- Messages
- 7,597
- Name
- Riz
- Edit My Images
- No
lol but it will gain you Eye-AFOn a positive note, the using the Sony A7III with 70-200 2.8 saves me 160g!!!
lol but it will gain you Eye-AFOn a positive note, the using the Sony A7III with 70-200 2.8 saves me 160g!!!
lol but it will gain you Eye-AF
You can always use Lock On - AF on the horses......HUMANS ONLY!!! It's rare I take pics of those strange beasts!
hahahahahahahah I see stripes and banding......@snerkler did i miss focus?
I honestly cant keep pace with this thread, I havent got enough time in the day.
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 thisI 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?
How does the sensor design differ? I'm assuming the A7Riii would suffer the same fate?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.
I don't see how they can deal with it though if it's a design 'issue'?Hopefully it does get dealt with, I know Ill be trying to reproduce it in my own scenarios. Wait and see.
Yep, a change is good. Just a shame it's such an expensive oneD750 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!).
Or sensor design?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?
lol
Plus its a bit of fun to change
So be it? I'd cry at the money lostThis also! If it does not work out so be it!
Wow, what a weight saving TBH it'd probably end up being heavier as you'd add the battery gripOn a positive note, the using the Sony A7III with 70-200 2.8 saves me 160g!!!
Yeah, I think main focus is on the bridge of the nose
Sharpening should certainly be done at 1:1 to make sure it's not overdone
Tell me about it...... and I also need to have lunch too!I darent go back to work, I will never catch up.
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.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?
When I had an A7 you'd hardly used it then lolNupe, 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
It is a light and compact and very reasonable standard zoom, IMO.
Or it could just be crap lolHas 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?
lol
lol gulpOr it could just be crap lol
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
How does the sensor design differ? I'm assuming the A7Riii would suffer the same fate?
I don't see how they can deal with it though if it's a design 'issue'?
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.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).
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 A7ivIf 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.
AgainSo much for not overheating in the desert after hours.... go to 7:20
View: https://youtu.be/n83VfAql1L8?t=7m15s
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
I like those oddsit hasn't happened once for me in 28,000 photos - so odds are good so far.
it hasn't happened once for me in 28,000 photos - so odds are good so far.
28,000 heavily backlit shots, you haven't viewed at 1:1?
Challenge accepted, i'll go get my flash
if you go looking for issues, they may crop up. Just like the banding on the Sony A9.Challenge accepted, i'll go get my flash
lol @dancook it could be used as your backup body innitYou'll also need an a7iii.
You'll also need an a7iii.
lol @dancook it could be used as your backup body innit
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.
it hasn't happened once for me in 28,000 photos - so odds are good so far.
Have you viewed 28k photos at 1:1 or looked at them all closely enough to notice?
No camera is perfect, but most imperfections don't impact on IQ.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.
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.
Oh...I thought it was an A9 thing too, my bad - I just got my lights from the car..
I don't think it's a case of it's not affected, just that the A7iii is affected more. That's my understanding anywayOh...I thought it was an A9 thing too, my bad - I just got my lights from the car..
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.
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
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