[Guest]

I would like to thank you all for your helpful replies.

I am still mostly undecided, but leaning slightly towards Canon.



Yesterday Sony caught my attention (again). I tried the A900 with both the Zeiss 24-70/2.8 and the Sony 35/1.4G.

The A900 is a very nice camera, probably what most people would call a "photographic tool". The viewfinder seems to be another step up from the 5D or D700. The JPEGs straight of the camera have a special look that reminds me of film days, but I guess this can be achieved by post-processing with any other camera. In the mixed lighting in front of that Sony store, I found the metering to be much better than what my Nikon would give in a similar situation.

The Zeiss 24-70 feels like milled from one block of glass, but I liked it very much. Longer reach with slower aperture would be better, though.

The Sony 35/1.4G is quite a bit more compact than its Canon and Nikon counterparts, but looks a bit outdated without SSM. Reviews seem to indicate that this lens is overpriced for what you get, but sample pictures taken with it do not look bad at all. Even some of the samples in the Photozone review look good.

Sadly, Sony does not seem to have an up-to-date macro lens. Please help me find more reasons to get this Sony thing out of my head. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[PuxaVida]

[quote name='ThomasD' timestamp='1299057363' post='6423']

....

Please help me find more reasons to get this Sony thing out of my head. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[/quote]



The high ISO performance in low light <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />...



Serkan

[genotypewriter]

[quote name='ThomasD' timestamp='1299057363' post='6423']

The Zeiss 24-70 feels like milled from one block of glass, but I liked it very much. [/quote]

Not saying the Canon 24-70 has the cleanest reputation but that 24-70 Sony lens has quite a bit of issues with dust. Do a bit of googling and you'll come across interesting links.





[quote name='ThomasD' timestamp='1299057363' post='6423']

The Sony 35/1.4G is quite a bit more compact than its Canon and Nikon counterparts, but looks a bit outdated without SSM.

[/quote]

The problem with that lens is not the lack of SSM. The lens never really comes in to good focus because of all the aberrations. You'd be able to verify this easily if you use live view on the a900... oh wait! <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



GTW

[Guest]

[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1299060674' post='6426']

The high ISO performance in low light <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />...

[/quote]

Thanks for reminding me. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1299070473' post='6433']

Not saying the Canon 24-70 has the cleanest reputation but that 24-70 Sony lens has quite a bit of issues with dust. Do a bit of googling and you'll come across interesting links.

...

The problem with that lens is not the lack of SSM. The lens never really comes in to good focus because of all the aberrations. You'd be able to verify this easily if you use live view on the a900... oh wait! <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[/quote]

Thank you. This is exactly what I needed.

Although I don't think I will ever need live view. The D90 has it and I never use it.

[Guest]

It's always very funny with the two guys (genotypewriter and brightcolors) here in this forum.



Both are known as die-hard-Canon-fanboys (not only here but also in the dpreview forum). So my advice is to take their assumptions, their statements (Canon has generally a better bokeh as Nikon... LOL!!! what a BS) and hints always with a grain of salt.



And pay attention: they do this often in a very subtly way.

[mst]

[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1299070473' post='6433']

Not saying the Canon 24-70 has the cleanest reputation but that 24-70 Sony lens has quite a bit of issues with dust.

[/quote]



Any zoom lens has. But dust is not really an issue in any lens (unless it collect tons of it).



-- Markus

[Guest]

[quote name='Claus' timestamp='1299072509' post='6436']

It's always very funny with the two guys (genotypewriter and brightcolors) here in this forum.



Both are known as die-hard-Canon-fanboys (not only here but also in the dpreview forum). So my advice is to take their assumptions, their statements (Canon has generally a better bokeh as Nikon... LOL!!! what a BS) and hints always with a grain of salt.



And pay attention: they do this often in a very subtly way.

[/quote]

I am well aware of this, don't worry.

It is always a bit sad that the Nikon fanboys in here are a bit under-represented and flame wars die out too quickly. :-)

[genotypewriter]

[quote name='ThomasD' timestamp='1299071739' post='6435']

Although I don't think I will ever need live view. The D90 has it and I never use it.

[/quote]

What I meant was live view can be used to verify this but in the case of the a900, it would show up only after the shot is taken (which is when it's too late) <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> Of course, this becomes a deficiency of the a900 because of the low quality of the Sony/Minolta 35 1.4. But with 20+MPs and shallower DOF, live view can be very beneficial to determine the best apertures and best points of focus. Currently the most popular monitors types, 24" 1920x1200 and 23" 1920x1080, instantly enlarge a 24MP shot to the equivalent of a 60"x40" print, as soon as you view it at 100%. And we look at it from a distance of ~2ft. Not many people printed all their 35mm negatives/slides that big and looked at them from 2ft away.





[quote name='Claus' timestamp='1299072509' post='6436']

It's always very funny with the two guys (genotypewriter and brightcolors) here in this forum.



Both are known as die-hard-Canon-fanboys (not only here but also in the dpreview forum). So my advice is to take their assumptions, their statements (Canon has generally a better bokeh as Nikon... LOL!!! what a BS) and hints always with a grain of salt.



And pay attention: they do this often in a very subtly way.

[/quote]

I think you're forgetting a few things:



1. The OP asked us to tell him the cons of the said system.

2. You call it "subtle" but we call it arguing our points which don't make us blind worshipers like people who say 12MP is all you need or in-body stabilisation is the solution for all problems. And in my case, I'm talking about stuff I've used... what about you?

3. I'm not a "fanboy"... I prefer "fan-warlord". The red rings around my lenses symbolise the fearlessness I have even if it means I'm going to be beheaded for speaking the truth <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />





[quote name='mst' timestamp='1299072600' post='6437']

Any zoom lens has. But dust is not really an issue in any lens (unless it collect tons of it).

[/quote]

Some more than the others... that's why not all zooms are called "the vacuum cleaner" etc. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />





[quote name='ThomasD' timestamp='1299081796' post='6447']

It is always a bit sad that the Nikon fanboys in here are a bit under-represented and flame wars die out too quickly. :-)

[/quote]

Good one! <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



GTW

[Guest]

[quote name='ThomasD' timestamp='1299081796' post='6447']

I am well aware of this, don't worry.

It is always a bit sad that the Nikon fanboys in here are a bit under-represented and flame wars die out too quickly. :-)

[/quote]

I'd rather say that Nikon fans are simply better behaving here <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



P.s. I have a sneaking suspicion that "subtle" was meant in a sarcastic way <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' />

[Guest]

[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1299116672' post='6454']



3. I'm not a "fanboy"... I prefer "fan-warlord". The red rings around my lenses symbolise the fearlessness I have even if it means I'm going to be beheaded for speaking the truth <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



GTW

[/quote]



At least you have a sense of humour... <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />