Ads reveal Sony's 24.6 megapixel A900 full-frame DSLR
By Donald Melanson 
posted Sep 4th 2008 11:37AM
posted Sep 4th 2008 11:37AM
It's not quite on Sony's schedule, but a new series of not-quite-precisely-timed ads have now revealed the company's new full-frame A900 DSLR, which boasts a mighty 24.6 megapixels. In addition to that desirable spec, it seems you can also expect to get Sony's Dual BIONZ image processing engine, "Intelligent Preview," a 3-inch "Hybrid LCD," 5 fps continuous shooting, and Sony's SteadyShot image stabilization, to name but a few features (head on past the break for the full spec list). Of course, there's no price or release date to be found in any of the ads, but we're guessing Sony will be spilling those little details when it gets official with the camera next week.
[Via Photography Bay, thanks to everyone who sent this in]
[Via Photography Bay, thanks to everyone who sent this in]
I heard Sony makes the sensors for Nikons which give them their low noise @ high ISOs, as in, 3200 - 25600 (ie; Nikon D700)
Would these sony cameras be using the same sensors?
Yes.
BUBBLES! BubblesBubblesBubblesBubblesBubblesBubblesBubblesBubblesBubbbbbbbbbbbbllllllllleeeeeeeeeeessssssss!
My Bubbles.
He likes bubbles.
Sony designs and makes all sensors in Nikon dSLRs with the exception of the D700/D3 sensors (which are Nikon designed but likely Sony fabricated). Also, Nikon uses LCDs and image processors for Sony as well (their Expeed is a rebranded Bionz). This 24.6MP sensor is also rumored to be in the Nikon D3x as well,but this Alpha-900 should be priced closer rival to the Canon 5D/Nikon D700.
That's the same thing that popped into my mind when I saw the image (no pun intended)
BUBBLES!!!!!
Nice Resolution (almost 15 times bigger than my monitor max display :P )
No kidding. Try finding Waldo in one of those pictures!
ROFL, Waldo would be one pixel on my monitor if it was shrunk to fit.
Ohh and a Danish ad, I am proud, unless it's Norwegian, but for god sake they have taken our oil, give us the damn ad :D
A full frame DSLR with a side of cheese danish... yum
You still have your pastries...
The text on the first image is in Danish, and says: "The new a900", "The worlds first full frame DSLR camera with 24,6 megapixels"
As Jakob said, it might be in Norwegian, I am not able to tell, but at least the translation should be quite correct anyway, not much difference on the two languages...
It IS Danish, I just figured out - 'It appears to be legit and coming from a Danish photography magazine. [via DPR]' (from source)
It's not Norwegian, if it where the ad would say "Den nye a900", not "Det nye a900". ;-)
@kristoffer
It would be the same in Norwegian, as "kamera" is a genderles (intetkjønn) noun in both Norwegian and Danish.
Looks fake to me though.
I am guessing Danish, only because in Norwegian, there is often some quirky attempts at translating English technical terms into Norwegian-like words - so it might not have said "megapixels" as much as "megapiksler".
But there is no way to tell for sure from this little text.
And then there was the 5D mk II.
Wow I was good enough wtih my 7 megapixel. The possibilities are endless with this one here.
.74x magnification on the viewfinder??... WTF?.. I shoot using a Sony already and the low mag viewfinder was one of my HUGE complaints. Why would they put a sub-par viewfinder on a top shelf camera like the A900?
This is a FF, 100% viewfinder, so 0.74x magnification is very good, Nikon D3 is just 0.7x and I think the Canon 1D Mkiii is a bit bigger with 0.76x (these are $5000 cameras).
Actually, this is huge. 100% coverage optical viewfiner and .74 magnification (for a full-frame sensor) is very good. Remember, you are magnifying a full-frame sensor size not a cropped smaller sensor.
For comparison the flagship Canon 1Ds Mark III has 0.75(100%), and the D700 and 5D has 0.72/0.71(and only 95% coverage)
Considering that is camera is aimed at the 5D MarkII and D700 and it has 100% coverage and 0.74x it seems like an outstanding spec.
you seem to have no idea. this is bigger than Nikon D3 and on par with the Canon 1Ds Mark III.
.74x magnification with 100% coverage on full frame approximates to a 1.17x magnification with 95% coverage viefinder on 1.5 crop factor cameras from Sony or Nikon.
