Jump to content

Pieter

Members
  • Content Count

    335
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    34

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from SAW in 100-400 GM on A7III   
    Valid argument if that's what you value. Bear in mind though that the DN (= Designed Native) Sigma lenses perform extremely well on Sony bodies, likely much better than they did on your old Canon. Be sure to check Dustin Abbotts thorough review: he compares it head-to-head to the GM on several aspects. Since you mention cost as an aspect in your trade-off it would be a waste to discard the Sigma purely based on a gut feeling.
    https://dustinabbott.net/2020/06/sigma-100-400mm-f5-6-3-dn-os-review/
  2. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from SAW in 100-400 GM on A7III   
    Have you considered the Sigma 100-400 which is about to be released? It's less than half the price of the GM and based on the reviews it's optically quite similar. Afaik it hasn't been verified yet if it's compatible with Sonys 1.4× extender though.
  3. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from BrianR in Question on warning in manual about sun being in angle of view   
    Yes, shooting directly into the sun, especially with a wide aperture, may cause your sensor to be damaged. Actually, you don't even need to be shooting to damage the sensor. This is one of the reasons that the aperture of the lens closes when you turn off the camera: to protect the sensor from direct sunlight when you forget to put the lens cap on.
    Also, if you're reviewing your photos on camera, the aperture will stay open for some 20 seconds before closing down. During this period take care not to point you camera into the sun as it might cause damage without you even being aware that you're exposing your sensor to intense concentrated light.
  4. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from BrianR in Question on warning in manual about sun being in angle of view   
    ND: Depending on the blocking factor of the filter, an ND-filter blocks 50% up to virtually all light. This works similar to closing the aperture when determining the light intensity of the sun projected onto your sensor.
    CPL: A polarization filter blocks about 50% of the light from the sun, so your sensor will still be at (a slightly reduced) risk.
    UV: No effect: there already is a UV-filter on your sensor. Stacking these hardly affects light intensity on the sensor.
  5. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from Thad E Ginathom in Question on warning in manual about sun being in angle of view   
    Yes, shooting directly into the sun, especially with a wide aperture, may cause your sensor to be damaged. Actually, you don't even need to be shooting to damage the sensor. This is one of the reasons that the aperture of the lens closes when you turn off the camera: to protect the sensor from direct sunlight when you forget to put the lens cap on.
    Also, if you're reviewing your photos on camera, the aperture will stay open for some 20 seconds before closing down. During this period take care not to point you camera into the sun as it might cause damage without you even being aware that you're exposing your sensor to intense concentrated light.
  6. Like
    Pieter reacted to Chrissie in Anyone with any real world experience upgrading from a6400?   
    What bothers me with people like you is the following:
    you don't really want to  _LEARN_  something. You are not interested in becoming smarter after an exchange. All you are looking for is a quick recipe to  _consume_ , preferably without gaining any understanding whatsoever.
    Well, good luck with that.
    No more recipes from side.
    Over and out.
  7. Like
    Pieter reacted to Chrissie in Anyone with any real world experience upgrading from a6400?   
    What the bloody hell keeps you from contemplating the good answer you already got?
    Why don't you follow that train of thought laid out in my previous answer?
    It's people like you that keep me wondering if it's really worth while the effort I put into my answers to newbies.
  8. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from Georgearnoldphotography in Should I upgrade to FF from APSC?   
    This is indeed the point I was trying to make. From what I gather (and looking at your photos) it seems like your current setup isn't holding you back but you're more interested in exploring new possibilities.
    If a new camera increases your interest in photography, your boosted enthusiasm will likely help produce more and nicer images. Looking at your photos though I'm pretty sure any (un)trained eye will have a very hard time telling if these were made with an APS-C camera or fullframe. Only in a side-by-side comparison of the same photo will experienced photographers be able to spot the slight difference.
  9. Like
    Pieter reacted to Benz3ne in Should I upgrade to FF from APSC?   
    Consider yourself followed (Benjour on there).
    The difference in results will be additional depth of field at a given aperture, higher ISO capabilities and, as you mentioned, dynamic range.
    The DR differences will probably not make a huge difference seeing as most of your shots are well exposed anyway, so having ability to boost shadows a little more or decrease highlights a little more won't be as valuable to you.The DR would be useful for your landscape shots, but you (again) manage absolutely fine without the need for it, plus you've always got bracketing in one form or another for reasonably static shots anyway.
    Being able to push ISO more is where I found the biggest difference going from APS-C to FF, albeit on Pentax before coming across to Sony. ISO 1600 on the K-70 was where I'd set my limit, with 3200 if I really needed it. On the K-1, and now the A7iii, I'd happily shoot at 2000 without much issue, 3200 is alright, 5000 is doable especially with noise reduction in post (through Topaz Denoise AI if Lightroom is struggling). For low light/B&W stuff I'll happily use 5000 if needs be. Yet to push it past that but have seen some reasonable results at higher ISOs (references unavailable sorry, not made a note of them)!
    Lastly, DoF. Again, it's nice for isolating subjects in the case of the odd flower photo you've taken but it's not something that can't be emulated to some degree through APS-C. i.e. shoot at a wider aperture on APS-C and you get more DoF, simple! For your longer shots it's probably not necessary to have it, because the DoF will be thin and you'd probably be shooting at a higher aperture for sharpness then anyway.
    Irrespective of all the above, you're VERY capable with what you've got - you could go for a FF and no doubt make the most of it, but you're nailing it with the A6400. 
    The question above about 'where is your setup lacking' is the best question to ask yourself.  Or wording it slightly differently, where is your current set up holding you back? If the answer is 'it's not' then no need to change unless, like me, you want new toys.
    The A7iv will give you huge detail given it's a 61mp sensor, but I think that's the only true benefit over the A9. I considered both but they weren't worth the additional outlay versus the A7iii which was a sweet spot for functions, cost and sensor size. 24mp is ample for internetting and medium-to-large prints so I don't need more.
     
