Printable View
anyone still using Sony ? like the new A65 or A77 ?
had been doing som reading about them as of late, interesting piece of gear but not sure its something i would ever buy.
maybe a weekend rental with the 35mm and 50mm primes.
i know Elisha used to be all over Sony until he got the 7D and then flipped to canon. - speaking of which havent seen him for many many months, atleast a year.
Yeah, I loved Elisha's pics :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Lestat
Well, I hate EVFs...
On top of that:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cam...rand3%29/Canon
For some reason it seems the mirrorless format hurts ISO performance (For example the NEX-5N vs other cameras using Sony's 16MP sensor, A580, D5100/7000)...their 24MP sensor seems to be quite a monster though.
oh i dont think the mirrorless hurts the iso performance as much as the simple fact that sony is a noisy sensor. and always has been save for 1 camera, which i dont know what it was, i just heard it was the king of low noise. maybe the A900 ????
too many megapixels for the sensor and not enough R&D spent in reducing the noise.
cripes the A77 and A65 are 24mp... on a friggin APS-C sensor !!!! not even canon has had the balls to do that.
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cam...(brand3)/CanonQuote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
Doesnt seem like that - NEX-5N vs A580 vs Canon 7D. Considering AA filter at 7D combined with its "color accuracy" I would take NEX over 7D every time, unless AF is really needed (tho with AF SLT module, its not much issue as long as you have spare battery in pocket).
24 mpix APS-C is just high megapixel count, its more base-ISO/studio camera than anything else (tho it really does produce nice video output..). Usable at higher ISO as long as you dont mind some de-noise PP work. Tho with de-noise PP and slight resize to lets say 12 mpix, it looks pretty good..
Theres no camera from Sony that would be king of low noise. :D But A900 is very usable and easy to clean up to something like ISO 1600 (3200 and 6400 is digital gain anyway, unless you have D3s). Best thing about A900 is colors and color accuracy (which is highest of all dSLRs) plus ofc, its 24 mpix. And it has pretty amazing ergonomy. But it doesn have LV or video mode. :D (tho LV is compensated by OVF which is like one in 1DsMK3)Quote:
Originally Posted by Lestat
Its not that RD isnt spent on reducing noise. Sony has similar approach to Minolta, color over everything. If you check that one hidden value in DxOmark (http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cam...#measuretabs-7) you will see why Sony is always behind competition in SNR. Cause they are most of the time before competition in colors. Same goes for A77 which has 86 color accuracy in daylight spectrum (just to give idea, 1DsMK3 has same value and along with 1DMK3 its only camera from Canon that has such high color accuracy).
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cam...#measuretabs-7
Nikon D7000 .. ofc it has low noise at high iso, but at certain price, that price is colors. A580 has higher noise, but accuracy is 5 points above D7000. Everything is compromise in dSLR (or pretty much in any kind of photography).
There is one help in this department and thats using Capture One for RAW developing, as they have profiled colors for most cameras, and can squeeze something decent even from some crappy mirrorless cams.
For A77, I think issue will be lens. But on other hand if you will have good lens, it will use everything from them.
Elisha is still shooting, Im following his Flickr. Still doing portraits with 7D. :)
New Camera
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7033/6...511da11b_z.jpg
Pierre by Bolweval, on Flickr
Look at the A580 and D5100/D7000...which all three use the same sensor...I THINK the Nex 5N does too...and it performs worse than all three of those.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lestat
A580, D5100 and D7000 share sensors ;D Nikon tweaked it for better noise performance...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mescalamba
These cameras all use the exact same APS-C sensor, and the NEX-5N is doing the worst:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cam...brand3%29/Sony
I'm able to salvage almost anything that comes out of my D5100:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...=1#post5003847
You can still see the whisker jetting up, I know this isn't a large print but overall a very clean image...
I also have this one, at ISO 3200:
http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/8...utfiltered.jpg
@Weevil- How is the new T3i?
Lovin it so far, only shot a few with the nifty 50, cant wait to try the rest of my lenses, kinda short on time atm..Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
New camera? Lucky guy!!!
Its not, its actually by just 0.1dB behind A580 and D5100 is worst of this. Just click on compare, SNR 18% and screen size (left up). Difference is near non-existent. And D5100 is that tiny bit lower just because its base ISO is closer to ISO 100 than in case of A580 and NEX-5N (real vs "manufacturer" ISO).Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
In real life you wont be able to tell difference between these, unless you shoot jpegs. Considering colors, I would take Sony over Nikon.
Ofc if it was D700 vs A850, then it might be different. :) But A900 would win again (colors).
It's been awhile but here's one I took the other day.
http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/5594/img2470q.th.jpg
Nice shot Darakian.
Thanks. It was taken with a Canon Rebel XS and the 18-55mm kit lens that came with it. I think I was at 18mm for that shot.
Actually it was at 55mm f11. :D Your EXIF is still there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darakian
Nice photo btw.
But isn't the difference in color depth also negligible? I can understand ~1 bit making a small difference but it will never be something you can see(?)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mescalamba
There are some anomalies in the 1600-6400 ISO range between the three, and the NEX5N isn't near the others above 6400 :shrug:
@Darakian-
Very nice shot :D
Nice shot Weevil.
http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p...s/DSC_6472.jpg
thx 4hams , nice tree.
Difference isnt there, its in thing called metamerism index, or simply how accurate colors are. Quite a big deal if you like nice colors, and it makes various post-processing easier if you have higher accuracy.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
Daylight, artifical lightning.
Nikon D5100 78/75
Nikon D7000 78/76
Sony A580 83/79
NEX - 5N 84/80
Higher, better.. each point means something and its not just tiny bit exactly.
Manufacturers sacrifice accuracy for better SNR and good CFA is bit on expensive side, so they usually save bit money there too. Worst currently is Canon with their APS-C sensors. In same time they have camera with best colors (tho its probably at end of its line - 1DsMK3). Nikon is usually somewhere between and they have decently tweaked RAW processors and JPEG engines, so even when color accuracy isnt exactly highest its ok.
I guess that unless you shoot landscapes or do a lot of studio work with models, its not that important. But importance of colors is different for each person, same goes for perception of colors.
About SNR, not sure where you are looking, but NEX-5N is exactly where A580 or D5100/D7000 is? SNR 18% graph, screen size (or print, doesnt matter). And zero difference in real use, except price.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7152/6...710b340f_b.jpg
And something Christmas-ish. :)
Cool shot BB2, how long was the exposure?
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7149/6...47a9f4ff_z.jpg
RIP Baby Girl by Bolweval, on Flickr
10 sec, f/11, ISO 320.
We threw two "M-80" firecracker bags in.