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

Competition news...

I see the Nikon Z7 has a max shutter speed of 1/2000 with EFCS. That would disappoint me.

Review at DPR.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-z7

"Overall this is a very impressive performance, meaning the Z7 will produce detailed, flexible files in a wide range of conditions. You'll have to remember to turn electronic first curtain on to avoid shutter shock, which unfortunately limits your fastest shutter speed to 1/2000s."
 
I just saw this and all I thought through out was "TP is going to go nuts" :D
You think so??? :LOL:
I remember some years back when (I think) CSTV did a "color review" and Sony A6000 was spanked for having to natural colors :thinking: :D
 
If men (the largest group of photographers) want a lesson on colours they should really ask a woman.
 
You think so??? :LOL:
I remember some years back when (I think) CSTV did a "color review" and Sony A6000 was spanked for having to natural colors :thinking: :D

I can literally picture certain members going "it's the Norhorps again, he doesn't know what he is talking about!"

Even when all he is doing is reflecting the data of his survey.

I have to admit that looking at some of the latest side by side comparison lately, #calistaring his videos of his recent EOS R, Fuji X-T3 and Sony A7III and I find myself liking the Sony more. The Canon can at times be more accurate but not always nicer.
 
For once I actually agree with ol' Tonser - I've said it many times on here in the past "colour science" is BS, especially for anyone who only shoots RAW and applies PP no matter the gear used. But I'm not TN so nobody listened. He should have thrown some of the other makes in the mix when doing his survey though to really throw people off.
 
Even with jpeg's there should be a way of setting the output more to your liking. It's a long time since I looked but I bet there's a page full of options to tweak just about everything colour and wb wise somewhere in the menu of every camera.
 
For once I actually agree with ol' Tonser - I've said it many times on here in the past "colour science" is BS, especially for anyone who only shoots RAW and applies PP no matter the gear used. But I'm not TN so nobody listened. He should have thrown some of the other makes in the mix when doing his survey though to really throw people off.
Ha well said.

Aimed at snake! Hehe oi snake geeza. What you saying now homie!
 
I can literally picture certain members going "it's the Norhorps again, he doesn't know what he is talking about!"

Even when all he is doing is reflecting the data of his survey.

Those certain members most likely didn't need a youtuber to point this out for them. Just like the shallow DOF nonsense, I posted a video about how much that doesn't matter, it was also survey based and people moaned that survey based results don't mean anything. But I knew 'certain members' would giggle like school girls over this one when I saw it

I don't know how you can 'literally picture certain members' when all you ever have to go on is what you choose to take from their words on a screen
 
Ha well said.

Aimed at snake! Hehe oi snake geeza. What you saying now homie!

Aimed at nobody in particular tbh, but I've seen it bandied about on here, and I would say it's mostly in here, or Canon threads. I see Fuji folk also say "I love the Fuji colours" too, then they process the hell out of them :D

I process all of my images, which is why it never matters so much to me what I'm shooting with. And what TN is correct about is that this "colour science" malarky seems to be a new trend, like Bokeh was before it. And youtube is responsible for a lot of it. Before Kai Wong started it, nobody was going around harping on about 'Booookay'
 
Aimed at nobody in particular tbh, but I've seen it bandied about on here, and I would say it's mostly in here, or Canon threads. I see Fuji folk also say "I love the Fuji colours" too, then they process the hell out of them :D

I process all of my images, which is why it never matters so much to me what I'm shooting with. And what TN is correct about is that this "colour science" malarky seems to be a new trend, like Bokeh was before it. And youtube is responsible for a lot of it. Before Kai Wong started it, nobody was going around harping on about 'Booookay'
I process my stuff too mate. Colour science is meh.
 
There's a bit on the history of bokeh here...

https://theonlinephotographer.typep...04/20-years-ago-this-month-what-is-bokeh.html

If we're talking 20 years ago bokeh wouldn't be the first thing to come to mind as some of us know that it was 20 years ago today Sgt Pepper taught the band to play and that's much more important.

It's always been possible, just wasn't so over used. I prefer when it's more subtle, not 90% of the image. There's such a thing as too much IMO.

Sgt Pepper? only 20 years ago eh?
 
It was 20 years ago today sgt pepper taught the band to play... they said that when they first sang the song :D

On bokeh, I think back then before it became the almost norm some people thought the out of focus areas weren't important and that what was was the subject. I can agree with that but also that the overall look matters too. I do think that people can go overboard to the point that very little is there apart from the bokeh. I agree with a lot of what the same on line photographer says in defence of depth.

https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/06/in-defense-of-depth.html
 
Last edited:
It was 20 years ago today sgt pepper taught the band to play... they said that when they first sang the song :D

On bokeh, I think back then before it became the almost norm some people thought the out of focus areas weren't important and that what was was the subject. I can agree with that but also that the overall look matters too. I do think that people can go overboard to the point that very little is there apart from the bokeh. I agree with a lot of what the same on line photographer says in defence of depth.

https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/06/in-defense-of-depth.html

Ha, the penny just dropped . . . I took you too literally :LOL:
 
Those certain members most likely didn't need a youtuber to point this out for them. Just like the shallow DOF nonsense, I posted a video about how much that doesn't matter, it was also survey based and people moaned that survey based results don't mean anything. But I knew 'certain members' would giggle like school girls over this one when I saw it

I don't know how you can 'literally picture certain members' when all you ever have to go on is what you choose to take from their words on a screen

Showing a random bunch of people shots with slightly different apertures and taking their thoughts on whether it was good or not isn't really going to convince many people that DOF is nonsense.

