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

The touch screen on the 5DIV is amazing, like a phone.

Pinch, swipe, tap, it's even responsive with a glass screen protector on top of it.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
Pray tell me, how do you get worse IQ from a LOSSLESS compressed file. its no different from zipping up a Word document, and unzipping it again, are the letters all jumbled up???

Its the old CD ripping WAV v FLAC non-argument!
Click to expand...
It's not lossless. That's the problem lol.

The A9 is the first camera to have lossless compressed raw on a Sony mirrorless body
 
I see the Nikon crowd are all having palpitations over the price which at least makes a change from Sony being the higher end of the price range and the butt of peoples price whinges :D I'd take the A7RII and the savings any day :D but in reality the camera I have is good enough for my snaps :D
 
I love what can be done with a CSC and manual focus :D

Just playing with my Sigma 50mm f2.8 macro and Rokkor 55mm f1.7.

Sigma stopped down a bit.

DSC07976.JPG

100%

DSC07976-C.jpg

Rokkor 55mm wide open.

55-wide-1.jpg

100%

55-wide-1-C.jpg

There are one or two who think that more accurate focus can be achieved with a DSLR but I have a problem believing that as how can you focus on detail that you can't even see? As you can see from the whole images there's no way you could see what I focused on let alone pick the precise whatever it was I focused on :D and could this be done with a DSLR with the lens wide open?

With the 55mm for that last shot I focused on the stamen or whatever it's called but I could count the legs on the bug and could if I'd wanted to have chosen the one I wanted to focus on. Is that possible with a DSLR? With AF?

Like I said, I have a problem believing that anyone could focus more accurately with a DSLR's but with a CSC you can do it every time, assuming you have the time to call up the magnified view and focus accurately.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I love what can be done with a CSC and manual focus :D

Just playing with my Sigma 50mm f2.8 macro and Rokkor 55mm f1.7.

Sigma stopped down a bit.

View attachment 109299

100%

View attachment 109300

Rokkor 55mm wide open.

View attachment 109301

100%

View attachment 109302

There are one or two who think that more accurate focus can be achieved with a DSLR but I have a problem believing that as how can you focus on detail that you can't even see? As you can see from the whole images there's no way you could see what I focused on let alone pick the precise whatever it was I focused on :D and could this be done with a DSLR with the lens wide open?

With the 55mm for that last shot I focused on the stamen or whatever it's called but I could count the legs on the bug and could if I'd wanted to have chosen the one I wanted to focus on. Is that possible with a DSLR? With AF?

Like I said, I have a problem believing that anyone could focus more accurately with a DSLR's but with a CSC you can do it every time, assuming you have the time to call up the magnified view and focus accurately.
Click to expand...

Easily possible with a DSLR. Af point over subject, done.... or just use mf via live view... magnified, like you did. Not with your 5d or 20d... Things have come along ;)
 
Last edited:
twist said:
Easily possible with a DSLR. Af point over subject, done.... or just use mf via live view... magnified, like you did. Not with your 5d or 20d... Things have come along ;)
Click to expand...
I meant through the ovf :D

Are you sure AF could do this? AF would focus on something but could it focus on the precise point you can with a magnified view and MF especially when you couldn't see the exact focus point through the ovf? If it could read your mind and know what you wanted to focus on how would you know you'd hit that exact point without chimping?

And there's the question of focusing at wide apertures, I thought DSLR's focused at f2.8?
 
Last edited:
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
I have a Minolta 135mm,bought from Alan last year.
What adaptor do I need for the a6000 please?
Click to expand...
Didn't I send you an adapter? Maybe I didn't or maybe it was for MFT but I thought I'd sent you one?

Anyway, just go to evil bay and type in Minolta SA or even MD to Sony and that should do it. It's not really called MD mount but that will work. You should find one around £10 or even less.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I meant through the ovf :D

Are you sure AF could do this? AF would focus on something but could it focus on the precise point you can with a magnified view and MF especially when you couldn't see the exact focus point through the ovf? If it could read your mind and know what you wanted to focus on how would you know you'd hit that exact point without chimping?

