Photo sharing: Sony Alpha

_DSC4616-XL.jpg
 
I don't disagree with you. There are times I have wondered if I should have gone Nikon. And yes, if high ISO is your highest priority, Canon 6d or Nikon d610 can make sense.

That said, the A99 would do Disney dark rides beautifully. I got some very nice dark ride pics with the Rx100-- and the a99 is about 3 stops better. I would be very confident in the a99 on dark rides.


Thanks for the input. I've never had the chance to shoot an a99 so it is unfair of me to judge it. I'm only working off of numbers and charts and theoretical performance. But if the a99 is plenty capable then it is certainly a camera to give serious consideration. But I'm not too worried about it right now. Like I said, I'm happy sticking to APS-C for the time being. Frankly I like the challenge of getting decent dark ride pictures on my a58. I don't want to make it too easy. ;)

Speaking of dark ride shooting... I've been looking at some of my old pics and comparing them to newer ones and I've realized something concerning. My old NEX 5 with a Sony 50mm f/1.8 takes better JPEGs on dark rides then my new a58 takes with RAW images and a Lightroom 5 clean-up. Almost all of my dark ride shots have been taken with a Sigma 30mm f1.4. A lot of images are turning out poorly. I recognize that f/1.4 is a very small DOF and that dark rides are mostly bad shots with a few gems. But my rate of success was higher with my NEX 5. I'm starting to suspect that I have back/front focusing issue with my Sigma. I've never micro adjusted a lens before. Anyone here have any information, suggestions, or thoughts about micro adjustment?

Thanks everybody!
 
I think ISO performance can be overblown. A Sony A99 with a fast prime will handle any Disney dark ride shot easily. The Sony also has in body stabilization which the Nikon doesn't ( I believe ).

anyway - unless you are taking pictures of a black cat in a dark basement, a full frame Sony A99 should be more than enough camera.

Yes and no. Remember, high ISO isn't solely for the dark. It's also so you can use higher shutter speeds in mediocre lighting.
I've seen Sony enthusiasts defend even the ISO performance of the APS-C cameras with, "nobody really needs to ever shoot above ISO 800 anyway.."

The reality cuts both ways. Go back just a few years (including film), and nobody was shooting over ISO 400/800. Getting usable pictures at ISO 25600 would be pure fantasy.
But now that the technology has evolved, there are certainly times it is useful.
If you've never known a high ISO camera, and you are used to shooting below ISO 1600, and you have "lived without" being able to shoot higher, then it's true you don't "need" more, because you have already learned to live without it.
For most of us casual photographers, I do think there is infrequently any real reason to go above ISO 1600/3200 --- within the range that the A99 still handles very very well. And for those times we are shooting in a dark restaurant or a Disney dark ride, ISO 6400 is typically plenty sufficient, and the A99 still handles ISO 6400 adequately. (But you won't want to use your Disney dark ride shot in poster-size.)
For someone who wants to take a Disney dark ride pic, AND blow it up at a poster (as opposed to 4X6, 5X7)... then such a photographer may be better served with a different camera. For those who regularly seek to take candlelit shots, night clubs, etc... a higher ISO performing camera may be beneficial.

I've tried ISO 12800 on the A99 out of curiosity. It isn't really pretty. I can get a usable 5X7 out of it, with some smudged detail, but not too horrible. Certainly much better than I can get from an APS-C camera. But if you actually find you need ISO 12800+ more than once in a blue moon, then another camera may be better.
 
Speaking of dark ride shooting... I've been looking at some of my old pics and comparing them to newer ones and I've realized something concerning. My old NEX 5 with a Sony 50mm f/1.8 takes better JPEGs on dark rides then my new a58 takes with RAW images and a Lightroom 5 clean-up. Almost all of my dark ride shots have been taken with a Sigma 30mm f1.4. A lot of images are turning out poorly. I recognize that f/1.4 is a very small DOF and that dark rides are mostly bad shots with a few gems. But my rate of success was higher with my NEX 5. I'm starting to suspect that I have back/front focusing issue with my Sigma. I've never micro adjusted a lens before. Anyone here have any information, suggestions, or thoughts about micro adjustment?

I have the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC and am overall unhappy with its performance. I haven't taken it to WDW yet, but even lower-light in-door pictures seem like they aren't focused properly. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated.
 

Jumping into the high ISO discussion and dark rides, here is one of my dar rides shots im pretty proud of. Not too bad for a Sony A55, 3200 ISO, using the Sony 35mm F/1,8, 1/25th in manual mode and manual focus. Ive seen this same shot from others with some higher end cameras and lenses and this one can hold its own up against some of them.


