FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

A77ii or A99?

Page  <1 23456>
Author
sybersitizen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 14225
Post Options Post Options   Quote sybersitizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 October 2018 at 20:39
Originally posted by pegelli pegelli wrote:

... if an image needs a certain aperture/shutter speed/iso on APS-C to be correctly exposed it will need exactly the same aperture/shutter speed/iso to be correctly exposed on full frame.

Not if you want as equivalent a comparison as possible under all conditions. If you happen to want that you have to change the aperture and ISO - and the focal length. Shutter speed should remain the same if you want to preserve equivalent camera shake and subject movement.

If you don't care about those things then correct exposure can be obtained in the way you describe ... but it's only one aspect of a photo.
 



Back to Top
Paul07 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 09 March 2006
Country: Belgium
Status: Offline
Posts: 2132
Post Options Post Options   Quote Paul07 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 October 2018 at 20:54
I see mainly a lot of theoretical discussion which i.m.o. is just fun activity to keep the brain cells active but which Phil most probably is not really interested in (Phil, correct me if I am wrong here please).

My summary remains the same, taking the initial question into account: just go for the a99, get it at decent 2nd hand price, and enjoy it.
If it would prove to not be what you were looking for, you can easily sell it again an get still get that a77ii. At least, you will have had the chance to experience FF for a while, play with the differences in output both types of sensor provide and enjoy adding some creativity into that play.
α7RIII 24-70G 70-200G 85/1.8 Samyang 35/2.8 ~~~ α6300 16-70/4 ~~~ Nex-5N 16-50 18-200 ~~~ RX10 IV ~~~ α100 50/1.4 24-105 ~~~ HX60V
Back to Top
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Offline
Posts: 27331
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 October 2018 at 21:02
Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

Originally posted by pegelli pegelli wrote:

... if an image needs a certain aperture/shutter speed/iso on APS-C to be correctly exposed it will need exactly the same aperture/shutter speed/iso to be correctly exposed on full frame.

Not if you want as equivalent a comparison as possible under all conditions. If you happen to want that you have to change the aperture and ISO - and the focal length. Shutter speed should remain the same if you want to preserve equivalent camera shake and subject movement.

If you don't care about those things then correct exposure can be obtained in the way you describe ... but it's only one aspect of a photo.
Fully agree Syber, but I responded to QuietOC as he just stated that a FF needed a higher iso because the beam is broader and spread over a wider area without talking about any other aspects of "equivalence". That's the statement I reacted to, because I think the broader beam has nothing to do with it. No more, no less.
Mind the bandwidth of others, don't link pictures larger then 1024 wide or 960 pix high, see here
Back to Top
sybersitizen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 14225
Post Options Post Options   Quote sybersitizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 October 2018 at 21:26
Originally posted by pegelli pegelli wrote:

Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

Originally posted by pegelli pegelli wrote:

... if an image needs a certain aperture/shutter speed/iso on APS-C to be correctly exposed it will need exactly the same aperture/shutter speed/iso to be correctly exposed on full frame.

Not if you want as equivalent a comparison as possible under all conditions. If you happen to want that you have to change the aperture and ISO - and the focal length. Shutter speed should remain the same if you want to preserve equivalent camera shake and subject movement.

If you don't care about those things then correct exposure can be obtained in the way you describe ... but it's only one aspect of a photo.
Fully agree Syber, but I responded to QuietOC as he just stated that a FF needed a higher iso because the beam is broader and spread over a wider area without talking about any other aspects of "equivalence". That's the statement I reacted to, because I think the broader beam has nothing to do with it. No more, no less.

Knowing QuietOC's position on such things, it's a sure bet that whatever he said was from the standpoint of maintaining equivalence as closely as possible.
Back to Top
Phil Wood View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 24 March 2013
Country: United Kingdom
Location: England
Status: Offline
Posts: 774
Post Options Post Options   Quote Phil Wood Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 October 2018 at 22:57
Originally posted by angora angora wrote:

PS? you'd be more than welcome to try out my camera. but suppose that w/b a long swim?
aren't there any members with any of these cameras where you are at?
or camera stores nearby that happen to have them in stock?
try them and you'll know?! :-)

Thanks for the offer Angora, I shall see if I can find my swimming trunks!

