What is wrong with these Photos ?

BADGER.BRAD

BADGER.BRAD

Messages
3,737
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello all,

I took my camera out today on a dog walk taking in a historical part of my village, I had great fun walking up the stream taking many photos. When I got back not one of them was even o.k, The camera I was using was a Sony A6000. Since buying this camera (new) I have been nothing but disappointed with it's performance even my now broken 2MP 2003 Kodak point and shoot had a better success rate. After this I did a factory reset and even took the UV filter off in case this was having some affect. Still the photos were naff seeming unsharp and very muted in anything but very bright light plus dynamic range seem no better than my old cameras. Is it just the fact that I need to use a PC rather than images straight from camera ( I'm not very keen on that ) is it possible I just have a dud ? Here are few photos I took after the reset, What would you say was wrong with them ? I have made no effort in composition as it was image quality I was looking for and the camera was set on auto to do it's own thing. To my eye they are not very sharp, colours are off and exposure is a bit on the low side.

how.JPGcar.JPGs.jpg
 
Last edited:
The only difference I can see in the car shots is the Sony has exposed a bit brighter. Perhaps the white balance is slightly different between the two.
The others look fine to me too. The top one maybe a touch noisy from high iso and slightly under exposed.
The one of the woman looks ok..

Obviously cant see full res images, but they look fine for what they are to me.
 
Setting it to auto means you are letting the camera choose where to focus and what it thinks is important i.e. aperture, shutter speed, ISO, and this may vary on the different cameras. I think cameras often choose the nearest point to focus, but that may not be the same in each of your photos.

If it is not very bright, it will probably go to the maximum aperture (do both lenses have equally wide aperture?) Wider aperture means narrower depth of field which will change how much is sharp. Perhaps one would go to a higher ISO than another?

Looking at the two cars, the Sony appears to be a wider angle lens than the Kodak (the background seems further away and smaller) .

The Kodak does appear a bit more saturated.

To me it looks like you probably just need better light.
 
The light was not fantastic I have to admit ! I've never been happy with the Sony, When I brought it ( approx 2 years ago) I was expecting a clear quality difference from my cheap second hand point and shoots which it never really delivered. Because of the 20 times cost ( and I'm a skinflint) the camera just annoys me more than giving me pleasure. Maybe I should just admit defeat and move it on. The Kodak only has a really small sensor so depth of field is not really controllable, The Sony has a much bigger sensor so aperture changes have more affect.
 
Last edited:
BADGER.BRAD said:
The light was not fantastic I have to admit ! I've never been happy with the Sony, When I brought it ( approx 2 years ago) I was expecting a clear quality difference from my cheap second hand point and shoots which it never really delivered. Because of the 20 times cost ( and I'm a skinflint) the camera just anoys me more than giving me pleasure. Maybe I should just admit defeat and move it on. The kodak only has a really small sensor so depth of field is not really controllable, The Sony has a much bigger sensor so aperture changes have more affect.
Click to expand...

My Micro Four Thirds cameras are a clear step up from a point and shoot and I'm sure the APS-C A6000 is too but you've posted numerous posts about issues with this camera and you've had it quite a while now so I honestly think it's time for you to do one of the following...

Give up and sell it and be happy with your point and shoot or phone or really throw yourself into this and commit to taking advice and really trying to get the most out of the A6000.
 
I'm not sure whether you are really struggling with it or just not taking nice photos in nice conditions with it.

Yes, the A6000 doesn't have the best high ISO or the best AF but it's a capable camera really. My boy has got some good (for a 15 year old) photos from his & I'm not sure how it compares with my original A7 but I do know they are about the same age technically. Everything from the waterfall & more recent plus all the Milky Way shots are with an A6000 - https://www.instagram.com/klratcliffe1811/
 
Sorry to say but these photos don't really prove anything.
A6000 is incredibly capable and you'd benefit from learning how to use in non-auto modes.
If you plan on only using fully automatic mode then something like latest iPhone or Google pixel phones will do better job because all computational photography algorithms in them are designed with this in mind.
The automatic modes in most of these types of cameras are very basic in comparison to a smart phone and won't really get you very far because they are designed to be mostly used in manual or semi-automatic modes.
 
LeeRatters said:
I'm not sure whether you are really struggling with it or just not taking nice photos in nice conditions with it.

Yes, the A6000 doesn't have the best high ISO or the best AF but it's a capable camera really. My boy has got some good (for a 15 year old) photos from his & I'm not sure how it compares with my original A7 but I do know they are about the same age technically. Everything from the waterfall & more recent plus all the Milky Way shots are with an A6000 - https://www.instagram.com/klratcliffe1811/
Click to expand...