Hitch Hiking Ghosts by Mike Sperduto, on Flickr
 
Jumping into the high ISO discussion and dark rides, here is one of my dar rides shots im pretty proud of. Not too bad for a Sony A55, 3200 ISO, using the Sony 35mm F/1,8, 1/25th in manual mode and manual focus. Ive seen this same shot from others with some higher end cameras and lenses and this one can hold its own up against some of them.


Hitch Hiking Ghosts by Mike Sperduto, on Flickr

Great job!
 
Playing around with the camera while the kids were opening gifts. My wife thought I should have been more focused on the kids, but how many gift opening shots do you need???


_DSC0214-XL.jpg
 
Playing around with the camera while the kids were opening gifts. My wife thought I should have been more focused on the kids, but how many gift opening shots do you need???


_DSC0214-XL.jpg

Great shot :thumbsup2 And our wives must be one and the same since mine had to have pictures taken of every single little thing everyone got :rotfl2:
 
Great shot :thumbsup2 And our wives must be one and the same since mine had to have pictures taken of every single little thing everyone got :rotfl2:

Thanks! Lol - yes, I'm trying to capture the expression on their faces while she's wants to catagorize and account for all the gifts. :confused3
 
I really want a new camera badly :lmao: I cant wait for Sony to announce the news stuff already so I can figure out what im going to do. Im still going back and forth between the A99 and A7
 
I really want a new camera badly :lmao: I cant wait for Sony to announce the news stuff already so I can figure out what im going to do. Im still going back and forth between the A99 and A7

Or the A79! Some rumors suggest it will employ a new mirror that saps away less light. That would potentially improve the ISO performance. (Maybe another 1/4th of a stop improvement?)

A99 price has been dropping away from the main retailers. Now you can get it new for about $2100.... used for under $1700.

Once you remove the excitement and novelty around the A7 (the first real fullframe mirrorless interchangeable lens camera), the A99 seems more like the better camera and better system.

What are the advantages of the A7?

*Smaller size --- To me, this is the biggest advantage IF you are going to shoot with short prime lenses. Then it becomes a pretty compact system compared to a fullframe dSLR. But once you start attaching longer lenses... You simply get poorer balance on the A7. If you are going to attach A-mount 2.8 zoom lenses.. with the adapter... You really lose most of the size advantage.

*Better high ISO performance -- Definitely true on paper, but in the real world, this is cancelled out in most cases. If you are going to use A-mount lenses in full auto-focus, you need to attach the LEA4 adapter, which cancels out the ISO upgrade. You essentially get the same ISO performance as the A99.
If you shoot with prime lenses, you will lose stabilization. For action shots, the loss of stabilization doesn't have much impact. But for many other shots, you can get slower shutter speed, and therefore lower ISO, on the A99. So what will come out better, shooting with a 50mm prime.... 1/12 of a second at ISO 3200 on the A99, or 1/50th of a second at ISO 12800 on the A7.
So take take full advantage of the better ISO on the A7, compared to the A99, you need to shoot with native E-mount optically stabilized lenses. But those lenses tend to have slower aperture -- once again forfeiting the ISO gain.
Yes, for an extra $300... you can get the A7 with an optically stabilized 28-70 3.5-5.6 lens.
So at shoot at a stabilized 5.6 on the A7 -- versus shooting with a stabilized 2.8 on the A99. So it's a choice between shooting 2.8 - 1/20 - ISO 3200 on the A99 -- versus shooting 5.6 -- 1/20 -- ISO 12800.
There are simply NO optically stabilized 2.8 (or faster) lenses for the A7.
The best you can do it $1200 for a 24-70 stabilized F4 -- and then only lose 1 stop versus many A99 lenses.

So the loss of stabilization in many cases... and smaller aperture lenses in other cases, really cancels out the A7 ISO advantages.

As to other advantages of the A7:

*Use any lens with an adapter! -- Great if you have old expensive Leica lenses sitting around! But really, if you like having fast autofocus, this isn't an advantage. Sure, if you also shoot with manual focus, this opens up lots of options. But for fast AF, you would need to use A-mount lenses with the LEA4 adapter -- which would take away stablization, and would take away the mirrorless ISO advantage. (since the LEA4 has a mirror). Plus of course, you are adding $350 to the purchase price of the camera.

Then the A99 has a few advantages of its own.. fully articulating LCD (as opposed to just tilt), GPS. Faster burst rate.
The A7 has wifi... In theory, I like wifi on a camera. But in practice, I mostly shoot RAW, and wifi isn't great for transmitting huge RAW files.

In terms of lens availability --- If you don't want to shoot with adapters, there are no native ultrawide angles lenses currently on the market and none that have been announced. There are no long zooms currently. Announced, there is (what will surely be ultra expensive) Zeiss 70-200 f/4. I've been happily shooting my $300 Tamron 70-300 4-5.6 on the A99.

I am interested to see more reviews of the A7, especially when the novelty wears off.

