I only do that with cars.

Hi Carl,

I will be buying one! I may sell my a350, since I will then use the a700 as my 2nd camera.

Jan

I will tell you after Tuesday. :D

I will not. I think it will be a great camera, but I feel fortunate to have the A700 at this point and I am very happy with it.
I am looking forward to hearing more about it though.

Ron

For me, it depends mostly on how the Flagship processes jpegs in general and if 1600 ISO is truly clean. I hoping we will see another generation's worth of progress from the A700 moving forward with the Flagship. In the month since my friend bought a D300 which has the same sensor as the A700, I'm thinking Sony needs to rethink their approach to how the camera handles the processing of jpegs. If the jpegs from the A900 look no better than the A700's, then no. (I know all about RAW and I'm not interested, thank you) I have a gut feeling that the processing in the A100 (which is decent IMO) was a remnant / carry over from Konica Minolta and their approach, and the A700 was Sony's real first attempt at it in the DSLR realm. I just hope they listen and learn. They sure got AF and flash metering quickly figured out!
This is really more than a very expensive camera body for me; it's also a new PC and also a new laptop for when I travel. These are going to be some very large files and my current computers are o.k. for the images coming out of the A700, but out of the question for files that are twice as big. Speaking of RAW, can you imagine how big those are going to be??
I can't see any other reasons why I would hesitate. Build and handling will be a dream like the A700. I absolutely don't want live-view, so that's a non-issue. Simply stun me with the images. I've been patient since 1999 and never uttered a bad word regarding KM or Sony, but this has got to be the one. FF is now established in the other two camps and "good enough" won't be good enough. I'm going to own a kick-butt FF DSLR by next summer. I hope it's a Sony.

I would like to get one right away, but I never, ever buy anything before reading reviews. If this camera is wicked awesome (as I hope it will be), I'll buy one. If the reviews are mixed, I'll buy an A700 to replace (or compliment) my KM 7D.

I would like to just say, "Yeah, gimme one of those," but the 24MP RAW files are also going to require I upgrade my computer (the 6MP files from the 7D are already choking my bare-minimum Power Mac G5 1.8GHz SP, circa 2005), so the total cost of the A900 for me will likely be double whatever Sony is asking. Ugh, I'm sweating just thinking about that credit card statement.

I am anxious to try out the new FF and will certainly be an early adopter.

You should be able to build a quad core machine using one the barebones kits from tigerdirect.com for $600 or less. A lot of kits come with everything you need. It wont be a Mac, but it will be a hell of a lot cheaper.

I just got my a700 in May this year and I find it a great camera. I am looking to buy better lenses for it. a900 will require really good glass for 24 MP. How much will that add to the price for someone who doesn't have already good lenses they can use with it? So, I will probably wait to see the next generation of a700 before buying anythng else ... unless the a900 reviews talk about a miracle camera ...
-----
Calin
"Time has no meaning, only life has."

Very curious.

Carl

I've barely learned to use my A700 and have a long way to go to get the most out of this camera. Plus my current lens assortment serves my hobby needs pretty well in terms of IQ, cost, size and weight. (Anything over $900 or 900 grams is off limits!) Last but not least, I like being married and don't enjoy my own cooking.

Andy

Image quality.

Unless Sony decides to market this thing for $4000, then price is the biggest factor. In other words, I won't be spending that kind of money on a new camera.

I will be purchasing one as soon as it's available from one of my favorite retailers. I have 2 or 3 major considerations when purchasing. Will it spend enough of it's life rented out to make it a good investment that way? I think it will definitely take care of itself. My other big two considerations are that it is FF, which to me is HUGE, and the last thing is IQ, and it will be more than I'll ever need.
I've already got a pelican case read for it to go on it's first rental trip :)

and the most important decision factor is my marriage. LOL! Maybe I will step up to the A700 replacement sometime next year.

All I can muster is .... LOL! (I know what you mean!)

Carl

I will be sticking with the A700 for now. I haven't even owned it a year yet, so it seems kind of silly to upgrade already.

I am interested in this 70-400mm lens that is supposedly coming out. I've been tempted to pull the trigger on a Tamron 200-500mm, but I am waiting to see what Sony is going to offer in September.

To be honest I'm unimpressed with what I have seen. I was looking for a stellar Hi-ISO performer, but they gave us a good studio camera instead. I don't do studio work, so I'm not impressed. Anyone that needs that type of resolution and has everything set up I'm sure will be loving this camera. Gone are the days of $7000 cameras hoorahhh!

What did look interesting was intelligent preview. People will say it's a fake live-view, but I think it's better in a way b/c it won't be draining the battery as heavily as liveview would. I mean they are pulling out 850 shots on one battery?!?! With LV that would've been cut in half.

The pixel pitch isnt much different than the A700, so I am just curious.

Carl

Though I find the live view fun to use on holiday or when i'm taking photos for pleasure with friends (and i normally use an Ixus for that) i do not find the live view of great help for professional use.
I believe the majority of users will work tethered to a computer if they need some viewing aid. Personally i cannot find of much use to look at a "live" small LCD, which will not have faithful colors and it will be a bit sluggish. I prefer the 100% view finder.
for studio work, tethered to a computer with calibrated monitors is the way to go. live view on a lcd, it is an approximate way of working that will not suite many photographers.
I understand that a tilting LCD can be useful, for those who shoot at events and people and need to put the camera far up above their head, but then for that kind of work another camera would be more suitable: smaller files and more space on the cards.
but that is just me.

as for expecting better noise performance, as carl said, it should have had at least equivalent noise of the a700. though on a double sized sensor there is much more electrons or photons moving around (or what ever they are), or it may warm up a little more while in use than a smaller sensor, that it is not as simple as 2+2= 4. something else is surely happening.
It could be some interference by the mirror mechanism, shutter or the Steady Shot device. those things my have an influence on noise. I remember the canon 5d having some banding noise problem if used with certain lenses at high iso. canon solved with a FW upgrade.
i believe, after seeing various sample and getting some feedback from carl, that at the time the cameras will be delivered and a proper raw converter will be available, the images will be much better.
though the first impression can leave a lot of bitter taste. it actually did to quite a few people.
maybe it would have been better to announce the camera without letting any reviewer to post any images until things will be ironed out. as canon and nikon do most of the times.
honestly, some of those high iso files, which I understood they are straight jpeg from the camera, looks a bit Kodak dcs alike. sort of digital vintage of an earlier era.

in any case i'm confident enough, that I have just ordered one.