Finding an A77ii in a local shop is tricky - finding a camera shop is difficult enough. Finding an A99 is needle in the haystack time.    
Back to Top
angora View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 02 March 2014
Country: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Posts: 3485
Post Options Post Options   Quote angora Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 October 2018 at 23:41
hurry! temperatures are dropping! ;-)
and trust...
w/b the keyword? if it's meant for you, it will come unto your path?

would you be willing to share in which part of England you are?
lemme guess? London?
Bob is in London. he has an A99. he is a Dyxummer, thus very nice! :-)
for instance?
bet you can find someone who would be willing to help you. or would like to meet up with you?
never say ..... ?


 



Back to Top
Phil Wood View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 24 March 2013
Country: United Kingdom
Location: England
Status: Offline
Posts: 774
Post Options Post Options   Quote Phil Wood Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 October 2018 at 01:06
Originally posted by Paul07 Paul07 wrote:

I see mainly a lot of theoretical discussion which i.m.o. is just fun activity to keep the brain cells active but which Phil most probably is not really interested in (Phil, correct me if I am wrong here please).

I am finding it fascinating - and a lot saner than a flurry of APS v FF comments I saw recently on another site.

I was particularly interested in QuietOC's practical idea of using APS lenses on FF using a 1.4xTC - I hadn't thought if that. I wonder which would be better my nice old Minolta 24-85 or the 16-50 + TC?

However, the choice to me is principally the added variety and lens enablement of the A99 v the more modern features of the A77ii (live view tethering, eye detect, etc).

Better low light performance would be nice, tighter DOF would be nice - but I would have no modern quality zoom with the A99 unless I can pick up one with a decent zoom attached. So picture quality A77ii + 16-50 v A99 + Min 24-85 / 28-85 / 28-105 / 28-135 / etc? I suspect the A99 would spend most of the time with a prime attached. One of the big reasons not to go E-mount is the high cost of lenses - the A99 has the same issue, albeit to a lesser extent.

Thanks for all the input - I shall ponder further.
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Posts: 2639
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 October 2018 at 02:03
The strong AA filter is a liability with soft lenses.

My Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 and Tokina 28-80mm F2.8 were affordable, but there's reason for that. Maybe the Sony 28-75mm F2.8 SAM is worth it? Wasn't it the kit lens for the A99? It is an AF-D lens and has Lens Compensation support and all that.

As far as expanding APS-C lens to cover full-frame, the Kenko MC4 1.4x/1.5x teleconverters just aren't great optically. If you just want center sharpness they are fine. The DGX 1.4x works well with SAM/SSM lenses. The DT lenses will even focus fine on the late film SLRs.

Edited by QuietOC - 05 October 2018 at 02:33
Sony A7II A6000 A77II LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MC-11 MD-NEX KR-NEX DA-NEX
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8 8.5/1.9
Back to Top
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Offline
Posts: 27331
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 October 2018 at 07:26
Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

Originally posted by pegelli pegelli wrote:

Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

Originally posted by pegelli pegelli wrote:

... if an image needs a certain aperture/shutter speed/iso on APS-C to be correctly exposed it will need exactly the same aperture/shutter speed/iso to be correctly exposed on full frame.

Not if you want as equivalent a comparison as possible under all conditions. If you happen to want that you have to change the aperture and ISO - and the focal length. Shutter speed should remain the same if you want to preserve equivalent camera shake and subject movement.

If you don't care about those things then correct exposure can be obtained in the way you describe ... but it's only one aspect of a photo.
Fully agree Syber, but I responded to QuietOC as he just stated that a FF needed a higher iso because the beam is broader and spread over a wider area without talking about any other aspects of "equivalence". That's the statement I reacted to, because I think the broader beam has nothing to do with it. No more, no less.

Knowing QuietOC's position on such things, it's a sure bet that whatever he said was from the standpoint of maintaining equivalence as closely as possible.
His stated explanation was a "broader beam", not equivalence.

Secondly, I'm not a mind reader and don't assume that I know what people think. I just read and respond to what they write.

Edited by pegelli - 05 October 2018 at 07:31
Mind the bandwidth of others, don't link pictures larger then 1024 wide or 960 pix high, see here
Back to Top
Phil Wood View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 24 March 2013
Country: United Kingdom
Location: England
Status: Offline
Posts: 774
Post Options Post Options   Quote Phil Wood Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 October 2018 at 08:43
Originally posted by QuietOC QuietOC wrote:

The strong AA filter is a liability with soft lenses.

My Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 and Tokina 28-80mm F2.8 were affordable, but there's reason for that. Maybe the Sony 28-75mm F2.8 SAM is worth it? Wasn't it the kit lens for the A99? It is an AF-D lens and has Lens Compensation support and all that.