  10. Like
    Pieter reacted to Taher Abouraya in sony lens adapter   
    It is true that you loose 1/3 of a stop which can be easily compensated. But, the AF on the EA3 is really very slow. I think you need to try both before you take a decision. I also have the LA-EA 1 and LA-EA2 for the crop sensor and the case is the same the EA1 is very slow when you use the SAM or SSM lenses or even manual focus in case you use the lenses that do not have an AF motor. 
  11. Like
    Pieter reacted to tom.b in Sony Alpha A7Rii - noisy images.   
    I got the Samyang 45mm and I could not be happier - it's resolved everything! Thanks so much for your help
  12. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from Thad E Ginathom in When will Sony upgrade their APS-C sensors with increased megapixels for the a6xxx??   
    ISO-range of A7Riii and A7Riv are the same (100 - 32000), as is the dynamic range:
    https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sony-a7riv-versus-a7riii-dynamic-range/
    Even though I like the absolute sharpness and detail when I pixel-peep my photo's, it hardly serves a practical purpose. It's like the whole 4k - 6k - 8k discussion in video-world. Yes you'll see the difference if you're sitting at half a meter from your 65" TV, but who does that except the guy who just bought a new TV?
    What would be an interesting concept though is if there was a native 'low-res' mode incorporated in high-res cameras. If enabled, it would still read the full high-res sensor but downsample the RAW-file to a lower resolution. That way you'd still have the ISO-performance of a full-sensor readout but stored in a lower file size RAW if you don't need all this resolution. I might even consider buying such a camera.
  13. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from Benz3ne in When will Sony upgrade their APS-C sensors with increased megapixels for the a6xxx??   
    Honestly, why do you need more MP? 24 MP is plenty for any kind of print you may ever want to make if you factor in optimal viewing angle. All these bells and whistles you speak of result in a vastly better image than just boosting the MP-count would (better AF and subject tracking, better low light ISO-performance, etc). Higher MP is just marketing crap unless you plan to heavily crop or print billboard size and stand with your nose against the canvas.
    For good reason the A7x you refer to has actually stuck with 24 MP ever since the first version. It's the A7Rx line which has received MP boosts because this line is ment for just that purpose: absolute best image quality despite bigger file size and more noise on pixel level. It's ment for those people who plan to crop their images or print billboard-size.
    Here's one hoping Sony's future A6XXX-camera will still have 24 MP but even better AF and (dare I say) 1-2 stops better ISO-performance.
  14. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from mlevin77 in Possible to control depth of field in movie mode?   
    I'm assuming you understand the concept of depth of field related to aperture and background-to-subject-to-camera distance. So no, assuming you're close to the camera you won't be able to have both in the same focus (unless you manually focus between yourself and the background).
    You can however make the background more in focus by moving closer to the background.
    If you enable Aperture-priority mode instead of Movie mode, you can manually pick a smaller aperture. Make sure to set your menu such that the record-button works in all modes (not just movie mode). A small aperture (like F/8) will also make the background less blurred.
    A combination of these suggestions might yield the desired result.
  15. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from mlevin77 in Possible to control depth of field in movie mode?   
    Menu 2 (cog wheel) -> page 6 -> MOVIE Button -> Always
  16. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from mlevin77 in Possible to control depth of field in movie mode?   
    Set it to manual focus and pre-focus it where you want it to before starting the video. You can also adjust the speed of focus racking during video. Put it to slow to make it much less distracting when the camera refocusses
  17. Thanks
    Pieter got a reaction from LukeConte in Aperture priority mode laggy   
    Sounds like you selected a very small aperture (large aperture value like 16 or above) in Aperture priority mode.
  18. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from Ante.Adc in Sony 16-35mm f.4 Green Halo problem | ASTRO   
    I recollect reading a similar topic on this forum but can't find it right now. I'll look for it a bit more.
