “take it with a grain of salt”
Poke
8 months ago |I just looked at the 6400 and both look great. Give me either one of these cameras and I will be loving it. I am impressed how well the 99 handles high iso now. Nikon always processed high iso pretty well and it was sort of Sony’s downfall. Sony has caught up. I actually preferred the 99 when zoomed on the book. Less noisy background and the book maintained excellent detail. I was suppose to get the 99 on Wed, but Sandy will cause a delay in delivery.
giomaniac
8 months ago |Agreed!!!
Vang
8 months ago |+1
Jonathan S
8 months ago |Sony looks more detailed to me, but it’s really close. They both look great.
Steve
8 months ago |I happy that from an image standpoint that its close as it is.
The a99 is a cooler camera and in many areas it is a better camera.
the SLT design of the a99 live that of the a77 has lowered slightly lowered its image scores for those that use Photoshop or pixel peep.
Lucas
8 months ago |I only looked at the ISO6400 samples and the difference in IQ at 100% ( if any ) is negligible. I like A99′s more due to slightly better colors and sharper details. Considering all other superior features of the A99, IMO it’s a no-brainer: I ordered my A99 already!
Alan
8 months ago |both perform great. in low iso d600 sharpness better. But personally favourite i like a99 pic with abit “darker” contrast dynamic range more effectively. and at high iso personally i think the a99 noise is abit nice to see than d600..i just order and bank in to the seller, cant wait to get my a99 soon. a99 feature is a camera that i want for both still and video although it still lake of something and got some more to improve. But improvement is nonstop, so i will keep pay attention on next sony camera which better than a99. This is a camera that so far i love the most in overall
dieterson
8 months ago |I like the A99 as a camera very much and prefer it about the D600 – the Sony has so many nice features! But the jpeg-Output is better with the Nikon! Especially in the dark areas (below the ati-chip) the noise reduction of Sony looks like small worms – I don’t like! The Nikon noise is looks more like the corn of analog film – well done Nikon!
But if you work with RAW the Sony will catch up.
Clifton
8 months ago |The D600 is slightly better, its hard to argue against that in this particular test. If it was massivly worse, what are we gonna do? jump ship for the sake of a stop? of course not.
Both cameras are amazing machines and I would gamble that 90% of the people on here (myself included) don’t need, or could ever use the specs of them anywhere near their limits. People need to get away from their monitors and take some damn photos.
Dulaney Ward
8 months ago |I doubt that the A600 will test as much as half a stop better in noise.
Chad
8 months ago |Sony’s high ISO JPEG processing is really sad compared to the Nikon. I’ve compared RAW files from the Quesabeda site and the Sony looked better at 6400 so indeed, take all this with a grain of salt and don’t bother nitpicking the high ISO JPEGS unless that is all you shoot. Even then, these are both good enough…
Steven
8 months ago |Well it appears to me that both camera are great in terms of ISO performance, but both manage it from different approaches. Nikon has been obvious for many years how to handle noise by maintainin as many details as possible. Sony, on the other hand, seems to focus on smooth color rendition. Both are awesome of course.
By the way, why didn’t they compare A99 with 5dmkIII, 6D, or D800 as well?
Ramin
8 months ago |I checked the jpegs made from raw for iso’s 6400 and 12800 and I can barely see a difference. A99 is slightly darker and perhaps slightly better noise than D600. However, I noticed A99 images are less sharp than D600? Why? Maybe the lens? I didn’t find any info on the lens in the website? Maybe, a little off in focus by mistake?
cbsva
8 months ago |Using Firefox with the Exif-Viewer addon one can see, that they used the 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM @ 50mm, f5.6 for the A99 vs. a 50mm F1,7 FF lens @ f5.6 for the D600.
No comment…;-)
Steve
8 months ago |So are you tell us that the Nikon D600 is sharper in the corners with a $225.00 50mm Nikon prime than the Sony a99 with the Zeiss 25-70/f2.8 that sells for $1,999.00?
