Pieter got a reaction from Samuell in Make apsc behave like Fullframe with Lens
You are mostly correct. For all practical purposes and intents, a 35mm f/0.95 lens on an APS-C camera will give the same depth of field and field of view as a 50mm f/1.4 on a fullframe camera. The ISO-performance of a fullframe camera is also only about 1 stop better than an APS-C camera with the same amount of megapixels.
So e.g. a FF-camera with a 50mm lens at f/1.4, 1/100 sec shutter speed and ISO800 produces roughly the same depth of field, field of view and noise performance as an APS-C camera with a 35mm lens at f/0.95, 1/100sec and ISO400.
However: the cheap 35mm lens will likely produce absolutely crap quality images at f/0.95. So unless you're into that 'arty dreamy look' of blurry images that are a hazy mess, your money is best invested elsewhere.
By the way, the new Laowa 33mm f/0.95 seems to be pretty good stopped down, but that wasn't your intent:
Pieter got a reaction from Lili in Converter Sony and lens FE 4.5-5.6 / 70-300 G OSS
Sorry to say but there's no teleconverter that will fit properly on this lens.
There's a way to make your 2×-converter fit, by shimming the rear end of the lens with extension tubes (I think you'd need about 14 mm), but that way autofocus becomes questionable and you'll loose infinity focus. I guess this is not what you're looking for.
For the price of the 70-300 and 2× extender you can buy the Tamron 150-500 or Sigma 150-600. If you really need the reach, I think that would be an option to consider.
Pieter got a reaction from Alejandro in Sony a7 ii or a7R ii?
There's no real need to downsample except to save storage space. Like I said: the 42MP image from the A7Rii will not look noisier than a 24MP image from an A7ii when viewed at the same size. So unless you're pixel peeping, there won't be any noticeable additional noise in the A7Rii images. The images from the A7Rii will look slightly more detailed tho when printed to the same size because it has more pixels to sample from.
Pieter got a reaction from Alejandro in Sony a7 ii or a7R ii?
The A7Rii produces more noise per pixel than the A7ii. However, it has a lot more pixels. Because noise is more or less randomly distributed, it cancels out to some degree when downsampling a high MP image to a lower MP count. So yes, the images from an A7Rii will look noisier when viewed at 100% than those from an A7ii, but it is also zoomed in more. When viewed/printed at the same size (or downsampled to 24MP) the noise should be pretty equal between both cameras.
Pieter reacted to fatmarley in Sony A7C Green tint
Had a little while to play with the camera, and it's a relief to say that I've only had a couple of shots that had strange skin tones, but that's out of hundreds of photos... The odd thing is, It wasn't green though, my girlfriend had an odd pinky red colour to her skin when she was overexposed.
The only problem I had was the metering in a forest area, I'm only using a 35mm f1.8 prime lens, so my main subject (4 year old) is often only small in the frame, so I guess the camera is trying to find the correct exposure of the whole area, rather than my sons face. It was a cloudy day yesterday, and the light was very even, but a bit dull due to the trees covering the sky, so it wasn't a problem with dappled light. The camera was exposing for the background and was blowing out skin tones badly. It was set on Multi, I changed it to Center, but that didn't help. I then changed to Highlight and that fixed the problem. It did mean I got a few underexposed shots in different areas, but at least that's easier to fix. I don't know how my old Canon 70d would have coped in the same situation, and for all I know it could have been the same.
The IBIS is not very good for video work, but that's not my main priority. I will probably buy a gimble because I like to film opening presents on Christmas day, and other family stuff. The film quality even at 1080p is excellent with the 35mm f1.8 lens, and really nails focus, and tracks very well. I did try recording in 4k, but my PC didn't like playing it, and it was stuttery (I guess it's a graphics card issue?), although it plays fine on my TV.
Out of well over 400 shots I took yesterday, only a handful were out of focus. I had the shutter speed set to a minimum of 1/250 and mostly had the aperture set to f1.8, with auto ISO, so well impressed. Also, well impressed with Luminar Ai.
I also tried the camera indoors at night with just the lights on. It looks like I'm going to have to get a flash to catch my fast moving 4 year old. When he's reasonably still I can get some very nice shots of him in low light, but although I have the shutter speed set to 1/250, Auto mode chooses f/4 and high ISO produces grainy images. If I shoot at f1.8 1/250 it looks like the pictures are often slightly out of focus, but that's being picky and pixel peeping at eyelashes.
The lighter weight and smaller size than my 70d is great, but I still don't like it round my neck, so I've ordered a rope, hand strap.
