sonyalpharumorsLog in

Very useful review – thank you, especially as I am still ‘weighing up’ between A99 and D600. One major point that reviewers seem to miss though… there are many raw converters to chose from for the Nikon system and very few for Sony. I prefer Capture One over ACR any day, but so far C1 only has 2 Sony lenses in it’s database. Personally, I think Sony needs to work on this aspect (Sony IDC is a joke) if they are to make any headway into the ‘Pro.’ market. Sony seem to work on producing top rate jpegs, as opposed to raw options, but that won’t please everyone. Another point is the much higher price and lower availability of the CZ lenses for the A99 compared to Nikon system.

Perhaps what was most revealing were David’s comments about the pricing, and how he believes Sony have set the pricing based on their perception of being at the “premium” end of the market, as he comments that have done is other markets such as semi-pro video. As a long term Minolta and Sony user, I have no intention of upgrading to an A99 at it’s current price, and may well decide to leave them entirely. There is nothing “premium” about a A99 compared to, for exmaple, a D600. If Sony, with their typically arrogance that it believes it somehow is, then it desrves not to sell.

I can also live without a SLR with a less than 200-shot battery life. That’s definately premium – or at least “like.no.other”.

The D600 is weather sealed as well.

Until you shoot with a full-frame OVF, it’s not even worth discussing. You shouldn’t compare anything to a 5-year-old, APS-C viewfinder. Those are like tunnels.

I would be happy to get the A77 if it wasn’t for the fact that Sony intentionally crippled the video-features on it. Seriously, no clean HDMI out?

Have to agree with the review the camera is way overpriced. Why would you pay more for the A99 than the 5D Mk3 or D800 unless you are into videography. Not to sure I agree on the EVF as I actually like it far more pro’s than con’s.

Back to price… how can people justify its price when they comparer it to the well priced A77, is it twice the camera as is suggested by its price multiple… I think not, The A99 should be circa £1500.

Also what concerns me as a prospective FF buyer (currently A77) is the time between FF releases from Sony, It should be yearly not every 3 years as with the previous a900-A99.

If I am also to invest serious money into an ‘A type’ lens system I would like to know the system has a future a yearly FF release would help some way towards this… to me it seems clear Sony is putting the Alphas on the back burner whilst putting its ‘E lens’ systems as priority… which in all fairness is understandable due to the vast numbers/profit they turn on that system.

Also Sony need to get a move on and release the 70-200 mk2 as that is another thing holding me back from buying the A99… no point having a weather sealed camera if the lenses aren’t!

Pointless to you perhaps, but not to others apparently.

I can’t wait to see a manufacturer make a bare bones simple FF DSLR with just the external/internal controls still shooters need and live view for under 1300.00 starting USD.

It should, and can happen. Sony should take charge and jump on that glaring hole in the marketplace.

C

There seems to be an unfortunate growing sense that Sony really made some mistakes with the A99. This review stacks it against the 6D/D600 wonder twins, but it’s more than just price competition.

It’s neither the successor to the A900 SLR that pros want nor is it an easy upgrade for an A77 owner. On top of all that, Sony releases the RX1 at the same time. A shame because they have made some real breakthroughs for photography.

As a consumer and SLT/NEX/RX100 owner, I would have entertained getting an A99, but I didn’t own any Sony full frame lens or flash and I’m already in the Canon system. The 5D3 was a safe purchase even at that hyper-inflated price.

I don’t know if we can get the pros back to Sony, but on the consumer level, there’s still a chance. Look at the D600 success. The main reason is that they produced a decent kit lens (24-85mm) months earlier and are now giving it away for free. Nikon essentially gets consumers to FF under $2000 USD using a Sony sensor. That was the smartest move ever.

Sony needs something like that, a kit with flash and lens to get people on board and jump start some sales. It’s a very consumer oriented strategy that doesn’t address the A900 pro, but it’s better to succeed in one area than fail in both. Also, there is no rule in God’s book that says Sony can’t produce an A900 Mark II SLR. Just give them what they want.

You’re mistaken. He loves the A99. Here are two quotes from the end of the article:

n the end, despite all its problems, the Alpha 99 simply turns in a better success rate on my sort of subjects – landscapes, street scenes, people, events – than its rivals. The metering is more accurate, the AF is either as good or better, the image quality at high ISOs is a touch lower, the GPS works well, and of course the sensor-based stabilisation is a total winner.

