March 15, 2012

The Sony Alpha SLT-A57: 1080p 60fps and Why It Doesn't Matter

Of course that's not quite true, it does matter, but will anyone really buy it? Sony is rarely a company to lag behind and not have an answer to major announcements from competitors. Instead of announcing a high-end product, they've announced a replacement to a low-end product: the 16 megapixel APS-C Sony Alpha SLT-A57. Like some recent Sony cameras, it has a translucent mirror instead of a flip-up mirror - so it stays down while recording to allow AF during video.

Here is Anthony Carboni from SGNL with Kenta from Sony introducing the camera:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7UiXxMtvVc

I'll just be talking about the video features, because if you're a stills shooter, and you aren't already invested in lenses, then this is one of the best values for the money under $1000 compared to Nikon or Canon. This camera actually uses the same sensor as a number of other Sony cameras - including the predecessor, the Sony A55, and also the Nikon D7000, but it's image processor is much improved this generation. This allows for lower overall noise and a max ISO of 16,000, which if you compare to other sub $1000 cameras, is clearly where cameras are heading (good sample videos seem hard to find, unlike the recent Canon and Nikon releases).

Now on to why this camera doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of new releases that are sure to come out this year - one of them rumored to be the Canon T4i. Yes, it has 1080p 60fps - but similar priced Sony cameras have had it for months. That seems to be a gold standard for so many people, but 60fps is more than twice the data as 24fps, yet the A57 records at 24mbps for 24fps and 28mbps for 60fps. Should it not stand to reason that if you've got double the data, your data rate should also be doubled? This is the problem with 60fps and the AVCHD standard at the moment - 28mbps is not great for that amount of data. It's the same way the FS100 does 60fps. It will do its job if that's what you're looking for, but you're stuck with those data rates - as this camera (to my knowledge) does not have a recordable HDMI.

But let's get to the real problem with this camera: lenses. It has Sony's Alpha/Minolta mount, which is one of the more incompatible lens mounts in the industry - much worse than most of Sony's other cameras that have the E-mount - because the flange distance is permanent. Samuel Hurtado actually put together a great little chart that's helpful if you're looking at what lenses you can adapt. Without some sort of glass adapter - which would be useless and affect sharpness - all you've got besides the A-mount lenses, are M42 screw mount and Leica R lenses. You might argue that the Nikon F mount has similar problems - but let's be fair to Nikon, they've had the same mount for over 50 years, and the positive of that is we've got a tremendous amount cheap, used lenses out there that will work on a number of other systems - Canon EF mount included. This might not seem like a big deal, and a lot of manufacturers have been forced to create new lens mounts for mirrorless cameras, but consider that Canon has been far and away the most popular DSLR for video, and with that comes a bit of loyalty.

I don't see too many people switching over to this camera - unless they haven't owned one already - mainly for those reasons: brand loyalty and lenses. If you've been buying into the low end Canon system - like the Canon T2i, Canon T3i, and Canon 60D - you probably have a few lenses that you use for video. Move to Sony and now you've got to buy into a whole new system.

This is a fantastic camera, and it's got a tremendous amount of features, 1080p 60fps, 12fps stills mode, autofocus while shooting video, a swivel lcd, a mediocre, but better EVF than its predecessor, and a very high max ISO of 16,000. That doesn't mean I recommend it - Sony has a similar but less featured camera that makes a lot more sense for the money, the Sony NEX-5N, which has the same sensor, higher max ISO at 25,600 (though the A57 should be less noisy), and has the more compatible E-mount, which can take numerous dumb adapters. Not to mention that camera is smaller and $100 cheaper, at $600, instead of the $700 starting price for the body only version of the A57 (lens version is $800).

This isn't going to be a Canon Rebel killer - certainly not if Canon brings down many of its new video features into the T4i. I expect it will have similar video resolution and quality as the previous Sony cameras, but with improved noise. If you really look at it, it's a bigger upgrade for stills shooters. If you've already bought into the A-mount system, then by all means this looks to be an amazing camera. If you're looking for a B-camera just to do 60fps, then this could do a good enough job at a cheap price. Unfortunately, I think the only way that this camera could really take off is if it had an uncompressed recordable HDMI - but that would surely destroy some sales for its far more expensive siblings.

Link: Sony Alpha SLT-A57 - B&H

Your Comment

51 Comments

It matters for what they may have in store. The A99.