I'll leave with this shot....... ISO 6400, shutter speed 1/500 because I wanted to capture action. I used my Minolta 135/2.8 prime. Used tracking continuous autofocus. Would I have been able to get this picture on the A7? They don't have a native 135mm lens. Would need to use an LAE4 adapter, which would cancel out the ISO gains, or LAE3 adapter, which would make it a manual focus lens. And lose stabilization either way.


untitled-124.jpg by Havoc315, on Flickr

Noise is pretty bad in the above, because I had to brighten the shadows. But even with lifting the shadows and ISO 6400, still very usable.

Below, this was ISO 6400 with a better exposure level. In fact, the aperture was stopped down to 3.5, shutter speed 1/500, ISO 6400.


untitled-120.jpg by Havoc315, on Flickr
 
Or the A79! Some rumors suggest it will employ a new mirror that saps away less light. That would potentially improve the ISO performance. (Maybe another 1/4th of a stop improvement?)

A99 price has been dropping away from the main retailers. Now you can get it new for about $2100.... used for under $1700.


Once you remove the excitement and novelty around the A7 (the first real fullframe mirrorless interchangeable lens camera), the A99 seems more like the better camera and better system.

What are the advantages of the A7?

*Smaller size --- To me, this is the biggest advantage IF you are going to shoot with short prime lenses. Then it becomes a pretty compact system compared to a fullframe dSLR. But once you start attaching longer lenses... You simply get poorer balance on the A7. If you are going to attach A-mount 2.8 zoom lenses.. with the adapter... You really lose most of the size advantage.

*Better high ISO performance -- Definitely true on paper, but in the real world, this is cancelled out in most cases. If you are going to use A-mount lenses in full auto-focus, you need to attach the LEA4 adapter, which cancels out the ISO upgrade. You essentially get the same ISO performance as the A99.
If you shoot with prime lenses, you will lose stabilization. For action shots, the loss of stabilization doesn't have much impact. But for many other shots, you can get slower shutter speed, and therefore lower ISO, on the A99. So what will come out better, shooting with a 50mm prime.... 1/12 of a second at ISO 3200 on the A99, or 1/50th of a second at ISO 12800 on the A7.
So take take full advantage of the better ISO on the A7, compared to the A99, you need to shoot with native E-mount optically stabilized lenses. But those lenses tend to have slower aperture -- once again forfeiting the ISO gain.
Yes, for an extra $300... you can get the A7 with an optically stabilized 28-70 3.5-5.6 lens.
So at shoot at a stabilized 5.6 on the A7 -- versus shooting with a stabilized 2.8 on the A99. So it's a choice between shooting 2.8 - 1/20 - ISO 3200 on the A99 -- versus shooting 5.6 -- 1/20 -- ISO 12800.
There are simply NO optically stabilized 2.8 (or faster) lenses for the A7.
The best you can do it $1200 for a 24-70 stabilized F4 -- and then only lose 1 stop versus many A99 lenses.

So the loss of stabilization in many cases... and smaller aperture lenses in other cases, really cancels out the A7 ISO advantages.

As to other advantages of the A7:

*Use any lens with an adapter! -- Great if you have old expensive Leica lenses sitting around! But really, if you like having fast autofocus, this isn't an advantage. Sure, if you also shoot with manual focus, this opens up lots of options. But for fast AF, you would need to use A-mount lenses with the LEA4 adapter -- which would take away stablization, and would take away the mirrorless ISO advantage. (since the LEA4 has a mirror). Plus of course, you are adding $350 to the purchase price of the camera.

Then the A99 has a few advantages of its own.. fully articulating LCD (as opposed to just tilt), GPS. Faster burst rate.
The A7 has wifi... In theory, I like wifi on a camera. But in practice, I mostly shoot RAW, and wifi isn't great for transmitting huge RAW files.

In terms of lens availability --- If you don't want to shoot with adapters, there are no native ultrawide angles lenses currently on the market and none that have been announced. There are no long zooms currently. Announced, there is (what will surely be ultra expensive) Zeiss 70-200 f/4. I've been happily shooting my $300 Tamron 70-300 4-5.6 on the A99.

I am interested to see more reviews of the A7, especially when the novelty wears off.

I'll leave with this shot....... ISO 6400, shutter speed 1/500 because I wanted to capture action. I used my Minolta 135/2.8 prime. Used tracking continuous autofocus. Would I have been able to get this picture on the A7? They don't have a native 135mm lens. Would need to use an LAE4 adapter, which would cancel out the ISO gains, or LAE3 adapter, which would make it a manual focus lens. And lose stabilization either way.


Noise is pretty bad in the above, because I had to brighten the shadows. But even with lifting the shadows and ISO 6400, still very usable.

Below, this was ISO 6400 with a better exposure level. In fact, the aperture was stopped down to 3.5, shutter speed 1/500, ISO 6400.