For those of us that are still photographers and don’t care about the superior video of the a99 seeing the Cheaper Nikon deliver images as well as it does makes the d600 an easy choice.
You pair that up with Nikon’s lens catalog that is second only to Canon in my opinion you have a winning combination.
I can afford to purchase the Nikon d800 but the d600 looks to be an outstanding camera for the money.
Dave Cox
8 months ago |99% of prime lenses are sharper at the corners than equivalent zooms. That is the price you pay for the versatility of a zoom. Google it and you will find a thousand technical articles explaining the reasons why.
This test is just nonsensical. Different focus points, different lenses, completely unrealistic.
Roll on DxoMark for some proper controlled tests…..
raz744u
8 months ago |Although I have invested a lot in Sony, and there is no way of switching systems, I have to give Nikon credit for the detail it can capture. If these photos are JPEGs from RAW captures, then D600 is clearly superior in low light. The detail at 12800 is really amazing comparing to Sony. Just look at the circuit board, the map and the letter! And here we go back to the SLT and the loss of light
BTW, I’m wondering when Amazon will have the A99 in stock, it’s really aggravating!
fotowolf61
8 months ago |D600 and A99 use a different JPEG-engine for pictures OOC.
A99 JPGs are definitly OOC and NOT converted from RAW. The pattern used is typical for all Sony SLTs and it is NOT related to the SLT mirror.
This is BS.
Take a ARC or DxO or PO and you get a totally different result. In camera JPG engine and denoising is a Sony weakness, since they changed the algorithms.
ntdbt
8 months ago |D600 is 2 stop better.
You guys can check the map details at left top of the picture.
On D600, you still can read the map easily at ISO25600. But on A99, you can’t read (or hardly) even ISO6400.
What a disappointed!
Tanglefoot
8 months ago |I thought that too when I first looked but then realised that I was looking at the corners which are more susceptible to better/worse lens performance than the centers – this is an image taken on a zoom compared to one taken on a prime….
Look at the center of the image & you will see detail retention is MUCH closer at the same ISO.
zinkplated
8 months ago |Why is the A99 always compared to the D600? why not the D800? Its pretty embarrasing for Sonys ‘flagship’ camera to be compared to Nikons cheaper and downmarket camera.
Tanglefoot
8 months ago |“….Nikons cheaper and downmarket camera.”…. with the same sensor….
Bobtastic
8 months ago |Amateur Photographer tested both D600 and D800 and the D600 outperforms the D800 in terms of noise performance at higher ISOs.
Rod
8 months ago |Once again the focus point is different. Looking at the 6400 photos The A99 is much aharper on the items that stick off the background (olive oil, car, camera and bear). Whilst the printed items are sharper on the D600
w1th0utnam3
8 months ago |Yes, I agree. The map in the top left corner is really blurred on the a99, whilst the lables on the lens at the bottom left corner are sharper than the D600.
alperen.alsn
8 months ago |it’s pretty obvious on the model car and the vintage camera too. wonder how they really test cameras.
lol
8 months ago |Why everyone is comparing A99 to D600. It is different class camera, at least now based on price in my country. In Poland A99 costs 12222 PLN, while Nikon D600 starts from 6899 PLN. For one A99 you can get almost two Nikons D600! Same sensor doesn’t mean we should compare this cameras.
And btw. there is difference nothing big (half EV?) but obvious. Compare 25600 pictures details and noise. Sony looks like was first blured for noise (and detal) reduction and then oversharpened – plenty of artefacts.
Give me A99 for price of D600 and I buying it today.
Brian
8 months ago |It is exactly what I keep saying. It’s a bit disappointing that you guys compare A99 with D600. A99 gotta be compared against D800. Common people!!!
rafael
8 months ago |I completely agree.
