Sony A850
 

Sony have released a FF camera that is on a per with, and in some cases better than the equivalent Canon (from reviews that I've seen) but I cannot find a single mention of it on PR.

Has it slipped under PR's radar?

Am I not searching in the right place?

Or does the name not start with Nikon / Canon? ;)

[quote=michaelb104;11282]Or does the name not start with Nikon / Canon? ;)[/quote]

Probablty - it's been covered everywhere else though!

Mike,

It's a great camera, I use the A900 which is pretty much identical except for 5fps on the 900 vs 3fps on the 850 and 100% viewfinder vs 98% viewfinder. The A900 is a fantastic bit of kit.

Is the Sony a900 really good at high ISO?

[QUOTE=sony_photographer_jake;19810]Is the Sony a900 really good at high ISO?[/QUOTE]

Depends on what you consider "good". In a lab comparison it generates more noise through the ISO range than the Nikon D700 or the Canon 5D (mark I).

There is loads of information [url=http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra900/page20.asp]here[/url]

I think that an evaluation of noise is both reasonable and appropriate. My concern is that dpreview sets both too high and too narrow of a threshold for what is "acceptable" noise in an image. It's like saying only a Lamborghini has good acceleration or handling; it's neither reasonable nor meaningful to compare all cars in terms of a Lamborghini's performance.
_______________
[url=http://bfitzphotography.com/]newborn photographer[/url]

More info [URL="http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Sensor-rankings"]HERE[/URL]

D700 scores 80, the A850 and 5dMk11 both score 79. Not a lot in it.

[quote=eloisecox12;23000]I think that an evaluation of noise is both reasonable and appropriate. My concern is that dpreview sets both too high and too narrow of a threshold for what is "acceptable" noise in an image. It's like saying only a Lamborghini has good acceleration or handling; it's neither reasonable nor meaningful to compare all cars in terms of a Lamborghini's performance.[/quote]

That may be true, but the assumption on the part of most reviewers who write for the sort of audience that DPReview do, or work at that level of technical detail, is that the readership are experienced or intelligent enough to evaluate the data, assimilate the results and draw their own conclusions.

Another tricky thing for reviewers is that they have to compare against the best in class. This means that you're forever saying that something is not quite as good as X, where X is your benchmark.

DxO (as H has already linked to) offer more information and don't make a call about quality or output, they simply present empirical data. Is that more meaningful than a review? Maybe. Maybe not.