Photo sharing: Sony Alpha

[havoc315]

Hogsmeade at Night by Adam Brown, on Flickr

 

[havoc315]

Uni def doesn't cater to the photographers like Disney does. That is one thing Disney does better. Try bringing in a tripod to Universal and you would think you were a threat to national security with they way they treat you. Did you guys stay on site?

I guess maybe because I go so much, the way Uni is doesn't really come as a shock to me but can see from someone in your shoes how it comes as a shock the differences

Yes, stayed on site. I really went with a compact travel kit, I stuck to the A6300 and a gorilla pod. There were times I didn't bring a camera bag, sticking the a6300 into a large pocket so I didn't have to locker it. I don't think most of the lockers could even fit my large camera bag that I use for the D750. If I return, maybe I'll bring more greear and make it a more photo-centric trip. Or stick to going light. I'm pretty happy with the results I got with the A6300 + 10-18. And the few dark ride photos I took, the A6300 + 24/1.8 did just fine. What I mostly find lacking compared to the D750 is the dynamic range. I see far more difference than even suggested in DXO testing... Particularly in my RAW landscape files, I get so much more flexibility in post with the D750.

 

[fractal]

@havoc315 - What's your impression of the A6300 after using it for a few months?

 

[havoc315]

@havoc315 - What's your impression of the A6300 after using it for a few months?

I don't love the jpegs, but I rarely shoot jpeg. I sometimes really dislike the white balance, way too "yellow" sometimes. And the IQ is still far behind full frame in most cases.

I mostly love the AF system, except it really should have a dedicated thumbstick to move the AF point. I find myself accidentally clicking the wrong part of the wheel when trying to move the AF point.
I do like the size and weight. When used with the right lenses, it can produce excellent results. It's a great travel camera. And with the firmware updated to the Nikon adapter, I can now get usable non-action shots with some of my Nikon lenses.
I'm really using both cameras 50/50 now. Really debating what to bring to Cruise-Disney World in August. I think I'm bringing both camera bodies, but trying to figure out the division of labor and lenses for each.

 

[fractal]

I don't love the jpegs, but I rarely shoot jpeg. I sometimes really dislike the white balance, way too "yellow" sometimes. And the IQ is still far behind full frame in most cases.

I mostly love the AF system, except it really should have a dedicated thumbstick to move the AF point. I find myself accidentally clicking the wrong part of the wheel when trying to move the AF point.
I do like the size and weight. When used with the right lenses, it can produce excellent results. It's a great travel camera. And with the firmware updated to the Nikon adapter, I can now get usable non-action shots with some of my Nikon lenses.
I'm really using both cameras 50/50 now. Really debating what to bring to Cruise-Disney World in August. I think I'm bringing both camera bodies, but trying to figure out the division of labor and lenses for each.

Thanks, also just saw your response to Hockeyman.

I've heard conflicting opinions on the Jpegs. David Busch loves them, others don't. That WB issues is the same with my NEX-7.

Nikon performed some kind of magic on the D750 sensor for sure.

 

[havoc315]

Thanks, also just saw your response to Hockeyman.

I've heard conflicting opinions on the Jpegs. David Busch loves them, others don't. That WB issues is the same with my NEX-7.

Nikon performed some kind of magic on the D750 sensor for sure.

I'm really hoping that in the next 2 years, Nikon truly jumps into mirrorless and basically released a mirrorless version of the D750 --- give it the same or better IQ, same responsiveness, same basic camera body and button layout, same ergonomics, but top notch on-sensor PDAF driving Nikon F-mount lenses.
My biggest issue with the D750 -- and all dSLRs --- is the often front/back focus when dealing with very thin DOF. I have the new Tamron 85/1.8 -- It is absolutely FANTASTIC, but it suffers from some serious front focus and focus shift. Thus, there is a different amount of front focus, depending on the aperture. Makes me just slightly miss perfection on a lot of shots. I want to try the lens a bit more actually adapted onto the A6300.