March 15, 2012 at 6:01PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
moebius22

How can you say such terrible things about this camera? What would EOSHD think? They're undoubtedly writing an article about how it's the camera of the century.

March 15, 2012 at 6:03PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
Darrell

You sure it wasn't another camera?

March 15, 2012 at 6:13PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
moebius22

This would be true if it's better than the GH2 or the NEX7, or if it's cheaper. Their requirements for Camera of the Century are a bit off.
And my comments are not intended to be factual statements.

March 15, 2012 at 6:22PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
Darrell

I understand the sarcasm, but I'm not going to allow unnecessary website bashing in the comments, regardless of what any of them might say about NoFilmSchool. It's just unproductive.

March 15, 2012 at 6:19PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Camera Department

That's commentable and understandable. Just a bit of fun.

March 15, 2012 at 6:48PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

2
Reply
Darrell

Good analysis, Joe. I agree on all fronts.

March 15, 2012 at 6:12PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

4
Reply
Rev. Benjamin

According to all the fuss from viewers on other threads of this site, this announcement doesn't matter because it's not a RED...

March 15, 2012 at 6:17PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

6
Reply
Thomas

LOL

March 15, 2012 at 6:36PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
Bobkat

Are there converter rings available to put a ZF on a Sony body? I do this with my Canon to run ZF primes and seems to work for the $25 I paid on ebay.

March 15, 2012 at 6:26PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
Shaun Wilson

Not without a piece of glass inside the adapter, which is a killer. I guess you could actually do macro photography with the glass removed though. http://www.fotodiox.com/product_info.php?products_id=665

March 15, 2012 at 6:37PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Camera Department

Hi Joe, I use one of these, works a treat, http://www.ebay.com/itm/For-Nikon-Al-F-Lens-to-Canon-EOS-EF-Mount-Adapter-Ring-/370578122469?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item56482d66e5#ht_1580wt_1141

March 15, 2012 at 10:45PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
Shaun Wilson

Hmm, that looks like a regular F mount to EF mount adapter, I think Shaun was looking for an F mount to Alpha mount (Sony camera) adapter. They exist, but they require glass inside.

March 15, 2012 at 11:00PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Camera Department

the bayonet shapes don't match, so even if focal flange distance is longer on nikon F, nikon-F-lens-to-sony-A-mount either has an optical element (which kills the lens' IQ) or doesn't have infinite focus (which can turn the lens into macro-only)

(btw: thanks for the link, nfs!)

March 16, 2012 at 9:10AM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply

Zeiss make ZS primes which are m42 mount, but I suppose that doesn't help Zeiss ZF owners much, but it is a viable option. And there is a huge amount of m42 glass out there, not to mention M-Mount.

March 16, 2012 at 10:10AM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

2
Reply
Markus

Forgot to mention, actually this camera does matter, for those who cant afford the big name cams, presuming it has 50p since the specs say 60, thats a huge difference to shooting at 25 (I'm talking in PAL language here). Even two years ago this would have been ground breaking stuff but since DSLRs have moved on quite considerably, for the small scale budget production, this might fit in nicely especially for student productions et al, but as always I get back to my main point - story and characters are more important than cameras - Blair witch , 16mm...

March 15, 2012 at 6:30PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
Shaun Wilson

It's sad because Sony has great hardware and this could be a huge camera but like you said, lack of lens flexibility is a deal breaker for 80% of filmmakers.

Canon has been the market leader for years now not because they have the best specs but because of lens adaptability. Hell, people are putting 100 year old lenses on the 5D without any issues.

This is the reason why many new prosumer cameras have the option of the EF mount in addition to the PL mount. (Digital Bolex, RED, Kineraw, etc etc)

Looking down the road, I doubt Canon will hold their monopoly but the EF mount is here to stay and rightfully so.

March 15, 2012 at 6:56PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply

Thats an interesting comment about 100 year old lenses, one of my PhD students is doing his thesis on slow media and he's gone out and shot on a 1896 brownie and the image quality is still pretty good. I guess that goes to show you that lenses and film cameras might actually live longer than 5K digital super-beasts we ever so relish now (I wonder though in 20 years time that when we mention 4K if it would be like saying "I shot my feature on Hi-8). So Austin, I completely agree with your lenses comment.

March 15, 2012 at 10:39PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

4
Reply
Shaun Wilson

Here's the video shot on a 100 year old lens, enjoy!

