Hockeyman
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2000
- Messages
- 1,555
Photo sharing: Sony Alpha
- Thread starter steery1
- Start date
Sony A6300 first impressions:
Came home from work, to an Amazon box waiting for me...
I'm far from ready to post a full review. I haven't gotten to try the camera in daylight. And lightroom doesn't support the raw files yet, so I've only looked at jpegs.
But some first impressions:
DSC_6408.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr
First off, it is definitely heavier than the A6000. Noticeably. The moment I took it out of the box, even without the battery, it was heavier than I expected. First I put the 50/1.8 on it, and put on the Optech cross body strap. It's a good combination, and overall lightweight and compact. I think I chose the right strap for the camera... I prefer cross-body. And this is cross-body without being too bulky, and attaches to just 1 side of the camera, without having to use the tripod socket.
In the shot, above, I was testing the feel with the 70-200, which i also just got. I feared the 70-200 would be too big and balance poorly on the A6300... But it seems to be a good combination. I wouldn't want to go any bigger, but it balances pretty nicely, especially WITHOUT the tripod collar and hood.
The autofocus does indeed seem exceptional, especially eye-AF in AF-C mode. In the past, I do 90% of my shooting in AF-S, so I can focus and re-compose. But I suspect I'll leave this camera in AF-C, without ever needing to re-compose since I can focus anywhere on the image, and can use eye-AF to get the eye without re-composing.
Now while it's good... I was using it at night, indoors -- so very low light. And it eventually got focus almost every time, but at times, it hunted very slowly before getting focus.
The EVF is great.... the 8 fps live view truly works. But the buffer SUCKS. And clears really slowly. Granted, I was shooting Raw+jpeg. But it felt like the buffer filled very very quickly, and then took a very long time to clear.
I don't want to comment much on IQ until I test in daylight, test with RAW, etc... But preliminary findings: ISO 25600 is surprisingly good. ISO 6400 is pretty bad. Yes, I know that sounds crazy. And this is just preliminary looking at a few jpegs... But here is what I mean:
IQ takes a quick turn down at ISO 6400. A couple ISO 6400 portraits looked really bad. And certainly, higher ISO portraits would be equally bad. But from 6400-25600, you do get usable non-portrait images. (I have a higher standard for portraits). Not images I would blow up. But images that look perfectly fine for sharing online, etc.
Eventually, I'll do side by side with the Nikon D750.. full frame. I have no doubt that ISO 6400-12800 will be far better on the D750 than on the D6300. But at super high ISO.. 25600... The A6300 may be pretty close. I'll need to test more.
On a side note, the 70-200 does indeed seem like a great optic. But I need to test it in good light. Still, excellent build. Good match to the A6300. And the IQ seems excellent.
Not exactly an impressive shot --- But with the 70-200, at ISO 25,600, and still looks ok:
DSC00039.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr
A fuller review to come eventually
Came home from work, to an Amazon box waiting for me...
I'm far from ready to post a full review. I haven't gotten to try the camera in daylight. And lightroom doesn't support the raw files yet, so I've only looked at jpegs.
But some first impressions:
DSC_6408.jpg by Adam Brown, on FlickrFirst off, it is definitely heavier than the A6000. Noticeably. The moment I took it out of the box, even without the battery, it was heavier than I expected. First I put the 50/1.8 on it, and put on the Optech cross body strap. It's a good combination, and overall lightweight and compact. I think I chose the right strap for the camera... I prefer cross-body. And this is cross-body without being too bulky, and attaches to just 1 side of the camera, without having to use the tripod socket.
In the shot, above, I was testing the feel with the 70-200, which i also just got. I feared the 70-200 would be too big and balance poorly on the A6300... But it seems to be a good combination. I wouldn't want to go any bigger, but it balances pretty nicely, especially WITHOUT the tripod collar and hood.
The autofocus does indeed seem exceptional, especially eye-AF in AF-C mode. In the past, I do 90% of my shooting in AF-S, so I can focus and re-compose. But I suspect I'll leave this camera in AF-C, without ever needing to re-compose since I can focus anywhere on the image, and can use eye-AF to get the eye without re-composing.
