- Messages
- 5,012
- Name
- Tim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
In the rain View attachment 239339
Positively moist
In the rain View attachment 239339
Lol yup. Was p***ing down mate.Positively moist
Lol yup. Was p***ing down mate.
Yup all goodWindy too? camera survive?
In the rain View attachment 239339
Fake rain, everyone knows the Sonys cant do it in the rain.
In the rain View attachment 239339
Diddnt bring a towel lol [emoji23] and it was the same case last weekend. It p***ed down while shooting!Toweled down frantically right after this shot
Diddnt bring a towel lol [emoji23] and it was the same case last weekend. It p***ed down while shooting!
Diddnt use no rain cover etc. All good.
I just scan disk extreme uhs-1 cards in both slots although currently testing a transcend card with similar write speeds but half the price.What way are people utilising the tow memory card slots on A7R, A9 etc? When I shot Canon to CF Cards I always just wrote duplicate RAWs to both cards for full redundancy. But it isn't that simple with Sony? Given only Slot 1 can take an SD II card I would be wiping out any speed gains of using one if I also write RAW to an SD I in Slot 2. I haven't used a jpeg straight from the camera in over a decade so while that would be a level of redundancy it wouldn't be ideal.
It’s a hard decision as shooting raw to both can slow things down. It depends on what you photograph. If out and out speed (10fps) is needed I’m shooting raw to UHS-II card and jpeg to UHS-I card. Not ideal but it’s a level of backup. If speed isn’t required shooting raw to both cards seems ok. The other option is to forget backup and just shoot to one card.What way are people utilising the tow memory card slots on A7R, A9 etc? When I shot Canon to CF Cards I always just wrote duplicate RAWs to both cards for full redundancy. But it isn't that simple with Sony? Given only Slot 1 can take an SD II card I would be wiping out any speed gains of using one if I also write RAW to an SD I in Slot 2. I haven't used a jpeg straight from the camera in over a decade so while that would be a level of redundancy it wouldn't be ideal.
I basically do this.It’s a hard decision as shooting raw to both can slow things down. if out and out speed (10fps) is needed I’m shooting raw to UHS-II card and jpeg to UHS-I card. Not ideal but it’s a level of backup. If speed isn’t required shooting raw to both cards seems ok. The other option is to forget backup and just shoot to one card.
I did noticed quite a difference between UHS-I and UHS-II cards when I was shooting bursts at higher FPS. Burst rate would slow down and the camera wouldn’t response if you tried to go into the menus until it had the buffer had wrote to the cards. If you don’t need higher FPS or long bursts it should be as much of a problem.
I was using the A7 last week over at the Brecon's Waterfalls in a bit of rain.
Another photographer there asked about it..... I said, I do look after my stuff & I'm more worried about the lens [CV40/1.2E] in all honesty. If the A7 goes I'll have to treat myself to an A7iii
I read somewhere how shooting jpg on the 2nd slot vs shooting raw in the 2nd slot is actually slower as the camera needs to convert from raw to jpg in the 2nd slot?I basically do this.
For shooting landscapes I go full on uncompressed RAW with RAW to both SD cards. But with fast action I write RAW only to UHS-II slot.
Not tempted to do the food bag and elastic bag trick to help protect it?In the rain View attachment 239339
I read somewhere how shooting jpg on the 2nd slot vs shooting raw in the 2nd slot is actually slower as the camera needs to convert from raw to jpg in the 2nd slot?
I read somewhere how shooting jpg on the 2nd slot vs shooting raw in the 2nd slot is actually slower as the camera needs to convert from raw to jpg in the 2nd slot?
i was actualy but could not be bothered. i may do so next time if it rains even heavier, i did have a spare plastic bag and elastics with me at hand mind u.Not tempted to do the food bag and elastic bag trick to help protect it?
It was @Riz_Guru who first mentioned it and found out about it somewhereNeed to test this. might be true. but then even if there is conversion time, it may be quicker than writing 42MB? I don't know really....
I haven't shot action at 8 fps too much to notice difference either way. Need to have it figure by May for my airshows and carshows
do the latest Sonys do lossless compressed 14 bit raw as well as the Uncompressed?I basically do this.
For shooting landscapes I go full on uncompressed RAW with RAW to both SD cards. But with fast action I write RAW only to UHS-II slot.
Riz hasnt been very active lately?i was actualy but could not be bothered. i may do so next time if it rains even heavier, i did have a spare plastic bag and elastics with me at hand mind u.
It was @Riz_Guru who first mentioned it and found out about it somewhere
Nopedo the latest Sonys do lossless compressed 14 bit raw as well as the Uncompressed?
hmmm,im suprised about thatNope
Too hard and innovative for Sony to do lossless compression
So it's either lossy compression or fully uncompressed
hmmm,im suprised about that
Ive just tried this out on my a7r3. RAW+RAW seems to be slightly faster to clear the buffer than RAW+JPEG but both are much slower than RAW to a single card (uhs-ii card). Good to know, jpeg isn’t really backup so better to shoot RAW+RAW when needed and just RAW when needing to take advantage so ultimate 10fps with the a7r3.I read somewhere how shooting jpg on the 2nd slot vs shooting raw in the 2nd slot is actually slower as the camera needs to convert from raw to jpg in the 2nd slot?
Riz hasnt been very active lately?
The LA-EA4 arrived today. Gave it a quick try, and it's like having a FF SLT camera with IBIS. Shot a few frames in the twilight with Sony 50 1.4 & Sammy 50 f1.4 plus the Minolta 70-210 f4 - I think I could see the IBIS working through the viewfinder.
Also did a quick comparison yesterday between the Sammy 50 1.4 and an old Nikkor 28 f3.5. Sammy wins on sharpness by quite a margin at the edges, but Nikon colours and rendering were nicer. Having just sold most of my Nikon kit I'm seriously thinking about sending the Sammy back & getting the 24-105 from E-finity, then maybe a 50 f1.8 later in the year. It's amazing how the Sony 50 f1.4 & LA-EA4 is so much smaller & lighter than the Sammy 50.
I need to do a 'proper' test with the camera on a tripod to compare between 50 f1.4s, but it's striking that the large front element on the Sammy collects more light than the Sony with a theoretically similar aperture - shutter speed for the Sammy was twice as fast as the Sony at f8. Sony seems to carry more detail though.
Isn’t that because of the translucent mirror in the adaptor?
Isn’t that because of the translucent mirror in the adaptor?