Some NSFW content

http://vimeo.com/15524618

March 16, 2012 at 1:49AM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply

I don't really agree with your assertion that 60fps should require twice the data rate of 30 fps. This statement would be true if you were using an intraframe codec, but not with AVCHD. The motion in the scene that you are capturing is the thing that has the greatest bearing on the required storage, and this is independent of the frame rate that you capture it at. If you capture 60 fps, then you are capturing more frames, but the difference betwen each frame is smaller. So a good inter-frame codec can do a better job of compressing these frames.

March 15, 2012 at 6:59PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
Michael

Well each frame isn't independent, actually, in AVCHD each frame is always dependent on either the previous frame or the next frame - or a series of frames. It's also not about motion, necessarily, but about detail and light levels. Like any compression scheme, shadows are usually where they save the most data.

But let's really look at what it means to have 60fps. If we've got 24fps at 24mbps, that means each frame is 1mb. If you've got 60fps at 28mbps, each frame is .466mb. I understand how the compression systems work, and that what I just did is a great simplification, but it's a simple math equation. If you've got double the frames, but only a minor increase in data rate, you have to be losing data somewhere. The math doesn't work itself any other way.

March 15, 2012 at 8:07PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Camera Department

"Well each frame isn’t independent, actually, in AVCHD". That's exactly what I said. If it was an intraframe codec then 60fps should take up twice as much room as 30. But not for AVCHD.

And while you are losing data, you are not necessarily losing information. Let's take the best case scenario for AVCHD (or any interframe codec): shoot a film with the lens cap on. Nothing but pure black. You can compress that with out losing anything at all. 60fps can take up exactly the same amount of space as 30fps. Data has been lost, but not information. This is my point. I'm not saying that 28mbps AVCHD is perfect for 1080p60 footage, I'm just saying that your simplification is not reality. The frames at 60p absolutely will be more similar than at 30p, so you will not need twice the data rate to preserve the same image quality.

March 15, 2012 at 11:32PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
Michael

Ok, I'll quite arguing semantics. I understand what you mean now, it's not as noticeable - it seems like a similar amount of information is there even though the data rate is less than half of what it was. I can buy that.

March 16, 2012 at 1:04AM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

2
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Camera Department

This article makes the assumption that so few people shoot video with an A-mount system, that the release of this camera is irrelevant. I think the only thing Sony got wrong is the price. At $700 or even $750 it would've made sense, but at $799 the a65 is only $200 away. I own an a65 and think it's great for video.

BTW, the AVCHD 2.0 codec is quite efficient. You quote 24/28mbps at the camera's data rate, but it'd be more correctly stated as the maximum data rate-- my 60p video files don't ever seem to hit the codec's ceiling (which is one of the reasons I always shoot in 60p).

March 15, 2012 at 7:17PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
Ty Prey

Does the A57 have the same increased crop factor when in video mode as the A65? I know for some people this is a turnoff.

March 15, 2012 at 9:21PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

2
Reply
Evan

Just waiting for the NAB 2012 .. All this Sony stuff is distraction for me..

March 15, 2012 at 9:52PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
Menelikk

I have been using the A65 to shoot a doc and so far I'm happy with it. I like its lightness and fast operation. I like the fact I can shoot high quality stills at the same time and so have the opportunity to do stop frame. I haven't done anything "cinematic" with it I admit. So long as I don't pan the camera too much I don't have moire problems, but I don't like pans and zooms; I go for long steady shots which suits the subject matter. However I have been thinking that maybe at some point we'll have to learn to embrace moire and other digital things in certain types of or moments in films, as a kind of digital cinema aesthetic, like we learned to embrace film grain.

March 16, 2012 at 6:21AM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

3
Reply
s75

I would like to respectufully disagree with two of your points here. We are a wedding photo/video company from the philippines and is using an all Sony Alpha system. Our videos can be found here https://vimeo.com/qbetastudios/videos using Nex 5N,7 and the FS100 plus the A55/33 as Alternative vantage point cameras and we are extremely satisfied with the image quality, even from our A55,Nex 5 days as compared to similarly videos uoloaded on vimeo using 5Ds,7Ds and rebels.