Now while it's good... I was using it at night, indoors -- so very low light. And it eventually got focus almost every time, but at times, it hunted very slowly before getting focus.
The EVF is great.... the 8 fps live view truly works. But the buffer SUCKS. And clears really slowly. Granted, I was shooting Raw+jpeg. But it felt like the buffer filled very very quickly, and then took a very long time to clear.
I don't want to comment much on IQ until I test in daylight, test with RAW, etc... But preliminary findings: ISO 25600 is surprisingly good. ISO 6400 is pretty bad. Yes, I know that sounds crazy. And this is just preliminary looking at a few jpegs... But here is what I mean:
IQ takes a quick turn down at ISO 6400. A couple ISO 6400 portraits looked really bad. And certainly, higher ISO portraits would be equally bad. But from 6400-25600, you do get usable non-portrait images. (I have a higher standard for portraits). Not images I would blow up. But images that look perfectly fine for sharing online, etc.
Eventually, I'll do side by side with the Nikon D750.. full frame. I have no doubt that ISO 6400-12800 will be far better on the D750 than on the D6300. But at super high ISO.. 25600... The A6300 may be pretty close. I'll need to test more.
On a side note, the 70-200 does indeed seem like a great optic. But I need to test it in good light. Still, excellent build. Good match to the A6300. And the IQ seems excellent.
Not exactly an impressive shot --- But with the 70-200, at ISO 25,600, and still looks ok:
DSC00039.jpg by Adam Brown, on FlickrA fuller review to come eventually
Yes... The f4. I don't have interest in a 70-200/2.8--- too big and heavy. And the rumored price of the Sony version is over $3000. I got the f4 for $900 used.
I'd like the extra f stop of course, but I kinda have my own maximum weight I prefer. Not to mention that my budget does have limits.
fractal
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- May 15, 2013
- Messages
- 9,751
Good to hear! You inspired me to break out my 8mm Rokinon last night.
Took a quick trip around the galaxy.
So some continuing thoughts:
Looked out the window for something to shoot this morning, expecting some birds on the nearest trees, but instead I saw a wolf walking through the woods:
DSC00071.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr
Despite all the branches in the way, focus grabbed well. Yes, I lost many shots to focus on the branches instead, but that will happen with any camera. So once again, I'm happy with the AF.
I am not thrilled with the OOC jpegs. This was at ISO 2500
Let's pixel peep a bit:
DSC00071.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr
Especially if my lens only goes to 200mm, I need the ability to crop extensively. ISO 2500 isn't that high. But at least in the jpeg rendering, the noise reduction and sharpening are ugly. Paint-by-numbers effects. As I looked more closely in other images, it really starts to get ugly at pretty low ISO... Again, I haven't done enough testing to draw any serious conclusions. But above ISO 800, maybe even above ISO 400, things start to suffer.
Now, of course I'm comparing to full frame... So it's not a "fair" comparison. In theory though, full frame should give about 1 stop of improvement. I don't know how much of it is full frame, and how much might just be better jpeg processing, but I find the OOC jpegs from the Nikon D750 far superior, and at much higher ISO.
But really, I rarely shoot jpegs. Maybe I'm imagining the difference and need to do side by side comparisons.
And once lightroom updates, I'll go back to raw. And then I'll be able to judge the differences better. I suspect I'll be happy with ISO 2500 when I process raw myself. (It was fine on the A6000, so shouldn't be any worse). But I really really don't like the jpegs at even medium ISOs.
Another complaint... and I had the same issue with the A6000. It is the same body, after all. I hate the memory card placement, where and how it is placed in the battery compartment. It makes it rather awkward to remove the memory card. (And I don't use USB to upload.. I always just insert the card into my computer).
I'm not meaning to be negative. Just sharing my impressions as I go. Overall, it is certainly a great camera. I suspect I'll appreciate it more, when I go back to raw. And also when I take more advantage of the AF system.