And there's the question of focusing at wide apertures, I thought DSLR's focused at f2.8?
Click to expand...

Yes, I've done tests like this before at f1.4 and was fine. Otherwise I'd just focus mf via ovf... it's easy enough with a bright ovf. Or as said, magnified lv.

Mag evf and peaking is cool though, better than DSLR but MF isn't impossible with dslr.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Didn't I send you an adapter? Maybe I didn't or maybe it was for MFT but I thought I'd sent you one?

Anyway, just go to evil bay and type in Minolta SA or even MD to Sony and that should do it. It's not really called MD mount but that will work. You should find one around £10 or even less.
Click to expand...
Hi Alan,it was the M 4/3rds you sent because at the time thats what I had lol.thanks for your advice
 
woof woof said:
Didn't I send you an adapter? Maybe I didn't or maybe it was for MFT but I thought I'd sent you one?

Anyway, just go to evil bay and type in Minolta SA or even MD to Sony and that should do it. It's not really called MD mount but that will work. You should find one around £10 or even less.
Click to expand...
Found a neewer one for £12 on amazon ,coming tomorrow,cheers will post a shot with the 135 once here
 
twist said:
Yes, I've done tests like this before at f1.4 and was fine. Otherwise I'd just focus mf via ovf... it's easy enough with a bright ovf. Or as said, magnified lv.

Mag evf and peaking is cool though, better than DSLR but MF isn't impossible with dslr.
Click to expand...

Dunno how a dslr can focus at f1.4 but maybe they can but that still leaves the problem of how you can place the focus point on something you can't see by eye like an individual hair or whatever it is or change of colour on the stamen or how you could mf through the ovf on that something which you can't see by eye.

From about 2 to 3ft away I could just about see that bug as a dot before calling up the magnified view and no one will convince me that it's individual legs could be seen through an evf unless you're Clark Kent or that they could be individually detected by the af :D I'll believe it when I see it :D
 
woof woof said:
Dunno how a dslr can focus at f1.4 but maybe they can but that still leaves the problem of how you can place the focus point on something you can't see by eye like an individual hair or whatever it is or change of colour on the stamen or how you could mf through the ovf on that something which you can't see by eye.

From about 2 to 3ft away I could just about see that bug as a dot before calling up the magnified view and no one will convince me that it's individual legs could be seen through an evf unless you're Clark Kent or that they could be individually detected by the af :D I'll believe it when I see it :D
Click to expand...

But I shoot and used to make money by purely shooting eyes at f1.4 with moving subjects at various distances from Mfd to ft away so I know it's very possible... and that was via af. Were taking mm of dof... Not inches. With a very high hit rate.

Again, if I needed to id just use LV to focus magnify for your type of shot (distance) wether it's DSLR or mirrorless. Like I said, it's not impossible.... the flowers not going anywhere lol so using evf and focus mag will be as slow as live view magnify.
 
Last edited:
Twist, the reason I posted was just in fun because a poster on this forum used to insist that he could focus more accurately through the OVF of his DSLR (5D I think...) than he could with a CSC and I've just never seen how that's possible. I think that any fair minded person would say it's completely impossible because you just can't see that level of detail when using an OVF and if you can't see it you can't deliberately focus on it. You can hide the fact that you can't see detail and you can hide the fact that the AF has focused on something else with DoF but that's another issue. Using an EVF and greatly magnified view as I'm sure you know allows you to see detail that you can't see through an OVF and you can see it at the aperture you're going to shoot at. Therefore you can focus on it. Of course all this accuracy depends on your focus ring having enough delicacy and holding the camera still etc.

I'm not a fan of back screen shooting when going for accuracy as it's often difficult to see detail especially outside in daylight and you've got to shoot holding the camera away from your face not braced against it.

