|
Doubt it, they've been using that for a couple of years now and should have caught any kinks. The W pixel just replaces one of the G pixels the the Bayer array to help with brightness.
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 16:12 |
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Apparently the display on the back of the A7II has RGBW pixel structure. I hope it isn't that terrible poo poo that failed hard on these Motorola smartphones two years ago. Almost every portable LCD screen uses that now, except for Samsung's RGBG array. Maybe this means the A7ii will be the first that can actually be read in the goddamn sun.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
Most recent smartphones with IPS type panels, that also have been put under the microscope during reviews, still show the traditional RGB pattern. The only displays I'm aware of also having white pixels are the terrible Pentile ones Motorola used back in the day.Bob Socko posted:Doubt it, they've been using that for a couple of years now and should have caught any kinks. The W pixel just replaces one of the G pixels the the Bayer array to help with brightness.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 18:16
|
|
|
Yeah, the display has been used a lot, and the issue with the Motorola ones is that they had awful DPI anyway. With higher DPI screens most of the issues aren't present. Presumably the actual viewfinder will still be the OLED RGB array/display they used in the previous viewfinders so it shouldn't affect actual shooting much.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 18:30
|
|
|
coolskillrex remix posted:Dec 8th for those wondering. I really don't get the purpose of the II. It seems like such a marginal improvement that the only thing that makes sense to me is a way for Sony to say "we're doubling down on this new format" so anyone who was avoiding switching over because they worried support might dry up won't have those reservations. I mean it's basically just slightly faster AF and in-body stabilization, right? Which the in-body is a great quality of life thing, but I can't imagine it's going to sell anyone who wasn't already sold. And I say that as someone who shoots pretty much exclusively old manual lenses on my A7. The A9, however, will be the second coming of photography.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 19:36
|
|
|
Unless the A9 has an RGB sensor or something else revolutionary, I don't see what will set it apart from the other A7 models. Everything it'll be able to offer are just more quality of life options.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 20:22
|
|
|
Well, I just pre ordered the a7ii. Mostly because it was announced right when I was catching up on the market and looking for a new body. They sold me on the a7ii with the addition of IBIS, as I shoot almost exclusively with old c/y zeiss lenses. I'm not sure if IBIS is worth $500, but I'm going to find out. Unrelated, is there an m42 adapter that will work with my tak 35 smc? I read there might be an issue with an extra tab on the smc version.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Unless the A9 has an RGB sensor or something else revolutionary, I don't see what will set it apart from the other A7 models. Everything it'll be able to offer are just more quality of life options. I feel like it'll have to be something big to make a new line.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
Sony's been using the RGBW rear screens for years, and they're not pentile. They're just RGB plus W (four dots) for each pixel, which cuts the backlight use in half. All the RX series cameras use them, e-mount cameras have used them since the NEX-7 the SLTs have used them since the a77 mark 1. If you've used any Sony camera since 2011 or so, you've used a RGBW screen. There are other camera manufacturers that use this screen tech as well, presumably sourced by Sony.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 02:24
|
|
|
Oh okay, glad to hear it's not a Pentile setup then. Some review site made it sound like the first A7 had a normal RGB one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 12:06
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:I really don't get the purpose of the II. It seems like such a marginal improvement that the only thing that makes sense to me is a way for Sony to say "we're doubling down on this new format" so anyone who was avoiding switching over because they worried support might dry up won't have those reservations. I mean it's basically just slightly faster AF and in-body stabilization, right? Which the in-body is a great quality of life thing, but I can't imagine it's going to sell anyone who wasn't already sold. And I say that as someone who shoots pretty much exclusively old manual lenses on my A7. You're forgetting it might make for a very good full frame video camera with ibis. Even if it ibis doesn't do much for video what would you want them to do? Sony has the best sensor by far when it comes to dynamic range and colors in my opinion. I'm glad they're iterating on it in pretty significant ways. Canon and Nikon just throw higher ISO and more megapixels for mark 2s and 3s but it takes them years. Who did canon win over with the 5d mk3?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 04:35
|
|
|
The Mk3 focus system destroooys the focus system in the Mk2. Like the Mk2 had a lovely focus system anyway, but it just makes it feel like a lovely entry level as far as low light and motion capabilities. It's a huge difference. And then they made the 6D which uses the same focus system as the Mk2 because gently caress you. I mean who is going to be sold on IBIS who wasn't already sold on the versatility of a mirrorless full frame for under $2000? I would agree Sony is trying way harder to innovate than Canon or Nikon at the moment, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
The 6D one had the same layout (not that this wins them any awards), but is actually a new module. As far as mirrorless goes, IBIS is what pushed me over the edge. I prefer big bodies for ergonomics, but since Canon goes nowhere with their sensor and Sony releases cool things like IBIS, a small body it is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
