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

Riz_Guru said:
I guarantee that the person who first spotted the strips on those original Sony press event photos is a big time pixel peeper.
It seem's its really come to the surface following the Sony A7 III announcement, what about the other previously released Sony bodies, why no big fuss back then?
Click to expand...
You don't have to be a "big time pixel peeper", I would imagine we all edit at 1:1 at some point or another during the process. Sharpening should certainly be done at 1:1 to make sure it's not overdone. I'd be gutted if I started editing and saw this :(

twist said:
Actually DPR spotted it in their hands on. The images are from their sample gallery.

From what I understand it does show up in other cameras incl the A9 (which I mentioned previously) but its worse due to A7iii sensor design.
Click to expand...
How does the sensor design differ? I'm assuming the A7Riii would suffer the same fate?

twist said:
Hopefully it does get dealt with, I know Ill be trying to reproduce it in my own scenarios. Wait and see.
Click to expand...
I don't see how they can deal with it though if it's a design 'issue'?

JJ! said:
D750 is indeed superb, but sometimes a change is good. Maybe it might be the wrong decision (one of which I have not made yet) but we learn by our mistakes (or good moves!).
Click to expand...
Yep, a change is good. Just a shame it's such an expensive one :(

Riz_Guru said:
Has anybody recreated the issue on their own body?
Could it be the studio lights they used?
Could it be a faulty body/sensor?
Could it be some kind of electrical interference?
Could it be a software related conversion issue?
Could it be a rouge individual who has doctored the images?

:D lol
Click to expand...
Or sensor design?

twist said:
Plus its a bit of fun to change
Click to expand...
(y)

JJ! said:
This also! If it does not work out so be it!
Click to expand...
So be it? I'd cry at the money lost :eek:

JJ! said:
On a positive note, the using the Sony A7III with 70-200 2.8 saves me 160g!!!
Click to expand...
Wow, what a weight saving ;) TBH it'd probably end up being heavier as you'd add the battery grip ;)

dancook said:
@snerkler did i miss focus?

DSC00600 by dancook1982, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think main focus is on the bridge of the nose ;)
 
dancook said:
Not that I've given it a lot of thought, wouldn't it be better to sharpen for the output size and viewing distance not for 1:1?
Click to expand...
TBH yes it depends. Officially (according to adobe) sharpening should be done at 1:1, but if you're outputting at small file sizes then you can add extra sharpening and you shouldn't (in theory) see sharpening artefacts (unless you've REALLY overdone it ;)) yet make the image look sharper.
 
woof woof said:
Nupe, never had the later Fuji's.

My comments based on the Panasonic, Canon and Nikon "kit" type lenses I've had and of those the Sony seems to be easily the best... hardly surprising though as it's the newest :D

It is a light and compact and very reasonable standard zoom, IMO.
Click to expand...
When I had an A7 you'd hardly used it then lol
 
snerkler said:
You don't have to be a "big time pixel peeper", I would imagine we all edit at 1:1 at some point or another during the process. Sharpening should certainly be done at 1:1 to make sure it's not overdone. I'd be gutted if I started editing and saw this :(
Click to expand...

Indeed, the effect is quite obvious without pixel peeping. If it's really noticeable in say only 1 in every 500 photos would that alter your decision to use the camera? I reasoned no but so far the best information we've got is coming from that DPR thread and that means things might be worse than assumed (again I doubt it but having an open mind costs nothing).

snerkler said:
How does the sensor design differ? I'm assuming the A7Riii would suffer the same fate?
Click to expand...

If you read the DPR threads I think they're suggesting it's more prevalent than other cameras in one of the channels, so it could be that the way it's processing photos rather than the hardware. You can find older photos with different bodies showing the same effect but none of them show up as badly as the samples from DPR so there probably is a difference.

snerkler said:
I don't see how they can deal with it though if it's a design 'issue'?
Click to expand...

They can do a lot through software if they really want to but unless the A7 III is more susceptible to the issue I seriously doubt they will.
 
simonbarker said:
Indeed, the effect is quite obvious without pixel peeping. If it's really noticeable in say only 1 in every 500 photos would that alter your decision to use the camera? I reasoned no but so far the best information we've got is coming from that DPR thread and that means things might be worse than assumed (again I doubt it but having an open mind costs nothing).
Click to expand...
1 in 500 would be too much for me tbh, 1 in 1000 I'd be on the fence, but I'd be gutted if it ruined a really good shot.