 

[zackiedawg]

I've been very happy with the JPGs myself. Though I shoot JPG a lot more often than I shoot RAW, and have on all my last few cameras, I was OK with the JPG on A6000 too but find the A6300 JPGs are definitely improved. For me, better detail preserved on higher ISOs as the NR algorithm is better, and I set it to 'low' so it's minimal, the color for me is less yellow than the A6000 was (I've compared side by side, and greens are definitely less yellow on the A6300), and I like the extra latitude the 'extra fine' setting provides when minor tweaks are needed.

 

[fractal]

 

[havoc315]

Despicable Me, Minion Mayhem by Adam Brown, on Flickr

 

[havoc315]

Leaving Hogsmeade by Adam Brown, on Flickr

 

[havoc315]

Looks like our friend Tom Bricker had a change of heart about Sony mirrorless..

http://www.disneytouristblog.com/jumping-ship-mirrorless-volume-ii/

As I've said, the advantages and disadvantages of mirrorless vs dslr are generally overrated on both sides.

 

[havoc315]

Skull Island, Reign of Kong, HDR by Adam Brown, on Flickr

 

[fractal]

Skull Island, Reign of Kong, HDR by Adam Brown, on Flickr

did you get to ride it?

 

[HPS3]

I sure like this photo. The lighting is great!

 

[HPS3]

Looks like our friend Tom Bricker had a change of heart about Sony mirrorless..

http://www.disneytouristblog.com/jumping-ship-mirrorless-volume-ii/

As I've said, the advantages and disadvantages of mirrorless vs dslr are generally overrated on both sides.

I don't get along with the Sony either. At first they raved about the size advantage but have thrown that away with the new lenses. The prices are also getting too high for most. CaNikon offer a better value.

 

[havoc315]

did you get to ride it?

Nope, it was closed or extremely long line every time we were near it.

 

[havoc315]

I don't get along with the Sony either. At first they raved about the size advantage but have thrown that away with the new lenses. The prices are also getting too high for most. CaNikon offer a better value.

It's why I'm happy with Nikon as my main setup. The Sony a7 series definitely has some advantages but:
1-- size is not a significant advantage.
2-- price ends up often being significantly more.

I like the a6300 where you get a real size advantage and you can get ok lenses without breaking the bank. (still a bit overpriced for so-so lenses but acceptable).

I'm hoping Nikon eventually does a f-mount mirrorless.

 

[fractal]

Looks like our friend Tom Bricker had a change of heart about Sony mirrorless..

http://www.disneytouristblog.com/jumping-ship-mirrorless-volume-ii/

As I've said, the advantages and disadvantages of mirrorless vs dslr are generally overrated on both sides.

Seems most of his issues are not getting the lenses he wanted in time, which is a temporary thing. Unfortunately, the high demand for the new lenses and the Japanese earthquake put things behind schedule. Another major issue is the menu system which is legitimate.

I still think mirrorless, even FF gives you more flexibility to go light. The cameras got bigger because they added IBIS, even so they are still smaller than a FF DSLR without IBIS. How big would a stabilized DSLR be? It is apple to oranges in that respect. Yes, you can use stabilized lenses on a DSLR but you can also buy an A7 or A7r and use stabilized lenses on a SonyE and be significantly smaller and lighter.

The biggest issue I have with Sony seems to stem with their decision to put the 36mpx sensor in the A7r. I don't know if this was due to an effort to directly take on Nikon or to just push the technology. That sensor requires a more "telecentric" DSLR lens design vs. a rangefinder lens design. The lenses could be made significantly smaller if designed for just the 24mpx or 42mpx sensor. Now they seem to be stuck having to also cater to the A7r sensor. The 36mpx sensor should have been used for an A99II.

See this article which I've posted before...http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2016/02/04/sonys-master-plan-new-85-24-70-70-200-and-more/



specifically this paragraph...

The compromise

And, having mentioned compromise, I should explain the great compromise which has made the entire Sony E/FE system much larger than it needs to be.