Im curious to see the new A79 whatever it is and wouldn't rule that out, especially if it those rumors are true with more light getting through the mirror.

I dont shoot a whole lot of action besides the kids running around and have notice my A55 has been struggling with the AF lately and more so indoors in lower light situations, not sure if it has always been like that or something im just now noticing with all the AF talk lately. Focus peaking is a feature im dying to try out from all the positive feed back ive heard about it

Money is going to be playing a huge role in what I end up with for sure. My wife has given me a budget of $1,000 but I will magically make the difference appear out of a hat ;) But still don't plan on getting crazy.

Ive seen used A99 going for $1700 on Ebay and still a tiny bit high but better than it new. Ive also seen the A7 used on Amazon for $1,500.

The size of the A7 is what is becoming more appealing but the lens and IBIS are the two things that are deterrents for me. I did see there is the 55mm f1.8 but that along is about $1,000

Now really which ever way I go I essentially have to start over with lenses since the ones I have now aren't FF so either way new glass is in the cards for me. At least with the A99 the selection of glass is a lot larger and most likely more affordable.

Id love the Sony a99 and Sigma 35mm f1.4 art lens. If I could score those both for less then $2,400 I think my choice would become a lot more clear lol.
 
Im curious to see the new A79 whatever it is and wouldn't rule that out, especially if it those rumors are true with more light getting through the mirror.

I dont shoot a whole lot of action besides the kids running around and have notice my A55 has been struggling with the AF lately and more so indoors in lower light situations, not sure if it has always been like that or something im just now noticing with all the AF talk lately. Focus peaking is a feature im dying to try out from all the positive feed back ive heard about it

Money is going to be playing a huge role in what I end up with for sure. My wife has given me a budget of $1,000 but I will magically make the difference appear out of a hat ;) But still don't plan on getting crazy.

Ive seen used A99 going for $1700 on Ebay and still a tiny bit high but better than it new. Ive also seen the A7 used on Amazon for $1,500.

The size of the A7 is what is becoming more appealing but the lens and IBIS are the two things that are deterrents for me. I did see there is the 55mm f1.8 but that along is about $1,000

Now really which ever way I go I essentially have to start over with lenses since the ones I have now aren't FF so either way new glass is in the cards for me. At least with the A99 the selection of glass is a lot larger and most likely more affordable.

Id love the Sony a99 and Sigma 35mm f1.4 art lens. If I could score those both for less then $2,400 I think my choice would become a lot more clear lol.

Sticking to the A79 and maybe getting a new lens or 2, and a good speedlite flash, would be a very nice upgrade. It will give you improved AF, a much more robust body, and focus peaking. (And whatever other improvements they put into the A79).

On the A99... My issue in terms of lenses, has been what to do for a walk-around zoom. While there are more native options than the A7/7r, there are few totally native new Sony options. There is the ridiculously overpriced and heavy Zeiss 24-70. There is the Sony 28-75/2.8, but it lacks SSM, it's a bit long as 28, and buying it new, it is very overpriced.
For $100, I just got a top condition Minolta 24-85. I'll be testing it out over the next few days. I'd likely rely on my primes for my best shots, but may use the 24-85 when I really want a walk-around zoom. I'll consider getting the Sony 28-75 used for under $500. I'll also possibly consider the Sigma 24-105/f4 when it is finally released for the A-mount.

I haven't tried the A7.. but from everything I've read, I would expect the A99 to have better AF than the A7. The A7 does reportedly focus very fast with A-mount lenses AND the LAE4 adapter, but then you are paying for the adapter, adding bulk to the camera, and losing 1/2 stop of ISO performance. (And not even gaining stabilization).

Focus peaking works very well on the A99, but works best on old screw-lenses, and on new SSM lenses. Does not work as well on SAM lenses, because they don't support DMF. With SSM lenses, and with older Minolta lenses, you can use AF to focus first, and then adjust the focus with just a touch manually and peaking. With SAM lenses, you need to disable the AF switch on the lens itself before you use focus peaking.

In terms of low light focus... I tried taking a picture of her with flash in her totally dark room where she was reading by the light of her kindle, but she closed the kindle before I took the picture. I could barely see her, but with the infrared AF assist, the camera accurately locked focus, fired the flash, and I got an ultra sharp picture down to the eyeballs. Without the AF-assist, I have found the AF difficult in low light.

Good luck with whatever you decide. In addition to Ebay, look at the Dyxum forums for used gear.
 


Receive up to $1,000 in Onboard Credit and a Gift Basket!
That’s right — when you book your Disney Cruise with Dreams Unlimited Travel, you’ll receive incredible shipboard credits to spend during your vacation!
CLICK HERE









DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter DIS Bluesky

Back
Top Bottom