If you read the DPR threads I think they're suggesting it's more prevalent than other cameras in one of the channels, so it could be that the way it's processing photos rather than the hardware. You can find older photos with different bodies showing the same effect but none of them show up as badly as the samples from DPR so there probably is a difference.
Click to expand...
That would be good if it was at it would suggest that it's fixable, at least to a large extent. But then this is Sony, and they're not renowned for solving issues through firmware, or indeed offering a lot at all with firmware updates. Best wait for the A7iv :LOL:
 
Just discovered Sony have removed the sweep panoramic from the A9 and A7Riii, have they removed it from the A7iii too? It's a feature I really like and wished my EM1 and D750 had it, I generally just use my iPhone now but IQ isn't great. I know I can stitch in LR but you don't know exactly how it's going to turn out until you get home, in which case it's too late. Personally I'd rather have the Panoramic feature than pixel shift, especially with the A7riii where you have 42mp already.
 
dancook said:
Challenge accepted, i'll go get my flash
Click to expand...
:D if you go looking for issues, they may crop up. Just like the banding on the Sony A9.
No camera is perfect but agree that this needs further investigation and a fix via firmware if possible.
 
Riz_Guru said:
:D if you go looking for issues, they may crop up. Just like the banding on the Sony A9.
No camera is perfect but agree that this needs further investigation and a fix via firmware if possible.
Click to expand...

I mean, you are right and we care more than other people who look at images! For example, the photos last week from the A9 were worse (IMO) than mine. This could have been down to a number of things. I edited mine, he was selling his jpegs straight from camera with no editing/cropping.

But at the end of the day, the misses liked a couple of his photos as when you look at them without zooming in they looked good.
 
Tom Green said:
Have you viewed 28k photos at 1:1 or looked at them all closely enough to notice?
Click to expand...

You don't need to scrutinize this flippant comment so closely :) Twist says it's not even with the A9 anyway? I haven't got an A7III

i would actually test it otherwise
 
Riz_Guru said:
:D if you go looking for issues, they may crop up. Just like the banding on the Sony A9.
No camera is perfect but agree that this needs further investigation and a fix via firmware if possible.
Click to expand...
No camera is perfect, but most imperfections don't impact on IQ.
 
JJ! said:
I mean, you are right and we care more than other people who look at images! For example, the photos last week from the A9 were worse (IMO) than mine. This could have been down to a number of things. I edited mine, he was selling his jpegs straight from camera with no editing/cropping.

But at the end of the day, the misses liked a couple of his photos as when you look at them without zooming in they looked good.
Click to expand...

Looking at photos without pixel peeping is the best way forward :D
 
I did just read this on the FB

"On a separate note, tried a7iii for awhile at the Sony centre, for those who are accustomed or used to a9 evf, you may need a motion sickness pill for a7iii."
 
dancook said:
Oh...I thought it was an A9 thing too, my bad - I just got my lights from the car..
Click to expand...
I don't think it's a case of it's not affected, just that the A7iii is affected more. That's my understanding anyway ;)
 
snerkler said:
1 in 500 would be too much for me tbh, 1 in 1000 I'd be on the fence, but I'd be gutted if it ruined a really good shot.
Click to expand...

It's not difficult to correct so it can't really ruin a shot, just waste a bit of your time. Even so that 1 in 500 figure is entirely made up, it could be 1 in 5 or it could be 1 in 5000, can't be sure without real testing but if you're constantly shooting into strong direct light sources then you're probably going to become familiar with it sooner or later.

snerkler said:
That would be good if it was at it would suggest that it's fixable, at least to a large extent. But then this is Sony, and they're not renowned for solving issues through firmware, or indeed offering a lot at all with firmware updates. Best wait for the A7iv :LOL:
Click to expand...

Technically it wouldn't be a fix but more of a work around, probably splitting hairs though.
 
snerkler said:
I don't think it's a case of it's not affected, just that the A7iii is affected more. That's my understanding anyway ;)
Click to expand...

Ok what do I need to do,

Have a flash at the edge of the frame pointed towards the camera, maybe removing the lens hood will increase chance?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top