Looked out the window for something to shoot this morning, expecting some birds on the nearest trees, but instead I saw a wolf walking through the woods:
DSC00071.jpg by Adam Brown, on FlickrDespite all the branches in the way, focus grabbed well. Yes, I lost many shots to focus on the branches instead, but that will happen with any camera. So once again, I'm happy with the AF.
I am not thrilled with the OOC jpegs. This was at ISO 2500
Let's pixel peep a bit:
DSC00071.jpg by Adam Brown, on FlickrEspecially if my lens only goes to 200mm, I need the ability to crop extensively. ISO 2500 isn't that high. But at least in the jpeg rendering, the noise reduction and sharpening are ugly. Paint-by-numbers effects. As I looked more closely in other images, it really starts to get ugly at pretty low ISO... Again, I haven't done enough testing to draw any serious conclusions. But above ISO 800, maybe even above ISO 400, things start to suffer.
Now, of course I'm comparing to full frame... So it's not a "fair" comparison. In theory though, full frame should give about 1 stop of improvement. I don't know how much of it is full frame, and how much might just be better jpeg processing, but I find the OOC jpegs from the Nikon D750 far superior, and at much higher ISO.
But really, I rarely shoot jpegs. Maybe I'm imagining the difference and need to do side by side comparisons.
And once lightroom updates, I'll go back to raw. And then I'll be able to judge the differences better. I suspect I'll be happy with ISO 2500 when I process raw myself. (It was fine on the A6000, so shouldn't be any worse). But I really really don't like the jpegs at even medium ISOs.
Another complaint... and I had the same issue with the A6000. It is the same body, after all. I hate the memory card placement, where and how it is placed in the battery compartment. It makes it rather awkward to remove the memory card. (And I don't use USB to upload.. I always just insert the card into my computer).
I'm not meaning to be negative. Just sharing my impressions as I go. Overall, it is certainly a great camera. I suspect I'll appreciate it more, when I go back to raw. And also when I take more advantage of the AF system.
Hockeyman
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2000
- Messages
- 1,555
Good to hear! You inspired me to break out my 8mm Rokinon last night.
Took a quick trip around the galaxy.
Love it @fractal and welcome back @havoc315
A lot of people shy away from manual lenses but I love the fact you can leave the focus alone and shoot really anything and its in focus. Its my go to outdoor ride lens at Disney
Last edited:
Hockeyman
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2000
- Messages
- 1,555
So yours truly had his first paid photography gig a couple weeks ago. I came across someone looking for a photographer in a Facebook group we are in so I responded and ended up getting hired. I did go pretty cheap $60 for 1-2 hours of shooting and all the photos I took, which after editing came to about 13 but could have stretched it if needed. Being new to this part of photography I wanted to ease into it and experiment and she was the perfect client for that, she didn’t want to spend and arm and a leg and was looking for someone on the newer side she could use frequently when needed. So for me $60 was well worth my time when I do it for free now and thought it was fair for her with me being pretty new at this.
So below are a few that I came away with. Not perfect by any means but pretty decent and more importantly she loved them and wants me to do another shoot. She creates these anime costumes and sells them so this be good becoming her resident photographer. Plus with the subject matter it gives me a little more artistic freedom.
For this shoot i decided to pick up a Rokinon 85mm lens and was really happy with the results. Pretty nice optics and pretty sharp, used it a little in Universal last weekend also.
Inuyasha 7 by Mike Sperduto, on Flickr
Inuyasha 2 by Mike Sperduto, on Flickr
Inuyasha 10 by Mike Sperduto, on Flickr
Inuyasha 5 by Mike Sperduto, on Flickr
So below are a few that I came away with. Not perfect by any means but pretty decent and more importantly she loved them and wants me to do another shoot. She creates these anime costumes and sells them so this be good becoming her resident photographer. Plus with the subject matter it gives me a little more artistic freedom.
For this shoot i decided to pick up a Rokinon 85mm lens and was really happy with the results. Pretty nice optics and pretty sharp, used it a little in Universal last weekend also.
