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

nandbytes said:
huh?



I am not taking about DoF at all. Yes shooting MFT at f4 can be equivalent shooting FF at f8.
In the example above E-M1+12-40/2.8 and A7+24-70mm/4. If you shoot both wide open, FF still have one stop advantage in terms of light. Just as you said shooting MFT @ f/2.8 is like shooting FF @f/5.6
What I said exactly matches you thinking...

Of course in bright day light you don't really care much for that extra spot but if you are having shoot at higher ISO or low light A7+24-70mm would do better
Click to expand...

I just think that the view often expressed on forums that FF captures x times the light and has x stops more advantage has always seemed at odds with what ordinary non pixel peeping obsessives see when they look at pictures and needs qualifying and explaining.
 
A ps to that.

When looking at FF v MFT or APS-C you have to remember that with the smaller formats you're likely to be using a wider lens...

FF = 50mm f1.8 = aperture of 50/1.8= 27.7mm.
MFT = 25mm 1.8 = aperture of 25/1.8= 13.8.

Theory is nice but take a FF and MFT out and shoot them side by side applying the crop factor (shoot FF at f8, MFT at f4) and few people will be able to tell the difference.

I spent a lot of time and money on this comparing FF, APS-C and MFT and concluded that I'd mostly wasted my time :D
 
nandbytes said:
FF sensor gathers 4x more light than a m43 sensor. So m43 is still under by 1 stop disadvantage i.e. it'll still gather one stop less light.
This basically reflected in FF having about 2 stops more ISO advantage over m43. m43 makes up for one stop from a f2.8 but still down a stop :)
Click to expand...
I was referring to exposure rather than total light gathered.

woof woof said:
I just think that the view often expressed on forums that FF captures x times the light and has x stops more advantage has always seemed at odds with what ordinary non pixel peeping obsessives see when they look at pictures and needs qualifying and explaining.
Click to expand...
I agree, it’s only really useful to know at high iso and/or if you really need the DR.

woof woof said:
A ps to that.

When looking at FF v MFT or APS-C you have to remember that with the smaller formats you're likely to be using a wider lens...

FF = 50mm f1.8 = aperture of 50/1.8= 27.7mm.
MFT = 25mm 1.8 = aperture of 25/1.8= 13.8.

Theory is nice but take a FF and MFT out and shoot them side by side applying the crop factor (shoot FF at f8, MFT at f4) and few people will be able to tell the difference.

I spent a lot of time and money on this comparing FF, APS-C and MFT and concluded that I'd mostly wasted my time :D
Click to expand...
Yep, and I would add that lenses (obviously) and the way you process make a huge difference too. I’ve recently been playing around in LR with my Olly images and have developed a preset which (imo) has transformed my images.

Whilst I’ve always been happy with my Olly images they didn’t have the clarity and punch of my D750 images, but I’ve recently discovered that Olly images need quite a contrast boost in LR (I use the tone curve for this). The trouble is that when you first apply them to the RAW it’s quite an extreme change so I’ve thought I was over baking them in the past, but when I compare them with my shots from the D750 they’re not. I’m therefore assuming the Olly RAW files lack quite a lot of contrast by default. I’ve also noticed that often the don’t spread over the full luminance scale of the histogram and by adding the high contrast hike they do then reach the blackest blacks and whitest whites (although of course this doesn’t always need to be the case).

Anyway, my point is that at normal viewing sizes I can struggle to tell the difference between my Olly and D750 now (scene, lens and DOF dependant ;))
 
F/1.4 said:
Decided after last night's shoot I can't deal with the form factor and shooting style. Back to Nikon it is
Click to expand...
Really????? Guessing it’s a leg pull?
 
snerkler said:
Really????? Are you going to lose a load of money, or can you return it on the 14day policy?
Click to expand...

I was only jokin. Nah in all seriousness I found the whole experience very strange. It felt like I was shooting with a compact camera and I didn't feel as in tune with the cameras but I suppose that's to be expected for the first while
 
F/1.4 said:
I was only jokin. Nah in all seriousness I found the whole experience very strange. It felt like I was shooting with a compact camera and I didn't feel as in tune with the cameras but I suppose that's to be expected for the first while
Click to expand...
Lol, I changed my post as I then thought it was a joke after I posted. I see Tom twigged straight away though ;)

TBH I’ve never had an issue switching from one system to another but it does take time to learn the best settings etc.
 
F/1.4 said:
I was only jokin. Nah in all seriousness I found the whole experience very strange. It felt like I was shooting with a compact camera and I didn't feel as in tune with the cameras but I suppose that's to be expected for the first while
Click to expand...

I did feel rather odd when I tried it with the 70-200 2.8. Not horrible, just a bit weird have this beast of a lens attached to a tiny body!!
 
Well I just got back from the show forgot my fecking phone wanted to see who was there to meet up with.
 
I was very impress with that A7 iii it never miss a shot with that bloke on bmx bike wow
 
F/1.4 said:
Did you buy one ?
Click to expand...

Not me, I only came home with a couple of boxes.

NjmiuX0.jpg


:p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top