Jump to content

Pieter

Members
  • Content Count

    269
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    24

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Pieter reacted to Chrissie in A6500: the mystery of the TTL flash delay   
    Basically the flash only fires, once proper focus has been acquired.
    The delay in releasing the flash is a direct consequence of the delayed focus acqusition.
    In a "flash use" situation, the lighting conditions are probably rather low, otherwise you wouldn't be using a flash in the first place. In low light conditions, the camera cannot use contrast AF, because contrast is also too low.
    So it has to use PDAF, which uses kind of a range finding mechanism, which employs the evaluation of the parallax between looking at the same object from two different positions. That's why humans and animals have two eyes, which are a little distance apart. Each eye generates a slightly different image, and the brain fuses them together for a 3D-Image, including distance estimations along the way.
    For special applications, this effext is amplified by dedicated range finders, which use an increased distance between the two lenses.
    Back to the camera:
    The base for the range finding in the camera are the left-to right (or top-to-bottom) opposite edges of the lense aperture. The wider the aperture, the easier the range finder can operate, resulting in faster focus acqusition.
    Stopped down, the base for range finding is narrowed, possibly up to the point that focus hunting occurs. Anyway, a narrow base makes precise distance computation difficult, also due to the limited precision of the computations involved. (A computer cannot distinguish infinitely miniscule differences between floating point values. Below a certain threshold ever smaller differences between two floating point values cannot be represented any more, making those values appear to be equal. In that case, a signal to move the focal plane cannot be derived any more).
  2. Thanks
    Pieter got a reaction from Peter67 in Sony Compatibly for A7R iii   
    The Sony A230 uses the older A-mount while the A7Riii uses the E-mount. You can use an adapter like the LA-EA4 to make your old lenses work on the A7Riii. Do take note that your old camera has an APS-C sized sensor so your old lens might be designed for APS-C. If so, it won't cover the entire sensor area and your A7Riii will switch to crop mode.
    The hot shoe is different too so your old flashgun won't fit unless used with a Sony/Minolta to Sony Multi Interface (MI) hot shoe adapter
  3. Thanks
    Pieter got a reaction from Jonas3 in a6400 vs a7ii   
    Really depends on your needs and type of photography.
     
    I'd say go for the a6400 if:
     - You shoot a lot of moving subjects (family, pets, birds in flight etc): autofocus on the a6400 is much better than A7II;
     - You want something small and portable;
     - Don't plan on upgrading to fullframe in the foreseeable future.
     
    Go for the A7II if:
     - You shoot a lot in dim lighting conditions: high ISO-performance of the A7II is noticeably better than the a6400;
     - You prefer the ergonomics of a larger body;
     - You consider going fullframe at some point.
     