As far as expanding APS-C lens to cover full-frame, the Kenko MC4 1.4x/1.5x teleconverters just aren't great optically. If you just want center sharpness they are fine. The DGX 1.4x works well with SAM/SSM lenses. The DT lenses will even focus fine on the late film SLRs.


I have a Kenko DGX 1.4x - so things are looking up on that front.

But new lenses are out of the question short term - the budget will be blown on the camera.

The AA filter - is that a variable between the A77ii and the A99 or a common issue?

@Angora - I'm in Newbury, about 80k west of London.


Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Posts: 9908
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 October 2018 at 09:41
I really do not understand the obsession with the converter, it is a cumbersome way to use a lens. Maybe nice to try once or twice.

I find my copy of the 24-85 capable on full frame, others prefer the 28-105. Both will be nice on the A99.

The 16-50/2.8 on APS-C behaves like a 24-70/4 on full frame. Using a TC has no benefit IMHO.

Re. The 28-75/2.8 - the Sony 28-75/2.8 SAM is optically the same as the Tamron (and Konica Minolta) 28-75/2.8. Check the reviews in the lens database if youíre considering one. It seems a capable lens.
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101
Back to Top
glass-hoper View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 03 April 2008
Country: United States
Location: New York
Status: Offline
Posts: 893
Post Options Post Options   Quote glass-hoper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 October 2018 at 13:16
@QuietOC Is the teleconverter going to extend the sensor coverage from a circle circumscribing the APC area to the FF area?

@Phil Woods: if the budget for lenses after acquiring the new camera is limited there are 2 options: if you get the a77II, this is a mute question since you already have the lenses you like; if you get the A99 you could spring for the cheap and competent Minolta 50/1.7 that goes for less that 50coins and would probably take care graciously of 80%plus of your photographic needs.

I for one amassed a decent (and by current standards expensive) collection of FF lenses in the 2008-2012 when were hoping for a big revival and expansion of the A mount. I could not make myself get rid of them and wanted to try on full frame so I ultimately acquired an A99 in 2016. (Sunk ships fallacy, anybody?) I was lucky to get one in very good condition with aproximatively 15k clicks for a very decent price. In the end, after the euphoria of the new toy passed, I find that the Sony 35/1.4G is stuck to it most of the time, and probably if I did not have it, the Min 50/1.7 would have done just fine.
(As another aside my most used camera, that pretty much lives in whatever bag/backpack I take with me, is the Sony nex 6 with the 20/2.8; it is hard to beat the portability but the A99 with the FF lenses has much more magic in it)
mehr licht!

Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Posts: 2639
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 October 2018 at 14:07
Originally posted by glass-hoper glass-hoper wrote:

@QuietOC Is the teleconverter going to extend the sensor coverage from a circle circumscribing the APC area to the FF area?

Yes, it makes a DT lens cover the larger sensor area. Some DT lenses cover or nearly cover full-frame already--a full 1.53x magnification is not required. My Kenko 1.5X DG teleconverter has the same optics as the DGX 1.4X.

I have a focal reducer for my E-mount cameras that does the opposite. It is a 0.726x teleconverter. It is optically much better than the MC4 teleconverters. It converts full-frame lenses into APS-C lenses. Or you can consider it turning an APS-C camera into a full-frame camera. If you look into it when it is mounted on the camera the sensor looks full-frame.

You can view a 1.4X teleconverter the same way. It effectively makes the camera operate like it had a 1.4X crop size sensor.

FWIW: some "full-frame" lenses cover digital medium format sensors.

Edited by QuietOC - 05 October 2018 at 14:18
Sony A7II A6000 A77II LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MC-11 MD-NEX KR-NEX DA-NEX
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8 8.5/1.9
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Posts: 2639
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 October 2018 at 14:31
Originally posted by Phil Wood Phil Wood wrote:

Originally posted by QuietOC QuietOC wrote:

The strong AA filter is a liability with soft lenses.

The AA filter - is that a variable between the A77ii and the A99 or a common issue?

The official line from Sony is all the 24 MP cameras have an AA filter. The shots in the DPReview comparator show more aliasing on the A77II than the A99. If these were shot with the same lens/aperture, the A77II should show less aliasing.

A99 images might not appear not as sharp as A77II images, but they should appear a lot more realistic with really sharp lenses. If you plan to mainly use sharp primes the strong AA filter should be a benefit.

Edited by QuietOC - 05 October 2018 at 14:41
Sony A7II A6000 A77II LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MC-11 MD-NEX KR-NEX DA-NEX
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8 8.5/1.9
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Camera Talk Page  <1 23456>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Feel free to contact us if needed.