Sony Alpha 100 Field Report
11/1/2006
Copyright by Klaus Schroiff
Introduction
Sometimes the end is the beginning of something new and the exit of Konica-Minolta (KM) from the camera market is such an example. Already working in a joint venture with KM Sony took over KM's complete camera-related business (inc. the servicing of KM legacy products) in early 2006. After half a year of silence and speculations Sony finally released the first products of the new Alpha system in August '06 with the Alpha 100 being the first (and so far the only) DSLR in the line-up. Interestingly "Alpha" was actually also a known trademark within the old KM world - the KM system was called "Dynax" in Europe, "Maxxum" in North America and "Alpha" in Japan. Anyway, the Sony Alpha 100 shares several similarities with the old KM 5D so it is, most likely, not really an exclusively Sony-designed camera but something that was already in development in the former KM labs. Consequently the camera is compatible to most of the old KM accessory - legacy Maxxum/Dynax/Alpha lenses are no problem to start with.
The Alpha 100 comes with a couple of strong selling arguments such as in-camera image stabilization, an anti-dust mechanism for the image sensor, 10mp and all packaged a bit below the 900€/US$ (MSRP) for the naked body - the street price should be about 10-20% lower than that by now. There´re also a couple of (basic) camera lens kits available but regarding the 10mp sensor it's probably a good idea to stay away from these kits because these lenses can hardly exploit the camera´s resolution potential.
Most of the lenses currently offered Sony lenses are "just" relabeled legacy designs from the KM era with slightly improved regarding their mechanical quality though. However, the most interesting news around the Sony Alpha system may be the release of new Zeiss AF lenses starting in October 2006 with the initial ones being the 85mm f/1.4 and 135mm f/1.8. The 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 (reduced image circle) and 24-70mm f/2.8 will follow in the first half of 2007. Interestingly 3 of these 4 Zeiss lenses are full frame variants which may give us a guidance to which format future Sony DSLRs are heading to. So the Essence of Carl-Zeiss is no longer Contax which left the camera arena in 2005 but Sony - certainly a smart marketing move regarding Sony's own non-existing history in the SLR market. The Zeiss lenses are designed in Germany and manufactured in Japan by Sony under Zeiss quality control guidance (similar to the old Contax days when most Zeiss lenses were also manufactured in Japan by Kyocera fabs). There'll be more Zeiss lenses to follow - we may speculate that some of the Carl-Zeiss AF lenses of the Contax N system see a revival in the process.
As hinted in the title this is a field report and not a formal test like for some other cameras presented here at Photozone. Well, the reason for this is that I´m traveling throughout Asia at the moment (August till January '07) to enjoy real photography again rather than shooting test targets. However, this is where the actual camera performance should show up anyway so it may be worthwhile to tell my story with the Sony Alpha. Historically I used primarily Canon (D)SLRs before enjoying short adventures on the Nikon and Olympus side of life (which I´m hoping to continue once Olympus will release a DSLR for us big boyz again). I was pretty attracted by the Sony´s feature set and the available lenses seemed Okay (I took the Sony 11-18mn f/4.5-5.6 DT, Minolta 17-35mm f/2.8-4, Minolta 50mm f/1.7(N), Minolta 85mm f/1.4 G and Minolta 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 APO) so I thought to give it a try beyond the formal scope of the test lab. Up to this stage I´ve taken the Sony up beyond 5000m in the Himalayas (on a 3 week trek) and down into the dusty plains and hills of Rajasthan, Hongkong and into Vietnam and China and I´m quite pleased with the Sony so far but let´s start with the details first ...
Sony Alpha 100 with AF 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 (kit lens) - photo courtesy by Sony
Handling
As already hinted above the Alpha 100 shares several design aspects with the old KM 5D so long-time Minolta users will not run into any major obstacles if deciding to join the new Sony club. However, the handling of today´s consumer grade DSLRs is largely identical so newcomers to the system should be able to feel home in a short amount of time.
Similar to Canon and unlike Nikon the main control dial is located behind the shutter release button. There´s no secondary control dial to control shutter speed and aperture independently but most will not miss this aspect - in manual mode you can switch between aperture and shutter speed via the exposure compensation button.