Could I work professionally with the Alpha 99? Yes. I’m confident it would not let me down in any situation I’m likely to encounter or set up – I do not shoot sports or hard news, events or conferences. Future professional use would be likely to be public relations, corporate brochure, annual report, advertising, industrial and environmental, executive portraiture, products, architectural, building works, stock travel and landscape. Frankly, anything I could once have shot on a Hasselblad can easily be tackled with an Alpha 99.

One thing I suppose we should be grateful for is that there were no issues with the A77 and not heard any about the A99?

Look at the nikon D800 left sensor, green tint ? Also the oil on the sensor being reported on the new D600?

At least if you buy a A99 you will be pretty confident it going to work?

I just wish the price would drop to a more realistic price in the market as am sure they missing a hell of a lot of sales because of the imo silly price point it set at?

Oh well I suppose it a waiting game and enjoy my A77 a little more until the price does eventually move to what I am willing to pay? At the moment I can not justify the £2200 price tag when you see the competitors slashing the prices and great offers?

I love the cinnabar-colored lens mount. Having a snazzy yet slick-looking camera is not a downside, it is a big plus. Just because it’s a serious photographic tool doesn’t mean it has to be hideous (I’m looking at you, Canon, you ugly bastards).

Not surprised, Minolta has a long track record of making the ugliest slrs with the most useless features. No suprise they are screwing around at Sony as well. The Minolta does not fall far from the tree.

Hey Paul you made the mistake not Frank.

READ THE ARTICLE. While he thinks it is over priced he likes the camera very much as this quote from the review should confirm.

“The Alpha 99 is currently the full-frame camera I’m working with and will stick with until the next generation arrives.”

I agree with DK that it’s pointless comparing the A99 to the 5D. He was right not draw a comparrison. The A99 may well perform equally well if not better than the 5D but the 5D has such a name for itself and has such a huge following that it is practically the industry standard professional full frame camera. There is no realistic competition. From a stills photography point of view the A99 is very over priced prosumer camera simply because it lacks great lenses. It may well be a great converegance camera for people who want both great video and photography but Sony are only tapping into a small market of an already relatively small market where again the 5D dominates. They missed a shot I think not pricing and indeed making the A99 for A77 users wanting to easily upgrade. They’re the realistic market for it.

Agree.
I would add: if you wanna pay less go for a D600 and you’ll get (included in the price, so for free) dust and (apparently) oil on the sensor starting from pic number 1 and piling up more and more as you keep taking pictures.
I’ve held both cameras and the difference in quality is there: D600 is plastic while A99 is as solid as a brick.

>>I cant see myself ever wanting to be stuck with a evf again, they are crap!

Hey Frank, I saw you made a mistake there and I fixed it for you. No need to thank me.

Kindly,
Paul

Sony’s idiotic MAP policy and their arrogance to list this camera at $2800 US (well over 3k EU), are going to kill what is an otherwise excellent camera. This is a $2200 with it going as low as $1900 if vendors were allows some latitude to price it as they saw fit.

the a99 is an amazing camera and I happily paid the amount that I did for it. I don’t have money by any means and sold a lot if stuff so I could get it, but it’s the best camera I’ve ever used. I jumped ship from Nikon to get it and I truly think that the people who say this camera is overpriced have never held it before, much less pushed it to it’s limits.

If you actually frequent photoclubalpha, you’d know that DK is even more down on the 5dmk3. Let’s just say that your assertion that everything on that camera works does not seem to be borne out by user reviews, especially on eoshd. It’s not a bad camera, but like the A99, it is flawed.

Sony’s main problem is limited range of new pro alfa lenses. Discussion about EVF and OVF is pointless.

So price-wise, should we compare A99 to D800 and 5Diii or to D600 and 6D? With the former, A99 is priced right; with the latter it is priced too high. What criterion make the comparison legitimate? Body construction image quality or, feature set?

I’ve noticed more and more provocative “headlines” that tended to make readers excited that don’t take the time to read it themselves and then posters respond to the ridiculous nonsensical postings about conclusions in a reviews that were never made.

They don’t bother with advertising video AF for two reasons:
1. It’s against their video buisness, especially since FS and VG series of cameras was introduced with E-mount. So making A99 look best for video is against two major parts of Sony Imaging.
2. They know that for serious video people use MF anyway, while for non-serious video there’s no way they could justify 2500$ camera instead of a…say: handycam.

Internal conflicts are still making Sony weak. (yet another example of that is canceling of the A1X)

True. But well… Sony didn’t bother so if they’re about to blame someone for A99 sales figures – it’s only themselves. If they’d try to push the boundries bit more then it mit work, but copy&paste to A77 is definietly not a way to go in a FF flagship.