A7 isn't actually huge lot better A6000. The sensor in A7 is actually from the even older Sony A99 which I also owned. The sensor in A6000 is one generation ahead so A7 only had about half a stop advantage over A6000.
I actually briefly moved from A7 to A6000 myself.
 
nandbytes said:
A7 isn't actually huge lot better A6000. The sensor in A7 is actually from the even older Sony A99 which I also owned. The sensor in A6000 is one generation ahead so A7 only had about half a stop advantage over A6000.
I actually briefly moved from A7 to A6000 myself.
Click to expand...

Thought so. That's sort of what I was getting at. If I can do pretty well (I think hope) with an A7 the A6000 shouldn't really be too far behind it!
 
I have recently bought the Sony A6600 and I am getting excellent results. I normally used to use a FF Canon 5D4. I do not just blindly use auto but use experience gained over many years. I also watched a You Tube on how to set up and get the best form this camera all of which helped. I was recently out on a shoot with another convert who changed from Nikon to Sony (he went for a FF though) but he gave me a few more useful tips.

Dave
 
I had an a6000 (with kit 16-50) for about 4 years as my walkabout camera alongside D800 and D500
Always shot raw.
IQ perfectly fine printed up to A3 - had a couple of BPE acceptances. Unfortunately, I really did not enjoy the user experience so sold it on.

If you can't get decent IQ then, IMHO, you're not using it optimally - sorry if this sounds harsh but I think it's probably true.
 
Last edited:
BADGER.BRAD said:
The light was not fantastic I have to admit ! I've never been happy with the Sony, When I brought it ( approx 2 years ago) I was expecting a clear quality difference from my cheap second hand point and shoots which it never really delivered. Because of the 20 times cost ( and I'm a skinflint) the camera just anoys me more than giving me pleasure. Maybe I should just admit defeat and move it on. The kodak only has a really small sensor so depth of field is not really controllable, The Sony has a much bigger sensor so aperture changes have more affect.
Click to expand...

You’ve made several posts on here about your disappointment with the Sony so my advice would be to sell it and move on. No point having something that you don’t like using.
 
Thanks for your replies everyone, I don't usually use this camera in auto it was just as a comparison to my second hand £20 camera. Most of the time use this camera in AP and sometimes Manual depending on what I'm trying to achieve. I brought it originally to get away from buying film and having an improvement in quality and flexibility over my basic pocket cameras.
Like you yzfmike I don't like the user experience I think I may have done better by going for an DSLR but in the price range they all seem very plasticy ( is that a word) I was looking for more of a film camera experience with something that felt quite solid. You are most likely right with your last statement as well ! I was expecting good results straight from camera rather than have to use a PC to get it right.

I am more than happy to take advise on how to get this camera to provide good results reliably Alan I would rather do that than lose money on my investment. So anyone that can provide some incite please do.
 
Hi,

If it is possible and the restrictions are lifted a bit, perhaps arrange a meet with fellow sony users in an area with some different things to shoot. Then go out and try some different settings to see if you can get the photo you want.
I assume there is a raw capture.. might be worth putting that on to try, lower iso if you can so if you go out and have sunny weather you should get some nicer results. If you went with the others you can compare shots and auto and which settings to get the sort of pics you want. Also if it is the camera being a dud, you should be able to get help / confirmation from them...
However, as has been posted, if it is not doing what you need, chop and change (especially if you haven't invested in lenses).

Also, if the local camera shop is open and has many models, go and handle them, see which you like the best, a target to save for then...
 
Man joins photography forum to ask why his pictures are rubbish; thinks it’s his camera. gets loads of advice which he continues to ignore.

4 years later, asks why his pictures are still rubbish, still blaming his camera.

I think some people are beyond advice.
 
Camera set on AUTO, theres your problem - you let the camera decide on shutter speed aperture and ISO, not what I would have done :)

Maybe try using manula settings see where you are then ??

Les :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
woof woof said:
My Micro Four Thirds cameras are a clear step up from a point and shoot and I'm sure the APS-C A6000 is too but you've posted numerous posts about issues with this camera and you've had it quite a while now so I honestly think it's time for you to do one of the following...

Give up and sell it and be happy with your point and shoot or phone or really throw yourself into this and commit to taking advice and really trying to get the most out of the A6000.
Click to expand...

Although he would be giving someone else a problem, if it is faulty.
 
Lez325 said:
Camera set on AUTO, theres your problem - you let the camera decide on shutter speed aperture and ISO, not what I would have done :)

Maybe try using manula settings see where you are then ??