Inuyasha 7 by Mike Sperduto, on FlickrInuyasha 2 by Mike Sperduto, on FlickrInuyasha 10 by Mike Sperduto, on FlickrInuyasha 5 by Mike Sperduto, on Flickr
Last edited:
So yours truly had his first paid photography gig a couple weeks ago. I came across someone looking for a photographer in a Facebook group we are in so I responded and ended up getting hired. I did go pretty cheap $60 for 1-2 hours of shooting and all the photos I took, which after editing came to about 13 but could have stretched it if needed. Being new to this part of photography I wanted to ease into it and experiment and she was the perfect client for that, she didn’t want to spend and arm and a leg and was looking for someone on the newer side she could use frequently when needed. So for me $60 was well worth my time when I do it for free now and thought it was fair for her with me being pretty new at this.
So below are a few that I came away with. Not perfect by any means but pretty decent and more importantly she loved them and wants me to do another shoot. She creates these anime costumes and sells them so this be good becoming her resident photographer. Plus with the subject matter it gives me a little more artistic freedom.
For this shoot i decided to pick up a Rokinon 85mm lens and was really happy with the results. Pretty nice optics and pretty sharp, used it a little in Universal last weekend also.
Congrats on paid work. And it's a very set. All just natural light or a couple look like flash was used?
For me, I try to do enough paid work, to justify my spending on new gear! Hmm, I got $250 for a job.. that surely justifies spending $500 on new gear..
Before I post some sample photos, some thoughts:
The new auto-ISO implementation is very good. I have been spoiled by my Nikon. Being able to set shutter speed parameters, even in A-mode, makes A-mode much more useful. Especially when you have a non-stabilized body... some lenses you may want to shoot faster than other lenses. Anyway, the new auto-ISO implementation is very very good.
Second, Big HOORAY for the return of the level. It is one of the best features of an EVF, in my opinion. Without realizing it, it's amazing how much I can tilt the camera back and forth. The full X-Y level right in the middle of the frame, really really is super helpful.
Next, a mixed bag... Where you previously had a customizable AEL button, that button is now attached to a dial. By default, it is MF/AF, or dial it to AEL. Or you can customize both. In theory, that's great. And I have already mapped eye-AF to the button. The problem is, the way the button is in-laid into the dial, it can actually make it a bit more difficult to push the button. Will definitely need to get used to the feel of it.
So in my 5 minutes of shooting today, there were lots of black birds circling in the sky a few hundred feet away. Against the bright sky, I really only got black bird shapes. So not exactly great bird photos, and I was quite distant. But it was a great test of the AF system, and it was VERY VERY impressive. I stuck to expanded flexible spot, AF-C. With the new 8 fps live stream, it was MUCH easier to follow the birds, than with prior EVF cameras. A surprising number of my shots with the 70-200/4 got perfect focus.
A few examples:
DSC00102.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr
DSC00098.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr
DSC00094.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr
These are all basically 100% crops. If I had RAW support, I could probably pull out quite a bit of detail in the bird bodies. So this isn't a great judge of IQ, but the AF was mostly really a winner, especially with the 8 fps live view... EXCEPT..
Yes, there is an except. At first, I was shooting in single shot. Stopped down to F8. Quickly and accurately got focus. Then switched to 8 fps... At F8, I had a surprising amount of AF hunting, especially considering it was a sunny day, and I was shooting a high contrast subject. Maybe I'm wrong, but if I recall, when shooting in high drive mode, the camera may keep the lens stopped down, instead of acquiring AF wide open (anyone know if this is true?) Thus, at F8, it seemed to hunt quite a bit for AF, even in good light. I opened up the aperture a bit, and AF returned to being snappy. I'd like to test this a bit more. But for shooting sports and wildlife, I really want to be able to get great AF at F8 and 8fps.
Next, really boring, I just wanted to check the sharpness of the 70-200 at base ISO.
These are 100% crops:
200mm, at F4, center of the frame:
DSC00087.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr
Tad soft, but not bad at all.