It’s all down to the A7R 36 megapixel sensor. This sensor, more so than the 24 megapixel full frame, requires a very telecentric lens design. That is, more like a DSLR lens, despite the slim A7 series body. In order to perform acceptably with this sensor, the FE lens range could not be designed to be as small as a rangefinder system equivalent, or to take full advantage of the 18mm mount to sensor distance.Brian Smith, whose images are great (not cheesy portraits) but whose technical info clearly comes via Sony PR, says this: “Mirrorless camera design has allowed Sony’s lens designers to place larger than normal lens element close to the body”. Actually, they don’t, as the design of the extenders will tell you. They’ve used a stronger degree of telephoto construction in the long zoom, allowing a smaller than normal rear element and they have taken measures to move it further away from the body – and this is a general trend. If you want to see what a properly small 85mm f/1.4 looks like try a Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f/1.4 ZE in Canon mount – 72mm filters not 82mm, 570g versus 850g and really solid all-metal manual focus. The mirrorless bodies do provide a zone from around 16mm to 42mm from the sensor surface which can accommodate the rear of the lens, and can’t ever be used on a DSLR. But Sony does not make full use of that and can not do so because of the microlens, filter layer and structural characteristics of the A7R sensor.


Despite this, the flexibility remains. Tom Bricker stated he may give the excellent Voigtlander 10mm a try before making up his mind on Sony. That combo is materially smaller than a DSLR wide angle counterpart. In fact, since 10mm is the widest rectilinear FF ever made, right now there is no DSLR counterpart. I think future hope for smaller lenses made reside in the third party realm.

Sony's A7r decision is now haunting them as the demand for more "pro-lenses" such as the f/2.8 zooms increased. They are as big as DSLR lenses because of the A7r. This is not to say that one cannot make a small FF kit with Sony. Using certain primes one can. The 35mm 2.8 is very compact. The 28mm f/2 is small and light and at a good price. The system allows you to be a big lens "Pro" one day and a light traveler the next. Obviously the A6000/6300 even more so. Unfortunately, it could have been even better.

 

[havoc315]

Seems most of his issues are not getting the lenses he wanted in time, which is a temporary thing. Unfortunately, the high demand for the new lenses and the Japanese earthquake put things behind schedule. Another major issue is the menu system which is legitimate.

I still think mirrorless, even FF gives you more flexibility to go light. The cameras got bigger because they added IBIS, even so they are still smaller than a FF DSLR without IBIS. How big would a stabilized DSLR be? It is apple to oranges in that respect. Yes, you can use stabilized lenses on a DSLR but you can also buy an A7 or A7r and use stabilized lenses on a SonyE and be significantly smaller and lighter.

The biggest issue I have with Sony seems to stem with their decision to put the 36mpx sensor in the A7r. I don't know if this was due to an effort to directly take on Nikon or to just push the technology. That sensor requires a more "telecentric" DSLR lens design vs. a rangefinder lens design. The lenses could be made significantly smaller if designed for just the 24mpx or 42mpx sensor. Now they seem to be stuck having to also cater to the A7r sensor. The 36mpx sensor should have been used for an A99II.

See this article which I've posted before...http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2016/02/04/sonys-master-plan-new-85-24-70-70-200-and-more/



specifically this paragraph...

The compromise

And, having mentioned compromise, I should explain the great compromise which has made the entire Sony E/FE system much larger than it needs to be.

It’s all down to the A7R 36 megapixel sensor. This sensor, more so than the 24 megapixel full frame, requires a very telecentric lens design. That is, more like a DSLR lens, despite the slim A7 series body. In order to perform acceptably with this sensor, the FE lens range could not be designed to be as small as a rangefinder system equivalent, or to take full advantage of the 18mm mount to sensor distance.Brian Smith, whose images are great (not cheesy portraits) but whose technical info clearly comes via Sony PR, says this: “Mirrorless camera design has allowed Sony’s lens designers to place larger than normal lens element close to the body”. Actually, they don’t, as the design of the extenders will tell you. They’ve used a stronger degree of telephoto construction in the long zoom, allowing a smaller than normal rear element and they have taken measures to move it further away from the body – and this is a general trend. If you want to see what a properly small 85mm f/1.4 looks like try a Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f/1.4 ZE in Canon mount – 72mm filters not 82mm, 570g versus 850g and really solid all-metal manual focus. The mirrorless bodies do provide a zone from around 16mm to 42mm from the sensor surface which can accommodate the rear of the lens, and can’t ever be used on a DSLR. But Sony does not make full use of that and can not do so because of the microlens, filter layer and structural characteristics of the A7R sensor.