Unlike most of the competitors Sony decided to implement a mode dial to access the primary operation modes such as ISO, metering mode, AF mode, white balancing and others. As an effect the back of the camera isn´t overly crowded with buttons and you rarely have to access the main menu. However, if you change some of the more frequently used settings more often this approach is a little slower than a dedicated button. Generally I had no problems in the field.
Sony followed to current trend to skip a secondary display for the core data - all settings must be checked via the color display on the back which is no issue in my opinion because the display lits up instantly. The orientation of the displayed information gets automatically adjusted to landscape or portrait mode according to the current usage mode. By default the camera only shows the taken image after a shot - if you want to check more detailed information (the histogram) you can do so via the arrow buttons on the back. This works instantly. Thereafter the selected review mode remains active till the camera is switched off - unfortunately the camera does not remember the mode at the next startup for whatever reason but due to the high operation speed this is not a major issue even if you´ve a preference for histograms (like I have). Hopefully Sony will address this via a firmware update though. In review mode you can also enlarge portions of an image which may make sense if you took advantage of the image stabilizer to the max.
Another feature from the KM era is the eye-start AF which works via proximity sensors located just below the viewfinder. When looking through the finder they trigger the camera´s AF system. On paper this may sound like an interesting approach but you rarely have finalized your composition instantly so you will end up engaging the AF once more anyway. Besides the AF will also get triggered by any other close object like your camera bag or simply when carrying the camera loosely at your body. This is a somewhat annoying side effect (if you forgot to switch off the camera). Personally I preferred to disable the feature after the first few hours of use - the value-add seems just too marginal.
Sony claims a battery life of 750 images. In the field I found this statement to be a little too bold (as always with any performance spec). With activated Super-Steady-Shot, Anti-Dust and marginal flash usage I'm usually getting around 400 images per battery load - a quite typical value for a DSLR.
As to be expected there´re no major obstacles with the lenses. The lens rear caps are a bit cumbersome to attach and tend to fall off easily leaving the rear lens element vulnerable - this drove me nuts a several times actually. The camera is also performing some sort of pre-focusing when mounting a new lens (probably to reassure that the AF-screw is attached). I found this to be slightly annoying with non-IF lenses where the inner lens tube extends/retracts during focusing.
Build Quality
In terms of build quality Sony did a pretty decent job but not without a few quirks - all within the scope of a consumer grade camera naturally. The camera can´t compete with professional grade DSLRs here but within its class it feels quite a bit better than e.g. a Canon EOS 350D, on par with an Olympus E-330 and slight worse than a Nikon D70s/D80. The quality of the outer shell is very good thanks to relatively high quality plastics - maybe the rubberized but only slightly textured hand grip could feel a little better. The mount as well as the inner support cage is made of metal. The quality of the control rings and buttons is up to today´s common standards in this class. Unfortunately Sony decided to keep the mirror construction from the old KM 5D and this translates to a very hollow sound when the mirror flips up. This has no influence on the image quality whatsoever (the amount of mirror induced vibration remains modest) but it decreases the subjective quality perception quite a bit. Size-wise Sony did not follow the current trend of releasing miniature-DSLRs which is certainly good news for most of us. There's certainly a coolness or cuteness factor to dwarfish cameras but some went already a little beyond the edge in this respect.
The quality of the display is about the best that I´ve seen to date in a DSLR but the anti-glare coating is slightly prone to finger prints and smears so it is still a good idea to get a good quality protection foil for it. Nonetheless it is still no fun to read the display in bright sunlight.
The viewfinder provides a relatively large and bright image of a scene but there're certainly better implementations out there. Don't expect a similar experience like in the old film SLR days. The amount of information displayed in the viewfinder includes the usual suspects plus a shake scale for the Super-Steady-Shot (more on this later). Unfortunately the current ISO number is not displayed. Personally I had no problems reading the data but two of my trekking buddies (who also bought the Sony) struggled here when wearing their glasses. The viewfinder has a diopter adjustment though so most users should have no problems.
AF System
The AF system of the Sony is decent with a very good focus accuracy (much better than with the EOS 350D for instance), relatively decent AF tracking and generally good AF speed. The latter is highly dependent on the used lens. The kit zoom (AF 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6) offers an exceptionally high AF speed for instance whereas other zooms such as the Minolta AF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 or Sony 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DT focus extremely slow so if this is an important point in your book better check the specific camera-lens combination.
