Does anyone here own or use to own this ten-year old camera? If so, do you/did you have any problems with sharpness, regardless of lens?. Thank you.
espJSB wrote:
Does anyone here own or use to own this ten-year old camera? If so, do you/did you have any problems with sharpness, regardless of lens?. Thank you.
No problems so far. It's my backup camera so doesn't get as much use as my a65. I'm happy with it.
OK, thanks...must be the user!
espJSB wrote:
Does anyone here own or use to own this ten-year old camera? If so, do you/did you have any problems with sharpness, regardless of lens?. Thank you.
I had an A65 which I loved. Bought an A77. That A77 and I had a love hate relationship. I was never happy with the pictures no matter what I did. I seemed to always go back to my A65. After 4 years of hardly using the A77 I sold it. I don't know if I got a bad camera or what but I could never get what I expected from it.
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
espJSB wrote:
Does anyone here own or use to own this ten-year old camera? If so, do you/did you have any problems with sharpness, regardless of lens?. Thank you.
When I owned that camera, I mounted mainly older AF Minolta lenses because I liked the color they produced. But no, I did not have any problems with focus.
Do you? What problems are you having? If the problem is with all the lenses you are using, that in itself may be telling you where the problem is.
Good luck and keep on shooting until the end.
espJSB wrote:
Does anyone here own or use to own this ten-year old camera? If so, do you/did you have any problems with sharpness, regardless of lens?. Thank you.
As maybe a partial answer to your question - I used a an A77II for a few years - in the end I could not deal with the noise - sold it and got an A99 which I am still using ....
.
azted
Loc: Las Vegas, NV.
espJSB wrote:
Does anyone here own or use to own this ten-year old camera? If so, do you/did you have any problems with sharpness, regardless of lens?. Thank you.
I used several APS-C sized Sony bodies (Nex-7 and A6300) but was never satisfied until I moved up to an A7 lll. Then I added an old A99 used body and I love that also. So it is just possible that your eyes are telling you that you are a Full Frame person. Why don't you rent a Full Frame E mount camera and try your current lenses out on that body?
espJSB wrote:
Does anyone here own or use to own this ten-year old camera? If so, do you/did you have any problems with sharpness, regardless of lens?. Thank you.
My primary camera is the A77 and it does a fantastic job for me. My primary lens on it is a Tamron 17-50 F2.8 and the sharpness of the images is amazing.
I've had the Sony A77V since 2013 and have had no problems with it. I got it with the SAL 16-50mm zoom which is excellent. I also got the SAL 75-300 which is OK in the mid mm and mid f-stops, but a bit fuzzy at the extremes.
You can look through the 28 pages of photos I've posted on this site and see that it does a great job. All the digital photos there are from this camera. Anything prior to 2013 posted is from slide film converted to digital and probably taken with a Minolta.
I just got a Sony A77ii from a fellow Hedgehogger and I'm getting good results with that also.
Well, this has been an interesting mix of responses. A full frame is something I'd like to have but can't justify, especially since I don't get around very much any more - so, more practice and some remedial training.
KTJohnson, I enjoyed your photos and especially liked the swing. Nice work!
planepics
Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs
I have the a77, which replaced an a330 and normally it works great, but shooting airshows, at 12 fps and a shutter speed somewhere around 1/2000-1/2500 it will work for a while and then it'll fart and I'll get a bunch of images that have an unexposed spot at the top third of the pic. That was even the 2nd shutter. Might have been a cost/benefit or engineering decision. I have the same issue with my Ford Focus. My clutch has already been replaced twice (under warranty) but I still have issues. The car is 8 yrs old now so I'm going to just live with it for a few more years. Since then, I've added a used a99ii so I have a full-frame choice and tomorrow I get my first G lens, a used 70-200G2 which still cost more than 2 or 3 of my current lenses combined!
planepics
Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs
radiomantom wrote:
My primary camera is the A77 and it does a fantastic job for me. My primary lens on it is a Tamron 17-50 F2.8 and the sharpness of the images is amazing.
I have the same lens and it works nice on the a77. On my a99ii (newest addition) because it only uses the middle part of the sensor, I only get 18 MP vs 24 on the a77. Using a full-frame lens on the a99ii I get 42 MP.
jeryh
Loc: Oxfordshire UK
I still have the A77 mk 1. I still use it occasionally, with the 500mm Sony AF lens. For bird photography, it is spot on, but I always mount the combination on a tripod. I understand that the A77 mk2 was very much better, but I never managed to find one !
planepics
Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs
Just looked - B&H has one used copy for $799.95. If I didn't just spend $1,800 on a new lens, I might just get it :)
No problems at all. I think that the results that I get with my 77 and my Minolta 100 mm macro rival any out there.
I get great shots with several "old" Minolta lenses. It is my second system, my first being Nikon, but I am very happy with the A77.
I got a good deal from KEH.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.