Les :)
Click to expand...

Doesn’t Martin Par use ‘P’ mode mostly? Appreciate that there are plenty of occasions that aperture or shutter priority modes are needed, but for shots as in the OP auto mode will fine. Having said that, the op complains about underexposure. The shot of the car looks like the Sony is slightly brighter than the Kodak. It will also be difficult to judge sharpness without full size images taken in a controlled manner. Are the images raw? That will make them look ‘flat’.
 
Rapscallion said:
Doesn’t Martin Par use ‘P’ mode mostly? Appreciate that there are plenty of occasions that aperture or shutter priority modes are needed, but for shots as in the OP auto mode will fine. Having said that, the op complains about underexposure. The shot of the car looks like the Sony is slightly brighter than the Kodak. It will also be difficult to judge sharpness without full size images taken in a controlled manner. Are the images raw? That will make them look ‘flat’.
Click to expand...


Hi Phil, I have no idea what mode Martin Par uses :) But fully auto ? the Camera decided what settings to use - I have no idea if they were shot in RAW or Jpg

I don't think for a second the camera is faulty - user error most likely and to quote @Phil V

Man joins photography forum to ask why his pictures are rubbish; thinks it’s his camera. gets loads of advice which he continues to ignore.

4 years later, asks why his pictures are still rubbish, still blaming his camera.

I think some people are beyond advice.

Les :)
 
May be and probably is a stupid question, are you shooting in jpeg or RAW and what processing software are you using ?
 
Don't see the point of P mode, as you can still choose ISO and focus point, why not pick AV and have the option of choosing an aperture? :thinking:
 
I use to use Full Auto on my camera and thought the camera is wrong as images were not sharp or in focus, then I was told to try other settings. I now shoot in Aperture mode and it's a breeze, so get out of using full auto and try another setting and you might well end up being very happy with the images.
 
You can pick an aperture in P mode (and even S...) - just shift away from the suggested settings until you get where you want to be. All 3 or the semi automatic settings do (basically) the same thing, the only real difference is that in aperture or shutter speed priority, the camera defaults to the last user set aperture/shutter speed while P mode suggests an initial setting from which the user can deviate should he/she want to.
 
Besides operator influence, I think there are two things at play here:-

  1. The Sony's metering is different to the Kodak, and no attempt has been made/tried to equalise these (do we know the current metering mode for the Sony??)
  2. The Kodak might produce punchy JPEGs out the box than the Sony

My thoughts are that the OP needs to take several shots of the same scene (in the same lighting conditions) applying different exposure compensation settings, and then repeat this using different JPEG settings within the camera. I appreciate that this is a tedious exercise but it will (eventually) determine whether the Sony is capable of generating images that the OP is happy with.

If he's not, then time to move the camera on - and perhaps a Fujifilm camera with its more extensive JPEG film simulations might be a better starting point - if he's happy with an image, then happy days!
 
Nod said:
You can pick an aperture in P mode (and even S...) - just shift away from the suggested settings until you get where you want to be. All 3 or the semi automatic settings do (basically) the same thing, the only real difference is that in aperture or shutter speed priority, the camera defaults to the last user set aperture/shutter speed while P mode suggests an initial setting from which the user can deviate should he/she want to.
Click to expand...

When in P mode on my Fuji XF10 Canon G7X and Nikon D3300 I can't pick an aperture. Maybe it is possible on some cameras.
 
I know you can on some D3??? bodies if they're set up to do so, just as it is on my baby X Fujis.
 
Lez325 said:
Hi Phil, I have no idea what mode Martin Par uses :) But fully auto ? the Camera decided what settings to use - I have no idea if they were shot in RAW or Jpg

I don't think for a second the camera is faulty - user error most likely and to quote @Phil V

Man joins photography forum to ask why his pictures are rubbish; thinks it’s his camera. gets loads of advice which he continues to ignore.

4 years later, asks why his pictures are still rubbish, still blaming his camera.

I think some people are beyond advice.

Les :)
Click to expand...
Totally agree that 99.9% of camera problems are user related!
 
It is a waste of time comparing image between cameras using them in point and shoot mode.

Some of your problem in the shots is choosing viewpoint and tending to shoot at the wide end of the 16-50 zoom. This emphasises geometric and viewpoint distortions. Your framing also leaves quite a lot to be desired. The brightness and colour of an image can easily be adjusted to taste in just about any basic software.
Sharpness depends on shutter speed, motion of the subject, hand steadiness. and focus on choice of focus point. and amount in focus on. aperture.
If you want your images to improve you must be prepared to put in some learning time and practice.