    Which lenses are you considering to go with the body?
  4. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from PeterMac in new guy with question   
    I would assume it mostly happens when you move your left hand thumb to the hotshoe as it gets closer to the EVF.
    There's a couple of solutions:
    1) Disable automatic switching between screen and EVF. If needed, you can assign a custom button to switch between either one;
    2) Tape off part of the proximity sensor to make it less sensitive, as explained here:
    https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3834906
  5. Haha
    Pieter got a reaction from Raz in Can't see "blue stars"   
    You want to see black holes by photographing the nights sky with your A7? You do realize that only this year for the very first time in history a black hole was 'photographed' using a virtual Earth-size telescope, after 60 institutions collaborated and did massive data-processing on readings by eight radio telescopes which were synchronized by atomic clocks?
    Please keep us posted when you succeed. You might well win a Nobel prize.
  6. Haha
    Pieter got a reaction from Thad E Ginathom in Can't see "blue stars"   
    You want to see black holes by photographing the nights sky with your A7? You do realize that only this year for the very first time in history a black hole was 'photographed' using a virtual Earth-size telescope, after 60 institutions collaborated and did massive data-processing on readings by eight radio telescopes which were synchronized by atomic clocks?
    Please keep us posted when you succeed. You might well win a Nobel prize.
  7. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from Thad E Ginathom in new guy with question   
    Lol yea, that's honestly the only reason I can think of... It's not like the sliding eyecup is more expensive to make. Actually I guess it would be a lot cheaper for Sony to let the a6100 and a6400 to have the same eyecup. As far as I know it's the only physicial difference between the two cameras. Oh and the a6100 doesn't have the AF/MF / AEL switch.
  8. Like
    Pieter reacted to Thad E Ginathom in new guy with question   
    Sony must regard it as a premium feature. Which, in a way, is true: it doesn't fall off!
  9. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from GraphicDesign in Sony APS-C lens for women photography?   
    Nooo! You just added to the confusion! Please stop spreading this misconception. The fact that you happen to use FF-equivalence as a reference doesn't make it the Golden Standard. Look up the definition of focal length: sensor size has nothing to do with it. A 50mm lens is a 50mm lens, no matter what sensor you use.
    Some cheap cameras put the FF-equivalent focal length on the lens, which is just wrong and confusing. People who know how to work with equivalence don't need this false information, people who don't know how to use equivalence don't care. For example: On the RX0 it says it has a 24mm lens, which is bullocks: it has an 8mm lens and a 1"-type sensor. People who know how to use equivalency will know a 1"-sensor has a crop-factor of about 3, so the camera has the same field of view as a 24mm lens on a fullframe sensor.
  10. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from Thad E Ginathom in Sony APS-C lens for women photography?   
    Nooo! You just added to the confusion! Please stop spreading this misconception. The fact that you happen to use FF-equivalence as a reference doesn't make it the Golden Standard. Look up the definition of focal length: sensor size has nothing to do with it. A 50mm lens is a 50mm lens, no matter what sensor you use.
    Some cheap cameras put the FF-equivalent focal length on the lens, which is just wrong and confusing. People who know how to work with equivalence don't need this false information, people who don't know how to use equivalence don't care. For example: On the RX0 it says it has a 24mm lens, which is bullocks: it has an 8mm lens and a 1"-type sensor. People who know how to use equivalency will know a 1"-sensor has a crop-factor of about 3, so the camera has the same field of view as a 24mm lens on a fullframe sensor.
  11. Confused
    Pieter reacted to cymmgarcia in Sony APS-C lens for women photography?   
    Just to elaborate...All lenses MM is presented in Full Frame Equivalency.
    What determines field of view is the crop factor of the camera sensor.
    Sony APS-C has a crop factor of 1.5 so in this case 1.5  times 16mm gives a field of view of 24mm.
  12. Like
    Pieter reacted to Chrissie in What computer for photo editing?   
    Harry,
    there's not a generic answer to your question. Things to consider (IMO) include:
    If you edit images professionally, you probably wouldn't ask this forum for advice in the first place. So let's assume, you're an amateur like most of us. In this case, you wonder if you should be trading money (which is an equivalent to the lifetime you spent earning it) for lifetime, which you are going to spend waiting for your edits to become visible on-screen. If you edit  _enough_  images, it's advisable to invest in a tool, which cuts down on the waiting time. If you edit only every once in a while, you'd probably be better off (financially and livetime-wise) waiting for the results. So much for the metaphorical part of it. 😉
    The waiting time itself consists of processing time  (which is dependent on the CPU power), the data loading time, which is dependent on several aspects like RAM size, RAM speed, disk speed (in case of insufficient amount of RAM) and even network bandwidth (in case of accessing data on a NAS). Finally, you have the display time, which is dependent on bus-width of the graphics adapter connection to the mainboard, plus of course the GPU power itself.
    If I had only limited resources at hand (which I can easily imagine), I would put my preference on a good CPU and enough of RAM.
    From a gut feeling, I would go for at least the twenty-fold of the size of a raw image (because of undo buffers, layers and similar stuff), plus enough for the OS and the image processing software itself. Since RAM isn't that expensive any more, 16GB would most probably bring you very far. Provided, the OS you're using supports that much RAM.
    The rest (disk or SSD, network and/or graphics adaptor) seem rather insignificant to me in comparison. Because, let's face it: as amateurs, we'll be spending most of the time sitting in front of our screen, contemplating on how we could tweak that decisive little bit more to of our picture.
    The waiting time for an edit to become visible becomes very insignificant, compared to the above. (My personal experience)
    Hope that helps.
     
  13. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from GraphicDesign in Sony APS-C lens for women photography?   
    Totally different optical design. Though the SAL 16-50 is good value for money, the SEL 16-55 is a state of the art optical design. The E-mount lens is designed for mirrorless camera's, the A-mount lens for cameras with a mirror box. I expect it to perform a whole lot better than the A-mount lens, but noone knows for sure until some proper reviews are published.

    Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content.
    Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content.
  14. Confused
    Pieter reacted to martti_s in Did I fry my Sony A7iii?   
    You did what?
    You had a 3rd-party battery unit and you screwed a screw in the living body of your 7AIII?
    Do you know what?
    You are the reason why the prices are so high and why nobody wants to give camera owners insurance.
    You need a new camera. And an adult to watch what you are doing so that you do not harm yourself.
    NO! the moves you described are not warranty or insurance issues.
    You killed your camera. Guilty as charged.
  15. Thanks
    Pieter reacted to Donald Mackie in Looking ahead for a new challenge   
    So for those that may be interested in this kinda thing and specific to my original post. I rented the Sony 70-300 4.5 this week. I also borrowed a Sigma 100-400 from a friend yesterday morning.  I’m coming from the perspective of either lens would be used in virtually good/great light. I don’t need these things for low light tasks. Also for the record I already own an MC-11 adaptor with the latest firmware updates.
     