Most of the current lenses in the Sony line-up still depend on a screw-driven AF by the camera. Screw-driven AF lenses tend to produce some noise during operation so don´t expect the camera to be as silent as a typical Canon outfit for instance.
The latest designs such as the Sony AF 70-200mm f/2.8 SSM feature an in-lens ultrasonic AF drive ("Super-Sonic Motor") similar to Canon´s USM or Nikon´s SWM. This approach tends to produce faster AF results but I wasn´t able to have a look at this because the 70-200mm SSM wasn´t available at the time of this report. There´re no third-party lenses offering ultrasonic AF lenses for Sony at this stage.
Personally I´m not a lover of AF sensor arrays so I usually used the central AF sensor only - by using just one AF sensor you tend to have more control over what the camera is doing for you. Within this scope most of my shots were spot-on - also with the 85mm f/1.4G @ f/1.4 which is certainly a good benchmark for AF accuracy regarding its shallow depth-of-field at f/1.4. The Alpha has no true fine spot AF though (despite offering a "spot AF" option) - the AF sensor base is relatively broad and in a crowded scene it may find something closer than the object sharp in the center. Sometimes it also "sees through" a object like e.g. a fine tree branch. AF tracking is not a major strength nor weakness of the camera but it´ll do the job within certain limits of the specific camera-lens combination. In very low contrast scenes the AF struggled a bit to lock on but the competition isn´t substantially better here as well.
The camera offers a "direct manual focus" (DMF) AF mode which is similar functionality to Canon´s Full-Time-Manual (FTM) feature in their USM lenses. When DMF is activated the camera detaches the focus gear once it has achieved focus so the user is free to override the focus without any further action. Obviously this is only possible in single-shot AF mode and not during AF tracking. DMF is a mechanical operation is also noticeable acoustically.
Exposure System
Sony took (once more) advantage of KM´s proven (40 segment) honeycomb metering system. For most scenes the system proved to be reliable in the field without any significant freakouts except in a few critical scenes. In standard scenes the honeycomb system seems to have a slight tendency towards the dark side so you may compensate by +1/3 EV by default. In critical scenes you can switch either to center-weighted or spot metering for a better control over the exposure system. Naturally exposure compensation is possible at any time.
When shooting night scenes (>1 sec exposure time) the camera is performing some noise reduction (can be switched off). The camera is blocked for some seconds in this case - the duration is dependent on the length of the exposure (longer exposure = longer post-processing). The resulting image is pretty clean so it is a good idea to take advantage of the noise reduction here.
Personally I´m not overly into flash photography and I don´t carry a serious system flash. The build-in flash unit seems to do the job within its limits but don´t expect to get really good quality results from it (which is typical for direct flash usage without diffusor anyway). I experienced a couple of underexposed flash shots.
Super-Steady-Shot (Image Stabilization)
Similar to its Minolta predecessors the Alpha features an in-camera image stabilizer - according to the usual Sony nomenclature it is now called Super-Steady-Shot (SSS). It works by shifting the image sensor according to the measured shake of the camera. Sony claims to have improved the efficiency of the system up to 2-3.5 f-stops. In the field I was never really able to squeeze out 3.5 f-stops but 2 f-stops were usually easily possible - this is a little worse than modern lens-based stabilizer (which can give you a quite reliable 3 f-stops advantage) but then even 2 f-stops are already a strong selling argument because you don´t have to pay for the image stabilizer just once (with the camera) unlike the Canon and Nikon variants where just have to spend your bucks for it on a per lens basis. SSS has no negative effect on the potential image quality of the lens whereas Canon´s IS or Nikon´s VR works by a controlled decentering of a lens group which will, no matter how you look at it, result in a certain decrease in image quality (albeit low). A sensor-centric image stabilizer doesn´t suffer from this effect but on the downside there no direct effect of the image stabilization in the viewfinder (scene). Instead there´s a dedicated bar chart which provides a guidance in how far the stabilization system can handle your shake. The quality of the information is Ok but don´t expect it to provide a rock solid statement because releasing the shutter will produce more shake than indicated at the time you check it. SSS can be deactivated via a dedicated button but I didn´t see any reason to do so in the field except during tripod usage.