Stopped down to 5.6, 200mm, the center of the frame is excellent:
DSC00124.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr
I wouldn't quite say tack sharp, but excellent for a zoom lens.
The corner at 5.6 (shooting the same sign, moving the focus point):
DSC00125.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr
It's a little soft, but not the worst I've ever seen. I suppose I should have stopped down a bit more and tested the corner again .
So hopefully this weekend, I get to do some real testing.
The new auto-ISO implementation is very good. I have been spoiled by my Nikon. Being able to set shutter speed parameters, even in A-mode, makes A-mode much more useful. Especially when you have a non-stabilized body... some lenses you may want to shoot faster than other lenses. Anyway, the new auto-ISO implementation is very very good.
Second, Big HOORAY for the return of the level. It is one of the best features of an EVF, in my opinion. Without realizing it, it's amazing how much I can tilt the camera back and forth. The full X-Y level right in the middle of the frame, really really is super helpful.
Next, a mixed bag... Where you previously had a customizable AEL button, that button is now attached to a dial. By default, it is MF/AF, or dial it to AEL. Or you can customize both. In theory, that's great. And I have already mapped eye-AF to the button. The problem is, the way the button is in-laid into the dial, it can actually make it a bit more difficult to push the button. Will definitely need to get used to the feel of it.
So in my 5 minutes of shooting today, there were lots of black birds circling in the sky a few hundred feet away. Against the bright sky, I really only got black bird shapes. So not exactly great bird photos, and I was quite distant. But it was a great test of the AF system, and it was VERY VERY impressive. I stuck to expanded flexible spot, AF-C. With the new 8 fps live stream, it was MUCH easier to follow the birds, than with prior EVF cameras. A surprising number of my shots with the 70-200/4 got perfect focus.
A few examples:
DSC00102.jpg by Adam Brown, on FlickrDSC00098.jpg by Adam Brown, on FlickrDSC00094.jpg by Adam Brown, on FlickrThese are all basically 100% crops. If I had RAW support, I could probably pull out quite a bit of detail in the bird bodies. So this isn't a great judge of IQ, but the AF was mostly really a winner, especially with the 8 fps live view... EXCEPT..
Yes, there is an except. At first, I was shooting in single shot. Stopped down to F8. Quickly and accurately got focus. Then switched to 8 fps... At F8, I had a surprising amount of AF hunting, especially considering it was a sunny day, and I was shooting a high contrast subject. Maybe I'm wrong, but if I recall, when shooting in high drive mode, the camera may keep the lens stopped down, instead of acquiring AF wide open (anyone know if this is true?) Thus, at F8, it seemed to hunt quite a bit for AF, even in good light. I opened up the aperture a bit, and AF returned to being snappy. I'd like to test this a bit more. But for shooting sports and wildlife, I really want to be able to get great AF at F8 and 8fps.
Next, really boring, I just wanted to check the sharpness of the 70-200 at base ISO.
These are 100% crops:
200mm, at F4, center of the frame:
DSC00087.jpg by Adam Brown, on FlickrTad soft, but not bad at all.
Stopped down to 5.6, 200mm, the center of the frame is excellent:
DSC00124.jpg by Adam Brown, on FlickrI wouldn't quite say tack sharp, but excellent for a zoom lens.
The corner at 5.6 (shooting the same sign, moving the focus point):
DSC00125.jpg by Adam Brown, on FlickrIt's a little soft, but not the worst I've ever seen. I suppose I should have stopped down a bit more and tested the corner again .
So hopefully this weekend, I get to do some real testing.
fractal
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- May 15, 2013
- Messages
- 9,751
Nice work @Hockeyman ! Sounds like a perfect gig.
