Sony A55: 16 MP, HD Video and 10 FPS w/AF, Built in IS, GPS, Swivel Screen

IN camera HDR is like in camera black and white, in camera noise reduction and in camera sharpening. All things that look better when you do it yourself from RAW shots. I don't think I would want to shoot JPEG anyway just to get the camera's interpretation of what the scene would look like with HDR.

Naturally, DIY HDR yields best control of results.
From mass market view, in-camera HDR will provide 'instant' results, this feature is attractive.
That and add in 9-11 shot bracketing.

There is no question that Canon looks bad because of a lack of innovation when compared to Sony today. It seems like Canon has lots of tricks up their sleeve but that they trickle them out based on marketing strategies to maximize sales. Whereas Sony has gone all out, as they needed to do given their market position. If the 60D is less exciting than some expect it to be it will really add fuel to this fire.

Does the mass market know what HDR is and when to use it? I mean a lot of these functions look great on a spec sheet, but 9/10 "mass market" people don't do anything but turn the camera on in auto mode and hit the shutter button. I think at some point a lot of these features are just tick marks on a marketing worksheet and not anything that the consumer really wants or needs.

Not saying they aren't kinda cool, but to base Canon for not including them seems a bit much. Canon still has the best picture quality and best video quality in most segments - at least to my eyes.

mpix345 wrote in post #10782551
If the 60D is less exciting than some expect it to be it will really add fuel to this fire.

And people will **** and then still buy it in droves because it is a Canon and Canon has the fewest compromises. Would you rather compromise on GPS or lens selection? High ISO noise, or HDR mode?

tkbslc wrote in post #10782573
Does the mass market know what HDR is and when to use it? I mean a lot of these functions look great on a spec sheet, but 9/10 "mass market" people don't do anything but turn the camera on in auto mode and hit the shutter button. I think at some point a lot of these features are just tick marks on a marketing worksheet and not anything that the consumer really wants or needs.

Not saying they aren't kinda cool, but to base Canon for not including them seems a bit much. Canon still has the best picture quality and best video quality in most segments - at least to my eyes.


And people will **** and then still buy it in droves because it is a Canon and Canon has the fewest compromises. Would you rather compromise on GPS or lens selection? High ISO noise, or HDR mode?

I should have been more specific. If the 60D costs $1000+ and has a downgraded body, marginal AF in video mode, and offers nothing new or game changing then it will look bad for Canon (to me at least). I don't disagree that the 60D will still sell big, especially for those with serious Canon glass investments, but I wouldn't expect sales patterns to change overnight.

Yes, I shoot both Sony and Canon. I will choose my next camera between the two companies based solely on equipment specs. I have lenses from both companies and am not dedicated to either...

Based on the rumors of the new 60D and what I have seen from this new Sony, I am going with the a55.

Holy crap, I did not think Sony was going to deliver a camera of these specs at this price-point. I mean, its Sony...right?

The fact of the matter is that I saw this coming sooner or later from Sony but I didn't think these kind of specs would ever hit a cropped sensor camera body...at $750. Taking into consideration that they have exclusive rights to AF-driven Carl Zeiss optics...Canon and Nikon are now looking at a serious threat that hits them where they're most profitable:

The consumer market.

Ouch, Sony. Ouch.

Luminodio wrote in post #10783223
Holy crap, I did not think Sony was going to deliver a camera of these specs at this price-point. I mean, its Sony...right?

The fact of the matter is that I saw this coming sooner or later from Sony but I didn't think these kind of specs would ever hit a cropped sensor camera body...at $750. Taking into consideration that they have exclusive rights to AF-driven Carl Zeiss optics...Canon and Nikon are now looking at a serious threat that hits them where they're most profitable:

The consumer market.

Ouch, Sony. Ouch.

Maybe Canon will finally up their game.

Depth wrote in post #10783255
Maybe Canon will finally up their game.

Canon cannot rely on reputation anymore. It is no longer "a safe bet" for them.

Nikon woke up from their slumber and stomped their way into the FF market.

Sony followed and now its beginning to look like Sony has taken lead; at least on the cropped front.

By chronology, the 1Ds IV would be Canon's first response to the newly acquired FF competition as the 5D II was in production long before Nikon or Sony made face with their FF camera bodies.

I hope they don't stick to the uniformity of the 1D-1Ds updates, but I'm sure they will and wait until the 5D III to respond seeing as the target market-share is much bigger at the 5D series price-point.

toxic wrote in post #10755105
I'd rather have longer shutter lag and no viewing lag than viewing lag and shorter shutter lag.

Viewing lag + shorter shutter lag = "I can document the fact that I missed the decisive moment without delay"

bjyoder wrote in post #10769637
And - something I just thought of - you'd still have blackout while the shutter is moving across the sensor to make the exposure, hence defeating the pellicle mirror again.

I know you wrote this comment BEFORE the official news release, but Sony is using pellicle mirror very differently than how pellicle mirror was used in the Canon EOS RT and Canon EOS 1N RS. Sony uses it for continuous AF, while Canon used it for continous viewing (through the optical viewfinder).

In Sony's case, the pellicle mirror is NOT needed for continuous viewing, since that job is done by the sensor/EVF (similar to all the point-and-shoots out there, but hopefully with less lag).

In fact, because of the dependence on EVF, I highly suspect that at higher shutter speeds (anything faster than max X-sync), electronic rather than mechanical shuttering will be used. Trying in use mechanical shuttering at faster than max X-sync speed would have shown the slit travelling across the sensor.