Why does Sony bother with this stuff? No professional or even semi-amateur photog in the market for a serious camera is going to buy anything that doesn't say Nikon or Canon on it. End of story.
why? obviously because it IS used.
Right, except for me.
obviously you are not into photography if you make a n00b comment like that. sony bought Konica Minolta. thats where they got there DSLR start from.
QFT.
Konica Minolta was a washed up brand when Sony bought them. I'm not saying their cameras aren't good, but the bottom line is the lenses and support just aren't anywhere near the level of the big two.
True the Sony lens line up is as full as C&N but they are getting there. Still for this camera to do any good it needs to be priced below the canon and nikon.
a roughly 0.74 mag viewfinder is normal on a pro camera, and has been since the Nikon F era. Higher magnification makes the image bigger, but means your eye needs to be closer to the viewfinder to see everything. This is problematic for glasses wearers and puts a bit more strain on the eye. Don't worry about it being small, the 100% viewfinder for a full frame sensor will be much bigger than the viewfinder on any current Sony SLR
Realized this after posting and subsequently researched the issue. Forgive my ignorance Sony :-) Good show on 100% coverage.
sony wins the megapixel race -_-;;;;; I bet it's gonna be horrible with noise and low light conditions...either that or it's going to cost OVER NINETHOUSAAAAND!
Megapixels mean squat, actually a 12-18 mpx sensor would give a much better high ISO and low light performance due to the simple fact that it's pixels are bigger and require less light to fill. And Sony should be smart about this and price it ~3000-4000$ to compete with the D700 and 5D.
Pixel density causes noise, not the number of pixels. 24.6MP on a full frame sensor is only slightly more dense than a 10MP APS-C.
This thing is aimed at the 5D/1D category, while maintaining a relatively cheap price.
Considering the quality of past Alpha models, and the fact that their sensors are in everybody's ('cept Canon) cameras, I have no doubt that they will deliver.
Being a Canon user is starting to feel awkward.
"Why does Sony bother with this stuff? No professional or even semi-amateur photog in the market for a serious camera is going to buy anything that doesn't say Nikon or Canon on it. End of story."
Wrong. Obviously you've never used Zeiss lenses, and Sony has them with autofocus, with more on the way. As a studio assistant/semi-pro, I've been waiting for this camera for a year. In fact, I sold my Leaf Digital back last winter in preparation for this camera's arrival.
Many people make the mistake that a photo "pro" is a sports shooter who needs 15 lenses and a million accessories. As a studio shooter, I use 2-3 lenses max (which are Zeiss and already available from Sony,) and it's all about resolution and lens quality, not quantity. If this camera is less than $3000 like is expected, this camera will interest many pro/ams like myself. Heck, I'd spend $4k on it. Putting class leading Zeiss lenses on 24MP is gonna really show the other 35MM DSLRs a thing or two.
Now, I can't wait for the "who needs 24MP?" argument. That's a classic. ;)
Doug,
Do you mind sharing which 3 lenses you use?
I am looking to upgrade from an Olympus E-510, I really like the Zuiko lenses, but I have gotten into shooting at events and parties at night indoors and I am looking for less noise at ISO 400, 800, and 1600. With Photokina coming up I will be researching Olympus, Panasonics, and Sony's new offerings. I like to stick with in body IS as bodies are less expensive to upgrade than the lenses price wise... (for new IS tech).
Just trying to research and price out my new step.
Thanks!
It looks simillar to this photoshoot
http://flickr.com/photos/creativereview/2567937338/ that was used for the A350
http://forum.xitek.com/showthread.php?threadid=556627
Another leak, looks like folk @ DPreview are more well-connected.
Sure thing. I use the Zeiss 24-70mm 2.8 for 90% of my work, along with the Zeiss 85mm 1.4 For my occasional need for longer lenses, I use a Zeiss Jena 135mm 3.5 and a converted Hasselblad 150mm, but those are both manual focus and use stop down metering, so not too convenient for some shooters. The AF Zeiss 135mm 1.8 will probably replace those for me at some point. I will say that Sony isn't necessarily cheap, and you're looking at around $6K for the new A900 plus the first two lenses I mentioned. If you don't need the 25MP resolution, you may want to try other options.
Doug, unfortunately you have either been deceived by your mentor photographer or you are deluded.
