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

woof woof said:
That doesn't sound right at all.

Last time I went out with my camera I took over 200 shots in 4 or 5 hours and although I stuck the second battery in I only took in the region of 20 shots with it if that.
Click to expand...

addicknchips said:
Strange. Should get around 400 per battery
Click to expand...

woof woof said:
eh? That's a bit optimistic isn't it? Or have I got a couple of weaklings? Should get more than 65 for two batteries though. It does look like a cold day but last time I was out there was widespread frost on the beach too and I still managed about 180 or so on the first battery.

Jon, have you got aeroplane mode disabled and have you stopped jump starting your car with your camera? :D
Click to expand...

1. Aeroplane mode not on. Oops.
2. Non-OEM batteries.
3. Long periods of walking between shots.
4. Bitterly cold - something like -1/-2 real; -10/-15 with windchill - the displays (live View & EVF) were a bit sluggish (probably biggest impact as I've got way longer from these same batteries ~ 200/300 in summer at MotoGP)
 
Jon Chalk said:
1. Aeroplane mode not on. Oops.
2. Non-OEM batteries.
3. Long periods of walking between shots.
4. Bitterly cold - something like -1/-2 real; -10/-15 with windchill - the displays (live View & EVF) were a bit sluggish (probably biggest impact as I've got way longer from these same batteries ~ 200/300 in summer at MotoGP)
Click to expand...

If you have both the LCD and evf going at the same time with the camera on for longboard periods it'll drain fairly quickly
 
Yes but it took me 2 goes. My first attempt was a bit hash & bash without knowing what I was doing and I ended up with duplicates all over the place because I stored the images inside the C1 catalog. Suitably annoyed (I remember cursing C1 instead of myself) I tried and bought DXO Elite and to cut a long story short after a while I wrote that off and went back to give C1 a proper go.
My second attempt with C1 (Sony) (I didn't want to use sessions) I kept my images in situ in file system and subsequent import into the file system new directories just keeping all the meta data / references in the C1 (small) catalog.
Thereafter it was deep immersion and learning / reading Sascha Erni's book and Phase One's excellent webinars.

It became awkward working in C1 for my Sony RAWs and back to LR 6 to work on earlier Canon RAWs so as I was much happier with C1 results I bit the bullet and moved to the full pro version of C1.

After 5 months I'm still a beginner.

This may be a rather long winded response but maybe it will help some folks.
Jamie
 
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
Anyone compared LR and C1 for Sony ,?
Click to expand...
Here is a list I started keeping for a mate of mine (he uses a Mac) it is far from complete but it might help someone....

Capture One
Pros
1 C1 renders my RAW files much better, cleaner, that haze like there was clingfilm over the sensor has gone.
2 Recovered 230GB through deleting all of DXOs stuff i.e. not keeping DXO TIFs , DXO XMPs, DXO DOP files
3 Only future need for TIFs will be CS6 edits
4 As I can print directly from RAWs I only need small JPGs for my web images
5 C1 Local adjustments (Layers) will probably work for me about 90% of the time
6 Tethered Capture on A7R2 LR/Adobe doesn't do Sony!
7 Mac users have Applescript integration with access to C1 Classes & Commands
8 "Edit With" lets C1 send a 16 bit TIFF (preferable) into CS6, LR or NIK (standalone version) etc.
with the result coming back into your C1 catalog or session


Cons
1 Can't put a Stroke Border on a print! (Duh!)
 
Hi guys. Looking for a Nikon F adaptor for the Sony E mount - there seems to be quite a few on offer ranging from cheap to silly expensive.
Ones ive looked at are the Metabones, Fotodiox and Commlite, plus many more.

Aporeciate any advice.
 
Lovely shot Chris but there does seem to be a lot of grain there. Was this a heavy crop of a high ISO shot?
 
Chris, just had another look and I think that shot was taken at ISO 1600 so I think there's something going on to create that amount of grain.

You may think that the shot is lovely and it is :D but maybe it could be even lovelier without the grain so if the grain bothers you at all maybe you could describe how this shot was taken and how it was processed. Was the exposure boosted post capture or is it a heavy crop? Stuff like that... and maybe someone will be able to suggest a way of getting even lovelier shots :D
 
woof woof said:
Chris, just had another look and I think that shot was taken at ISO 1600 so I think there's something going on to create that amount of grain.

You may think that the shot is lovely and it is :D but maybe it could be even lovelier without the grain so if the grain bothers you at all maybe you could describe how this shot was taken and how it was processed. Was the exposure boosted post capture or is it a heavy crop? Stuff like that... and maybe someone will be able to suggest a way of getting even lovelier shots :D
Click to expand...

Its a 22mp ish shot so cant have been cropped much at all.
 
twist said:
Its a 22mp ish shot so cant have been cropped much at all.
Click to expand...
But there's something going on to create that much grain.

I posted an ISO 5,000 shot a few pages back that doesn't show this much and actually I've just looked at a picture of my GF at ISO 8,000 and that doesn't either.