Image quality
The Alpha uses the same or a closely related 10mp sensor also found in the Nikon D200/D80 or the upcoming Pentax K10D. However, this doesn´t really mean that the image quality is identical to the Nikon because the in-camera image post-processing is different (also for the RAW files). All-in-all I would rate the pixel-to-pixel resolution at least as good as for the D200 - which is slightly lower than in Canon land (based on RAWs, not JPEGs).
The colors are more pleasing in my book compared to the Nikon which I always felt to be too greenish. The Sony (daylight) colors seem quite neutral with a slight tendency towards cooler tones. The standard saturation present in the RAW files is relatively high but not excessive - this is a little hard to tell though because the various RAW converters have different calibration profiles. In artificial light the auto white balancing doesn´t really produce great results but this is a quite common problem with today´s DSLR anyway and manual white balancing can save the day. JPEGs aren't really my style because the results tend to be less sharp combined with a rather low dynamic range compared to what you can get out of RAW files. However, Sony tried to make the best of it by offering DRO - Dynamic Range Optimization. JPEGs have a color depth of 8bit (per color) compared to 12bit in RAW files. DRO tries to get advantage of the extra headroom present in the RAW data in order to recover details in very dark or bright image portions. It is a strictly optional feature which comes in two strengths but if you want to really see a noticeable effect you should go for the more aggressive DRO+ variant. DRO may be hardware-supported but it can only take advantage on the RAW data from the sensor so it has no effect on RAW files.
Sensor noise is a frequently discussed aspect but often blown way out of portions. Nonetheless it needs to be mentioned that the Alpha is not low-noise DSLR - the current Canon DSLRs are certainly capable to produce quite a bit less noise and even the D200 has a slight edge here. At ISO 100 the images are free of noise and at ISO 200 the issue is only marginal. At ISO 400 it is already relatively easy to spot noise in uniform image portions such as out-of-focus blur - still not an issue for prints but pixel peepers may have a reason to complain here already. ISO 800 remains usable in some but not all situations (specifically those with lots of dark portions) whereas ISO 1600 should be generally avoided because lots of details are lost in the noise. At medium ISO settings I found the tonality to be quite coarse in shadow portions - even at ISO 400. This is quite disappointing for a modern DSLR. Nonetheless you should often be able to stay with low ISOs by taking advantage of the Super-Steady-Shot image stabilizer.
Anti-Dust System
One of the more interesting features of the camera is the new anti-dust system for the image sensor. Many long time DSLR users know the problem - sensor dust. When changing lenses it is inevitable that a minor degree of dust enters the mirror chamber and when releasing the shutter a subset of this dust will ultimately also find its way to the sensor filter surface. The dust will show up as faint blobs in images which naturally accumulate over time and it´s an annoying task to remove these traces via an imaging application. Cleaning the sensor yourself is possible but it´s not exactly a fun aspect to do so and there´ll be always some images affected before you become aware of the problem. In order to provide some protection Sony implemented two improvements - a special anti-static coating applied to the low-pass filter in front of the sensor and a mechanism to shake off dust by taking advantage of the image stabilizer. This is similar to Olympus´ well-proven anti-dust system but the shake frequency isn´t quite as high thus less efficient. Unlike Olympus the Alpha activates the anti-dust shaker when switching off the camera. You may debate whether this is smart or not but this way it has no negative side-effect on the startup time of the camera.
As mentioned above this is a field report written on my still ongoing trip throughout Asia. So far (after about 13 weeks and 3000 images) I´m pleased to report that none of my images show any traces of dust and that´s despite numerous lens exchange cycles. However, a friend of mine also took the Sony to a trekking tour but his camera suffered from a couple of dust spots during the journey (which were easy to remove). So while the anti-dust system seems to have improved the situation compared to conventional DSLRs without such a support system it is not the ultimate protection. It remains a good idea to point the camera downwards when exchanging lenses and switch off the camera thereafter to activate the anti-dust system. Taking some cleaning gear for rescue surgeries continues to be a required precaution with the Alpha 100.
Sample Images
This is a field report and I've a strict preference for RAW files. All samples that you can see below were processed via Adobe Lightroom Beta 4 - I simply can´t get used to manufacturer-supplied RAW converters. (Silkypix 3.0 seems to be a very attractive alternative as well - unlike Lightroom Silkypix can also process JPEGs).