    That being said, there's no such thing as a magic trick to prevent noise by shooting low ISO and raising exposure in post. ISO doesn't cause noise: it is already there in your photo even at ISO 100 and is amplified by raising ISO just like Lightroom amplifies noise if you raise exposure. In fact, your camera is better at preserving dynamic range than what you would get by boosting exposure in post, especially when going over ISO 640.
    https://www.dpreview.com/articles/3389926460/sony-a7-iii-dynamic-range-and-high-iso-improve-over-its-predecessor
  19. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from Chrissie in Sony 16-35mm f.4 Green Halo problem | ASTRO   
    I recollect reading a similar topic on this forum but can't find it right now. I'll look for it a bit more.
    That being said, there's no such thing as a magic trick to prevent noise by shooting low ISO and raising exposure in post. ISO doesn't cause noise: it is already there in your photo even at ISO 100 and is amplified by raising ISO just like Lightroom amplifies noise if you raise exposure. In fact, your camera is better at preserving dynamic range than what you would get by boosting exposure in post, especially when going over ISO 640.
    https://www.dpreview.com/articles/3389926460/sony-a7-iii-dynamic-range-and-high-iso-improve-over-its-predecessor
  20. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from Brenda in I am looking for the best portrait lens for my a6000   
    Great choice! I have the Sigma 56mm myself and consider it to be exceptional value. Fairly cheap, compact, large aperture, extremely sharp, practically zero chromatic abberation (both lateral and longitudinal) and buttery smooth backgrounds. Only drawback is that it has quite extreme pincushion distortion if you're shooting RAW. If you're using Lightroom to post-process, distortion compensation -8 should fix it entirely. If hefty distortion is the price we have to pay for such a great combination of portability and image quality, I'm all up for it: glad we live in the digital age where it can be fixed with just a mouseclick.
  21. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from Brenda in I am looking for the best portrait lens for my a6000   
    Bear in mind there's also a 35mm f/1.8 lens with stabilization specifically designed for APS-C cameras, make sure to have a look at that one: it's about half the price of the fullframe version.
    That being said: you mention you're looking for a portraiture lens and are considering 35mm focal length. On APS-C cameras, 50-60mm is generally considered to be the ideal focal length for portraiture. Don't go blindly on this as your portraiture style might include more context around the subject, but for an a6000 camera I'd say the 50mm f/1.8 OSS or Sigma 56mm f/1.4 would be ideal portraiture lenses.
    Honestly, unless you're planning to go fullframe one day, the combination of a 'professional' fullframe lens on an a6000 camera doesn't make too much sense to me. You're paying a lot for a bigger lens to cover a sensor area you're not utilizing.
  22. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from Thad E Ginathom in I am looking for the best portrait lens for my a6000   
    Bear in mind there's also a 35mm f/1.8 lens with stabilization specifically designed for APS-C cameras, make sure to have a look at that one: it's about half the price of the fullframe version.
    That being said: you mention you're looking for a portraiture lens and are considering 35mm focal length. On APS-C cameras, 50-60mm is generally considered to be the ideal focal length for portraiture. Don't go blindly on this as your portraiture style might include more context around the subject, but for an a6000 camera I'd say the 50mm f/1.8 OSS or Sigma 56mm f/1.4 would be ideal portraiture lenses.
    Honestly, unless you're planning to go fullframe one day, the combination of a 'professional' fullframe lens on an a6000 camera doesn't make too much sense to me. You're paying a lot for a bigger lens to cover a sensor area you're not utilizing.
  23. Haha
    Pieter got a reaction from mirrorlessNY(youtuber) in Low-light, wide-angle lenses for A7iii   
    How are those good wide-angle lenses?
  24. Haha
    Pieter got a reaction from Wally The Confused in Urgent : Lens Suggestion for Sony a7iii ?   
    I don't think OP cares anymore as he posted his message as 'urgent' half a year ago and never commented on any of the suggestions.
  25. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from Roy in Sony 70-350 APSC zoom lenses on a7 series   
    @Mikey Leigh I think this link might be of interest to you, look at chapter 2.2:
    https://sonyalpha.blog/2019/10/27/sony-e-70-350mm-f4-5-6-3-g-oss/
    It covers fullframe at nearly all focal lengths except at 300+ mm. No need to use auto-APS-C mode at all: if you're planning to crop in post-processing you'll be able to keep much more megapixels than just the APS-C area.
    @Roy As OP mentioned, he's planning to use it on an A7R3, so will 'only' have 18 MP in auto-crop mode.
×
×
  • Create New...