Hockeyman
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2000
- Messages
- 1,555
Thanks guys. @havoc315 I did some flash and some natural lighting, cloud cover was nice since it acted as a natural diffuser. The first photo was one I used flash on, getting the hang of is somewhat, a lot of guess work mixed with a lot of luck 
I got a buddy who asked me to shoot his engagement photos so another one lined up possibly
I got a buddy who asked me to shoot his engagement photos so another one lined up possiblyThanks guys. @havoc315 I did some flash and some natural lighting, cloud cover was nice since it acted as a natural diffuser. The first photo was one I used flash on, getting the hang of is somewhat, a lot of guess work mixed with a lot of luck
I had an engagement shoot for this weekend, it's my favorite type of shoot. And they were considering hiring me for the wedding (though not sure I would have even wanted that). Then when I went to confirm the date, I get a reply that they broke up, the wedding is off, lol.
If I may offer a little unsolicited advice -- Get a reflector. For natural light shoots, it really can give a much nicer effect than a flash. Though you need an extra person around to actually hold the reflector.
The effect of your flash (and your shutter speed and aperture) in the first shot is that it illuminated your subject, but left your background darker. A slightly slower shutter speed would have looked more natural. I really like what you did with the composition. But the effect of the flash makes it look like it was shot in a studio with fake trees, not outdoors.
I try to aim between $150 and $200. And I try to talk the couple into bringing a friend... to help hold hairbrushes, hold any props from the couple... and hold the reflector!
My engagement photos:
http://www.picklepiephoto.com/p401038773
More A6300 first impressions..
Some high ISO indoor portaits!
And because I love unfair comparisons, I simultaneously did portraits with my D750. So Sony A6300 + 50/1.8. The camera chose ISO 6400. On the D750, I used the Tamron 45/1.8 and moved closer to the subject for somewhat similar framing. Knowing the DOF would be much narrower on the D750, I stopped down just a teeny tiny bit (still leaving less DOF on the D750). Shutter speed was just slightly faster on the Sony.. but I would have expected the Nikon to use higher ISO. Instead, the Sony went with ISO 6400 and the D750 went with ISO 5000. Still, that's only a fraction of a stop apart.
These are SOOC Jpegs from both the Sony and Nikon. I would expect very different results if processing RAW.
(for full disclosure, my daughter wasn't thrilled to pose)
First the Sony:
DSC00137.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr
Now the Nikon:
DSC_6409-2.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr
Comments thus far:
I greatly prefer the white balance on the Nikon. They are VERY different. Maybe I'm just used to the Nikon after shooting it for a year and a half.
I used continue eye-AF on the Sony. And it really really really is fantastic for portraits. No need to recompose. On the Nikon, I moved my AF point over the eye. No need to do that.
Now let's pixel peep:
Sony:
DSC00137-2.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr
Comment: Since the focus was truly perfect with eye-AF, it really does help. I changed NR to low after my earlier shots, and it does look a little better. Still pretty noisy, with jpeg artifacts.
Now the Nikon:
DSC_6409.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr
To me, its very hard to judge sharpness comparisons at high ISO, since you are also looking at noise, sharpening, noise reduction. Does appear the Tamron 45/1.8 is sharper than the Sony 50/1.8 -- no big surprise. But the 50/1.8 does well. And the noise and noise reduction is a bit uglier on the Sony -- Again, no surprise since we are comparing to full frame. In fact, while the Nikon is clearly better to my eye, the difference isn't necessarily that massive. I'd like to do a RAW comparison, so I could compare both images, at their best.
Anyway, I continue to be impressed with the A6300, but it's definitely not perfect. And I hope to do some real testing this weekend.
Some high ISO indoor portaits!
And because I love unfair comparisons, I simultaneously did portraits with my D750. So Sony A6300 + 50/1.8. The camera chose ISO 6400. On the D750, I used the Tamron 45/1.8 and moved closer to the subject for somewhat similar framing. Knowing the DOF would be much narrower on the D750, I stopped down just a teeny tiny bit (still leaving less DOF on the D750). Shutter speed was just slightly faster on the Sony.. but I would have expected the Nikon to use higher ISO. Instead, the Sony went with ISO 6400 and the D750 went with ISO 5000. Still, that's only a fraction of a stop apart.
