Sony Alpha33, Alpha55, Alpha 560 and Alpha580 are now official. See the detailed coverage at:
- Details specs, price, pictures and availability
- New: Hands-on with the A55, A560 and the Zeiss 24mm f/2 ZA SSM
- The pellicle mirror explained
- Sony A55 review
- Sony A55 preview field report
Update: B&H are now taking pre-orders for the new Alpha 33, Alpha55 and Alpha 560 cameras.
Related posts:
10 Comments
iso 6400 same as alpha 900 iso400 my foot!
it’s worse than 550D
@ coolpux
“iso 6400 same as alpha 900 iso400 my foot!”
Who made the claim it was the same – the voices in your head? ;->
“it’s worse than 550D”
Says who? The preliminary reviews are jpeg only and look pretty good, in spite of Sony’s very average kit lens.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonyslta55/page15.asp
And the a33 costs $200 less than the 550D, the a55 costs $100 less, both have built-in image stabilization, both have phase-detect AF in video AND in high speed still shooting (10fps for the a55, matched only by the D3s and 1DIII), and both have auto-HDR modes and pano-stitching modes.
So what exactly are you whining about?
“Who made the claim it was the same – the voices in your head? ;->”
That was a very silly baseless rumor that was going around running up to the release of the a33/a55.
“Says who? The preliminary reviews are jpeg only and look pretty good, in spite of Sony’s very average kit lens.”
Except when you deviate from the base ISO, and then the 550D is in a whole other world of image quality from the a55s slushy heavily noise-reduced crapfest.
“So what exactly are you whining about?”
The fact that the 10fps needs to have an * trailing it is worth whining over (instead of viewfinder blackout it has viewfinder flashback. :O)
We’ll have to see the RAWs. A900 jpgs vs A55 jpgs already loose miserably if you pixel-peep. Though still A900 RAWs after ACR3 have amazing quality. So yet it’s to be seen how good the image actually is.
“instead of viewfinder blackout it has viewfinder flashback. :O” – what doesn’t change the fact that the A55 can most likely take twice as much photos per second as your camera do – and it’s all for so very little money!
phoblographer doesn’t even have anything on the 580, I wonder where they have been…
B&H now taking pre-0rders for the new Sony cams if anyone is interested:
A560:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/731660-REG/Sony_DSLR_A560_DSLR_A560_SLR_DIGITAL_CAMERA.html/BI/2446/KBID/3285
A33:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/731617-REG/Sony_SLT_A33_SLT_A33_SLR_DIGITAL_CAMERA.html/BI/2446/KBID/3285
A55:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/731596-REG/Sony_SLT_A55_SLT_A55_SLR_DIGITAL_CAMERA.html/BI/2446/KBID/3285
A55 and A33, two more cameras for “Umpa-Lumpas”
Try operating a camera of this size with fingers frozen in the snow!
Bullshit!
Two more cameras that are born dead beside the G1, G2, G10, H10, NX15, HX1 and others.
Manufacturers and designers must figure out what is the limit to downsize!
cnet is wrong – the A33/55 mirror is not a Pellice mirror. It’s regular, semi-transparent mirror, only more thin than that from standard DSLRs (thanks to the fact it doesn’t have to move doing continuous shooting).
Can anyone give me a place to figure out why I would go with the a55 or canon 60d or the nikon d7000 (or d3100). I am trying to find a great camera with the continuous AF for hd video.
well, one reason why A55 rules over 60D: Price with lens – 850$ vs 1400$ gives the difference of 550$. For the difference you can get a lens, for example Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 – and the set will give you much better quality photos than 60D does with Canon. (or if you’ll sell your kit on e-bay you can get excellent Sony 16-105mm, one of best zoom lenses out there)