No 1, I cannot agree with you that one of the bad points of this camera are the limited lens options. I cant fathom the fact that so many people dont realize that Zeis, the best lens maker on the planet, have the only autofucsing lenses on the Sony a-mount. I mean that madafaking Zeis?!?! And it autofocuses?!?! You have any idea how many filmakers drool just at the mention of Zeis to be used by their cameras?! And how many nikon and canon lens connoiseurs would give their balls just to have the zeis lenses autofocus on their cameras. But on Sony, every single Zeis glass do! And they are awesome! We own the entire range of Zeis lenses and use them for both phoo and video and the images they produce are just stunning. Add to that the the decade old line of minolta lenses including the oldest first autofocusing lenses ever made workks perfectly with all current sony alpha line. This lens argument is old and misguided. Lets stop this BS. Minolta,Alpha and Carl Zeis lenses and 3rd party manufacturers already have more than enough lenses to cover the entire focal length requirement of the entire industry...yes even specialized ones like TS!

2, that this A57 will nottrump the upcoming t4i of which it will be up against no matter what. Judging from the video side, Canon have not been innovating in any significant way thier video feautures. I mean, its 2012 and even their 16k C300 cantdo 1080p 60p?!?! Whatmore their entry level lines?!

This misconception about Sony and their limitations are such bullshit. I really respect this site, lets notcontribute to the proliferation of misguided information just because the cameras we use are canon and nikon like our friends do. Sony is the only company innovating these days. We should spit at Canon for repackaging their old internals and rebadging them as new cameras and asking for more money. Thats total disrespect to you, their customers.

I do agree on one point, if youre thingking of using this for videos, Id rather buythe Nex 5N, the unlimited lens possibilities is just hard to pass by.

March 16, 2012 at 8:39AM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
Quobetah

"This is a fantastic camera, and it’s got a tremendous amount of features, 1080p 60fps, 12fps stills mode, autofocus while shooting video, a swivel lcd, a mediocre, but better EVF than its predecessor, and a very high max ISO of 16,000."

I think I was pretty fair in saying the camera is actually amazing - but that's not going to mean people will buy it, or you should necessarily buy unless you're already invested in the Alpha mount. That's why I also said I recommended the NEX-5N - the options are limitless.

March 16, 2012 at 1:16PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

1
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Camera Department

I have to disagree with this article.
The flange distance on the Alpha/Maxxum mount is 44.50 against 44 for the Canon EF. Almost the same... With the Canon you have the same problems, you can "only" use besides the native mount, Leica, Olympus, M42 and Nikon, just like the Sony camera!
Of course the Maxxum mount was never so popular against the Canon EF mount, but the lenses are very, very good, The old Minoltas from mid 80's and early 90's are amazingly good, now you have new Sony lenses and also Zeiss lenses made only for the A mount, like the Zeiss 85 1.4 and the 135 1.8.
You have a lot of good lenses to choose from, the only problem is that most people would not switch for the A mount.
I have lots of good old Minolta and new Sony lenses, and I really miss a good body like the old A700.
That's the problem to me... the inverse, not so good cameras and lots of great lenses...
(I'm talking for a specific still photography camera here) for video I prefer m4/3s!

March 19, 2012 at 4:29PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

1
Reply
Ivan Lee

Hi Ivan, I agree. Read my comment dowm on this page. It's a typical Canon-environment, but Sony has the best cards for the future. They should takle a look at the combination Alpha 77 and 2.8 16-50 mm: killer combi for an incredible price. Full HD EVF, full speed AF... but to Canon believers there's only one trademark...

My opinion (as we say in Holland: vraag niet hoe het can, geniet ervan..." don't ask how they camn make equipment that userfriendly and fast for such prices... just enjoy it and let the rest of the world stumble with ugly constructions the be able the see the images by bright daylight... Sony: make.believe ;-)

March 22, 2012 at 4:57PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply

I have an Sony Alpha 850 that I purchased a Mirex tilt-shift lens adapter for. I can put Mamiya 645 lenses on the camera. Makes me think about this A57 because as of now I don't have a camera that shoots video.

March 20, 2012 at 2:59PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply

my sony nex has no problem even if it is 50fps

March 22, 2012 at 3:19PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply

If I want to create slo-mo: wouldn't it be better to shoot in AVCHD at 28mbit/s 1080p50 and playback at 25p or instead shoot at AVCHD 24MBit/s at 25p and then slow down in FCPX or whatever?

I guess what I want to say is that I believe that this camera could create better slow motion with with any other cam that just shoots 30p max.

