First wedding with the a7iii tomorrow
Good luckFirst wedding with the a7iii tomorrow
Gold luck
Nice man, bet you're excited... and nervous with new kit. Im sure it'll go really well, good luck!!
Not so much, got the D750 still so it’ll be fine. Going D750 and 35 and A7iii and 85mm. But may pop the art on the A7iii for a bit
That's a fantastic image!
Would love to see it as a B & W conversion as well.
got a few fun snaps on the way to the coffee shop today. the light sucked but its looking more promising tomorrow.
4-1 by Jonathan Howes, on Flickr
3-1 by Jonathan Howes, on Flickr
1-1 by Jonathan Howes, on Flickr
2-1 by Jonathan Howes, on Flickr
Beautiful only thing I would suggest is on the third image, I'd try tone down the yellow reflections/shadows on her face. Gawd I miss when my girls were this age, they were so photogenic and never moaned about posing for me, now they're 11 & 15 and trying to get a nice portrait of them is a ruddy chore
That's the first thing my Mrs said to me (about the yellow).
It's just a little distracting, should be easily cleaned up in LR - adjustment brush, de-saturate maybe?
Hello can I come back in lol
Trying find on here of talk of a7 iii firmware update that’s coming what going be added or improved?
Nah can’t be arse to change my lens so if I fancy a new camera it be a A9 lol
Nah can’t be arse to change my lens so if I fancy a new camera it be a A9 lol
Nah can’t be arse to change my lens so if I fancy a new camera it be a A9 lol
Genuine question from someone with a bit of GAS and some money burning a hole... (i.e. not trying to start a war!)
What do you all make of this Sony "colour science" debate and them not being very good for skin tones? My primary reason for getting one would be portraits of my new kids
The alternative would be a Z6, which on one hand I am draw to because I had Nikon DSLRs and also the f/4 kit lens is smaller and also I understand the Sony 50mm 1.8 isn't all that. On the flip side, the Z6 is a first gen product and Sony have shown how quickly a product can mature (and also the Sony is cheaper).
For those who bought a proper camera.
Genuine question from someone with a bit of GAS and some money burning a hole... (i.e. not trying to start a war!)
What do you all make of this Sony "colour science" debate and them not being very good for skin tones? My primary reason for getting one would be portraits of my new kids
The alternative would be a Z6, which on one hand I am draw to because I had Nikon DSLRs and also the f/4 kit lens is smaller and also I understand the Sony 50mm 1.8 isn't all that. On the flip side, the Z6 is a first gen product and Sony have shown how quickly a product can mature (and also the Sony is cheaper).
Genuine question from someone with a bit of GAS and some money burning a hole... (i.e. not trying to start a war!)
What do you all make of this Sony "colour science" debate and them not being very good for skin tones? My primary reason for getting one would be portraits of my new kids
The alternative would be a Z6, which on one hand I am draw to because I had Nikon DSLRs and also the f/4 kit lens is smaller and also I understand the Sony 50mm 1.8 isn't all that. On the flip side, the Z6 is a first gen product and Sony have shown how quickly a product can mature (and also the Sony is cheaper).
The colour science thing is blown out of proportion on the internet. Funnily enough people never talked about it when it was truly aweful on original A7 lol. I am sure this will pass and people will find a new point to obsess and moan about.
At this point it's purely subjective. I prefer canon/Fuji to Sony and sony to Nikon. None of them are bad or good, they all give you a good starting point and any minor niggles can be easily tweaked in post. It's not something that I'd use make camera decisions especially if you shoot RAW.
If you are a jpg shooter I think Fuji has long held the crown in this area.
Sony has much better skin tones than they used to, they started improving noticeably with the A7rii onwards. Id say for me Canon has the worst colour.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMfCDujQywY
View attachment 237621
I went from Nikon too Sony. Colour science hasn’t been an issue for me. The Northrups did a blind test on colour science and most people preferred Sony colours. When they did the same test but included the brand names most people preferred Fuji.
The Sony 50mm is actually not that bad but the a.f is a little slower than their better lenses. I actually really like the 55mm f/1.8. It s a good performer and a.f is snappy. It’s also a nice and compact light weight lens.
Yes, I guess finding anything camera related on the internet is asking for hyperbole and extreme opinions
Thanks for that, actually quite an interesting test, it tells us way more about human behaviour than anything else. Not usually a TN fan but I do like this experiment
An A7iii plus 55mm could be just the kind of setup I'm looking for, the 50mm would be ok too except the slow and noisy AF would really bug me (especially being a m43 user where lenses focus instantly).
The 55mm f1.8 is an outstanding lens and quite compact too when you compare it to the latest high performance f1.4 lenses from Sony and Sigma.
I've been with MFT since the GF1 but there's no denying that even my original A7 files are way ahead of anything you'll get from MFT if you go extreme pixel peeping.
Yes, I guess finding anything camera related on the internet is asking for hyperbole and extreme opinions
Thanks for that, actually quite an interesting test, it tells us way more about human behaviour than anything else. Not usually a TN fan but I do like this experiment
An A7iii plus 55mm could be just the kind of setup I'm looking for, the 50mm would be ok too except the slow and noisy AF would really bug me (especially being a m43 user where lenses focus instantly).
It's smaller than sharper than the Nikon Z 50mm f1.8 but dpreview will tell you Nikon is better because it's so well corrected for CA.I have the 55 and it’s surprisingly good, but then, it’s not cheap for a 1.8 lens.
It's smaller than sharper than the Nikon Z 50mm f1.8 but dpreview will tell you Nikon is better because it's so well corrected for CA.
I have the 55 and it’s surprisingly good, but then, it’s not cheap for a 1.8 lens.
I don't think that's the sensible think to do tbh. You are paying a premium for such a fast lens on m43 for not equal returns. Something On FF will give you shallower DoF at a better price point and sizeI’m not a pixel peeper and m43 files are plenty ok for me, even up to ISO6400.
What I’m really after is the low DoF look for a few shots, the sensible thing would be to just get the Oly 25 1.2 but on the other hand it is always nice to try something different and the eye AF seems particularly good, and it’s been a long time since I’ve strayed...
Also, with the arrival of the twins I suspect it will be an awful long time before I have this kind of spare cash to throw at toys for me.
Well being from m43 even the Sony 55mm looks chunky to me
Well being from m43 even the Sony 55mm looks chunky to me
It also small, the 1.4 lenses are flipping hoooooge!
Well being from m43 even the Sony 55mm looks chunky to me
It also small, the 1.4 lenses are flipping hoooooge!
The 50mm 1.8 is not too bad really, especially at the price.
Although it can shoot 20fps on the A9, the 55mm can’t.