The Amazing Sony A1/A7/A9/APS-C & Anything else welcome Mega Thread!

Messages
636
Name
Lee
Edit My Images
Yes
Some positive news it seems from Boris' roadmap out of lockdown statement just now. From 29th March the stay at home rule ends and we'll be able to travel outside local areas from 29th March without needing a reason or getting fined, although there will still be encouragement to stay local. So we should be able to brush away the cobwebs on our cameras and lenses in just over 4 weeks. Non essential shops opening April 12th, so any camera shops will presumably reopen.
 
Messages
1,332
Name
Malcolm
Edit My Images
Yes
Some positive news it seems from Boris' roadmap out of lockdown statement just now. From 29th March the stay at home rule ends and we'll be able to travel outside local areas from 29th March without needing a reason or getting fined, although there will still be encouragement to stay local. So we should be able to brush away the cobwebs on our cameras and lenses in just over 4 weeks. Non essential shops opening April 12th, so any camera shops will presumably reopen.

Problem is - March 29th is still 5 weeks away! :confused:
 
Messages
1,849
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
Yes
Cool
Did you have it tracking her eye or head?
I didn't even know you could choose. Eye Af was on so it would be attempting to get her eye but it mostly latches on to her head. I must try to get her name tag sorted out as that is a bit of a magnet for Af systems with the shiny silver on the black fur
 
Messages
18,261
Edit My Images
No
Looks nice and sharp on here, but soft when clicking through to Flickr? Great detail though, doesn't half show how much the moon has been pounded.
Thanks. That's odd, looks sharper on Flickr to me, as is always the case when posting to TP.
 
OP
woof woof
Messages
26,318
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Some positive news it seems from Boris' roadmap out of lockdown statement just now. From 29th March the stay at home rule ends and we'll be able to travel outside local areas from 29th March without needing a reason or getting fined, although there will still be encouragement to stay local. So we should be able to brush away the cobwebs on our cameras and lenses in just over 4 weeks. Non essential shops opening April 12th, so any camera shops will presumably reopen.
Unfortunately for me life is going in another direction and even once lockdown is lifted I can't see my life returning to what it was even just before c19 as I just can't get help at home now and will very probably be largely tied to the house with trips out being infrequent and limited to a couple of hours at most for the foreseeable. Looks like my "photography" will be very limited now, to the house and garden, the odd couple of hours out and maybe a holiday every two or three years if I can get someone in at home.
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,622
Name
Lee
Edit My Images
Yes
Unfortunately for me life is going in another direction and even once lockdown is lifted I can't see my life returning to what it was even just before c19 as I just can't get help at home now and will very probably be largely tied to the house with trips out being infrequent and limited to a couple of hours at most for the foreseeable. Looks like my "photography" will be very limited now, to the house and garden, the odd couple of hours out and maybe a holiday every two or three years if I can get someone in at home.
Have you got the space for a table top type 'studio' Alan?
 
OP
woof woof
Messages
26,318
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Have you got the space for a table top type 'studio' Alan?
I'll see how things go but still life scene type stuff has never really grabbed me. The appeal has always been to take pictures of places and things while I'm out and about, scenes, trees, leaves and flowers and that sort of thing. I do like taking pictures of the flowers and plants in the house and garden so that's something I can and will still do.
 
Messages
6,069
Name
Dan
Edit My Images
No
Thanks, this is an example of what I mean. On the top is the image processed to look right on my Macbook (using Color Fidelity as recommended by @dancook), and on the bottom is how I have to process it to look right on my iphone (i.e. to look the same as the top looks on Macbook). On my Macbook the bottom looks far too magenta, but on my iPhone the top looks too green :banghead:

FYI the bricks in real life are more of an orangey red.



A9_00387
by TDG-77, on Flickr

A9_00387 iphone
by TDG-77, on Flickr
I find the first image so much more pleasing to view than the second, the second is an assault on my eyes :D
 
OP
woof woof
Messages
26,318
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
I have no idea and no opinion on the FX3. Is it a good thing? I dunno :D



Is anyone interested? Is it a good price? And just out of interest, is it a good thing?
 
