 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / August 2006Sony A100 noise
How bad is the noise on the Sony A100 camera? I've heard it's pretty bad, but does anybody have experience with it? And how about in-camera vibration reduction, does it work as well as traditional VR lenses? > How bad is the noise on the Sony A100 camera? I've heard it's pretty > bad, but does anybody have experience with it? > And how about in-camera vibration reduction, does it work as well as > traditional VR lenses? The Sony has similar noise level to all 10 M-pixel CCD's. After much reading it's simply a trade off. More Pixels vs Low Noise. It's only a problem at high ISO. But most people don't shoot that often at high ISO and would rather have the pixels. Everything boils down to $$$, weight, light, (setuo) time and ruggedness. An ISO step (over another camera) gives you an extra stop. More pixels *can* give you an extra stop (by not zooming in as far and croping). Good glass gives you and extra stop (or 2 or 3...) at the cost of $$$ and weight. Image stabilization in Lens gives you typically 2+ stops. Image stabilization in camera gives you typically 1+ stops (reviews say the Sony works). So you really can't say the Sony is bad noise for $1000.00 10 Mega pixel camera. The bigger problem with the sony however (only from reading reviews). Is it's long exposure noise reduction (for hot pixel not for high ISO) does not work and is needed. This could possible be corrected in software. >The Sony has similar noise level to all 10 M-pixel CCD's. Unfortunately that statement is not true. The Sony A100 has significantly more noise at higher ISOs than the Nikon D200, which uses the same Sony CCD sensor. ISO 1600 is unusable, and ISO 800 is very noisy indeed. The Nikon has less noise at ISO 1600 than the Sony has at ISO 800. If most of your shooting is at ISO settings below 400, the Sony is fine. I seem to remember an interview I read 2-3 months ago that was translated on a Sony Japan website that described the CCD as being newly designed and that the A100 was the first camera that it has appeared in. So not the same as the Nikon D200. I have been waiting to see if the D80 has the same CCD. If I can find the link again I will post it to the group. I do remember the interview talking about miniturisation of components as well as convergence of photographic and video sensors. (That's a scary thought!) Does anyone else remember the site....................?? Tone >>The Sony has similar noise level to all 10 M-pixel CCD's. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > The Nikon has less noise at ISO 1600 than the Sony has at ISO 800. If > most of your shooting is at ISO settings below 400, the Sony is fine. >I seem to remember an interview I read 2-3 months ago that was translated on >a Sony Japan website that described the CCD as being newly designed and that >the A100 was the first camera that it has appeared in. So not the same as >the Nikon D200. OK, point accepted. > >I seem to remember an interview I read 2-3 months ago that was translated on > >a Sony Japan website that described the CCD as being newly designed and that > >the A100 was the first camera that it has appeared in. So not the same as > >the Nikon D200. > > OK, point accepted. I would consider those as all the same chip. Only the D200 uses the 4 Channel read out (5 fps) and the A100/D80 (3 fps) use the 2 Channel. All specs are identical. > I seem to remember an interview I read 2-3 months ago that was translated on > a Sony Japan website that described the CCD as being newly designed and that [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > of photographic and video sensors. (That's a scary thought!) Does anyone > else remember the site....................?? http://www.riddle.ru/dl/ccd/sony/icx493aqa.pdf http://www.riddle.ru/dl/ccd/sony/icx483aqa.pdf Different chips. I guess the D80 (and new Pentax?) will use the same sensor as the a100. >How bad is the noise on the Sony A100 camera? I've heard it's pretty >bad, but does anybody have experience with it? Pictures at 1600 are terrible - only good for something where noise isn't important. At 800 the pictures also look a bit fuzzy... This is a bright light camera! >And how about in-camera vibration reduction, does it work as well as >traditional VR lenses? I never tried a VR lens but I can tell you that the Sony system works very well indeed. I got some clean shots with a 70mm lens at 1/20 second and some at 1/10 second. That's 2 and 3 stops if you consider 1/100 sec normal.. The sensor is technically superior to the aesthetic skills of most of the photographers that will use it. > How bad is the noise on the Sony A100 camera? I've heard it's pretty > bad, but does anybody have experience with it? > And how about in-camera vibration reduction, does it work as well as > traditional VR lenses? The noise as produced in in-camera JPEGs in good light (i.e. action shots) is not bad. In low light, or in very contrasty conditions, it gets awful at 1600 but there is a really sudden jump from 800. 800 is usable, 1600 is often just not good enough. There is a serious issue with Adobe Camera Raw beta conversion of the files - the noise is STUPID, not bad, it's worse than the worst consumer cam ever made, and something is obviously wrong. Lightroom with NR does a very good job, Silkypix does an even better one, and that's about all the raw converters except Sony's own (not a bad job). The SSS works extremely well. The noise issue at 1600 is enough to make the camera unusable at this setting; all the benefits of the extra res are lost. But the difference between in-camera JPEGs (half decent even at 1600) and ACR raw conversions (extreme noise) points to some issue which may be resolved in future. The A100 is best used at 100-400 ISO for shots which need extra detail, it's very good at that at low ISOs. David |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.