Photo sharing: Sony Alpha

[havoc315]

Don't have the 200/2.8 yet, but played with the 135/2.8 today:

 

[Hockeyman]

 

[fractal]

 

[HPS3]

Nice shots people I enjoy coming to the sony thread.

 

[Hockeyman]

 

[fractal]

cool pic; how was the ride?

 

[Hockeyman]

cool pic; how was the ride?

Oh its awesome. Not sure if you are familiar with the Spiderman ride at Island of Adventure but its the same ride system where the cars move scene by scene while on a motion based RV in 3d but a faster paced ride. I love it

 

[Hockeyman]

 

[Hockeyman]

 

[Hockeyman]

[/url



[url=https://flic.kr/p/mHaT4K]

 

[fractal]

#18 Pebble Beach from the clubhouse

 

[havoc315]

 

[Hockeyman]

 

[havoc315]

untitled-35-2.jpg by Havoc315, on Flickr

 

[Hockeyman]

 

[fractal]

A7s - Sony's new ISO King.

I'm not really into video but this would be the ultimate dark-ride camera.



http://www.theverge.com/2014/4/6/5588278/sony-a7s-full-frame-mirrorless-camera-announced


Sony announces full-frame A7s camera that can practically shoot 4K video in the dark

 

[havoc315]

A7s - Sony's new ISO King.

I'm not really into video but this would be the ultimate dark-ride camera.



http://www.theverge.com/2014/4/6/5588278/sony-a7s-full-frame-mirrorless-camera-announced


Sony announces full-frame A7s camera that can practically shoot 4K video in the dark

Ehhh... Is it really a new ISO king? Yes, it has 402,000.... and so does the Nikon 4ds. But if you have seen the Nikon samples, they look horrible.

Plus, you are "only" getting 12 mp. Don't get me wrong. I'm not a MP extremist. I know that 12 is enough for all regular photo needs. But I do prefer 16-24 to have more room for error to crop in post-processing.
And also consider the effect on ISO --- Yes, that 24mp image is pretty noisy at say ISO 25600 when you pixel peep and blow the image up. But if you downsize is to only 12mp.... magic, far less noisy.

In other words, is the A7s really cleaner high ISO? Or is it simply downsized compared to other Sony cameras. Somehow, I doubt the real high ISO quality is any better than the A7r. Which is only a few months old.

Seems more like they rushed this product to market in order to have a 4k camera, as Panasonic had beaten them to the punch.

 

[fractal]

Ehhh... Is it really a new ISO king? Yes, it has 402,000.... and so does the Nikon 4ds. But if you have seen the Nikon samples, they look horrible.

Plus, you are "only" getting 12 mp. Don't get me wrong. I'm not a MP extremist. I know that 12 is enough for all regular photo needs. But I do prefer 16-24 to have more room for error to crop in post-processing.
And also consider the effect on ISO --- Yes, that 24mp image is pretty noisy at say ISO 25600 when you pixel peep and blow the image up. But if you downsize is to only 12mp.... magic, far less noisy.

In other words, is the A7s really cleaner high ISO? Or is it simply downsized compared to other Sony cameras. Somehow, I doubt the real high ISO quality is any better than the A7r. Which is only a few months old.

Seems more like they rushed this product to market in order to have a 4k camera, as Panasonic had beaten them to the punch.

Well, I don't think many people will be taking shots at 400,000 ISO. Just like not many people drive their Corvette 200mph. Things get shaky at the limits.
What it says is it has great high ISO capabilities - and aren't 4D's like $5,000? The talk was for this camera to come in around $1,700.

Good question regarding downsized. I understand this is a new sensor so I think we have to wait for some more samples. The samples on SARS, however do look pretty good.

It seems to me that Sony is pushing 4k - makes sense as I'm sure they would like to sell everybody a new 4k capable TV. BTW, what is the purpose of 4K if you don't have a monitor/screen capable of viewing - or am I missing something?

As an owner of an NEX-7, I do favor more resolution vs. higher ISO range - but I can see how this camera would be appealing to many. The 3 mirrorless fullframe Sonys seem to each target very different and specific photographic and video needs. Interesting strategy.

 

[havoc315]

Well, I don't think many people will be taking shots at 400,000 ISO. Just like not many people drive their Corvette 200mph. Things get shaky at the limits.
What it says is it has great high ISO capabilities - and aren't 4D's like $5,000? The talk was for this camera to come in around $1,700.

Good question regarding downsized. I understand this is a new sensor so I think we have to wait for some more samples. The samples on SARS, however do look pretty good.

It seems to me that Sony is pushing 4k - makes sense as I'm sure they would like to sell everybody a new 4k capable TV. BTW, what is the purpose of 4K if you don't have a monitor/screen capable of viewing - or am I missing something?

As an owner of an NEX-7, I do favor more resolution vs. higher ISO range - but I can see how this camera would be appealing to many. The 3 mirrorless fullframe Sonys seem to each target very different and specific photographic and video needs. Interesting strategy.

Don't know the price yet. I suspect it will be over $2,000, but far less than the Nikon 4Ds.

The question is "how new" is this sensor. If it was a revolutionary new sensor, then I doubt they just invented it last night --- why wasn't a version of it put into the A7/r just a couple months ago?
I suspect it's simply the A7r sensor re-worked with less megapixels, and with whatever modifications are needed for 4k video.

Truthfully, I rarely use my camera for video, so I don't need 4k.. or any video at all. But I guess it has 2 points:
-- To claim cutting edge
-- For professional videographers.

Really, it would only serve professional and semi-professional videographers. Because apparently, SD cards can't support the 4k on the A7s. You can only actually shoot 4k with expensive accessories. So this isn't designed to 4k home movies.

I agree with targeting different markets.. just wish Sony would do the same thing with A-mount!

Traditionally, professional sports type dSLRs had better ISO range, but with less megapixels, and much faster burst rates (the smaller files being easier to achieve a high burst rate).
But the A7s still has a pretty slow burst rate.

Having less megapixels makes files look cleaner when you pixel peep. But only because everything -- including the noise --- is smaller. I suspect if you took the 36mp A7r file, and downsized at high ISO image from the A7r, down to 12 mp -- the noise performance would be identical to the A7s.

So it's like digital cropping. You can get the full 36mp in the A7r. Or let the camera do the downsizing to 12mp. The end results are similar.

I think the point of this camera was really the 4k... I doubt it's a low light break through. If it really was a massive low light break through, then Sony should start putting 24/36 mp versions of the sensor into the A7 and 7r!

 

[Hockeyman]

The announcement made it sound like the A7s was god's gift to low light shooting

I don't shoot much video and have been impressed with the video on the A99 but when I saw the A7s had the 4K I was somewhat intrigued, not enough to get the camera though but when I saw you needed an external recorder to get 4K I was like, forget that.