Here´re a couple of comments about the used lenses:
Sony AF 11-18mm f/4.5-5.6 DT: Nicely build but not super sharp at the image borders. Also very prone to field curvature so manual focusing tends to yield in superior results.
Minolta AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4: Generally a very good lens. Unfortunately my sample suffered from a centering defect at large aperture settings. A little on the bulky side regarding its limited range on an APS-C DSLR.
Minolta AF 50mm f/1.7 (N): Very sharp lens from f/2.8 and up, less so at max. aperture where the borders tend to be a little soft.
Minolta AF 85mm f/1.4G: Big block of glass. Already very sharp when stopped down to f/2. Beautiful bokeh.
Minolta AF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 APO: Very compact and light-weight for such a lens. No significant CAs. Good but not great sharpness at close to medium focus distances, less so towards infinity and at 300mm.
Eventually I might add a couple of native JPEGs but personally I consider this to be as a waste of data and consequently quality potential.
| Focal Length |
12.0mm |
 |
| Width x Height |
2592 x 3872 pixel |
| Camera |
SONY DSLR-A100 |
| File size |
6.49Mbytes |
| Exposure data |
1/25s @ f/8.0 |
| ISO |
100 |
| Metering mode |
Multi-segment |
|
| Focal Length |
100.0mm |
 |
| Width x Height |
2592 x 3872 pixel |
| Camera |
SONY DSLR-A100 |
| File size |
8.36Mbytes |
| Exposure data |
1/320s @ f/4.5 |
| ISO |
400 |
| Metering mode |
Center weighted average |
|
| Focal Length |
85.0mm |
 |
| Width x Height |
2592 x 3872 pixel |
| Camera |
SONY DSLR-A100 |
| File size |
6.5Mbytes |
| Exposure data |
1/1250s @ f/1.4 |
| ISO |
400 |
| Metering mode |
Center weighted average |
|
| Focal Length |
85.0mm |
 |
| Width x Height |
2592 x 3872 pixel |
| Camera |
SONY DSLR-A100 |
| File size |
9.67Mbytes |
| Exposure data |
1/30s @ f/1.4 |
| ISO |
800 |
| Metering mode |
Multi-segment |
|
| Focal Length |
17.0mm |
 |
| Width x Height |
3872 x 2592 pixel |
| Camera |
SONY DSLR-A100 |
| File size |
10.01Mbytes |
| Exposure data |
1/320s @ f/11.0 |
| ISO |
100 |
| Metering mode |
Multi-segment |
|
| Focal Length |
50.0mm |
 |
| Width x Height |
2592 x 3872 pixel |
| Camera |
SONY DSLR-A100 |
| File size |
7.49Mbytes |
| Exposure data |
1/320s @ f/11.0 |
| ISO |
100 |
| Metering mode |
Multi-segment |
|
| Focal Length |
85.0mm |
 |
| Width x Height |
3872 x 2592 pixel |
| Camera |
SONY DSLR-A100 |
| File size |
9.11Mbytes |
| Exposure data |
1/400s @ f/5.6 |
| ISO |
100 |
| Metering mode |
Multi-segment |
|
| Focal Length |
17.0mm |
 |
| Width x Height |
2592 x 3872 pixel |
| Camera |
SONY DSLR-A100 |
| File size |
6.64Mbytes |
| Exposure data |
1/125s @ f/13.0 |
| ISO |
200 |
| Metering mode |
Multi-segment |
|
| Focal Length |
50.0mm |
 |
| Width x Height |
2592 x 3872 pixel |
| Camera |
SONY DSLR-A100 |
| File size |
4.55Mbytes |
| Exposure data |
1/320s @ f/5.6 |
| ISO |
100 |
| Metering mode |
Multi-segment |
|
| Focal Length |
85.0mm |
 |
| Width x Height |
2592 x 3872 pixel |
| Camera |
SONY DSLR-A100 |
| File size |
5.12Mbytes |
| Exposure data |
1/320s @ f/1.4 |
| ISO |
200 |
| Metering mode |
Center weighted average |
|
| Focal Length |
250.0mm |
 |
| Width x Height |
3872 x 2592 pixel |
| Camera |
SONY DSLR-A100 |
| File size |
4.09Mbytes |
| Exposure data |
1/250s @ f/5.6 |
| ISO |
200 |
| Metering mode |
Multi-segment |
|
| Focal Length |
160.0mm |
 |
| Width x Height |
3872 x 2592 pixel |
| Camera |
SONY DSLR-A100 |
| File size |
9.55Mbytes |
| Exposure data |
1/160s @ f/10.0 |
| ISO |
200 |
| Metering mode |
Multi-segment |
|
| Focal Length |
50.0mm |
 |
| Width x Height |
3872 x 2592 pixel |
| Camera |
SONY DSLR-A100 |
| File size |
7.79Mbytes |
| Exposure data |
1/20s @ f/2.2 |
| ISO |
400 |
| Metering mode |
Spot |
|