The a6000 is a very capable camera. it is certainly not to blame for any shortcomings in your results.
However if you are happy using the old Kodak and do not want to put in the time to learn, either continue using the Kodak or perhaps a phone.

how-A.jpgs-A.jpg
 
Quebec Panorama.co use The A600 camera fitted with a Samyang 7.5mm fisheye lens for use by all their Professional photographers for the 360x180 VR photography
and have done numerous tests of other lens and body combinations. you will find loads of examples here.
However they do replace the usual Sony Plastic lens mount with a metal one. https://www.amazon.co.uk/TOUGH-Mount-Fotodiox-Pro-mount/dp/B00STSBYXC
Which is not a bad idea for a heavily used camera.
You can find examples and details here https://quebecpanorama.com/en/kits/view/rokinon-7.5mm-for-sony-sony-a6000
 
BADGER.BRAD said:
Thanks for your replies everyone, I don't usually use this camera in auto it was just as a comparison to my second hand £20 camera. Most of the time use this camera in AP and sometimes Manual depending on what I'm trying to achieve. I brought it originally to get away from buying film and having an improvement in quality and flexibility over my basic pocket cameras.
Like you yzfmike I don't like the user experience I think I may have done better by going for an DSLR but in the price range they all seem very plasticy ( is that a word) I was looking for more of a film camera experience with something that felt quite solid. You are most likely right with your last statement as well ! I was expecting good results straight from camera rather than have to use a PC to get it right.

I am more than happy to take advise on how to get this camera to provide good results reliably Alan I would rather do that than lose money on my investment. So anyone that can provide some incite please do.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that a DSLR will be a vastly different experience offering any real improvements. I've never had an A6000 but I believe it's a capable camera and very possibly better than any DSLR I've owned and (contentious I know...) better than any film+camera I've ever used. So I don't see swapping kit as the way forward. I think it'd be better to get to grips with the A6000 and I do think there are several ways forward with the A6000.

You could watch beginner help videos on Youtube as there's bound to be some that'll help as just about everything seems to be available on Youtube. Or you could decide on a way to move forward by yourself. For example you could commit to JPEGs, dive into the menu and set the various options for contrast, colour, sharpening and the like to your taste or you could shoot raw and process your pictures on your pc. That's what I do but I do realise this isn't for everyone.

I think you do need to at least in part understand how the camera meters and the basics of focusing, aperture, shutter speed and ISO, the limits of dynamic range and the effect light and shade and the positioning of your subject have. I think it's also important to really see what you are going to take a picture of and think about composition, perspective, camera to subject distance, what will be your main interest and point of focus, how it is framed, the relationships between things in the frame, and try and visualise how the final picture will look and how you want it to look but don't expect miracles as if the light is dead and flat and the subject not particularly inspiring you could just end up with a flat uninteresting picture. Such is life.

With digital it's relatively easy to practice and take pictures and change things and do it all over again so getting to grips with the hardware and how to use it and what settings suit you best should hopefully be just a matter of time and practice. I think having a mirrorless camera should make this easier for you as you can see in the VF or on the screen what the picture will look like before you press the shutter button so seeing the effect changing settings will have should be visible in real time.

Personally I'd start with evaluative metering but changing to spot as appropriate, one focus point but moving it about the frame to place it on your main point of interest and aperture priority with auto ISO if possible as that'll be one less thing to think about, and staying between the aperture being wide open and maybe something like f8. And then I'd take a lot of pictures, look at them on the pc and think about changes I'd make and do it all again.
 
Thanks everyone for your input, much appreciated. I don't usually use auto mode I normally use Aperture or shutter priority and occasionally full manual, as I'm very limited for time and am usually doing other things/hobbies ( far too many of them) at the same time as photography and have to admit I don't spend hours setting up my shots and just photograph interesting things I come across doing the other things. with the Sony I just seem to have a low success/keeper rate in comparison to my other cameras the images appear very flat the colours are pale and they never appear very sharp.That said I do have some shots from it that I am very pleased with, mainly sunny day shots. So the camera is very capable in the right conditions. I normally shoot .JPEG only mode and don't do a lot of processing ( hating computers from a previous life) I either use Gimp or Shotwell just as a quick touch up but would prefer not to have to involve computers ( partly down to limited time)

jonbeeza said:
Although he would be giving someone else a problem, if it is faulty.
Click to expand...

That's exactly my worry, I would hate to give someone else problems !

Lez325 said:
Man joins photography forum to ask why his pictures are rubbish; thinks it’s his camera. gets loads of advice which he continues to ignore.