Firstly you mention you use your gear for studio work, and to use a 24-70 zoom lens in a studio situation is plain bonkers.
Selling your leaf-back for a sony handy cam gimmicky 25 MP piece of crap is moronic.
Sony's only agenda is to convince rich people with more money then brains that if they have a 25 MP camera they will be better in bed and their pictures will look professional.
I agree partly with the earlier comments about unless it being Canon or Nikon, no Pro is going to touch it, although you forgot to mention Hasselblad and Mamiya to name a few others. However this Camera is obviously aimed at the hand held 35mm market so Canon and Nikon are the only relevant competition for this camera.
As a working pro myself, I have never met or expect to meet a serious photographer who would bother using Sony's equipment and expect to be taken seriously.......by anyone.
Personally I use the 1DS III and the 85 1.2L for most of my studio work, I would put this camera up against Sony's "flagship" any day and I think you will find they don't come close.
Once again Sony blows their own pathetic horn, not because they need to, but because they can.....
@Graeme.taylor
You gotta be kidding me. I own a Leaf Aptus 22 and have paired it with a Hasselblad H2 and Mamiya RZ67 ProII (I also rent the PhaseOne 45+ back and the H3DII-39MS when needed), but these 'full-frame' dSLRs have been catching up QUICK and are much more versatile then the cumbersome MFDs.
I would pair this Sony A900 along with my 1DsIII if its only $2.5K(why the the hell not relative to its specs and price). I use Zeiss lenses on my Hasselblad H2 and can vouch for their quality (and Sony is the only source of good AF Zeiss lenses). Only real trepidation I have is in its AF (which seems to be 19-point from what I read). Beyond that you sound more like some fanboy then an actually photographer. . . sorry but you can't be taken seriously.
Sony' Alpha 900, and the Alpha 700 already on the market, are indications that what
the company did in the mid-70's, surpassing and then just about crushing Ikigami, RCA,
JVC, Canon etc. in the professional television camera and equipment field, could be on the distant horizon in DSLR's. It will certainly require great products, but Sony can do that. How they market, how they connect with authorized dealers, what conditions they place on minimums of inventory, and, of course, how the great lens line-up they've been growing gets better, will determine where Sony goes in all of this. As one writer here said, Sony service must become top-notch. They do it for video. DSLR' shooters should expect nothing less.
Then too, there is the matter of DSLR's with video.
Nikon has broken through with the D90...what Sony and the other companies do will
be interesting to see. But, if video does become standard in DSLR's, be assurred, Sony,
with who they are and what they have already, will probably dominate eventually.
Newspapers that have fired or retired photography staffs and required reporters to shoot as well as report/write, need a camera system the one-man bands can use for great stills, and excellent videos for websites. Point and Shoots won't do. The D-90 has a leg up for that growing market, and I expect Sony and the other companies will jump in. If I was to bet for the long run, especially with the video consideration, the Zeiss connection, the terrific G lenses now being added to Sony's HD video cams, I'd bet Sony gets the business. If the newspapers own or are part of groups that own TV stations, Sony already has an advantage.
hey Graeme
dude, you're awesome, let me tell you, you are awesome!
now wake up tool bag, you haven't even read any specs or seen any pics to judge a camera that hasn't even been released!
and you say if you don't have a nikon or canon, or a medium format camera like a mamiya you won't have a chance in the industry, it's the quality of your images, your lighting set up and the production value that will judge a good pic, not just a camera.
pull your thumb out.
I wonder what the shooting speed @ 12mp is? If the continous shooting speed is 5fps @ 24mp.
Could be interesting.
Great, more FF please
Gee, you think that's enough megapixels?
Take a lesson from the Spirit rover's camera, which uses a 1 megapixel sensor to capture its beautifully detailed images of Mars' surface: megapixels aren't everything. In fact, if you cram too many megapixels into the same size of sensor, the actual resolution (resolution is detail, not pixels, after all) of the resulting photos decreases because of higher noise.
I would much prefer manufacturers focus on developing ways of maximizing sensor efficiency, and create sensors capable of taking high quality, low noise photos at super high sensitivities. THAT would be really useful!
Anyhoo, the point is, don't judge a camera by its megapixels. I will be waiting anxiously to read what they have to say about this thing's image quality at dpreview.com, when the camera's released.