Pieter got a reaction from Sony-G-Man in Seeking advice as a new Sony owner - Did I get a faulty unit?
I concur with @thebeardedgroundsmans answers. What's more, a high megapixel sensor like in the A7RIII will show more noise on pixel level than an A7III (24MP) or the A7S (12MP).
Regarding the banding in movies: what shutter speed did you use? A shutter speed close to the frequency of artificial lighting will cause banding in the footage.
All in all, nothing wrong with your camera I'd say.
Pieter got a reaction from PNW photog in A7Rii problems with LCD flip out screen goes black if I hold the camera too close to my chest, but not if I hold it 20" away.
This is caused by the proximity sensor of the viewfinder (EVF). To disable auto-toggle between monitor and EVF, go to:
"MENU > Gear > Finder/Monitor" and set it to "Monitor (Manual)".
This completely disables the EVF. To still have the possibility to use it, you can use a custom button to switch manually by mapping "Finder/Monitor Sel." to it.
Pieter got a reaction from Nextguitar in SONY a6400 getting overexposed at lowest iso in daylight ! ! Help
That's a stupid software thing and becomes especially apparent under those conditions: the in-camera vignetting correction does not seem to be gradual but compensates in discrete steps away from the center. When boosting the in-camera corrected image (either in post or by extremely high ISO in-camera), these concentric rings become very clear. I believe the in-camera shading compensation is baked into the RAW-file if you do photography, which renders an otherwise nice photo useless.
I always disable in-camera shading compensation (= vignetting correction) for this very reason. And because I often like a bit of vignette in my shots. If I don't want vignetting for some reason, I stop down the lens or correct in post.
Pieter got a reaction from Nextguitar in To use a filter or not to use a filter on a lens?
I'm using filters on my lenses for the following reasons:
- If you buy good quality filters, the impact on the optical quality of the lens in my opinion is negligible (like 0.3% light loss and almost zero additional ghosting/flare).
- I clean my lenses quite often. Even when first blowing/brushing off dust before a wet wipe, you'll inadvertedly cause abrasion on the front element. In time, the degradation of the coating on this element will have adverse effects on image quality as well. Replacing a front filter is cheap, replacing a front lens element not so much.
- Don't expect the filter glass to protect your front element from a direct impact with a solid object, but having some metal ring protruding beyond the front element certainly helps in keeping it from harm. A lot of impact energy can be dissipated by the deformation of the filter ring before wrecking the front of your lens. Always keeping the lens hood on also helps here.
- Resale value: a minor scratch on the front element (e.g. by accidentally rubbing a grain of sand over the lens while cleaning it) won't affect image quality much, but it severely affects resale value.
Have a read here, you might find it interesting:
Pieter got a reaction from Kumar Nishit in How often should you get the camera sensor cleaned
That is a convenience none of us DSLT/mirrorless-users can ever enjoy.
Pieter reacted to XKAES in Filter vs No Filter
It's only "controversial" to people who want it to be controversial. To people like yourself, and myself -- who have test results -- it's not. That's like saying the COVID vaccine is controversial. It only is to the people who choose to put their lives at risk!
I have UV filters on all of my lenses -- not just to reduce UV light (which is a bigger deal for film than digital sensors) but to protect my lens glass.
Thanks for your test results, anyway!
Pieter got a reaction from scrane in Testing recently bought SEL24105G lens
ISO 6400 will indeed result in blotchy/grainy images with little sharpness. Since you were shooting in a controlled environment off a tripod, I kind off assumed you were at ISO 100 and let the shutter speed be as slow as needed for proper exposure.
Pieter got a reaction from Kumar Nishit in Issue with new a6100 camera
I'd try a factory settings reset and see if the issue persists. Not sure which setting might cause this behaviour. It would be less annoying if the 16-50 lens collapsed immediately after switching the camera off but alas, it waits with collapsing until the camera is completely finished with whatever it's doing.
Hot pixels occur in cameras of all ages from all brands. I've occasionally spotted a hot pixel in my camera, but after a hot pixel mapping routine the issue was totally gone. Wouldn't worry about this as it's adequately dealt with in Sony cameras.
Pieter got a reaction from Gen in I can’t change aperture on Sony A600
The Meike 35mm F/1.7 is a fully manual 'dumb' lens, meaning it won't communicate with your camera. All settings have to be set manually and your camera won't know what aperture value or focus distance you set on the lens, and consequently won't show an aperture value on the screen. All your camera knows is the light exposure of the sensor, and it will set shutter speed and ISO accordingly for correct exposure.