FWIW, the NEX-7 is the best camera Sony has ever made, and the proof is in the sales numbers…

After reading nearly all of the review I disagree with the assessment, “doesn’t like it at all.”

Where’d you get that?

Overall, this is actually a pretty good review for an ambitious attempt at changing the game. I agree with many of the observations regarding the pros and cons of this camera as per this review. I do hope that the engineers at Sony read this and respond accordingly. A return to the dual BIONZ would indeed be nice. The focus points being clustered around the center and not respecting the essential truth of the Rule of Thirds is also a major blow-it that must be remedied. I’m still not totally sold on EVFs but, like the review states, the future will no doubt see increasing improvements. Still, I would like to see the OVF offered on at least one new model cycle and I know it would sell. The “organic” experience of the OVF is still unrivaled in enough situations to make it worth having. Yes, the low light performance is still a rough patch but I’m sure that will change soon enough as well in lock step with EVF improvements. The price points don’t bother me; they’re just not egregious enough. The lens selection disparities also don’t bother me since many old Minolta lenses are still out there in circulation and third party manufacturers are abundant enough to take up slack.

Sony has only been in this game for less than a decade and already compete directly. Sure, CaNikon are THE dominant two and I concede that without hesitation but it is very obvious that Sony has shaken things up considerably and are unquestionable contenders. If they weren’t I wouldn’t shoot with their system – and none of the CaNikon fanboy trolls would bother with sites like these.

Relatively minor issues aside, Sony’s legit and that’s it.

Sony had the opportunity to make a camera that could lead in both stills and video, if they’d chosen to use the best sensor that they make. That was an opportunity lost. Going forward, perhaps they should keep in mind that there are three major uses for a FF camera that could/should be met with 3 different models – all of which could benefit from on-chip focus (and dump the slt):
1. A high resolution stills body – c’moon Sony, it’s time to kill MF by putting out a 54 megapixel sensor. Sony has the tech to have decent ISO in that machine, which is a feature MF sensors don’t have. Those of use who do landscape photography would love this.
2. A combo body with excellent video/very good stills. I envision the use of a 36 megapixel sensor in this. Also, can this body be made to have 4k capabilities?
3. An event camera body – with lower megapixels, and high iso and frame rate. I wonder if the current 24 megapixel sensor could be used for this?

Trying to put all the eggs into one basket will always cause compromises, and result in a camera that can’t do everything as well as the competition. I gotta say that the perceived shortcomings of Sony cameras are the focus of many contributions, and have to suspect that a lot of writers who emphasize those shortcomings are just trolls in sheep’s clothing, who neglect to mention that they are not making fair comparisons. In this case, the unfairness is that they are not mentioning that the A99′s best quality is the ability to focus decently during video. Perhaps Sony has done a poor job marketing the slt as obviously the general public doesn’t realize how compromised the OVF cameras are in regards to that ability. And, they don’t realize that the “pros” they are trying to emulate have staff to aid focus, and time to map out their shots – which is exactly NOT what happens when you’re trying to immortalize your family in video. People need decent autofocus in their video – I remember clearly when my friend bought a Nikon, and was so disappointed when he realized the video focussing was crap – he said that his camera was fine for doing interviews, but awful for making videos of his 3 year old.

Anyhow, that’s how I see it.

Advanced HEAT DISPERSEMENT is required for the internal components

Okay,
I read the posts on this site and THEN read the DK review.
In my opinion many posters here haven’t read the review.

The lack of an stellar new EVF is definitely a big disappointment with the a99. It doesn’t seem to do enough to set it apart from the a77 to call it a flagship.

Meh, A99 is perfect stills camera. Yea AF isnt top of the league, but sensor is pure gold.

Get over A900 please. Yes I do think A900 was one of best dSLR ever made and I love it. But in same time Sony made these with loss, not profit, cause it was damn expensive to make. Thats why it was priced so low.

For me A99 is best thing since sliced bread or at least, best camera of this year (yup its still 2012). Closely followed by RX1 (thats cause RX1 idea actually needed some balls to realize it, no one else except Leica tried it).

My criteria for camera quality is following:
1) image quality – colors, DR, resolution
2) build quality – sturdy = good
3) handling

Nothing except 1DsMKIII is close to A99. Which is camera with highest IQ ever made by Canon. Maybe D3X could be counted too, just colors arent that nice.. (but it has one sweet AA filter).