Messages
1,846
Edit My Images
No
I have no idea and no opinion on the FX3. Is it a good thing? I dunno :D



Is anyone interested? And just out of interest, is is a good thing?
Looks like it's designed with drones in mind, and partly as a replacement to the A7S.
 
Messages
18,261
Edit My Images
No
I find the first image so much more pleasing to view than the second, the second is an assault on my eyes :D
Agreed. The first is a game changer.
The second looks like magenta hell on my Mac ;) I've actually just brought my iPad home from work and the iPad is far closer to my Mac in terms of colour so it would appear it's the phone that's definitely off. Bloody Apple :LOL:
 
Messages
18,261
Edit My Images
No
Wanna see some ISO handling ? :D

static-assets-upload15862537099998067469.png

The indoor ones impress me more as high ISO is not the sole determining factor of noise, quality of light is also key. Not sure why it says ISO 65535 on the EXIF rather than 100,000?

Strangely I think I prefer the picture without using Topaz. Obviously difficult to tell with the size of the images on Flickr but there's not that much difference in overall noise but after Topaz the noise looks more 'mushy' rather than a nice fine grain.
 
Messages
6,069
Name
Dan
Edit My Images
No
View attachment 309874

The indoor ones impress me more as high ISO is not the sole determining factor of noise, quality of light is also key. Not sure why it says ISO 65535 on the EXIF rather than 100,000?

Strangely I think I prefer the picture without using Topaz. Obviously difficult to tell with the size of the images on Flickr but there's not that much difference in overall noise but after Topaz the noise looks more 'mushy' rather than a nice fine grain.
Yup I prefer without, it does create a mush/pattern that's not as nice as the Q2M noise which is a fine grain :)
 
Messages
18,261
Edit My Images
No
OP
woof woof
Messages
26,318
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
The indoor ones impress me more as high ISO is not the sole determining factor of noise, quality of light is also key. Not sure why it says ISO 65535 on the EXIF rather than 100,000?
Yup. Some artificial lighting is just a killer and can make even relatively low ISO pictures (1,600,? 3,200?) look problematic.
 
Last edited:
Messages
6,069
Name
Dan
Edit My Images
No
Just as a test between my cameras, it's not test conditions - but I shot three cameras at ISO 25k (Sony related now.. )

Sony A9 24MP, Hasselblad 907X 50MP and Leica Q2M 47MP - hasselblad gets some banding at high ISO

the detail on the Sony A9 is quite mush, but that might be f16! the outdoor detail is bleh.

Sony A9 25k by Daniel Cook, on Flickr

Hasselblad 907X 25k by Daniel Cook, on Flickr

Leica Q2M 25k by Daniel Cook, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Messages
18,261
Edit My Images
No
Just as a test between my cameras, it's not test conditions - but I shot three cameras at ISO 25k (Sony related now.. )

Sony A9 24MP, Hasselblad 907X 50MP and Leica Q2M 47MP - hasselblad gets some banding at high ISO

the detail on the Sony A9 is quite mush, but that might be f16! the outdoor detail is bleh.

Sony A9 25k by Daniel Cook, on Flickr

Hasselblad 907X 25k by Daniel Cook, on Flickr

Leica Q2M 25k by Daniel Cook, on Flickr
I can only assume you’re right in that diffraction is kicking in at f16, the detail shouldn’t be that bad normally I wouldn’t have thought :eek: What causes the banding on the Blad, I thought that it’d destroy the 35mm sensors?

The grain on the Q2M is rather nice I have to say. Apart from the obvious noise advantages, are there any other advantages of the Q2M over using the Q2 and using a monochrome profile?
 
Messages
6,069
Name
Dan
Edit My Images
No
I can only assume you’re right in that diffraction is kicking in at f16, the detail shouldn’t be that bad normally I wouldn’t have thought :eek: What causes the banding on the Blad, I thought that it’d destroy the 35mm sensors?

