Sony A100 noise

Discussion in 'Sony' started by jeffrey, Aug 14, 2006.

  1. jeffrey

    jeffrey Guest

    How bad is the noise on the Sony A100 camera? I've heard it's pretty
    bad, but does anybody have experience with it?
    And how about in-camera vibration reduction, does it work as well as
    traditional VR lenses?
     
    jeffrey, Aug 14, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. jeffrey

    mswlogo Guest

    The Sony has similar noise level to all 10 M-pixel CCD's. After much
    reading it's simply a trade off. More Pixels vs Low Noise. It's only a
    problem at high ISO. But most people don't shoot that often at high ISO
    and would rather have the pixels.

    Everything boils down to $$$, weight, light, (setuo) time and
    ruggedness.

    An ISO step (over another camera) gives you an extra stop.
    More pixels *can* give you an extra stop (by not zooming in as far and
    croping).
    Good glass gives you and extra stop (or 2 or 3...) at the cost of $$$
    and weight.
    Image stabilization in Lens gives you typically 2+ stops.
    Image stabilization in camera gives you typically 1+ stops (reviews say
    the Sony works).

    So you really can't say the Sony is bad noise for $1000.00 10 Mega
    pixel camera.

    The bigger problem with the sony however (only from reading reviews).
    Is it's long exposure noise reduction (for hot pixel not for high ISO)
    does not work and is needed. This could possible be corrected in
    software.
     
    mswlogo, Aug 14, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. jeffrey

    BobF Guest

    Pictures at 1600 are terrible - only good for something where noise isn't
    important. At 800 the pictures also look a bit fuzzy... This is a bright light
    camera!
    I never tried a VR lens but I can tell you that the Sony system works very well
    indeed. I got some clean shots with a 70mm lens at 1/20 second and some at 1/10
    second. That's 2 and 3 stops if you consider 1/100 sec normal..
     
    BobF, Aug 14, 2006
    #3
  4. jeffrey

    Tony Polson Guest


    Unfortunately that statement is not true.

    The Sony A100 has significantly more noise at higher ISOs than the
    Nikon D200, which uses the same Sony CCD sensor. ISO 1600 is
    unusable, and ISO 800 is very noisy indeed.

    The Nikon has less noise at ISO 1600 than the Sony has at ISO 800. If
    most of your shooting is at ISO settings below 400, the Sony is fine.
     
    Tony Polson, Aug 14, 2006
    #4
  5. jeffrey

    Tony Walker Guest

    I seem to remember an interview I read 2-3 months ago that was translated on
    a Sony Japan website that described the CCD as being newly designed and that
    the A100 was the first camera that it has appeared in. So not the same as
    the Nikon D200. I have been waiting to see if the D80 has the same CCD. If I
    can find the link again I will post it to the group. I do remember the
    interview talking about miniturisation of components as well as convergence
    of photographic and video sensors. (That's a scary thought!) Does anyone
    else remember the site....................??

    Tone
     
    Tony Walker, Aug 14, 2006
    #5
  6. jeffrey

    Tony Polson Guest


    OK, point accepted.
     
    Tony Polson, Aug 14, 2006
    #6
  7. jeffrey

    frederick Guest

    http://www.riddle.ru/dl/ccd/sony/icx493aqa.pdf
    http://www.riddle.ru/dl/ccd/sony/icx483aqa.pdf

    Different chips. I guess the D80 (and new Pentax?) will use the same
    sensor as the a100.
     
    frederick, Aug 14, 2006
    #7
  8. jeffrey

    mswlogo Guest

    I would consider those as all the same chip. Only the D200 uses the 4
    Channel read out (5 fps) and the A100/D80 (3 fps) use the 2 Channel.

    All specs are identical.
     
    mswlogo, Aug 14, 2006
    #8
  9. jeffrey

    bmoag Guest

    The sensor is technically superior to the aesthetic skills of most of the
    photographers that will use it.
     
    bmoag, Aug 15, 2006
    #9

  10. The noise as produced in in-camera JPEGs in good light (i.e. action
    shots) is not bad. In low light, or in very contrasty conditions, it
    gets awful at 1600 but there is a really sudden jump from 800. 800 is
    usable, 1600 is often just not good enough.

    There is a serious issue with Adobe Camera Raw beta conversion of the
    files - the noise is STUPID, not bad, it's worse than the worst consumer
    cam ever made, and something is obviously wrong. Lightroom with NR does
    a very good job, Silkypix does an even better one, and that's about all
    the raw converters except Sony's own (not a bad job).

    The SSS works extremely well. The noise issue at 1600 is enough to make
    the camera unusable at this setting; all the benefits of the extra res
    are lost. But the difference between in-camera JPEGs (half decent even
    at 1600) and ACR raw conversions (extreme noise) points to some issue
    which may be resolved in future.

    The A100 is best used at 100-400 ISO for shots which need extra detail,
    it's very good at that at low ISOs.

    David
     
    David Kilpatrick, Aug 15, 2006
    #10
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.