Sony A55: 10 FPS w/AF, full HD video w/AF, built in IS and GPS, swivel screen, $750!

[996GT2]

UPDATE 2: Reviewed by DPReview...GOLD AWARD

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonyslta55/page17.asp

A55 is $750 Body only. A33 is $650 Body Only.

Sony Store: http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...2#/panel_prod1

Official Specs:

* 16.2MP (effective) APS HD CMOS sensor
* Fixed, pellicle-type semi-translucent mirror
* Maximum ISO 12,800 (with a quasi-ISO 25,600 'Multi-frame NR' option)
* 15-point phase-detection AF array with 3 cross-type AF points
* Electronic viewfinder with 1.44 million dot resolution (1.15M dots used)
* Built-in GPS
* Electronic level in EVF/LCD with pitch/roll indicator
* Dual-purpose Memory Stick/SD card slot
* 10fps continuous shooting rate
* 1080p AVCHD movie mode with continuous AF
* Articulated 3in 'TruBlack' LCD with 912k dots
* socket for external microphone
* 2x magnification mode in live view
* Face-detection AF (focus via nearest phase-detection AF point)

 

[jpeyton]

10FPS at full resolution is quite amazing for a camera that price.

 

[ElFenix]

pellicle is pretty interesting. AF practically through exposure plus you see the moment of capture (leica's big claim). darker VF though and exposure calculations are slightly different than normal.

i suppose sony is using it to full time live view with phase AF and replacing their kinda funky previous live view setup.

 

[jpeyton]

Damn Sony, don't hurt 'em: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonyslta55/

Sounds like a hell of a package for $749. And they've got two nice, cheap ($200) prime lenses coming out as well; the 35/1.8 and the 85/2.8.

 

[Cattykit]

Pellicle mirror, EVF, and cont. AF during video!
It's good to see Sony is doing something finally.

I wonder how pellicle mirror will affect IQ (Obviously, having a extra mirror there would affect IQ and I doubt very high quality glass is used.)
I also wonder how good EVF will be when it's dark. Will it be terribly laggy?
50 sec. of freezing after 10 fps burst. That's terrible.

 

[arrfep]

They are definitely nice cams, best of both the EVIL and DSLR, IMO. But there's two things I don't get about the pellicle implementation.

Why still use an EVF? In all the murmurings of pellicle-equipped cams in the past few years, one of the benefits of a partially-silvered mirror would be that there would be no need for an EVF. Because the light path could stay the same as it is in a traditional SLR, but be split to hit the sensor giving full-time live view. It solved the biggest problem of live-view, viewfinder blackout. When these cams were rumored, I assumed that's how the pellicle mirror would be used. So why go EVF? Maybe 70% light transmission isn't enough for an effective OVF? How'd the Canon RT do it?

Secondly, why not keep the mirror fixed? Sony could have sealed the entire mirror box behind the pellicle mirror, thus avoiding one of the biggest pitfalls of interchangeable lenses on an an electronic-sensor body: dust on the sensor. Seems pointless to have the mirror flipping if you never need it to flip except to clean the sensor which you wouldn't need to do if it didn't flip in the first place...

Anyway, I still think they're neat cameras. Sony's definitely upping the ante, and this is before Canikon have even caught up in the EVIL game. I'm interested in seeing what the industry looks like in a year.

 

[jpeyton]

It should be noted that the A33/A55 bodies are significantly smaller than the models they are replacing. An OVF would have been dim and small in this implementation; the EVF they used is described as being very large and bright, by comparison.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

Very, very interesting, and it's good to see some new camera designs finally coming out.

1) I suppose the displayed ISO's are compensated for the 1/3rd stop light loss due to the pellicle mirror. I.e., the exposure is matched so that selecting ISO 400, 1/100, f/8 on the A55 will give the same exposure as, say, an A550 with the same exposure. But in reality the sensor will be boosted by 1/3rd stop (extra noise) to compensate. Actually this is the only reason I could think of why they might have the mirror flip up -- you could go manual focus, flip the mirror up and gain back the 1/3rd stop of light. But that doesn't seem to be a feature of these cameras.