In my opinion Sony knew that the Alpha a99 would ONLY sell to current A-Mount owners and video types and would have little support over the Nikon and Canon products, so it is trying to make the most money it can with the product. Serious photographers look at cameras as a part of a system and Sony loses.
Photographers invested in a Canon or Nikon lens system are unlikely to jump ship and move to Sony.
Sony did have a chance with the Minolta purchase but sat on their hands and did little after the wonderful a700, a850 & a900 and a nice selection of Zeiss and G lenses.
Sony has a new opportunity with mirrorless, but still needs to show more of a commitment to the supporting products if it hopes to get and then keep a professional following.
I bet that this next year (2013) both Canon and Nikon will quickly close the gap in Mirrorless cameras with new bodies and optics that use much of the lenses and supporting products that photographers already own.

I think we all (well most am sure) agree that the biggest downside to the A99 at the present is the price point?

Especially here in the UK it just to expensive? I have been using the A77 for 10K + shots now and it produces more keepers in my field of bird photography than any other many camera(s) I have used? Partly because thanks to the EVF you can see what you are getting before even committing to the shot?

The downside to the A77 is 1600+ ISO performance is poor? I was saving for the A99 for this reason? When I saw the price that was end of that, and I was expecting a sub £2000 price point by now?

I payed over the odds for my A77 and it doesn’t really bother me that it dropped a few hundred pound as I have had the enjoyment out of it and some superb pictures to boot?

I am not however willing to pay more than say a D800 for the A99 and Sony need to lower there prices soon or loose out as people will always go with the better value options available to them the majority of the time?

@Lonnie, The review is written largely how photo-only reviews have been written for 40 years. Although it acknowledges some benefits for EVF, it is clear that he strongly favors OVF. The fact that he sees NO difference between N600 and A99 means that he sharply discounts significant features that only START with video.

The guy is entitled to his opinion, but Sony is clearly trying to move the SLR community to incorporate video and several electronic enhancement to photos that a strong traditionalist would need to LEARN. Everything about the article expresses admiration for history and traditions (I admire them, too), but the Sony vision is BARELY mentioned. The reviewer wants a new A900 and wants to piss off (I mean influence) Sony by writing the review this way.

Dave’s been shooting Sony and before that Minolta for many, many years. He was one of Minolta’s top shooters and has a vast arsenal of Sony/Minolta cameras. To say that he’s not familiar with the camera is an ignorant statement by a poster who’s ignorant of the history of the Alpha mount camera system….

Correction : 6D, not 60D! Sorry for the typo!!

The price is spot on and several working photographers have adapted the A99 for what it is. One of the top-five FF dslr’s but for them the best tool because of the steadyshot inside, the superb EVF, the magnificent tilting screen and all the possible options one can ever need in a top notch dslr. Also the lens line up is adequate for them with top notch glass like the Zeiss lenses other brand users are jealous about! Only in the field of very fast sports action on high iso and with long bright tele lenses Sony lags behind with the EVF, AF and lens collection. Let Canikon have that part of the market with the D4 and the D1.

People should read the forum entries at photoclubalpha. Lots of good, mostly unbiased information. photoclubalpha is a great destination.

+ Lucas

It is completely David’s view of EVF. He just can’t accept the EVF and the high tech IMHO. I don’t want to compare EVF vs OVF here – I think it’s personal choice – you might like one and hate the other, that’s ok.

But, you don’t like it, doesn’t mean it is BAD! David, grow up!!

While, I agree that a99 price coud be a bit lower, i.e., $2,599- 2,699; but comparing with 60D or D600 is like comparing Toyota vs Lexus to me!!

Different people surely interpret the same thing in different ways. While David had some quibbles with the A99, the general impression was that he liked the camera overall, though he thought it was overpriced. A great camera with flaws is how he generally describes it. And overpriced. I agree with that.

About the flash. Flagship flash units from Canon and Nikon costs a lot. All of them overprice the flagship flash units. Sony is no exception. As usual, camera makers make a lot of money on accessories.

I hope, however, that Sony drops the A99 price.

In Europe prices always include sales tax. That’s 19 % in Germany, 20 % in Austria etc.

Now…here is how I interpret the statement about the single processor…

could the 2012 BIONZ processor be the same used back in 2008?
I don’t think so…
so..this single processor may well do the load the two processors did in 2008.

another completelly different thing is the crappy buffer…

As it is worth remembering…the A700, under Jpeg Fine, could go on forever on shooting, and the buffer would never stop the camera until the CF was full. This is NOTABLE in any camera…

Philip is RIGHT. A99 is a convergence camera. The reviewer TOTALLY suppressed the video features. That just stares in your face when you read it.

