Comments on: Sony A700 Reviews and Samples http://www.dpnotes.com/sony-a700-reviews-and-samples/ Links to Digital Camera, Photography and Accessories Reviews, Tips, Tricks, News, How-To's, Tutorials Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:29:12 +0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Ken http://www.dpnotes.com/sony-a700-reviews-and-samples/#comment-636 Ken Sun, 04 Nov 2007 07:25:25 +0000 http://www.dpnotes.com/sony-a700-reviews-and-samples/#comment-636 Bit depth is a very important detail that seems to have slipped through the examinations of this camera. Bit depth is a very important detail that seems to have slipped through the examinations of this camera.

]]> By: andy d http://www.dpnotes.com/sony-a700-reviews-and-samples/#comment-612 andy d Tue, 18 Sep 2007 08:12:01 +0000 http://www.dpnotes.com/sony-a700-reviews-and-samples/#comment-612 Hey there, does anyone know when the A700 is released in the UK? Thanks Andy Hey there, does anyone know when the A700 is released in the UK?

Thanks
Andy

]]> By: Mal http://www.dpnotes.com/sony-a700-reviews-and-samples/#comment-609 Mal Sat, 15 Sep 2007 18:00:01 +0000 http://www.dpnotes.com/sony-a700-reviews-and-samples/#comment-609 I believe that the Sony A700 comes with a wireless remote as an included accessory (=no etra charge). I see no mention of that on almost all websites. If that control was included as an standard accessory with the Nikon or Canon there would be a great deal of coverage and praise for that addition. But do it with a Sony and nobody makes any point about it. Secondly from my reading the Nikon HDMI does not give a full coverage picture on HDTVs. It is surrounded by a black border where the exposure information is printed. One cannot make the image full size or eliminate the informational writing - I would consider that annoying. Thirdly the Sony wireless remote during HD viewing allows you to go forward and back with the photos as well as allowing magnification and movement when magnified. Why is no one giving praise to these wonderful attributes which I am sure would be front page news if Nikon had done this better. I believe Nikon does offer an accessory (=you have to pay extra for it) wireless remote but there is no information if you can magnify the on screen HD with it. It is obvious that no two cameras have all the same features but there seems to be a bias when people review these cameras. What I mean by that is if Nikon has a particular feature that is better than a Sony it is given a lot of wordage and praise. When the Sony has an item or feature that is better than the Nikon people just skim over it and do not give Sony any credit. To give some other examples - the viewfinder in the Sony is adjustable from -3 to +1. The Nikon is one diopter less at -2 to +1. No one makes mention in their reviews about this however if the situation were reversed the reviewers would be quick to point this advantage out for the Nikon. And there are many other items included in the same vein. Most photographers will not need live view - that is basically a toy for any serious photographer, but getting to a -3 will be an advantage to many people. In addition live view adds to shutter lag. Same goes for the secondary small info center on the top of the camera when all you have to do is tilt the camera slightly forward to see the same information better from the same viewing point. However instead of lauding Sony for leaving out an unnecessary tiny hard to read display they criticize the a700 for its lack. And lastly, the Sony has embedded in its memory a 1920x1080 size file which is saved at the same time that other formats like JPEG and Raw are saved. You cannot see this in adobe or on your computer but that is the file that permits the large full screen image without overwriting on an HD 1080P television. It is also one of the reasons that the Sony a700 shoots slightly slower at 5 frames per second as opposed to the Nikon 6 Frames per second. All the coverage I see applauds Nikon for 6 frames per second but no one mentions what benefit was added to the Sony in its place. For me and I believe 99% of people the HDMI at full resolution and size is far more important than 1 extra frame per second. It is time that the reviewers to stop protecting the Nikon D300 as it is truly a great product and give credit where credit is due. Mal I believe that the Sony A700 comes with a wireless remote as an included accessory (=no etra charge). I see no mention of that on almost all websites. If that control was included as an standard accessory with the Nikon or Canon there would be a great deal of coverage and praise for that addition. But do it with a Sony and nobody makes any point about it. Secondly from my reading the Nikon HDMI does not give a full coverage picture on HDTVs. It is surrounded by a black border where the exposure information is printed. One cannot make the image full size or eliminate the informational writing – I would consider that annoying. Thirdly the Sony wireless remote during HD viewing allows you to go forward and back with the photos as well as allowing magnification and movement when magnified. Why is no one giving praise to these wonderful attributes which I am sure would be front page news if Nikon had done this better. I believe Nikon does offer an accessory (=you have to pay extra for it) wireless remote but there is no information if you can magnify the on screen HD with it.
It is obvious that no two cameras have all the same features but there seems to be a bias when people review these cameras. What I mean by that is if Nikon has a particular feature that is better than a Sony it is given a lot of wordage and praise. When the Sony has an item or feature that is better than the Nikon people just skim over it and do not give Sony any credit.
To give some other examples – the viewfinder in the Sony is adjustable from -3 to +1. The Nikon is one diopter less at -2 to +1. No one makes mention in their reviews about this however if the situation were reversed the reviewers would be quick to point this advantage out for the Nikon.
And there are many other items included in the same vein. Most photographers will not need live view – that is basically a toy for any serious photographer, but getting to a -3 will be an advantage to many people. In addition live view adds to shutter lag.
Same goes for the secondary small info center on the top of the camera when all you have to do is tilt the camera slightly forward to see the same information better from the same viewing point. However instead of lauding Sony for leaving out an unnecessary tiny hard to read display they criticize the a700 for its lack.
And lastly, the Sony has embedded in its memory a 1920×1080 size file which is saved at the same time that other formats like JPEG and Raw are saved. You cannot see this in adobe or on your computer but that is the file that permits the large full screen image without overwriting on an HD 1080P television. It is also one of the reasons that the Sony a700 shoots slightly slower at 5 frames per second as opposed to the Nikon 6 Frames per second. All the coverage I see applauds Nikon for 6 frames per second but no one mentions what benefit was added to the Sony in its place. For me and I believe 99% of people the HDMI at full resolution and size is far more important than 1 extra frame per second.
It is time that the reviewers to stop protecting the Nikon D300 as it is truly a great product and give credit where credit is due.
Mal

]]>