I just picked up the Zeiss 24-70 and 16-35 for a trip to St. Maarten. Living near a rental place has its benefits.  I've used the 16-35 before but only on plane interiors. It'll be nice to see what it can do in a proper outdoor setting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 23:53
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:The 6D one had the same layout (not that this wins them any awards), but is actually a new module. Why not the A99? Better lenses, too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 04:55
|
|
|
Adapting my EF lenses. All my glass is Sigma, doesn't keep its value.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 05:01
|
|
|
Does anyone have a suggestion for good video import/organize/editing software that works well with Sony AVCHD? I have both Mac and PC but the Mac is what I use for photos (currently on Aperture but switching to Lightroom soon) so I prefer it. Should I stick with iMovie or look into something else? So far I've just been bringing them into Aperture when I import photos but I'm not sure they grab the originals and Aperture won't delete the videos off my memory cards automatically so I have a mess of files on my hands.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 04:07
|
|
|
Any information on how ISO steppings work with Sony in regards to amplification? On at least Canon, the hardware only supports powers of two, and any third stop ISO values have the camera select the closest hardware ISO and do math on the sensor output, potentially capping shadows or highlights, depending on the bias. This the same with Sony?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 13:47
|
|
|
That's probably how Sony's works too, since you can generally only pick 200/400/800 etc, though auto ISO will sometimes step in and say 320 or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 20:42
|
|
|
Meanwhile I keep reading that the A7 series is "ISO-less", as in that there's no gain applied to the signal readout and that the ISO setting is pretty much just metadata in the RAW file. Or some poo poo, I didn't really get it fully, but it doesn't seem traditional. See here: http://blog.kasson.com/?p=4928 Given how much he's sperging about camera sensors, I suppose he's right. So I guess third stops don't matter. --edit: I guess the idea is, if I shoot an image at ISO 100 and 3200 while maintaining same shutter speed and aperture, the RAW readouts are the same, ignoring the virtually non-existent read noise that makes it possible to begin with. It's Lightroom or whatever else that then acts on the RAW data given the ISO setting stored in the file. Combat Pretzel fucked around with this message at 22:50 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
What are those complaints about Sony throwing devices on the market and then not supplying firmware updates? I've seen that the A7 received two the last year (i.e. its whole lifetime), that's a slightly faster pace than the EOS 6D of mine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 00:34
|
|
|
It's mostly comparing it to Fuji's constant updates and adding new features. The part that's skipped over is that Sony cameras don't really have much that needs to be added, and most of the Fuji features are things that Sony's had since the e-mount launch.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 01:01
|
|
|
Elliotw2 posted:It's mostly comparing it to Fuji's constant updates and adding new features. The part that's skipped over is that Sony cameras don't really have much that needs to be added, and most of the Fuji features are things that Sony's had since the e-mount launch. Well my biggest complaint is that the only aspect ratios we get are 3:2 and 16:9!
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 01:37
|
|
|
Does anyone have experience with the new FE 16-35 f4?
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2015 11:31
|
|
|
Protip: Don't leave your A7/A7II in continuous drive mode, if not necessary. It'll drop the bitdepth of the ADC to keep up with read outs. Not sure how much that applies to the A7R/A7S.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 12:25
|
|
|
Question about the A55... what is the point of the AF button on the back of the camera? Just a second way to focus? I was under the impression that you could use that instead of half pressing the shutter to focus but there doesn't appear to be a menu option to disable half pressing focus. (Unless I'm an idiot.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 01:07
|
|
|
Anyone have the fe 55? I'm looking at picking one up and wondering how you guys feel about it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 06:13
|
|
|
Follow-up, I'm renting the fe 55 right now. If there's anyone out there with an a7ii or a7, do you have your custom buttons set up for AF functions? I'm currently using c3 for af settings so I can quickly move the flexible focus point and the center dial button to center lock af. Curious if you guys have any tracking af functions mapped.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure at least a few of these are just the defaults, but for focus-related custom buttons I use: C1: Focus Settings (Which is also the focus zoom button in MF) C2: Focus Mode Center is Eye AF and Down is for Lock-on AF, but I never really use either of those. However, I did set up custom mode 2 for AF-C and Lock-on AF @ Shutter, for when I want to try playing with it. I just don't really seem to shoot anything where that would be more useful than taking a second to focus/recompose or move the focus spot. I did map the AF/MF button to AF-On briefly, but never bothered to turn off AF-on @ shutter, so that was pointless. Might be useful if you use DMF a lot or something like that, though. How are you liking the 55?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
Literally just thinking about getting a 55 today after my friend decided to get an A7 and asked me what prime lenses were available and it turns out the exact same ones as when I bought my A7 two weeks after it came out. Also curious how you're liking it. I remember being pretty impressed with the images I saw from it but I was all about manual focus lenses back then and I bought the 24-70 to still be able to take photos when I didn't want to gently caress with manual focusing, but it turns out F4 is just so dull and I use my Canon for actual work so I never use it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 06:21