2) Looks like they just need some added processing juice to clean up the high-speed AF and the buffer clearing times. The EOS-1D series and 7D have dual processors, one for focusing and the other for image processing, etc. Movement-tracking AF at 10FPS is no small potatoes.

Seems like Sony is really throwing their hat in the ring, big-time, in the high-end camera market. They're hitting on all fronts: DSLRs, standard EVILs with a whole new range of lenses, and now this new class of camera that doesn't seem to have a good name yet. This is excellent, as Canikon would otherwise probably be willing to sit on their butts and revisit designs from the 90's with digital sensors slapped in them.

 

[kalniel]

Why still use an EVF? In all the murmurings of pellicle-equipped cams in the past few years, one of the benefits of a partially-silvered mirror would be that there would be no need for an EVF. Because the light path could stay the same as it is in a traditional SLR, but be split to hit the sensor giving full-time live view. It solved the biggest problem of live-view, viewfinder blackout. When these cams were rumored, I assumed that's how the pellicle mirror would be used. So why go EVF? Maybe 70% light transmission isn't enough for an effective OVF? How'd the Canon RT do it?

If they only skim off enough light for the AF module then more gets through to the sensor and they don't have to turn the gain up as much on the sensor. Given how dim some small cameras are when they give you 100% of the light they'd have to go with a very bulky and expensive prism system to produce a satisfactory OVF.. which is what the old cameras did.

Don't know about the second point. Perhaps a combined mirror/sensor package is too bulky for their current assembly method or something.

 

[996GT2]

Official specs and pricing posted in OP

 

[ElFenix]

whoa it's an evil?

 

[jpeyton]

Gold award b*****s!

 

[foghorn67]

That is a hell of a lot of cons for a gold award. I mean there is a ton of drawbacks.

Still a great bargain though.

 

[randomlinh]

whoa it's an evil?

only partially evil

 

[alkemyst]

how is lens selection for Sony's?

 

[996GT2]

how is lens selection for Sony's?

Pretty good. They've got a good beginner/midrange selection of zooms and primes, and on the high end they have a nice selection of Zeiss zooms and primes (such as the 85mm f/1.4 Planar).

Sony's weakness is in supertele lenses, but Sigma has several good choices there in the Sony mount. And of course there are other great third-party lenses for Sony, such as the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8.

A huge advantage of the Sony system is that any lens mounted on a Sony Alpha camera will have image stabilization courtesy of the built-in sensor shift IS.


Edit: It looks as though several of Sony's zoom lenses are simply rebranded Tamrons. For example, the Sony 28-75mm f/2.8, 11-18mm, 18-250mm, 18-200mm, 55-200mm all seem very similar to Tamron designs, down to the # groups/elements used.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

how is lens selection for Sony's?

Sony purchased Minolta's camera division several years ago, so they are compatible with legacy Minolta SLR lenses (and many of the current Sony lenses are simply cosmetic updates of the Minolta designs). Sony has a pretty big lens lineup, and many of them are quite good, but availability is a problem IMO. Sony just doesn't have the wide adoption of Canon and Nikon, which means many shops don't carry them at all, or if they do then it is only a small portion of the lens lineup. Sony needs to push distribution to the small, traditional camera shops and give them incentives to keep their lenses in stock for purchase and rental. As it is, if you want to try a Sony body and a few lenses for the weekend, in most places you're SOL. But I know of several stores where I can easily go and do the same for Canon or Nikon with a fairly wide selection of lenses and bodies.

The DSLR world is one of systems. You buy into a system, not a body. That's why it's very hard for smaller players to really break in and gain market share. People switch back and forth all the time between Canon and Nikon. But I haven't heard of many instances of people switching to Sony, Pentax et al. But it looks as if Sony is throwing a large amount of money and development resources at this, so maybe they will improve their market share and availability.