Chris
8 months ago |Argue all you like about the D600 which is a completely different class of camera (we should be comparing the A99 to 5d III and D800)but there is no way it’s 1 stop ahead in terms of overall noise. Tomorrow I will publish some head to head tests against my D700 with the A99 scaled to the same size and you will see that the A99 has a clear advantage. This leads into what DXO’s final score will be. If the D700 is at 2300ISO and they do indeed normalise their files for fair comparison then there is no way the A99 will come out less than that, I have tested it numerous times and the A99 is superior, this puts it around 2400ISO which is NOT 1 stop behind the D600!
cervantes
8 months ago |Cleary we can see that the focus point its not the same, map more sharpness for d600 and hoil bottle for a99, so for the map d600 win and bottle a99 win so this test suck. But anyway we know a99 do a really great job in low light iso, people was really complain with a77 and its normal but now you can shoot iso 6400 why people just focus about iso ?? take camera and go shoot and then we will see your photo. Go buy d600, i clearly prefere a99 for all advantage it have.
Really?
8 months ago |Are people seriously complaining about the noise issues with the A99? I can promise that those who are complaining about the quality and noise on this camera, clearly doesnt use cameras to make money. If I have been able to use the A900 for the past 3 years in commercial work for big brands, the A99 is going to be such a big upgrade! The in body IS is going to be so important for sony as it will assist in higher iso shots too. So while Nikon and canon will have to go to 6400, we can go to 1600/3200 with IS and it will be perfect!
Please stop complaining! You people are getting on my last nerve
Mike
8 months ago |1. you are confusing stating observations with complaining
2. nobody said the d600 is a better overall camera than a99
3. nobody said the a99 won’t be a significant upgrade
4. an auto rickshaw driver on the streets of delhi also is a professional, nonetheless he won’t be able to convince me to buy his vehicle instead of a new car
Baki
8 months ago |d600 better. 2 stop difference raw format. slt out
sony hybrid system should.classic mirror and slt mirror mode.
Steve
8 months ago |The a99 looks to be a fine camera
Let’s see how will it sells
Ramin
8 months ago |2 stops difference?! That’s only in your imagination. What I see does not show any significant difference in noise performance.
The Lotus Eater
8 months ago |The tests are basically useless. Different exposures, different lenses.
Saying that, both cameras’ image quality looks excellent. If anybody were to buy either of these cameras based only on 100% pixel peeping tests, I’d recommend they’re committed to a lunatic asylum.
It’s basically pointless comparing two camera with the same sensor, yes, even when taking the SLT mirror into account. For all intents and purposes, these cameras will perform as well as each other in terms of image quality in the real world. Not happy with the image quality? Buy a better lens.
5dii
8 months ago |Focal plane is not the same.
Spoon
8 months ago |Andrea, as mentioned by others, this comment in your original post wasn’t correct: “converted into JPG from original RAW files”
They are default out of camera jpegs. The corresponding RAW files are posted too though, as usual. So you can do your own conversions.
exm3racer
8 months ago |When viewing the A99 images you can clearly see the jpeg artifacts, and I don’t see them in the D600 images. This is what is smearing the noise.
I saved the 6400 images on my HD.
The A99 file is 8.2 MB
The D600 file is 16.4 MB
DUH!!!
All this shows is that Nikon still has less jpeg compression
Baki Çirkin
8 months ago |I like this ISO to eliminate the problems have a suggestion
http://bakicirkin.blogspot.com/2012/10/tunnel-sensor-technology.html
Bruno
8 months ago |Hello,
Does the fact that the A99 exposes to the left of the histogram and the D600 to the right, according to Focus Numérique, could explain some differences?.
Frosten
8 months ago |Who wants a camera full of dust as the D600?
Nikonisbtter
8 months ago |Well the Nikon obivously wins on high iso performance. Very nice Nikon for a 2Grand camera. But obviously the A99 doesnt score bad either.
Roy K.
8 months ago |5dIII is absolutely a winner. It was proved that its performance blows aways both D800 and D4 into small pieces.
Dave Cox
8 months ago |I’ll have some of what you’re smoking please!
Show me a single magazine review that scores the 5dmk3 over the D800 and I’ll show you 5 where the D800 wins.