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:Literally just thinking about getting a 55 today after my friend decided to get an A7 and asked me what prime lenses were available and it turns out the exact same ones as when I bought my A7 two weeks after it came out. Also curious how you're liking it. I remember being pretty impressed with the images I saw from it but I was all about manual focus lenses back then and I bought the 24-70 to still be able to take photos when I didn't want to gently caress with manual focusing, but it turns out F4 is just so dull and I use my Canon for actual work so I never use it. I really like it, but I'm not sure how I felt about the AF. Coming from using manual focus primes 99% of the time, felt like it got in the way. I decided to rent the Loxia 50 f/2 just to be sure I want to go with the FE 55 or not, I feel like it's optically more unique, but the fly by wire MF is annoying.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 06:34
|
|
|
I picked up a Beercan on Cragislist today, and holy poo poo, this thing is Color Fringing: The Lens. Check out this out-of-camera JPEG comparison shot: The top is the Beercan at 210mm and f/4 and the bottom is the Sony DT 55-300mm F4.5-5.6 SAM at 210mm and f/5 (its max at that focal length).  When I did indoor sharpness comparisons, the Beercan lagged behind the Sony at every focal length to the extent that it was noticeable even without cropping. The extra half stop of light was nice to have as the sun was going down, though. Nomenclature fucked around with this message at 06:40 on Feb 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 06:36
|
|
|
That looks like you got a really bad copy, it shouldn't fringe like that at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 06:42
|
|
|
Google Butt posted:I really like it, but I'm not sure how I felt about the AF. Coming from using manual focus primes 99% of the time, felt like it got in the way. I decided to rent the Loxia 50 f/2 just to be sure I want to go with the FE 55 or not, I feel like it's optically more unique, but the fly by wire MF is annoying. I just want a lazy walk-around lens for when I'm not really doing a shoot or going for anything in particular so the AF will be nice to have. I have a bunch of old baller Minolta lenses for when I want to be all artsy and take time composing shots. I'd use the 24-70 if it wasn't so huge and the DOF wasn't so garbage. How did you like the IQ? E: Lol at this review I found of the Loxia. Nice Clarity 100 ruining any way to judge the images from the lens dickhead. http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2014/11/14/the-sony-a7-and-zeiss-loxia-50mm-f2-lens-review-by-tomer-vaknin/ mr. mephistopheles fucked around with this message at 06:56 on Feb 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 06:52
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:I just want a lazy walk-around lens for when I'm not really doing a shoot or going for anything in particular so the AF will be nice to have. I have a bunch of old baller Minolta lenses for when I want to be all artsy and take time composing shots. I'd use the 24-70 if it wasn't so huge and the DOF wasn't so garbage. How did you like the IQ? Having used MF for so long I feel like I'm actually faster in most situations with it than AF. The a7ii t makes MF lenses a such a dream. From what I've read the Loxia and FE perform the same after f2.8 in terms of sharpness, the color looks better in the Loxia samples I've seen. They both look exceptional and it comes down to AF vs MF. http://www.dearsusan.net/2014/10/10/zeiss-loxia-50-sony-fe-55-leica-summicron-50-great-normal-lens-shootout/ Google Butt fucked around with this message at 07:33 on Feb 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 07:11
|
|
|
drat, the Loxia is quite a bit sharper at 2. But yeah it's close enough that I think I'm in for the AF. Thanks for the feedback and the link!
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 07:28
|
|
|
Elliotw2 posted:That looks like you got a really bad copy, it shouldn't fringe like that at all. Maybe. Those are pretty heavy crops, though. Here is the full Minolta photo, followed by the Sony one. Focus is on the stop sign, about 230 yards away from the camera, and the sun is about to start setting, from the left side of the photo. https://www.flickr.com/photos/129609957@N08/16514232291/in/set-72157650795862465 https://www.flickr.com/photos/129609957@N08/16489937546/in/set-72157650795862465 It doesn't seem to be a huge issue, but it does keep popping up whenever there is white under direct sunlight, for example, the circles on this woman's shirt and the logo on the left arm of this guy's T-shirt: https://www.flickr.com/photos/129609957@N08/15893767864/in/set-72157650795862465 https://www.flickr.com/photos/129609957@N08/16516336875/in/set-72157650795862465/ Here are some spotted doves at 210mm, with the Minolta then with the Sony (although the size compression hides the fringing well): https://www.flickr.com/photos/129609957@N08/15896207613/in/set-72157650795862465/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/129609957@N08/16330467207/in/set-72157650795862465/ And here are crops from the color/sharpness comparisons I did (2/3rds of the way between the middle and the corner), with 100mm and 210mm shown below respectively. The Sony is the lower, inset image.  
Nomenclature fucked around with this message at 07:52 on Feb 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 07:45
|
|
|
Nomenclature posted:...fringing...
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
Beercans are basically playing the fringing lottery. Some are betters than others. The lens certainly has a character that I've always liked. It's better for people and portraits than action. The greens it renders are always lush and clear. It's also slow.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 00:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 16:12 |
|
|
Elliotw2 posted:That looks like you got a really bad copy, it shouldn't fringe like that at all. Some lenses made for film just didnt give a crap about fringing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 10:29
|
|