The grain on the Q2M is rather nice I have to say. Apart from the obvious noise advantages, are there any other advantages of the Q2M over using the Q2 and using a monochrome profile?
The Hasselblad excels over FF before 25k, at ISO 3200 is very clean, ISO 6400 starting to see a bit of noise - 12.5k is pretty good still, at 25k the colour noise isn't so nice and banding kicks in.

Over the Q2, the Q2M should have greater acuity (sharpness?) and perhaps tonality.. oh and dynamic range! pulling from shadows is immense :)
 
Last edited:
Messages
5,977
Name
David
Edit My Images
Yes
The Hasselblad excels over FF before 25k, at ISO 3200 is very clean, ISO 6400 starting to see a bit of noise - 12.5k is pretty good still, at 25k the colour noise isn't so nice and banding kicks in.

Over the Q2, the Q2M should have greater acuity (sharpness?) and perhaps tonality.. oh and dynamic range! pulling from shadows is immense :)
@snerkler Without a Bayer (or colour arrary sensor), the images with have more spatial accuracy, a sharp black/white edge of one pixel width will be rendered as so, with a bayer filter spatial accuracy is reduced by 1/4 so a sharp black/white one pixel edge will be images vas a partial Gaussian curve, and the actual position of the edge will be off by up to a pixel either side. This is not that important in picture taking but is important in machine vision systems.

The sensor should be slightly more sensitive as well without the attenuation through the colour filter, shown by the different ISO ranges of Q2 and Q2M

Tonality should also be more accurate as you are dealing with an exact grey value as opposed to an interpolated one.
 
Messages
18,261
Edit My Images
No
@snerkler Without a Bayer (or colour arrary sensor), the images with have more spatial accuracy, a sharp black/white edge of one pixel width will be rendered as so, with a bayer filter spatial accuracy is reduced by 1/4 so a sharp black/white one pixel edge will be images vas a partial Gaussian curve, and the actual position of the edge will be off by up to a pixel either side. This is not that important in picture taking but is important in machine vision systems.

The sensor should be slightly more sensitive as well without the attenuation through the colour filter, shown by the different ISO ranges of Q2 and Q2M

Tonality should also be more accurate as you are dealing with an exact grey value as opposed to an interpolated one.
Interesting, thanks (y)
 
Messages
18,261
Edit My Images
No
Just as a test between my cameras, it's not test conditions - but I shot three cameras at ISO 25k (Sony related now.. )

Sony A9 24MP, Hasselblad 907X 50MP and Leica Q2M 47MP - hasselblad gets some banding at high ISO

the detail on the Sony A9 is quite mush, but that might be f16! the outdoor detail is bleh.

Sony A9 25k by Daniel Cook, on Flickr

Hasselblad 907X 25k by Daniel Cook, on Flickr

Leica Q2M 25k by Daniel Cook, on Flickr
.

Looking at this diffraction is definitely becoming an issue at f16


What I’ve just found interesting is that looking at a variety of different lenses (specifically the 34mm f1.4 ZA, 24-70mm F4, 24-105mm f4 and 16-35mm f4) diffraction starts to show by f11. For some reason I thought you were ‘safe’ up to f11 with FF. I think I’m going to start shooting landscapes at f8 rather than f11 based on this.
 

Stephen L

I asked a Stupid Question Once...
Messages
5,189
Name
Stephen
Edit My Images
Yes
Messages
2,622
Name
Lee
Edit My Images
Yes
I'll see how things go but still life scene type stuff has never really grabbed me. The appeal has always been to take pictures of places and things while I'm out and about, scenes, trees, leaves and flowers and that sort of thing. I do like taking pictures of the flowers and plants in the house and garden so that's something I can and will still do.
Yes. I fully get and understand that Alan. Just didn't know if getting into lights, reflectors etc could give you something extra to delve into that's all....

I've started learning CAD and I'm starting to make metal/wood furniture...!!
 
Top