Looking Forward

The Sony A900 is a truly revolutionary camera. As the highest resolution full-frame DSLR you can currently buy it distinguishes itself with astonishing resolution. As discussed in our preview it is also the first full-frame with body-integrated Image Stabilization (add 2 to 4 stops to hand held shooting) and the viewfinder is the best, brightest, sharpest that we have ever seen in a DSLR - or perhaps in any camera.

It is important to keep those huge pluses in perspective because image noise at extended ISOs, while just one factor in the total image quality equation, is definitely not a strength of the A900. Compared to the Nikon D700, noise in the A900 is about two stops worse. That means the D700 at ISO 6400 exhibits about the same noise as the A900 at ISO 1600. In the case of the D700 that applies to both the actual pixel comparisons as well as the double pixel samples downsized to reflect the same image view in both crops. Despite the huge noise advantage, the D700 outputs nothing near the resolution and detail of the A900, which should not come as a surprise.

The Canon 5D is now three years old, but noise control is still about a stop or two better than the A900. However, we noticed for the first time how much Canon softens images at higher ISOs in an effort to control noise. Looking at the pixel level, high ISO Canon images are extremely soft at higher ISO settings, though they are quite sharp in the lower ISOs most sites use in evaluating the 5D output. Taken in total the A900 is again a clear leader in detail compared to the 5D. The 5D has perhaps a one stop advantage in noise when the A900 and 5D are equalized for sharpness.

Finally we come to the biggest surprise of all, which is our comparison of the A900 noise to the APS-C sensor in the A700. This is the same sensor used in the Nikon D300 and the most recent Nikon D90. When the A700 was first released, some in the press trashed it because of its heavy-handed noise reduction techniques. Sony has worked hard to answer those complaints, and most users were pleased with the v3 firmware fixes. With the release of the A900 Sony also released a v4 firmware for the A700, which allows complete disabling of NR plus a range of adjustments in noise reduction. V4 incorporates in the A700 all Sony had learned in developing the A900.

With sensor density of the A900 less than the A900 (2.9 vs. 3.3) we really thought the A900 would shine compared to the A700. In fact the A700 is about two stops better in noise control looking at actual pixel crops and one to two stops better looking at crops equalized for image view (A900 down-sampled to equivalent 12MP). This performance difference is a complete surprise and it is either good news or bad news depending on your perspective. The bad news version is that the A900 sensor is inherently a high-noise sensor and the high ISO noise performance is as good as we will see. The good news version is that the A900 was just released and, like the A700, Sony will continue to improve the noise performance in future firmware/software releases. We certainly saw that in the A700, but we did have the Nikon D300 as the constant reminder of what that sensor was capable of.

Our hands-on test of the A900 reveals a mixed bag of performance. At Lower ISOs, 100-400, nothing on the market comes close to the Sony. A little is given up at 800-1600 and if that were as bad as it got the A900 would be something of a Holy Grail. However, noise at ISO 3200 and 6400 are truly not competitive. High detail is still there but it is seriously marred by high noise. In the end our expectation is that professionals will stick to ISO 100-400 for the highest resolution shots you can get from a camera in this class. Action shooters and the rest of us will also be happy with ISO 800 and 1600. However, dial in above ISO 1600 only if you will be happy with stunning detail in smaller prints.

The last page contains a few sample images taken in the couple of weeks the Sony A900 has been in the office. As always, we chose the images to show both the strengths and weaknesses of the camera we are testing. The A900 is capable of capturing amazing detail and if you do a lot of pixel-peeping on these images you will see exactly what we mean. There are also a couple of shots that show the potential impact of poor noise performance at higher ISO, which is not always as bad as it sounds.

The Sony A900 will likely be long remembered for its record-setting resolution and its utility as a camera that is a true working tool instead of an amalgam of gadgets. The stunning 100% viewfinder is one example of that, but so is the logical and simple control that is a part of every aspect of the A900. It is not without its flaws but in total the A900 is definitely greater than the sum of its parts or any one area of measured performance.

Sony A900 Full Frame vs. Sony A700 APS-C Samples
Comments Locked

45 Comments

View All Comments

  • Heidfirst - Wednesday, October 29, 2008 - link

    Wesley has already said that these are out of the camera jpegs at default settings & every manufacturer has different values for settings even if they may use the same names for them.
    If you want sharper out of the camera JPEGs then simply set more sharpness.
    Or as a semi-pro you'll probably be using RAW & you'll be used to having to sharpen in pp anyway.


  • jamesbond007 - Thursday, October 30, 2008 - link

    RAW images, which typically have zero sharpening (or any in-camera adjustments made) are sharper than the images provided.
  • TariqGibran - Wednesday, October 29, 2008 - link

    Your statement:

    "Sony sensor is double the resolution of competing full-frame cameras"

    is technically incorrect. You also made this same statement in your initial review of the a900. In order to double the resolution, one must quadruple the megapixels, not just double them.
  • Wesley Fink - Wednesday, October 29, 2008 - link

    You are talking about doubling the SIZE of the sensor, which is, as you point out, four times the resolution. Most readers would consider 12 MP double the resolution of a 6 MP sensor. I therefore stand by my description that the A900 at 24.6 megapixels doubles the resolution of the 12 megapixel full-frame competitors.
  • sxr7171 - Monday, November 3, 2008 - link

    I think that's a misconception that you should not perpetuate. It is the responsibility of the educated reviewer to inform people about linear resolution. That is the only number that truly speaks about how large you can print the image at a given DPI. Sure you could make the argument that twice the pixels is twice the detail and I wouldn't object but the ability to resolve two different points on either axis is a product of linear resolution. Please don't perpetuate the megapixel myth people are already clueless about the true meaning of the megapixel count and while the 24.8MP is nice for well lit, low action studio type shots most people really need something to shoot action with and talking about increased detail of 24MP vs 12 MP is something that is not important unless you want to shoot to make posters.
  • TariqGibran - Wednesday, October 29, 2008 - link

    You are incorrect. Look it up. You are only doubling the MP, not the linear resolution which is what we look at when we speak of resolution in regards to a digital sensor in this context. This is basic stuff any reviewer should be aware of and its sort of an embarrassment to the site and review that you do not know this. No knowledgeable reviewer would claim that 24MP gives double the resolution of 12MP. The fact that you stand by this inaccuracy is even more troublesome. Do some research.
  • Wesley Fink - Wednesday, October 29, 2008 - link

    I did try to look up your claim when you first made it in your comments to the A900 preview. I found nothing that corroborated your claim. We tried to look up your CLEAR definition of double resolution as 4 times the number of pixels again and found nothing to indicate that.

    It is not that we doubt you, but without any references to substantiate what you say it is not reasonable to make changes. If you have the "proof" you say is so easy to find please send us some links and we will take a look.

    The 24.6 megapixel A900 does have twice as many pixels as the Nikon D3/D700 and Canon 5D.
  • melgross - Thursday, October 30, 2008 - link

    Doubling the number of pixels increases the resolution by 39% (approx), but doubles the pixel DENSITY.

    This isn't in question.
  • lsman - Tuesday, October 28, 2008 - link

    On first page,
    That resolution performance is amazing when you consider the 24.6MP Sony A700 is just $3000


    You meant A900 is just $3000
  • Wesley Fink - Tuesday, October 28, 2008 - link

    Thanks for bringing this to our attention. Now corrected.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now