March 22, 2012 at 4:11PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
Cmdrlaforge

The Sony uses a mount that has a 44.50mm flange focal distance. Canon EF mount is 44.00mm The only lenses Canon cameras can use that Sony cameras cannot are EF mount lenses. The Sony Alpha mount can readily accept any other type of lens that a Canon user would be using, including and especially: Nikon lenses, any except the auto-aperture ones, basically any manual focus Zeiss lenses, excluding again the EF mount ones, anything from Pentax, the old Olympus manual focus mount, which comes with a plethora of high quality wide angle glass, the Leica R mount, and the T mounts. Again the only advantage Canon has for lenses is the native EF mount glass, that's the only mount that a Sony camera would need an optical adapter for. Not sure where the misinformation is coming from here, but the Sony mount has a smaller flange than everything the Canon mount can use. Theoretically any lens could be adapted for it that was just mentioned.

March 22, 2012 at 4:40PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

1
Reply
Ed

That's wrong, Nikon and Pentax K might as well not work at all - they require an optical piece of glass in the adapter to work properly, unless you're just shooting macro. That kills the whole reason for using those lenses as they lose incredible amounts of sharpness. Flange distance is not the end of the story for many of these lens mounts, so there's no misinformation here. So with the A mount, effectively you can't use hundreds of Nikon and Canon lenses. It's very limiting.

March 22, 2012 at 4:58PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Camera Department

I'm sorry, you are not correct. Flange focal distance is that which dictates whether an adapter needs an optical aspect. Just because the obstacles have not yet been overcome, do not make them insurmountable. Kindly do your homework before purporting to have knowledge.

March 29, 2012 at 4:09PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
Ed

Yes, I've done my homework, I understand theoretically it should work perfectly without an adapter, but it does not. You cannot get infinity focus without the piece of glass - and that glass ruins performance. When they make one that works perfectly for all Nikon lenses without glass I'll happily take back what I said.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pw_photo_album/sets/72157617505514838/

To quote the designer of this:

"I found out that flange on different Nikkor lens have different thickness and centering diameter, therefore, it is not possible to make a perfect fit with one size fit all approach. So, there is no plan to make any production run."

March 29, 2012 at 6:06PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

7
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Camera Department

Please forgive my non-perfect english. I'm from Holland.

your comment is not really independent. I work with Sony (as a professional photographer) and the DST-camera's are great value for money. The biggest advantages:
1. you are not convicted to use the monitor in daylight situations - which is totally useless for real good focussing. You don't need a loupe-construction or whatever: just watch the EVF: My Alpha 77 has a full HD EVF. All corrections are seen directly and i can use a normal videotripod (ever tried to use a tripod ald a loupe connected to the monitor?) in stead of an rig which is a lot of handling and still not really steady. My result: ROCKSTEADY en very high quality images for very low costs.
2. Very quick autofiocus while filming. OK. not necessairy, but a great option (at least I can choose it)
3. Sony has huge experience with high end video.There are a number of compact cams shooting 50 or 60 P (depending on PAL of NTSC) and Canon or Nikon are still "thinking about it"... The war is not won on optics, thats all developped now. The war will be won on features and userfriendlyness.
4. Body with build in image stabilisation: no need to buy expensive lenses: all lenses can be used

About the lenses: not really true: there is a great variaty of lenses: starting with a great 16-50 2.8 SSM for approx. €500. Sony offers a mighty fine set of Zeiss lenses too...
OK, you can call me a Sony-advocate... at least I have my mind wide open to a future with cheap yet great hardware and ease of use. No rig for me, no need: my tripod can be used quicker and more steady.

Please be a liitle bit more open to non-Canon-addicts.

Greetings from the kingdom oversea

March 22, 2012 at 4:50PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

3
Reply

“This is a fantastic camera, and it’s got a tremendous amount of features, 1080p 60fps, 12fps stills mode, autofocus while shooting video, a swivel lcd, a mediocre, but better EVF than its predecessor, and a very high max ISO of 16,000.”

As I said above, I'm not denying that it's a great camera, I'm just saying what will hurt it in sales.

March 22, 2012 at 5:01PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Camera Department

Now this may sound dumb, but could someone please explain to me how if you are shooting in 1080p megapixel rates can differ? I thought that 1080p is the number of pixels, and megapixels were just another way of saying how many pixels a camera has.

March 22, 2012 at 10:21PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
Jace

You've summed this up perfectly mate. I am a fan of sony's sensor and processor, but the effed it up with their dumb-arse camera mount. If I was a Sony share-holder, I wouldn't know whether to cry or shoot someone. It's great technology going begging due to two stupid things. I understand sony'c commitment to blu-ray and AVCHD, but that's just a really good way to cripple high technology and turn a tool into a toy.
Even if it could record HDMI, your overall budget would still be high as those recorders aren't cheap (plus you'd need a rig). So you may as well just buy a 5D MkIII.