4 years later, asks why his pictures are still rubbish, still blaming his camera.

I think some people are beyond advice.
Click to expand...

Don't listen to Phil too much, I've only had the camera a max of two years ( it's spent most of that in a cupboard) and Phil took a disliking to me as soon as I entered the forum with my late fathers film camera collection asking for advise ( A great welcome !) I have him blocked so don't see his comments anymore ! I do get plenty of shots I'm really happy with but just not with this camera. Maybe I expect too much straight from camera ,sort of expecting 20x cost to equate to big increase in technical quality of the image !


Mr Perceptive said:
My thoughts are that the OP needs to take several shots of the same scene (in the same lighting conditions) applying different exposure compensation settings, and then repeat this
using different JPEG settings within the camera. I appreciate that this is a tedious exercise but it will (eventually) determine whether the Sony is capable of generating images that the OP is happy with.
Click to expand...

That sounds like a great plan, thanks for the advise. I have a bit of spare time tonight and will have a go in the garden.
 
Last edited:
BADGER.BRAD said:
Don't listen to Phil too much, I've only had the camera a max of two years ( it's spent most of that in a cupboard) and Phil took a disliking to me as soon as I entered the forum with my late fathers film camera collection asking for advise ( A great welcome !) I have him blocked so don't see his comments anymore ! I do get plenty of shots I'm really happy with but just not with this camera. Maybe I expect too much straight from camera ,sort of expecting 20x cost to equate to big increase in technical quality of the image !
Click to expand...

Ah I see- you 2 have some history :(

I use Sony and have never had any issues and always and I do mean always shoot in manual - If you lived closer then I could maybe offer some pointers ???

Les :)
 
Lez325 said:
Ah I see- you 2 have some history :(

I use Sony and have never had any issues and always and I do mean always shoot in manual - If you lived closer then I could maybe offer some pointers ???

Les :)
Click to expand...
He’d like you to believe his revisionism.
The truth though; that’s a different tale.
When he joined and was having trouble with incompatible gear, I advised what I always advise. To concentrate on picture taking rather than trying to make things work that he didn’t have the knowledge for.

He ignored my advice but there was never a crossed word - till last week when I pulled him up for describing everyone available to go to the bank during the daytime as ‘dole dossers’.

He put me on ignore at that point. We have no ‘history’ I’ve largely ignored his ramblings the last 4 years, during which period I’ve continued to help others and he’s learned precisely nothing.

If it was possible to go back to his first post, the evidence would be there, there is obviously evidence of last weeks interaction, where he was an utter prig but then tried to play the victim.

Of course you shouldn’t have needed that explanation. It should be obvious that if he has me on ignore but continues to make accusations I can’t defend directly he’s what we’d generally describe as a bully.
 
Phil V said:
He’d like you to believe his revisionism.
The truth though; that’s a different tale.
When he joined and was having trouble with incompatible gear, I advised what I always advise. To concentrate on picture taking rather than trying to make things work that he didn’t have the knowledge for.

He ignored my advice but there was never a crossed word - till last week when I pulled him up for describing everyone available to go to the bank during the daytime as ‘dole dossers’.

He put me on ignore at that point. We have no ‘history’ I’ve largely ignored his ramblings the last 4 years, during which period I’ve continued to help others and he’s learned precisely nothing.

If it was possible to go back to his first post, the evidence would be there, there is obviously evidence of last weeks interaction, where he was an utter prig but then tried to play the victim.

Of course you shouldn’t have needed that explanation. It should be obvious that if he has me on ignore but continues to make accusations I can’t defend directly he’s what we’d generally describe as a bully.
Click to expand...


I obviously don't know whats going on between you guys- I appologise if I have it wrong Phil- we have never had any issues between us and I really do not wish to fall out with you or anyone come to that or end up on your ignore list- I have always found you to very knowledgeable in all things photography.

If advice was offered and rejected, then not a lot more to be said

Les :)
 
I've been using my other cameras lately and I have found two things that I miss about the Sony which are not impossible to live without but do make using it a little easier, The articulating screen and The EVF. Using a flat unmovable screen sometimes at certain angles is hard to frame your photo and although I don't really like the EVF in bright sunlight it is easier to see. I have also found a few comments that seem to say exactly what I think of the .jpeg picture quality of the Sony but it does seem fixable ! Here is one comment on another forum.

I know that the default JPEG color is awful. Muted, pale and dull. Is there a way to set the relevant parameters (colors, saturation, contrast etc) in order to achieve nicer, warmer tones?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top