PS.
The shot looks better on Flickr... which leaves the question of why there's so much grain visible here.
 
Last edited:
I was shocked too when i saw the hi iso. i hadn't altered anything part from setting raw and it must be on auto iso which i never use. will set to base 100 and then move up when and if needed.I need to go through the menu settings ,i just wanted to take a photo or 2 before setting anything else but i was surprised how hi it autoed to
 
The higher ISO's should be good. When I looked at your shot on my pc a few hours ago there was a lot of grain visible, far more than I'd expect to see at ISO 8,000 never mind 1,600 but the shot on flikr looked ok. Looking at it now the shot on this page looks much better on my tablet so I don't know what's going on.

I just leave mine on auto ISO and let it use any up to and including 25,600.

PS.
Just looking at this page on my PC and tablet side by side and what I see is s good picture on my tablet but a very grainy one on my pc so I'm a bit puzzled.

What do you see Chris? Do you see a lot of grain in your cat shot? The A7 should give good image quality at ISO 1,600 and if you go back to here...

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/the-glorious-a7-but-its-all-good-thread.511885/page-369

that picture of a rather smug looking young lady was taken at ISO 5,000 and doesn't show anything like the grain I see in your cat photo at ISO 1,600 so I'm a bit baffled what's going on.
 
Last edited:
Tbh i cant see particularly any grain on my mac or my ipad ,seems strange you see 2 different looks re pc and tablet,so im lost lol
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Chris, just had another look and I think that shot was taken at ISO 1600 so I think there's something going on to create that amount of grain.

You may think that the shot is lovely and it is :D but maybe it could be even lovelier without the grain so if the grain bothers you at all maybe you could describe how this shot was taken and how it was processed. Was the exposure boosted post capture or is it a heavy crop? Stuff like that... and maybe someone will be able to suggest a way of getting even lovelier shots :D
Click to expand...

The other photo of his cat is much, much sharper at a higher ISO, so perhaps it's more camera shake than anything? I can't see grain, but am viewing on my phone.
 
Yes it could be johnathan,just took a quick few shots,should have been concentrating more but just wanted to test and fire a few off,wasnt taking much care
If im honest as i was in a hurry .:)
 
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
First quick shot, not set camera up yet but I'm loving it already :)
Click to expand...

Grain is a bit surprising, also focus seems to have missed, though possibly too close to focus on the eyes. Mine occasionally gets very grainy for no apparent reason - even ISO400 sometimes grain appears, othertimes 3200 is as clean as a whistle, especially once reduced to web-screen size.

Cute cat though :D
 
Sony FE 24-70mm f2.8 G Master now sold folks :D
Just the 85mm f1.4 to go then I am officially all out :eek:
 
Wet day pictures taken with my A7 and Minolta 50mm f1.2...







100% from that one at ISO 1,600.





Something like a 50% crop from that one at ISO 8,000.

 
Last edited:
Sorry, haven't tried it. I convert my raw's to DNG and then incompetently butcher them in Adobe CS5 sometimes adding insult to injury by passing them through the old camera emulation thingies in Nik filters. The thought of learning how to use new software scares me :(

Have you got the Nik filters? They're free...

https://www.google.com/nikcollection/

Barnacle thingies at ISO 16,000...



100% from that...



And the Nik old camera and film filter effect...

 
Last edited:
Yes I have the Nikon collection and Adobe cc and I also do the capture 1 pro for Sony free but not tried it yet with a7
 
I thought about getting CC but every time I tried to download it it just crashed and gave an error. I've gone to Windows 10 since then but haven't tried again yet. I was interested in the moiré fixing ability of CC as CS5 doesn't fix it.
 
I think your download crashed cus you were missing the latest Adobe download manager,i had same prob twice after uninstalling it and removing everything Adobe :)
 
Just one last one from today, under the pier at ISO 5,000...





I think I like this one. I sometimes find the pictures I very nearly delete grow on me.
 
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
What are opinions on the Samsung 85 1.4 and does it come with mount built in?
Click to expand...

the sony e mount version will fit..

focus peaking will be the way to go. although i had mixed result when peaking using the 85mm 1.2 wide open. would show that i had focus on the eyes but then later in post it was clear i'd miss focus on some.
 
addicknchips said:
the sony e mount version will fit..

focus peaking will be the way to go. although i had mixed result when peaking using the 85mm 1.2 wide open. would show that i had focus on the eyes but then later in post it was clear i'd miss focus on some.
Click to expand...

I had this a couple of years ago and I couldn't work out what I was doing wrong but after that things seem to have come together much better. I find peaking pretty accurate but for best results I find the magnified view the best way to go and of course no focusing and recomposing, best to move the focus spot.

Chris, don't forget the legacy options... Minolta and Olympus 85mm f2 and Canon FD f1.8, I have each of those although the modern lenses are probably going to be much better at wider apertures.
 
Can't knock the Canon FD85. Sort of usable wide open & certainly usable at f/2 no problem.

I've moved mine into the 'for sale' pile but only because I bought the Batis 85 for the AF.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top