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

owenb said:
but @jonneymendoza lets be fair with a 1.2 or 1.4 aperture to need to shoot over iso 12800 your shooting in crazy light I use a flash at weddings and low light portraits but agreed with a scene but I would tripod that
Click to expand...

Yup. I agree... light is going to be extremely low... but having decent high ISO performance means that you can shoot at something more suitable than f1.4, like f4 or even as far as f8 and that's when the higher ISO's are more likely to be needed.
 
Last edited:
My plan is to get the kit lens to start me off as people say they prefer it over the 24-70 f4.. This lens be my walk s out lens and landscape as it will do me.. Then I get a Sony 55mm prime for portrait and indoor. What aperture that one?
 
@woof woof yep totally agree mate I obv bing a portrait /wedding guy like to shoot as low as poss ( just the way I see it) but on scenes etc yep high iso will help :-)
 
yeo @jonneymendoza I noticed a vast improvement over the canon in dr and shadow recovery also seems to have a different way of handling lightroom presets
 
ahhhhhhh awesome did he have to do it in a leather thong though lmao shame the girl above isn't ....................
 
owenb said:
@woof woof yep totally agree mate I obv bing a portrait /wedding guy like to shoot as low as poss ( just the way I see it) but on scenes etc yep high iso will help :)
Click to expand...

I think that many people don't think enough about the final image and how the choice of gear and settings affect it.

Personally I do like shallow DoF but there's a time and a place and a subject for it and sometimes I'd rather use a smaller aperture even if the trade off is more noise. It's a decision that has to be made and a balancing act too but on occasions I'd rather let the ISO rise if it means that I can shoot at (for example) f4 and maintain a reasonable shutter speed, maybe 1/100. I do this in the knowledge that I can apply some NR, back the exposure off slightly and resize the image and it'll look ok on screen or in a reasonably sized print.

However, I do know that my shots would not be gallery quality if printed a meter wide or viewed on screen at 200% :D

The alternative to shooting at smaller apertures and ISO 8,000+ might be shooting at 3200 and f1.4 and 1/60 and only getting razor thin depth of field and risking blur. That's fine if that's the aim and if the subject suits it but I do like having the option of doing otherwise :D
 
Some brilliant images there and the colour rendering looks great. Thank you for sharing
 
@woof woof I think it is just what makes us difference I have always shot that way in some instances I would prob be off with a wider aperture tbh and some occasions I have stepped down etc I think I'm fairly open minded with portraits and u sort of get a feel for how to shoot etc with experience
 
twist said:
Wheres all the colour gone from your hi iso images, look muddy? Did you setup your camera on a tripod for your thong shot :p
Click to expand...
Man the light sucked that time. Just a couple of low powered Street lights. It was far darker then that in real life!

Make no mistake @twist I shoot more with this camera because it can be converted to a tiny system compared to my 5DMK3.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Man the light sucked that time. Just a couple of low powered Street lights. It was far darker then that in real life!

Make no mistake @twist I shoot more with this camera because it can be converted to a tiny system compared to my 5DMK3.
Click to expand...

I still shoot more with my DSLR because I need its advantages, but I do also like taking my A7 out and about for non serious stuff.
 
I just sent @rookies a 25600 f8 photo that I took in my kitchen of some cayenne pepper and cumin seeds lol I forgot how good the a7ii is at high iso lmao ( didn't use the a7rii as hes buying a a7ii)
 
owenb said:
I just sent @rookies a 25600 f8 photo that I took in my kitchen of some cayenne pepper and cumin seeds lol I forgot how good the a7ii is at high iso lmao ( didn't use the a7rii as hes buying a a7ii)
Click to expand...

Got it and it pretty good without being process so it quite a impressive camera me think
 
Awesome. I think we have established that most modern full frame cameras are decent at high iso. :pint:
 
god its going to be an expensive moth the wife is now eyeing a a7s ii up for video and high iso......................
 
owenb said:
god its going to be an expensive moth the wife is now eyeing a a7s ii up for video and high iso......................
Click to expand...

The A7sii isn't that amazing at hi iso stills (its good but not ground breaking), just downsample the A7rii images and youll get very similar results. Video however is very impressive from the A7S cameras (both).
 
Last edited:
twist said:
The A7sii isn't that amazing at hi iso stills (its good but not ground breaking), just downsample the A7rii images and youll get very similar results. Video however is very impressive from the A7S cameras (both).
Click to expand...
When you say Downsample you mean resize the image smaller? how would this make a difference.. or you mean within the camera?
 
yeah shes getting into video a lot morefor her side so the s seems logical we will own all the sony cams then lol rii sii and ii lol
 
rookies said:
When you say Downsample you mean resize the image smaller? how would this make a difference.. or you mean within the camera?
Click to expand...
the r is a lot higher mp ifd u downsample it to the s ii levels it will have a reduction in noise by a fair bit
 
rookies said:
When you say Downsample you mean resize the image smaller? how would this make a difference.. or you mean within the camera?
Click to expand...

Yes, you effectively resize the image to the other cameras native mp count. The more you "zoom" the more the noise is magnified. This will explain it.

native.JPG

down.JPG
 
Ah know what you mean now pal..
 
Is that Test site really telling the truth? As when I compare the D750 to the A7II the D750 is better but from some of the Raw images I have been sent don't appear that bad....
 
rookies said:
Is that Test site really telling the truth? As when I compare the D750 to the A7II the D750 is better but from some of the Raw images I have been sent don't appear that bad....
Click to expand...

The d750 is one of the best for low light, that's what I keep telling you. If you don't notice it vs the a7ii then that's good news for you, I can definitely notice the difference between my a7 (same as a7ii) and d750, it's about 1 1/4 to 1 1/2 stops.
 
twist said:
The d750 is one of the best for low light, that's what I keep telling you. If you don't notice it vs the a7ii then that's good news for you, I can definitely notice the difference between my a7 (same as a7ii) and d750, it's about 1 1/4 to 1 1/2 stops.
Click to expand...

No I meant on that Test Page from DP Review you can clearly see the difference.. But with some Raw files I've been sent they not as noisy as those on that test site.. Or can anything play into this factor?
 
its because I nail the exposure correctly makes a big difference when you raise shadows in editing etc;-)
 
Nailing Exposure I though this getting it spot on is buy having the needle in the middle of light meter?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top