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

Riz_Guru said:
:D if you go looking for issues, they may crop up. Just like the banding on the Sony A9.
No camera is perfect but agree that this needs further investigation and a fix via firmware if possible.
Click to expand...

I mean, you are right and we care more than other people who look at images! For example, the photos last week from the A9 were worse (IMO) than mine. This could have been down to a number of things. I edited mine, he was selling his jpegs straight from camera with no editing/cropping.

But at the end of the day, the misses liked a couple of his photos as when you look at them without zooming in they looked good.
 
Tom Green said:
Have you viewed 28k photos at 1:1 or looked at them all closely enough to notice?
Click to expand...

You don't need to scrutinize this flippant comment so closely :) Twist says it's not even with the A9 anyway? I haven't got an A7III

i would actually test it otherwise
 
Riz_Guru said:
:D if you go looking for issues, they may crop up. Just like the banding on the Sony A9.
No camera is perfect but agree that this needs further investigation and a fix via firmware if possible.
Click to expand...
No camera is perfect, but most imperfections don't impact on IQ.
 
JJ! said:
I mean, you are right and we care more than other people who look at images! For example, the photos last week from the A9 were worse (IMO) than mine. This could have been down to a number of things. I edited mine, he was selling his jpegs straight from camera with no editing/cropping.

But at the end of the day, the misses liked a couple of his photos as when you look at them without zooming in they looked good.
Click to expand...

Looking at photos without pixel peeping is the best way forward :D
 
I did just read this on the FB

"On a separate note, tried a7iii for awhile at the Sony centre, for those who are accustomed or used to a9 evf, you may need a motion sickness pill for a7iii."
 
dancook said:
Oh...I thought it was an A9 thing too, my bad - I just got my lights from the car..
Click to expand...
I don't think it's a case of it's not affected, just that the A7iii is affected more. That's my understanding anyway ;)
 
snerkler said:
1 in 500 would be too much for me tbh, 1 in 1000 I'd be on the fence, but I'd be gutted if it ruined a really good shot.
Click to expand...

It's not difficult to correct so it can't really ruin a shot, just waste a bit of your time. Even so that 1 in 500 figure is entirely made up, it could be 1 in 5 or it could be 1 in 5000, can't be sure without real testing but if you're constantly shooting into strong direct light sources then you're probably going to become familiar with it sooner or later.

snerkler said:
That would be good if it was at it would suggest that it's fixable, at least to a large extent. But then this is Sony, and they're not renowned for solving issues through firmware, or indeed offering a lot at all with firmware updates. Best wait for the A7iv :LOL:
Click to expand...

Technically it wouldn't be a fix but more of a work around, probably splitting hairs though.
 
snerkler said:
I don't think it's a case of it's not affected, just that the A7iii is affected more. That's my understanding anyway ;)
Click to expand...

Ok what do I need to do,

Have a flash at the edge of the frame pointed towards the camera, maybe removing the lens hood will increase chance?
 
snerkler said:
No camera is perfect, but most imperfections don't impact on IQ.
Click to expand...
I agree, the original A7 produces IQ good enough for me and probably good enough for clients too.
It's our inner GAS / pixel peeping mindset which drives us to buy cutting edge technology..... the end results might not differ that much from older DSLR / mirrorless systems.
 
dancook said:
I did just read this on the FB

"On a separate note, tried a7iii for awhile at the Sony centre, for those who are accustomed or used to a9 evf, you may need a motion sickness pill for a7iii."
Click to expand...

Is it way different then??!
 
dancook said:
Have a flash at the edge of the frame pointed towards the camera, maybe removing the lens hood will increase chance?
Click to expand...

Just shoot a subject with the light behind it at different angles, eventually you're going to reproduce the issue. You can use the DPR samples as a guide to positioning:

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/6769434587/sony-a7-iii-sample-photos/6081204033 - visible in the flare above her head
https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/6769434587/sony-a7-iii-sample-photos/5655951041 - visible on her head

It should still occur on your A9 but may be less obvious.
 
simonbarker said:
Just shoot a subject with the light behind it at different angles, eventually you're going to reproduce the issue. You can use the DPR samples as a guide to positioning:

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/6769434587/sony-a7-iii-sample-photos/6081204033 - visible in the flare above her head
https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/6769434587/sony-a7-iii-sample-photos/5655951041 - visible on her head

It should still occur on your A9 but may be less obvious.
Click to expand...

Yes I see it, it was faint but I have bumped up clarity contrast and all that to make it more obviously


DSC01129.jpg DSC01130.jpg DSC01139-2.jpg
 
dancook said:
I did just read this on the FB

"On a separate note, tried a7iii for awhile at the Sony centre, for those who are accustomed or used to a9 evf, you may need a motion sickness pill for a7iii."
Click to expand...
Can't be that bad surely ;)

simonbarker said:
It's not difficult to correct so it can't really ruin a shot, just waste a bit of your time. Even so that 1 in 500 figure is entirely made up, it could be 1 in 5 or it could be 1 in 5000, can't be sure without real testing but if you're constantly shooting into strong direct light sources then you're probably going to become familiar with it sooner or later.



Technically it wouldn't be a fix but more of a work around, probably splitting hairs though.
Click to expand...
Looks a time consuming fix in PP to me tbh.
 
JJ! said:
Is it way different then??!
Click to expand...

Sony A7 III VS Sony A9
  • 1.3 cm (0.5 type) electronic viewfinder (color), XGA OLED VS 1.3 cm (0.5 type) electronic viewfinder (color),Quad-VGA OLED
  • 2,359,296 dots VS 3 686 400 dots
  • Auto/Manual (5 steps between -2 and +2) VS Auto/Manual (5 steps between -2 and +2)
  • Manual (5 steps) VS Manual (5 steps)
  • 100% VS 100%
  • approx. 0.78 x (with 50 mm lens at infinity, -1m-1) VS approx. 0.78 x (with 50 mm lens at infinity, -1m-1)
  • -4.0 to +3.0m-1 VS -4.0 to +3.0m-1
  • Approx. 23 mm from the eyepiece lens, 18.5 mm from the eyepiece frame at -1m-1 (CIPA Standard) VS Approx. 23 mm from the eyepiece lens, 18.5 mm from the eyepiece frame at -1m-1 (CIPA standard)
  • STD 60fps VS STD 60fps / HI 120fps
  • Graphic Display, Display All Info, No Display Info, Digital Level Gauge, Histogram VS Digital Level Gauge, Display All Info, For viewfinder, Graphic Display, Histogram, No Disp. Info
:D
 
Riz_Guru said:
I can see it too....... so @dancook , will you be giving up your Sony system because of this issue? :D
Click to expand...

Of course not :P if there was a rare case an image that I took had the issue and it had to be blown up huge for print or viewing - then I might just have use photoshop to fix it.

But for the majority of usage no one will notice it.
 
So I just bought a Zeiss Batis 85mm and I already have the Sony 85mm 1.8 LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top