Drozz119 wrote in post #10777807
Canon should be squirming.. The video AF works!
http://vimeo.com/14376​901

Since I got my 7D, other cameras don't impress me much (the 5D2 and the 1-series don't tempt me either), but this "phase-detection AF during video" thing definitely got a "wow" out of me.

Boily wrote in post #10778776
check this out !
http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=eKwLICLPUoY

They did a good job marketing the A55 in this video. One is made aware of all the major selling points of this camera A LOT faster reading a 17-page review.

Obviously, the video is meant to praise and sell the camera, while the various reviews offer a much more balanced perspective.

toxic wrote in post #10781539
Why should 10fps be restricted to AE? IR says the aperture must be "locked" to "[remove] the delay required to set and reset the aperture to allow focusing between shots." Why is the aperture an issue? Every SLR lens has to move its aperture blades continuously. Do Sony lenses really not stop down and open up fast enough?

Phase-detection AF works by comparing light coming from different parts of the lens, which in turns requires the aperture to be opened wide enough to allow light from the "periphery" of image circle. This is why the usual "lens must be faster than F5.6 to retain AF" restriction we see all the time.

If you are shooting outdoors and using an aperture of F11, in order to AF again between shots, the camera needs to open up the aperture to F5.6 at least to allow phase-detection AF to work, then close it down again to F11 before the next shot. It may not be possible to do this "close down/expose frame/open up/AF/close down/expose frame/open up/AF" dance 10 times per second.

toxic wrote in post #10781539
DPR also says the 10 fps AE mode doesn't choose the best shutter speeds for action since it sticks to 1/FL. It would have been acceptable if it chose faster shutter speeds, but it apparently doesn't.

Since the max X-sync is only 1/160, does any one know if the A55 uses electronic shuttering with faster shutter speeds?

For those who don't remember, with shutter speeds faster than max X-sync, the leading and trailing shutter blades are no longer allowing light to strike the entire sensor at the same time -- the shutter blades form a slit, which travels across the sensor.

With EVF, I can't imagine the camera allowing you to watch this "slit action" as it happens. Perhaps this is why one is restricted to slower shutter speeds in 10 fps mode?

Anyway, gimmick or innovation, one must give some credit to Sony for trying something new. As others have said, hopefully this will trigger some response from the Big 2, allowing us to benefit without switching brand/system.

Competition is a great thing for us consumers. I sincerely hope Canon considers this new Sony at least slightly threatening.

dithiolium wrote in post #10781839
Canon shld adopt the in-camera HDR function.

They already started doing that, with their latest batch of cameras:
http://www.dpreview.co​m …1918canonpowers​hots95.asp

"A High Dynamic Range shooting mode allows the capture of high contrast scenes closer to how they appear to the human eye. Exceeding the limitations of conventional cameras, the PowerShot S95 takes three different exposures of the same scene*2 before analysing and combining shots to create a single image in-camera. The result is an image that captures highlight and shadow detail closer to how the photographer sees it.

*2 Tripod required for High Dynamic Range shooting"

tkbslc wrote in post #10782446
IN camera HDR is like in camera black and white, in camera noise reduction and in camera sharpening. All things that look better when you do it yourself from RAW shots. I don't think I would want to shoot JPEG anyway just to get the camera's interpretation of what the scene would look like with HDR.

If it can be turned off and on whenever I want, I don't consider any "feature/gimmick" a negative. It's there when I want something quick, but I always have the option of turning it off and do it later in PP.

However, Canon's implementation (of in-camera HDR) requires a tripod. For snapshots, I still think nothing beats the Fujifilm EXR technology -- simultaneously, half of the pixels are read early for highlights and the other half for shadows. And it works -- the F200EXR can achieve a DR of over 10 stops with almost no effort (turning the mode dial to EXR mode), while with the 7D one needs to shoot in RAW and process manually to get 9.8 stops.

tkbslc wrote in post #10782573
Does the mass market know what HDR is and when to use it? I mean a lot of these functions look great on a spec sheet, but 9/10 "mass market" people don't do anything but turn the camera on in auto mode and hit the shutter button. I think at some point a lot of these features are just tick marks on a marketing worksheet and not anything that the consumer really wants or needs.

Yes, but the same "mass market" people will buy the camera and kit lens and probably never spend a dime any more.

Clearly, the A55 is aimed at gearheads who want the features but cannot (or are unwilling to) spend the money on a 7D/5D or D300/D700. Once hooked, gearheads are more likely to buy additional lenses and flashes, where the profit margin is A LOT higher than in bodies.

I have a feeling that Canon's marketing team is paying attention though. Had Nikon not released the D300/D300s, we never would've gotten the 7D. Canon seems to build artificial weaknesses in cameras (ie 5D Mark II with old autofocus) until competitors release something significantly better. Should be interesting to see what the next two generations of Rebels are like.

I've seen some sentient comments here about this cam but overall I think us Canon/Nikon folks have missed the impact of this one. I initially dismissed it when I saw it on the DPR list. Then I READ the review.

As few quotes that impressed me: (DPReview)

handles very well indeed

crisp and detailed enough for accurate manual focusing using the 15x magnification option

Metering, especially, is more or less infallible (Edit by me: C'mon Canon!)

12,800 image quality has dropped significantly but high-contrast detail remains impressively well-defined, making this setting genuinely useful

Total dynamic range is almost 9EV, which is about as good as things get from the current crop of APS-C and full-frame DSLRs.

Drozz119 wrote in post #10777807
Canon should be squirming.. The video AF works!
http://vimeo.com/14376​901

That seems to work really well.

Oh boy, I don't even think video should be in "Click Camera" and this is insanely good results above David. So does this do away with most of the need for those huge focusing rigs?