    The Sony is relatively light and not much bigger than the 24-105. It focuses lightning fast. It’s color profile (Lightroom Adobe Profile) reminds me very much of the 24-105, which is really pleasing. The zoom ring and the manual focus ring was noticeably sticky. Understanding this was a rental which showed obvious signs of use (maybe even mis-use) my biggest concern past that was it’s focus ability past 200mm. It very well could have been me but not much was sharp above 200. Perhaps to some extent “acceptably” sharp up to 250mm but disappointing at 300mm. Again for reference it was a well used lens and the conditions being what they were it may well have been bad decisions on my part.
    The Sigma 100-400 is on the big side. Manageable but much bigger (and I’d assume heavier) than the Sony. The new MC-11 firmware puts focus attributes on par with the 70-300. Maybe better?! From there the Sigma leaves the Sony pretty far behind in almost every category. It’s sharp almost all the way through. I’ve had limited time with this lens but it appears to be tack sharp all the way out. The color is a bit more neutral to the Sony but I shoot Raw and honestly that neutral may well be more advantageous. 
    In the end and for what I’d use it for the Sigma is a bit of a no-brainer. I checked on pricing and right now there’s a $200.00 instant rebate on the lens. I’ll sleep on it tonight but $600 for this lens? That’s gonna be tough to beat!
     
  16. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from abniven in A6300 slow / delay issue   
    About once a month shutting down will take longer because the camera will take a black image to map hot pixels on the sensor. You'll know by hearing the shutter sound after a while when turning the camera off. This is completely normal.
  17. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from Thad E Ginathom in what is on my sensor ?!   
    Hurray for warranty!
    Your sensor is especially at risk with manual lenses as those are often left at working aperture. Electronically coupled lenses close down the aperture when the camera is turned off to protect the sensor. When not in 'live view' the aperture is also closed after about 20 second. These 20 seconds are a risky period: while reviewing images shot in strong backlight the aperture may be wide open with the camera pointed at the sun and no lens cap on. You might not even know you're exposing your sensor to direct sunlight.
  18. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from mplsony in Undecided on a6300 vs a6400   
    Check this to determine if the advantages of the a6400 vs a6300 are worth it to you:
    https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/preview/sony-a6300-vs-a6400-vs-a6500/
    What not many comparison sites mention is that the a6500 body and grip are a bit beefier than the a6300/6400. To me the a6500 has much better handling, and I can immagine that if you're coming from a Nikon DSLR the a6300/6400 may feel a bit tiny in the hands. The a6500 wasn't on your lost though so don't want to complicate things more 😉
    The 18-135 lens is considerably sharper than the 16-50 and has a useful range if you do occasional wildlife stuff. Then again, the a6400 has animal eye AF, though I doubt either of these lenses lens will give a small enough depth of field to see whether focus was on the eye or face... Choices...
  19. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from Thad E Ginathom in Beginner -Help with Sony A6000 Raw files   
    How do you define a 'large image', and in what sense are your images lacking?
    Do you want a higher megapixel count? Buy an A7Rx-camera instead or learn how to shoot multiple images and merge them into one.
    Do you want a larger file size? I don't see why anyone would want this save for the neccesary size to ensure high picture quality, but make sure your image quality in camera is set to 'jpeg fine' or 'raw+jpeg'. If you want still larger file sizes, open the jpeg in Photoshop and save it in the highest quality possible. This gains you nothing except a larger file size though.
    Do you want a larger area covered in your photos? Increase the distance to your subject when taking the photo, buy a wide angle lens or again learn to shoot and merge multiple images.
    Are the images not large enough when viewing them on your Mac? Enlarge the viewing window or buy a bigger monitor.
    I'm sure there are still other reasons for one to find his images not large enough...
  20. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from Thad E Ginathom in New a6000 Owner Deeply Puzzled re: Performance   
    You're welcome. Should more questions arise I'd be happy to help.
  21. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from Xiropillo in Sony A6500 Shutter not locked when not in focus   
    Did some reading on BBF and it seems the very essence of BBF is to detach shutter release from the focus action. The focus action is bypassed when pressing the shutter button, so naturally it will take a shot without focus confirmation. Supposedly it's like this with any brand/type of camera which allows for BBF.
    Seems like you're out of luck. Either drop BBF and use the regular half-press focussing or practice to have focus confirmation before pressing the shutter button.
  22. Thanks
    Pieter got a reaction from Thad E Ginathom in Crop lens/crop body   
    Canon APS-C is 1.6 (1.59). All other brands are 1.5 (1.52).
  23. Thanks
    Pieter got a reaction from smithrog34 in Crop lens/crop body   
    Not sure if I understand your question correctly... It will behave like any other 16-50 lens on an APS-C body. The fact that the lens is designated as 'crop' has nothing to do with the focal length, it just means that the lens' projection is not big enough to cover a fullframe sensor. It's your sensor size that does the cropping, not the lens.
  24. Thanks
    Pieter got a reaction from smithrog34 in Crop lens/crop body   
    Again: the focal length is a fixed property of the lens so 16mm will always be 16mm. On an APS-C body like your a6300 however it will produce a similar field of view as a 24mm lens on a fullframe camera. But this has to do with the camera sensor size, not with the lens.
    Eg. the (crop) 16-50 lens will produce exactly the same field of view as the (fullframe) 12-24 lens when both are set to 16mm and both mounted on your a6300.
    I'm sure you can distill whatever answer you were looking for from my comment.
  25. Like
    Pieter got a reaction from lukx in Is selling a7iii to buy a9 a good idea at this point of time?   
    Sounds to me like a typical case of GAS. For your use cases your photo's will likely gain nothing from switching to the a9. Where do you feel your a7III is lacking?
×
×
  • Create New...