| Focal Length |
150.0mm |
 |
| Width x Height |
3872 x 2592 pixel |
| Camera |
SONY DSLR-A100 |
| File size |
5.31Mbytes |
| Exposure data |
1/800s @ f/5.6 |
| ISO |
100 |
| Metering mode |
Multi-segment |
|
| Focal Length |
100.0mm |
 |
| Width x Height |
3872 x 2592 pixel |
| Camera |
SONY DSLR-A100 |
| File size |
7.32Mbytes |
| Exposure data |
1/40s @ f/6.3 |
| ISO |
800 |
| Metering mode |
Multi-segment |
|
| Focal Length |
22.0mm |
 |
| Width x Height |
3872 x 2592 pixel |
| Camera |
SONY DSLR-A100 |
| File size |
5.53Mbytes |
| Exposure data |
10.0s @ f/13.0 |
| ISO |
100 |
| Metering mode |
Multi-segment |
|
| Focal Length |
50.0mm |
 |
| Width x Height |
2592 x 3872 pixel |
| Camera |
SONY DSLR-A100 |
| File size |
9.07Mbytes |
| Exposure data |
1/25s @ f/5.6 |
| ISO |
400 |
| Metering mode |
Multi-segment |
|
| Focal Length |
50.0mm |
 |
| Width x Height |
3872 x 2592 pixel |
| Camera |
SONY DSLR-A100 |
| File size |
5.46Mbytes |
| Exposure data |
1/160s @ f/11.0 |
| ISO |
100 |
| Metering mode |
Center weighted average |
|
If you want to check out some (web-sized) further images beyond the provided samples you may check out my travel blog which I´m updating with new photos from my tour about every two week or so.
Specifications
Well, I will not bore you with another feature list here. If you want to go into the camera specs of the Sony Alpha simply check out the information on the Sony homepage.
Verdict
So far I enjoyed using the camera and the quality of the results are about in line with my expectations of a modern consumer-class DSLR. The camera worked flawlessly during the first months of half-year journey and I´m confident that it´ll survive the rest. Some may prefer to have an extra kick in terms of build quality (specifically regarding the shutter sound) but then I had no reliability problems whatsoever to date. An obvious strength of the camera is the build-in image stabilizer which helped in several situations especially when working with tele lenses. The AF is both accurate and responsive - at least with fast focusing lenses. Sensor noise is a slight weakness in comparison to the rest of the gang and the tonality could also be somewhat smoother in shadow areas in medium to high ISO image. The amount of details is pretty impressive though as is the color reproduction quality.
As of today the primary weakness of Sony Alpha system is lack of a critical mass of system lenses and no alternative below and beyond the Alpha 100. Most of the currently available lenses are old Minolta designs or even relabeled Tamron lenses. Even worse Sony decided to abandon some of the more interesting Minolta lenses, especially most of the APO and G series lenses which were popular among prosumers. Eventually new Zeiss or Sony lenses will probably fill the gaps but this will take time and regarding the strong competition time is a rather precious good. Naturally you will find some alternatives in the third party arena or bid for the old Minolta lenses over at eBay (which is what I did) but this is only a work around for the real stuff. On the upside Sony didn´t just change the brand name on the lenses but introduced a new mechanical design with a higher (subjective) quality perception compared to the older Minolta variants.
Regarding the perspective of the system I have no doubts that they´re here to stay. Sony isn´t exactly a niche player and their marketing-, production- and distribution power in the mass market may be only second to Canon in this market - certainly a worry some situation for the other players who are also mostly dependent on Sony image sensors (...). I can surely recommend the Sony Alpha 100 to the average Joe out there. Prosumers and more so professionals should probably wait and see till there´re more cameras and system accessories available