All in all, working as intended.
Pieter reacted to joerg in Suitability of the Sony SEL200600G Lens for Astrophotography
In the second section I would like to discuss the possibility of photographing deep sky objects.
To achieve exposure times of a few seconds the earth's rotation has to be compensated, in my case by the equatorial mount CEM25P from iOptron. With the possibility of autoguiding, here by the MGEN3 from Lacerta in combination with a 50mm finder scope, exposure times of several minutes can be achieved. Seemingly small things are also important in my opinion, like a heating tape to avoid humidity condensation and the use of a dummy battery adapter to be able to run the camera constantly for several hours.
Emission and reflection nebulae
With the possibility to select the focal length almost arbitrarily between 200 and 1800mm, very many objects can be photographed with the SEL200600G. For emission nebulae with a primary emission at hydrogen-alpha and 656nm the use of an astromodified camera is recommended (replacement of the IR cut filter by clear glass). In my case I took a Sony A7R bought used at E-Bay and let it astromodify.
Orion nebula M42 Composit 10x10s and 30x180s ISO-800 F6.3 600mm 7xDarks 15xFlats 15xBias Optolong L-Pro Filter
Plejades M45 28x120s ISO-800 F6.3 600mm 5xDarks 26xFlats 20xBias
The same applies analogously to galaxies as to planetary photography. It is possible to photograph single galaxies. However, the optic is not fast and not long-wavelength enough for very detailed images.
Markajan chain 102x240s ISO-800 600mm F6.3 6xDarks 15xFlats 15xBias
M51 110x120s ISO-1600 1200mm F13 7xDarks 15xFlats 15xBias
Pieter reacted to joerg in Sony 200-600 mm Lens for Astrophotography?
To be clear: all the effort with the equatorial mount and elaborate post-processing, which caused me a learning cycle of more than half a year and a financial expenditure comparable to the purchase of a SEL200600G lens and a SEL20TC teleconverter, which are not cheap either, is only needed to photograph faint deep sky objects!
All the lunar images I posted here in the forum almost a year ago were taken exclusively with the following equipment: Sony A6000 camera, SEL200600G lens, SEL20TC teleconverter on a wobbly aluminium tripod! Partly I used a remote release RMT-DSLR2.
I used the following procedure for this:
1. Frame up the moon in the picture, filling about approx. 80% of the horizontal image area.
2. With the help of the focus magnifier, focus on a crater on the terminator as well as possible (today I would use the Bahtinov mask and a bright star!).
3. Use an exposure time of well under 1/10s (see below) and ensure a vibration-free release with the built-in timer or a remote control. Take 5-10 shots to catch one moment with little air turbulence, until the moon has finally run out of the frame.
Because I was unsure whether the focus was perfect, I went through this whole process 4-5 times in one evening and got a really beautiful moon image every night. I have to admit that in the beginning I even shot pure JPG and only did moderate post-processing (exposure and maybe a little sharpening). Of course, all the individual images with embedded meta data still exist and have not been deleted...
In this way, not only the moon can be photographed, but also various double stars and the bright planets (Venus, Jupiter, Saturn). However, the planetary images (my best Jupiter image is attached) are by no means comparable with those taken with fast and long focal length telescopes and special planetary cameras (webcams), which film thousands of pictures and do not take photos...
According to the "500 rule", you can use 500/1800 = approx. 1/3s exposure time with a fixed camera and an 1800mm lens on a tripot. In my experience, however, 1/6s is just about possible, 1/8 to 1/10s is better and anything shorter causes no problems at all.
With an equatorial mount, single exposure times of 15-30s are possible at such long focal lengths (1200-1800mm).
Only with an autoguider you can you achieve such good tracking that several minutes of exposure time can be achieved, which is very helpful for dark deep sky objects!
Pieter got a reaction from Rea in 4K recording in iPhone vs Sony
I think you'll need to read up a bit on the benefits of a large sensor. There's no denying that some of those benefits can be offset by heavy post-processing done in modern phones, but in the foreseeable future a large sensor will still produce a much cleaner image than a small one, especially in poor lighting conditions.
Pieter reacted to BrooklynFoto in Newbie looking for the right lens for Disney
Thanks for the recommendations. I have decided to leave the camera home, use my iPhone, and purchased the Memory Maker for 69.00. I want to enjoy my time with my family and not get bogged down with trying to learn lenses settings. Easy! This will give me time to learn the camera and practice with different lenses for future trips. Thanks all.