These are SOOC Jpegs from both the Sony and Nikon. I would expect very different results if processing RAW.
(for full disclosure, my daughter wasn't thrilled to pose)
First the Sony:
DSC00137.jpg by Adam Brown, on FlickrNow the Nikon:
DSC_6409-2.jpg by Adam Brown, on FlickrComments thus far:
I greatly prefer the white balance on the Nikon. They are VERY different. Maybe I'm just used to the Nikon after shooting it for a year and a half.
I used continue eye-AF on the Sony. And it really really really is fantastic for portraits. No need to recompose. On the Nikon, I moved my AF point over the eye. No need to do that.
Now let's pixel peep:
Sony:
DSC00137-2.jpg by Adam Brown, on FlickrComment: Since the focus was truly perfect with eye-AF, it really does help. I changed NR to low after my earlier shots, and it does look a little better. Still pretty noisy, with jpeg artifacts.
Now the Nikon:
DSC_6409.jpg by Adam Brown, on FlickrTo me, its very hard to judge sharpness comparisons at high ISO, since you are also looking at noise, sharpening, noise reduction. Does appear the Tamron 45/1.8 is sharper than the Sony 50/1.8 -- no big surprise. But the 50/1.8 does well. And the noise and noise reduction is a bit uglier on the Sony -- Again, no surprise since we are comparing to full frame. In fact, while the Nikon is clearly better to my eye, the difference isn't necessarily that massive. I'd like to do a RAW comparison, so I could compare both images, at their best.
Anyway, I continue to be impressed with the A6300, but it's definitely not perfect. And I hope to do some real testing this weekend.
fractal
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- May 15, 2013
- Messages
- 9,751
@havoc315
I also prefer the AWB of the Nikon. With my NEX-7 I always find myself adjusting (RAW) in Post. I will say, the "Custom Set" WB is very good, if you can find something gray to shoot at.
From what I've seen, the Raw files from the A6300 look much better. I'll be interested to see your results with RAW.
Thanks for the updates! As far as your daughter, it's not going to get better (posing enthusiasm).
I also prefer the AWB of the Nikon. With my NEX-7 I always find myself adjusting (RAW) in Post. I will say, the "Custom Set" WB is very good, if you can find something gray to shoot at.
From what I've seen, the Raw files from the A6300 look much better. I'll be interested to see your results with RAW.
Thanks for the updates! As far as your daughter, it's not going to get better (posing enthusiasm).
@havoc315
I also prefer the AWB of the Nikon. With my NEX-7 I always find myself adjusting (RAW) in Post. I will say, the "Custom Set" WB is very good, if you can find something gray to shoot at.
From what I've seen, the Raw files from the A6300 look much better. I'll be interested to see your results with RAW.
Thanks for the updates! As far as your daughter, it's not going to get better (posing enthusiasm).
I know I could use the Sony software, but I figure I'll just wait for the lightroom update... Lightroom is usually pretty quick.
There are times when my daughter loves to pose, but those times seem to be getting less frequent.
Did some birding this morning.... Weighed down, Nikon with 70-200/4 on one shoulder, Sony with 70-200/4 on the other shoulder. But I wanted to do some comparisons. Did a lot of shooting at a neighbor who keeps a bird feeder... in the shade, it pushed ISOs up.. so I'm interested to see how they look.
Oh... but another thing I really dislike with the A6300 -- the hard eyecup viewfinder. The viewfinder is impossible to use with glasses. I need to lift my glasses to use the viewfinder.
-
First Look: Mickey's Very Merry Christmas Party Exclusive Merch
-
Which Celebrities Have You Seen at Disney Parks?
-
New Disney Dogs Disney Store Est. 1987 Totes
-
New Mickey Mouse Bath Bombs Arrive at Basin Fresh in Disney Springs
-
Ways Walt Disney World Will Honor Hispanic and Latin American Heritage Month
-
The Disney Loungefly You've Been Waiting For: New 'Up' Cake
-
Check Out the NEW Gap x Disney Nightmare Before Christmas Merch Collection
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
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