They should have made all their cameras e-mount. Actually if they made them all EF mount and EOS compatible, they would sell a truckload of units and really gouge Canon. The headstart on the 1080/60p would have actually mattered. I know I would have bought one for both sports stills as well as video.

The alpha mount has ruined their whole DSLR gameplan.

March 23, 2012 at 7:40AM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

3
Reply

What's wrong with the Alpha mount? They don't exactly design it so that you can put other people's lenses on there. There's a ton of dirt-cheap legacy Minolta lenses and Sony has a full line of their own. What's the problem? Seriously.

Also, how are they going to make an E-mount DSLR? I'd be very surprised if Canon would let them use the EF mount, for that matter. This is a really stupid comment, man.

April 8, 2012 at 6:49AM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

5
Reply
Andrew

The a57 does not use the 16.2 Mp sensor from the previous a55, a580, Nikon d7000, but a newer generation 16.1 Mp first seen in the Nex 5-N.

November 16, 2012 at 3:21PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply

T4i has been out for a while now. So which camera has the best image/video quality? I'm trying to decide which of these two I should get.

December 4, 2012 at 11:28PM, Edited September 4, 10:54AM

0
Reply
Drp

This article only have been made to confuse the people with the lack of information of the author about the camera. What a shame.

April 2, 2013 at 5:58PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

2
Reply
Darth Willie

There are over 4,000 lenses that are listed in the Dyxum lens database. That includes AF legacy lenses, current sony and Zeiss lenses, more than a few 3rd party lenses. Then throw in all the m42 lenses, and leica r mounts. That doesn't seem like a limited system to me.
A mount lens systems are 30 years old. Not quiet the age of Nikon F, but pretty respectable no?
Have you tried adapting any other lenses to a sony camera? I just wonder what the results would be. They may not be as bad as you seem to suggest.
Also keep in mind that that sony evf cameras have class leading peaking, making them ideal for using legacy MF glass.
My point is, you seemed to have written a non article, with rather poor research into the sony a mount and it's potential. Sure you call it a great camera, but it seems more a political move on your part.
I'm sure you could write a stronger piece than this, after doing some basic research and actually consulting with a mount video and photo users.

May 19, 2013 at 6:50PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

1
Reply
Please

Just a note: bitrate does not necessarily scale linearly with frame rate.

This has to do with how the video is compressed. When you shoot in IPB (as opposed to ALL-I) mode, adjacent frames are compared to one another, and ONLY the differences are coded and kept, otherwise identical sections are simply copied from the previous complete frame.

When you have more frames in a second, you are going to have more similarities between frames, and so you are going to find that you will be ignoring similar sections more often... this means the bitrate will not necessarily be double...

So whilst I agree that you will quite possibly see a drop in quality going from 24-28 Mbps and 24-60fps... You don't need to go to 60Mbps just to get equivalent quality for 60fps. Something around the low-mid 30Mbps should be sufficient.

August 23, 2013 at 7:30AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Luke

The readers know more than the author of this post.
Hahahahaha!!!!

September 2, 2013 at 12:46PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

1
Reply
darth willie

1 in 1000 who start shooting in DSLR will start buying loads of expensive lenses. Majority of users will use the standard kit lens, 50mm f1.8 portrait and one telephoto lens.
Sony A mount has all these lenses.

The photo quality(RAW) is on par with Canikons. Video capability is better than Canon and a generation ahead of Nikon.

The camera comes with inbuilt Image stabiliser. Thats a killer deal. I recently migrated from Canon 50D to Sony SLT A57. Except for the build quality and ECF, I am delighted about this product and recommend it to any one

September 12, 2013 at 3:33AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Nandish

G'Day from Downunder. Just picked up an A57K with the 18-55mm Sony lens. So much fun. But within days it started throwing up CAMERA ERROR messages at random intervals. I've read quite a few comments on other websites and forums re these error messages. I searched SONY and updated the firmware from V1.02 to the latest V1.04. Has anyone heard of the firmware update solving the error message problem or will I have to take the camera back under warranty before it's really damaged or quits altogether? All advice received with gratitude!

October 22, 2013 at 5:42AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
GMW - Australia