Yup, good luck to you and more power to you shooting moving peoples eyes at f1.4 but I bet when taking the picture even if the people were sat still you couldn't see the detail in the iris and individual eye lashes etc that you'd see with an EVF and magnified view and I doubt that AF is accurate enough to specifically hit any of these details that you may choose as your focus point if you could see them and put your focus point on them. I'm still pretty convinced that no OVF camera or AF can match what's possible with an EVF, magnified view and manual focus if you have the time to MF and if you and the subject are still enough to get the accuracy I'm talking about when viewing at 100% plus. I do use AF lenses sometimes :D and I've just not see that level of accuracy.

Anyway, I should stop pixel peeping but I wont because I often take pictures intending to do 100% crops and that's often when I want this level of accuracy.
 
Wowza.

I didn't know this existed.... Tokina 20mm f2.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sony-tidbits-655/#disqus_thread

When I had DSLR's I had a Sigma 20mm f1.8 and liked it. This Tokina is MF but looks nice if a little expensive.

SsSsSsSsSnake said:
I look forward to Twist’s reply but got an idea
Click to expand...

If Twist can do better or even just as well with AF or a DSLR OVF then good luck to him and he deserves every £1 he makes :D I just know that for ultimate pixel peeping focus accuracy MF seems to be the way to go for me when taking pictures of static stuff and wanting to be able to pixel peep at 100%+ and say that I've hit what I was aiming at. Of course it doesn't matter which exact tiny speck on a flower or which of my Mrs eyelashes is bang on focus to anyone but me :D
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Wowza.

I didn't know this existed.... Tokina 20mm f2.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sony-tidbits-655/#disqus_thread

When I had DSLR's I had a Sigma 20mm f1.8 and liked it. This Tokina is MF but looks nice if a little expensive.



If Twist can do better or even just as well with AF or a DSLR OVF then good luck to him and he deserves every £1 he makes :D I just know that for ultimate pixel peeping focus accuracy MF seems to be the way to go for me when taking pictures of static stuff and wanting to be able to pixel peep at 100%+ and say that I've hit what I was aiming at. Of course it doesn't matter which exact tiny speck on a flower or which of my Mrs eyelashes is bang on focus to anyone but me :D
Click to expand...
the thing with that is its largely irrelevant as dof is greater the a hair anyway. also I don't know anyone who shakes/wobbles less the a width of a hair-well not without a tripod:p so even if your focus is that good with an evf/ovf its luck or great timing that wobbles you in to focus:D if the dof is a hairs width
 
niko said:
the thing with that is its largely irrelevant as dof is greater the a hair anyway. also I don't know anyone who shakes/wobbles less the a width of a hair-well not without a tripod:p so even if your focus is that good with an evf/ovf its luck or great timing that wobbles you in to focus:D if the dof is a hairs width
Click to expand...

I'm not claiming I can focus accurately on the width of a hair but it's possible to pick the hair and see it's in focus and you can pick your focus point along it or on a particular hair or speck of pollen on a stamen. That sort of thing.

Can you pick which "hair" to focus on with AF or through an OVF? Maybe you can but deffo with manual focus and a magnified view.

Hand held 100%, MFT and 50mm macro, 1/1000 sec. Just to post something different to the A7 crops I posted above.

_1250971-c.jpg

I can't see :D how you can see that level of detail good enough to focus with an OVF or how AF can hit it.

Whole picture.

_1250971-s.jpg

You can do this all day long. Back to A7.

DSC07613.jpg

I have thousands of these, I put them on slide show sometimes, usually a whole image followed by a crop or two :D

DSC07954.jpg

DSC07954-C.jpg

:D
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Wowza.

I didn't know this existed.... Tokina 20mm f2.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sony-tidbits-655/#disqus_thread

When I had DSLR's I had a Sigma 20mm f1.8 and liked it. This Tokina is MF but looks nice if a little expensive.



If Twist can do better or even just as well with AF or a DSLR OVF then good luck to him and he deserves every £1 he makes :D I just know that for ultimate pixel peeping focus accuracy MF seems to be the way to go for me when taking pictures of static stuff and wanting to be able to pixel peep at 100%+ and say that I've hit what I was aiming at. Of course it doesn't matter which exact tiny speck on a flower or which of my Mrs eyelashes is bang on focus to anyone but me :D
Click to expand...