It really comes off as 'certain members' being overly defensive of the limitations of their system.
 
Showing a random bunch of people shots with slightly different apertures and taking their thoughts on whether it was good or not isn't really going to convince many people that DOF is nonsense.

It really comes off as 'certain members' being overly defensive of the limitations of their system.
I'd recommend you watch that video again and listen very carefully to what he says.
 
Showing a random bunch of people shots with slightly different apertures and taking their thoughts on whether it was good or not isn't really going to convince many people that DOF is nonsense.

It really comes off as 'certain members' being overly defensive of the limitations of their system.

You must not have watched it then, because the survey wasn't based on any make or model, just shallow DOF in general, 'certain members' just love to p*** on anything other 'certain members' post no matter, but that's been happening years and won't change.
 
You must not have watched it then, because the survey wasn't based on any make or model, just shallow DOF in general, 'certain members' just love to p*** on anything other 'certain members' post no matter, but that's been happening years and won't change.

You made the claim that the video justifies your position and whined about 'certain members', I'm making the point the two videos are unrelated and you have a chip on your shoulder over 'certain members' because you keep going on about them even when no one else has brought it up.
 
You made the claim that the video justifies your position and whined about 'certain members', I'm making the point the two videos are unrelated and you have a chip on your shoulder over 'certain members' because you keep going on about them even when no one else has brought it up.

No, I posted the same video in three different threads, the only one whining now is you! again! You jumped into one thread you knew naff all about - didn't even watch the video and starting ranting like you are right now. And it is Ray who brought up 'certain members' above right here, and I played up on it. You clearly haven't been reading here either, you just have some weird hard 'un for me :D bless your cotton socks, you're not the only one. You're one of them posters who never contributes anything but nit-picking, no change today then?

Suggest you take Soeren's advice, go watch the video and maybe learn something
 
Last edited:
No, I posted the same video in three different threads, the only one whining now is you! again! You jumped into one thread you knew naff all about - didn't even watch the video and starting ranting like you are right now. And it is Ray who brought up 'certain members' above right here, and I played up on it. You clearly haven't been reading here either, you just have some weird hard 'un for me :D bless your cotton socks, you're not the only one. You're one of them posters who never contributes anything but nit-picking, no change today then?

Suggest you take Soeren's advice, go watch the video and maybe learn something

You posted the video because it agrees with your prejudices, I watched the video and I still disagree with it, take the dog photo as an example, he's got the body blurred in one and the other isn't and amazingly people find more detail in the latter, none of which detracts from my original point they're just tools to achieve a result.

I did miss Raymond bringing it up (although for a different subject) but then again you've been going on about them so long it's hard to notice but then so many of your posts are abusive.
 
You posted the video because it agrees with your prejudices, I watched the video and I still disagree with it, take the dog photo as an example, he's got the body blurred in one and the other isn't and amazingly people find more detail in the latter, none of which detracts from my original point they're just tools to achieve a result.

I did miss Raymond bringing it up (although for a different subject) but then again you've been going on about them so long it's hard to notice but then so many of your posts are abusive.

Prejudice? or what I see as fact? You may like to think you know a lot more than the average person when it comes to what makes an image, but it's the general everyday person who we shoot for mostly. If they're not impressed by the 90% bokeh of your image then you're only pleasing yourself with it. And that's fine, if that's what you love ... it's just not everybody does, and that video shows in fact that most prefer more detail. Why was the Northrup video posted this morning? Particularly in here? Because it suited some folk and their way of thinking. I'm no different, yes of course I post things that I agree with, or that back up points I'm making, I am hardly going to go against myself! :D You can take or leave these examples too you know? I don't 'go on' about anything, I just state my point/case same as every other regular on here. There is only a bunch that post daily, and we do clash, but end of the day a lot of it is willy waving nonsense, nobody is really changing anyone else's stubborn mindset.

Ironically, the video this morning is one I agreed with. You missed that part too perhaps? I think 'colour science' is BS, no matter the gear. I also agree that these format and brand wars are pathetic, they're no better than console wars or PC [The 'master' race - FF] vs console [lesser peasant tech, smaller sensors?]. But they go on daily across forums too. And it's mostly grown ass men too! The kids just get on with the playing.
 
Last edited:
Brand loyalty is the business :cool:

Sony > Nikon > Canon > the rest of the muck

I.O.S > Android

M&S > Sainsburys > Tesco > Asda
 
Brand loyalty is the business :cool:

Sony > Nikon > Canon > the rest of the muck

I.O.S > Android

M&S > Sainsburys > Tesco > Asda

Lidl Bakery Cheese Twists beat all other twists - FACT
 
Brand loyalty is the business :cool:

Sony > Nikon > Canon > the rest of the muck

I.O.S > Android

M&S > Sainsburys > Tesco > Asda

I knew it! You had to be an Apple boi :D

Tesco > the rest for me, just for convenience and variety, the M&S here are terrible, they only cater to the knobs who want prawns, wine and mouldy cheese :D I certainly wouldn't do a full shop in there. We don't have the others, there's Super Value, Centra then the usual German twins
 
I knew I should’ve unsubscribed earlier [emoji30]
 
Brand loyalty is the business :cool:

Sony > Nikon > Canon > the rest of the muck

I.O.S > Android

M&S > Sainsburys > Tesco > Asda

Lol, I won't go into cameras but for the supermarkets I agree.....but replace M&S with Waitrose purely because M&S closes too early.
 
Omg this thread now gone off topic
 
Back
Top