Jump to content

Aldowski

Members
  • Posts

    50
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Aldowski's Achievements

  1. Aldowski

    A7II Historical Sites

    Few historical sites, Sony A7II with 28-70.
  2. Yes, there is exact option for the focusing to the detail not being in the center, not being closest to the camera, not being "contrasty" enough as well, Focus Area -> Flexible spot; it's ("spot's") dimension can be chosen, and, most important, it can be positioned anywhere at the visible area. Requires some time to be managed, but it works. Learned this many years ago using the Fujifilm S2950, which has no manual focus, and this option is just exactly what I did need many times. BTW, still have that old camera, it can act as a great telephoto 18X zoom (28 – 504 mm); and (super)macro one as well (less than an inch distance). Sensor based stabilization! Anyway, most of cameras have similar or same processes to achieve solutions, sometimes, or many times the biggest difference is the name of the task, words in manual.
  3. Today, I put 4 photos to gallery here, using Helios 44M. New ones, I went outside, very nice weather, sunny, inviting. Made a bit more than 100 photos total, saw the strengths of the Helios 44M (with power of Biotar optics math inside). Using Graduated ND 8, sometimes incredibly helpful, to avoid vertical light balance issues (yes, I know that many are against the GND use). F4, F5.6, F8 used. Yes, lenses might be similar or same FL, but the character, nature of those, it's different. I got same question few times recently, why to buy other ones, if already have the native, Sony, AF, FE 50mm 1.8? The Minolta 28mm 2.8 one is different, it is reasonably fast, angle of view visible to the sensor is good, as related to it's FL. And, the 44M is providing some difference (when compared to Canon FD 50mm 1.8 or Revuenon mentioned here). Adding some vividness, photos are nicely detailed as well. It's telling image stories different, own way. Of course, not saying any of those lenses is the best one ever, greatest of all time, or so. It's just good to make photos with them.
  4. Today made some 100 photos with this very interesting lens. Aperture 4 to 8, ISO 100 to 400. Graduated ND filter, hood.
  5. Bought the Helios 44M 2 58, very good shape, took it to forest late afternoon. As expected, photos are sharp, detailed, colors well defined (did not play a lot with aperture, used just F4); bokeh nice. Heavy lens, just metal and glass. Made around 100 photos, Just put 2 photos to gallery here (lens with adapter on Sony A7II).
  6. Late afternoon, Autumn colors, 2021, Sony A7II Lens used, Helios 44M; just bought it, in good shape. Pleasant colors, bokeh, reasonably sharp, photos created using aperture F4. Using with adapter, did not put any filter this time. Photos postprocessed, downsized.
  7. Few days ago, I bought Minolta MD W.ROKKOR 28mm 2.8 (version with 49mm thread) and Revuenon AUTO REVUENON MC 50mm 1.7 (thread 49mm). I would not compare it to modern lenses now. During few days, I was able to see (late afternoon; sunset time, and middle of the day), some great capabilities of those. At low(er) light, results are still good, details are visible clearly. Of course, at "full" daylight; sunny day; all looks very clear, sharp, detailed, Minolta's minimum focus distance is ~1feet. Revuenon photos are with nicely defined details as well. Took photos of autumn leaves (using both lenses, and Canon FD 50mm 1.8), rosehips at forest, great colors and details. Both lenses are well built, strong, got them in very good shape. At gallery here I put just few photos taken by Revuenon, with A7II (photos created just for testing lenses). The only thing required prior to start shooting is to set Steadyshot to proper numbers at Sony camera.
  8. Autumn 2021; Sony A7 ii Using Auto Revuenon MC 50mm 1:1.7 lens with adapter
  9. Aldowski

    Forest

    18-55mm on the A3000; Forest, Late afternoon, Autumn, 2021, postprocessed and downsized
  10. Somehow, I did aggressively waste time trying to explain, then getting conclusion points I tried to represent. Recent hours I spent using the A7II together with Sony FE 1.8 50mm, exclusively in Manual focus mode, As the optical design is being very similar (or more than just a similar) to the Canon FD 50mm 1.8, results are similar as well. Sharpness is really descent. Must say, colors well defined. Tried to compare those with photos when 28-70 was used, in similar conditions, with Manual focus, it's so different. Even when using Manual focus (with magnifier, of course) 28-70 photos are bad. Again, I was trying to make more exposures of the same outdoor scene, trying to find the best focus more times, did not help a lot. Sharpness not existing on the list of the 28-70 kit lens features at all, unfortunately.
  11. Of course it is. There are multiple factors affecting the results. Not a single one. Rain example. Rainy day, Light rain. 1000 vessels with surface of 1squarefoot each and 1000 vessels with surface of 1squareinch each. 10 seconds vessels opened then closed. Bigger total surface reflects bigger vessels. And number of vessels is the same. Can the total amount of water captured in first and second group of vessels be the same for the same time? I am emphasizing huge (theoretical) sensor I mentioned, 16inchesX9inches. I mentioned pixels and bigger sensor surface as well. And, where did I mention that the total surface is not important? Different example. A7S has 12MP. A7 has 24MP. Both FF. Sony had the reason to "use" bigger pixels, to allow sensor to take more light per pixel at A7S.
  12. When 28-70 is being used with wide aperture, on sunny day and the ISO is ~100, shutter speed, more than 1/1000, tripod may not play role, as the sharpness at photos is lost very specific, strange way. That is the sharpness problem I mentioned. Using tripod at low(er) light or with telephoto lenses (200+mm, for example) is sometimes (of course not every single time) a must. On bright, sunny day, it's different. Density? In this case not related. Bigger sensor may get more light, per pixel. The difference is visible at sensor sensitivity charts. At the other side, if, theoretically there will be sensor 16inchesX9inches; 6000X4000 pixels, for example, it will be able to collect incredible amount of light and probably, shutter speed may be 1/100000, aperture F100 and ISO 1, But, most important: photo as result will still have the same number of pixels as FF Sony A7II.
  13. For sure, it would be better in terms of lenses structure, if I used Sony FE 50mm 1.8 only to compare it directly to Canon FD 50mm 1.8; anyway, I did not go that way, I used different types of lenses. Every lens should provide good sharpness and have good representation of colors at it's best settings. Recently, I made lots of photos with the Sony FE 50mm 1.8 and it seems to be good, anyway, not being impressed. Okay, it's not expensive, it's not having optical image stabilization inside, still, it is not providing better results compared to old FD 50mm 1.8. Optical math built into the Canon FD lenses seems to be really great, that's what I found. At the other side, the Sony 28-70mm may be example of "the lens in the bundle, just to be in the bundle", unfortunately. Having thousands of photos made by it, I still did not make those which may be as sharp as those created using the FD 50mm 1.8.
  14. Today afternoon, I went to small town to take some photos using A7II with kit lens 28-70mm; Canon FD 50mm 1.8, Olympus Zuiko zoom 35-105mm. Few hundreds of photos, weather was nice, sunny, unfortunately the temperatures outside were not very pleasant. A7 II Steadyshot with Manual settings 50mm set. While even Zuiko had some results better than Sony kit one, the Canon FD, oldtimer is unbelievably good. I used F8 most of the time on it, sometimes F5.6. Sharpness, details, are much, much better than at Sony kit lens, looks even as different, higher level. I did not use wider apertures this time (on Canon), I just wanted to make photos at mentioned range F5.6 to F8, using the Canon FD, again, results were great. I am now trying to find a FD 50mm 1.4, in a good shape, few days ago I found Minolta50mm F1,7, but I may need to see it first.
×
×
  • Create New...