Despite this, the flexibility remains. Tom Bricker stated he may give the excellent Voigtlander 10mm a try before making up his mind on Sony. That combo is materially smaller than a DSLR wide angle counterpart. In fact, since 10mm is the widest rectilinear FF ever made, right now there is no DSLR counterpart. I think future hope for smaller lenses made reside in the third party realm.

Sony's A7r decision is now haunting them as the demand for more "pro-lenses" such as the f/2.8 zooms increased. They are as big as DSLR lenses because of the A7r. This is not to say that one cannot make a small FF kit with Sony. Using certain primes one can. The 35mm 1.8 is very compact. The 28mm f/2 is small and light and at a good price. The system allows you to be a big lens "Pro" one day and a light traveler the next. Obviously the A6000/6300 even more so. Unfortunately, it could have been even better.

Honestly, I don't know if this 36mp story is fact or fiction. I've heard lots of weird theories and tumors over time -- included detailed analysis claiming that 2.8 zooms weren't possible for Sony mirrorless, etc.

I see 3 main issues that Tom had:
1... If you don't compromise by taking slower lenses, you don't really save much in size and weight. Sure, the body may be 200 grams less. But if you are using a 1000 gram 2.8 zoom lens..maybe even a speed light flash too... carrying additional lenses, extra batteries...
What's really the difference between a 5000 gram kit versus a 5200 gram kit.
Sure, there are some combinations where the a7 is a bit smaller, but an overall enthusiast / pro camera bag will have similar weight.

2.. price. Yes, some anticipated lenses not available yet. But even more so, as the good lenses are released, the overall assortment and choices are far more expensive than available for CaNikon. (compare a Tamron 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8, versus native 2.8 lenses for Sony).

3.. menu system. Sony's is a mess. compared to the Nikon d750, you definitely miss some shots fiddling with the menus, moving the AF point, etc.

Truthfully, I agree with his criticisms which is why I still prefer the d750 for full frame use.
For aps-c use -- the system is indeed much smaller. There are some decent affordable lenses. The menu system still sucks, but I'm willing to live with it due to the other advantages.

But for full frame -- my main lenses are Nikon 18-35, Tamron 24-70/2.8, Nikon 70-200/4, Tamron 45/1.8, Tamron 85/1.8, and Nikon 105mm macro -- equivalent Sony lenses would be much more costly. And total kit weight wouldn't be that much lighter.

 

[fractal]

I've seen another article on the A7r sensor and why it's very finicky. It was designed for Nikon DSLR. I'll have to dig it up.

1) You are gaining IBIS vs. no IBIS DSLR. Whether that is important or not is up to you. For Tom it seemed to be important. In fact he previously showed examples of shots he would not have been able to get with the Nikon. So he lost shots with the Sony because of menu but did earlier claim the reverse due to IBIS.

2) Agree. The argument is that the new Sony lenses are designed for the next generation of higher Mpx cameras and are higher quality. Can be debated. I know I wont be buying the new FE 50mm 1.4 any time soon. The only real "hole" it the lineup for me is a 135mm 2.8. In Nikon and Canon's favor, their lenses would seem to hold their value better over time.

3) Everyone bashed the NEX menu system. It's cluttered but after playing with the A6000 the new menu definitely feels more confusing. Some of it can be blamed on all the new features but still... I'm happy shooting in Manual with the Tri-Nav system.


Moving to DSLR would mean no EVF which again is personal preference. I love using EVF.