Jump to content

Pieter

Members
  • Content Count

    129
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Pieter last won the day on March 31

Pieter had the most liked content!

About Pieter

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

529 profile views
  1. If your camera was in A-mode and you got iso 12000 without you knowing why, A-mode is beyond your skill-level of the camera (and technical photography in general). iso 12000 will get you a really ugly picture on the rx100 (or just about any camera). The reason you hot this high iso-value is that you likely chose a really small aperture (high aperture number). Stick to auto-mode and your pictured will turn out much nicer.
  2. Wasn't your question answered in your previous thread? This is exactly the same question. If you want help, you really need to be more specific. Selfie could have the same problem as last time: you initiate self timer while standing behind the camera. The camera focusses on the background. You move in front of the camera but camera won't refocus before exposure. Result: blurry selfie.
  3. I think it's the general consensus that the FE 50 f/1.8 is by far the worst native Sony lens. That being said, some people argue it's still decent value for money.
  4. Hence my honest question. In the very rare occasion that I want to focus on something else than ones eyes when photographing a face, I'd likely use single spot AF of MF even. Eye-AF is just a more advanced version of face AF and can't work without face AF being active simultaneously.
  5. Just out of pure curiosity, why would you want face AF without Eye-AF? I have an a6500 where I have face detect off by default to prevent the camera from locking on to faces when I don't want it to. Eye-AF is under the AEL-button. By pressing it, face detect is also engaged automatically. I like this setup due to its flexibility but can't really think of a situation where I'd want face detect without Eye-AF (or care about it if my camera chose to lock on to an eye anyway during face detect)...
  6. I can see how people were offended by him and admittedly he was stretching it a bit every now and then, but honestly I found most of his posts amusing. People generally just failed to see the irony in them and took him too seriously. I don't know what post tipped the bucket for him but I remember some of his last posts where he got in an argument with Jaf Photo, Jaf refusing to post some of his work as proof of being an experienced photographer. Jaf instead returned the question to username, who in turn posted 15 pages of his photo's. To me that was quite hilarious though many were annoyed by it.
  7. Your a6400 indeed came with most of these features on the original firmware. I don't own one though so can't direct you to the settings. Please consult the product manual for that.
  8. It would help to be a bit more specific... What do you mean by 'this'? If you mean to refer to the firmware update in todays SAR entry, please read the subject title again.
  9. Yea I miss him too. Always an answer with a fresh perspective. Though most people didn't like his answers 😆
  10. This is not a very busy forum but one with some active and experienced users willing to make an effort to provide as good an answer as they can to your questions. In the various threads you were involved in I can see people did the same for you Johnhoward28. If you don't like the speed or efficiency at which answers are provided, this is indeed not the place for you.
  11. A good alternative to the Sigma would also be the upcoming Tamron 17-28 f/2.8, combining a fast aperture with a modest price point. Should be available in a couple of weeks and doesn't need an adapter.
  12. a6400 is identical to a6300. a6500 is slightly thicker due to bigger grip.
  13. The MC-11 adapter converts lenses with a Canon EF-mount to Sony E-mount. If you get the Sony-version, it'll come with an A-mount. For that you'll need the Sony LA-EA3 or LA-EA4. Autofocus performance and general functionality will be better with the Canon version plus MC-11, as this combination is supported by Sigma. Do keep in mind that the 18-35 f/1.8 is an APS-C lens. You might want to consider the fullframe 24-35 f/2 instead on your A7iii.
  14. Do you have the 16-50, 18-55 or 18-135 f/3.5-5.6? I guess for your purposes I'd recommend the 18-135 but it's still not a lowlight monster. The 18-105 f/4 is slightly faster at the long end but is also slightly bigger when not in use (it doesn't extend when zooming). For the price I'd advise against the Sony/Zeiss 16-70 f/4, which performs similar to the 18-105 f/4 at a 50% higher price. There are no other fast native zoom lenses for the a6000 unless you resort to bulky and pricey fullframe lenses.
  15. I'll have to rectify my previous post a bit: some lenses have a moving rear element, such as my E 55-210mm. The rear element moves outward when zooming in, thus creating underpressure in the sensor chamber. Out of pure curiosity and a scientific mindset I taped off the rear side of the lens to see if I could create a vacuum between the rear lens element and the tape. I couldn't, indicating that there must be a vent in the lens which lets in external air into the rear part (and thus into the sensor chamber). Removing the tape and holding my hand over the rear side of the lens while rapidly zooming in and out, I could feel some airflow against my hand. Air that would normally be blown right onto the sensor. I guess the air is sucked in through the tight seams in the lens so I wouldn't really worry about big dust particles, but it seems plausible that lenses with a moving rear element might pump some air (and dust) onto your sensor.
×
×
  • Create New...