That flash can be bought for US$550 here in America, and even as low as $450 on the gray market. Why do things cost so much more in Europe?

My guess is Nikon pay the right price to Sony for their sensors. In return, Sony cannot produice a classic mirror camera to not compete the Photographic market. Nikon doesn’t care if Sony compete the more video oriented products with SLT and Nex lines against Canon.

This is just my personnal opinion and i think I’m right

honestly, I rather expect Canon and Nikon to go EVF soon. I own the A99 and I don’t miss the OVF.

I don’t find the US price of $2799 to be expensive for what one gets. For me the EVF is what made me upgrade from the A900. I wouldn’t have been interested in the d600 version of the A99. I’d have just kept my A900 in that case.

For Nikon users I guess the D600 is a huge upgrade coming from 12MP’s. Notsomuch from the A900. Maybe it’s a good time for unhappy users to sell their Sony gear and go Nikon.

Personally, I’m pretty happy.

Worth persisting with…

the truth…I sold my A700 last week because I had bought an A99 for X-tmas…
and I really hate the viewfinder…

Your words should have been Andrea’s headline. I disgress about the boring part, but the review was indeed long. Any review that says that a person using this camera will not have to change any setting and still get a well exposed photograph can’t be that bad (for the camera). He didn’t exacly say he disliked EVFs totally. He just prevers OVFs. The D600 sensor on an A900 class camera. His dream and the dream of many Alpha shooters.

I’ve a lot of respect for DK, but his very long and boring review says something he could’ve summed up in one sentence:

“The a99 performs well, but I don’t like EVF’s and its a bit expensive in the UK”.

If he’d just said that, he’d have saved us all half an hour of our lives.

Next!

I think David wrote a comprehensive and fair review of the A99,. The thing is, he actually liked the A99 and Andrea’s headline is not only sensationalistic but also wrong. To say that David Kilpatrick doesn’t know what he is talking about is laughable. He is one of the foremost Minolta/Sony experts around.

Well I read the long review entirely. In the review the A99 is randomly compared to the Nikon D600, the Canon 6D and the Sony A77. All in all the writer praises the A99 on many details except pricing and the EVF in the end. it is clear he wants the optical finder back like his beloved A900 had. Before this end he said the following somewhere half way: “But in the end, despite all its problems, the Alpha 99 simply turns in a better success rate on my sort of subjects – landscapes, street scenes, people, events – than its rivals. The metering is more accurate, the AF is either as good or better, the image quality at high ISOs is a touch lower, the GPS works well, and of course the sensor-based stabilisation is a total winner.” – in my opinion that says it all.

It’s good to know his views about the a99 but in my humble opinion, he’s just trying to change his image just like what “That nikon guy” or every blogger is doing. He’ll probably drop that Photoclubalpha name and replace it with something neutral.

The A99 will be history soon enough anyway. Sony appears to be pressing ahead with its plans to get rid of the SLT. They’ve accepted the fact that the semitransparent mirror has been an unwelcome compromise–more for sports and video shooters than anyone else. But the EVF is here to stay. That’s fine with me. It’s not bad right now and will only get better. With any luck, the FF NEX will go a long way toward re-establishing Sony as a maker of cameras for all serious photographers.

The 5DIII is IMHO overpriced as its about the same price as the A99, but the 5DII which will give you just the same IQ is £1249 a real bargin. The D800 is several hundred pounds cheaper and has much better IQ thanks to the 36MP sensor, in fact the D800e is the same price as the A99 and its the current FF king of IQ. Sorry Sony is just ripping people off!

I doubt Sony will ever bring out another camera with an OVF, sorry its EVIL from now on.

DK has given an honest and detailed review of the A99, and I to think the camera is 50% overpriced. Its a shame Sony are being very greedy as it will hit sales and only boost the sales of the D600 & 6D.

I wonder how Pentax will price its FF camera which will be launched next month, that’s if this weeks AP’s prediction is correct. I’m guessing this camera will use the same 24MP sensor, inbody AS and it has no AA filter like the D800e.

Perhaps its time for Sony to heavily discount the A99

it sounds more like he is not familiar with the camera and regret the fact that he have to re-learn the camera, Sad to say that he publish something like this out of his own negative perspective due to laziness. Once again go to DP review with a neutral and professional review! or camera labs, however Gordon still waiting for Sony before he release his review!

I will never understand why Sony got so stubborn with SLT for all their models. I would never sell my A900…