Each upgrade from my first DSLR over the years brought me easier MF and better MF focusing aids, to the point when if I had the time I'd often check the accuracy of the camera's AF. It was a bit of a shock to discover how often AF was rather approximate, how much with some lenses it shifted with aperture, and how wider angle lenses with wide DoF seemed to really confuse the AF. Now with such good MF aids it's not only easy but a pleasure to use MF I use AF when I'm in a hurry or shooting at an aperture and with a lens and in circumstances where I know the AF can be trusted to get the focus exactly right, otherwise I just use AF as a way of quickly getting very close to the exact focus, and if I'm lucky, exact.
 
I've just today managed to get some time to play with my new A9's in readyiness to sell my D750's .
There are so many positives to this camera but the one thing negative that struck me was the high ISO performance. It's good but it's very slightly lagging behind the D750 in my opinion by perhaps half a stop.
 
MartinH32 said:
I've just today managed to get some time to play with my new A9's in readyiness to sell my D750's .
There are so many positives to this camera but the one thing negative that struck me was the high ISO performance. It's good but it's very slightly lagging behind the D750 in my opinion by perhaps half a stop.
Click to expand...

Wait for it. Someone will be here shortly with the graphs and charts.
 
Back home now sorting through all the holiday pics and have to say I'm loving the Sony sensor on my A7Rii. Here is a before and after of one of my favourites. The details recorded in the shadows are awesome, this was a single exposure with the shadows lifted in PP.

Before
FLO00457.jpg by Chris Heathcote, on Flickr

Shadows raised and highlights lowered
FLO00457.jpg by Chris Heathcote, on Flickr
 
MartinH32 said:
I've just today managed to get some time to play with my new A9's in readyiness to sell my D750's .
There are so many positives to this camera but the one thing negative that struck me was the high ISO performance. It's good but it's very slightly lagging behind the D750 in my opinion by perhaps half a stop.
Click to expand...

I thought it was supposed to be ahead of the D750 for high ISO but behind in DR.
Is it enough of a difference to make you keep the D750's? :D
 
Riz_Guru said:
I thought it was supposed to be ahead of the D750 for high ISO but behind in DR.
Is it enough of a difference to make you keep the D750's? :D
Click to expand...
No, there are far more reasons to keep the Sony - weight, focus ability and speed, 4k video shooting to name a few. It's not a huge difference and certainly nothing that's an issue - just a little surprised by the results. Saying that I've never seen a camera as good as the D750 for low light.
 
MartinH32 said:
No, there are far more reasons to keep the Sony - weight, focus ability and speed, 4k video shooting to name a few. It's not a huge difference and certainly nothing that's an issue - just a little surprised by the results. Saying that I've never seen a camera as good as the D750 for low light.
Click to expand...

I agree, as an overall package the Sony A9 is pretty hard to beat but then it should be considering the cost.

I made a brief move to the Fuji XT-2 (APS-C) from the Sony A7RII and realised soon after that for day to day usage the XT-2 was excellent, but when greater ISO/DR was needed the Fuji just couldn't compete with the Sony FF sensors I'd been accustomed to.

I did briefly consider the Sony A7RII again but I never found the original A7/7II files lacking, I also much preferred 24mp files with a more speedy body.

Gaining operation speed at the expense of a little bit of high ISO/DR seems a good compromise to me.
 
Riz_Guru said:
I agree, as an overall package the Sony A9 is pretty hard to beat but then it should be considering the cost.

I made a brief move to the Fuji XT-2 (APS-C) from the Sony A7RII and realised soon after that for day to day usage the XT-2 was excellent, but when greater ISO/DR was needed the Fuji just couldn't compete with the Sony FF sensors I'd been accustomed to.

I did briefly consider the Sony A7RII again but I never found the original A7/7II files lacking, I also much preferred 24mp files with a more speedy body.

Gaining operation speed at the expense of a little bit of high ISO/DR seems a good compromise to me.
Click to expand...
don't you have the A7Rii Riz? thought you did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top