ieR: The focal length encoder may not be very precise as there are a set number of steps it can report.

farex: Yup Sony Image Data Converter (IDC) is pretty good (but you might want to pull down the Luminance NR... I do the same thing in DxO, to get the details back).

wingster: I paid USD199 for DxO Optics Pro Elite in 2009 when they had a promotion. Best money I ever spent to get 2 stops more out of my RAW files! Cheaper than buying a Nikon D700 and you get better color and a lot of handy correction tools. Of course this was before IDC and ACR and Lightroom all got major noise upgrades.

The NEX if that is what it is called, is still mirrorless. The sensor is a bigger 24x16mm instead of Micro FourThirds' 17.3x13mm.

zstan:

EVIL = Electronic Viewfinder, Interchangeable Lens (no mirror)
SLR = Single Lens Reflex (one lens, must have mirror)
TLR = Twin Lens Reflex (two lenses, mirror on top lens)

farex: IDC is pretty good, but not as 'complete' as the proper serious RAW converters. I particularly like DxO's Lens Modules (it has a profile for certain lenses so it corrects lateral chromatic aberration and lens distortion automatically based on the lens' unique distortion.)

Where DxO is excellent at, is when you use their Fill Light... it looks better to me lah compared to using DRO Level 5 on-camera. They have a Multi-Point Color Balance picker and excellent parallel line correction (for fixing geometry and perspective!)

jamesies: Nice complete scene. Thanks for paying attention to what they are promoting!

Use a good RAW converter, or the latest IDC and you should see a very usable ISO1600!

neo_lam: Interface, really, and previous complaints that Adobe was always doing lousy conversions of Sony RAWs.

You can always try the 30 day trial version:
http://www.dxo.com/us/photo

ieR: Were you using strong fill light for the girl on stage? Since obviously the light on her legs seems to be much brighter than the rest of her and you pulled it up, exaggerating noise.

Any old-timer camera shop should have 120 format film.

jamesies: IDC = Sony Image Data Converter. Their latest version cleans up noise in RAW really well. The version included in the CD that comes in your Sony Alpha box is an older version.

Banzai_san: Nice #1 and #4 (his band is called Estranged by the way.) Single crops are very obvious - maybe it should've been a full group picture.

And yes, cropping is what made it obvious.

If you're on a budget, the Minolta 135mm F2.8 will be just long enough for stage. It would be in the RM1xxx range.

porkchop: Nice! I was expecting the newer Sigma 28mm F1.8 EX DG Macro, though. Am surprised at the filter size of 58mm, as the newer one has a filter size of 77mm, probably to allow close focus!

The Minolta 20mm F2.8 has a MFD of 25cm though.

ieR: Tilt!

neo_lam: Eh same lah like every RAW converter, you need to adjust the WB yourself.

Wonka: Since you're on APS-C, obviously even the 24mm is not wide enough for group shots in a crowded room! 20mm is wide enough to be close to your kit lens.

porkchop: It's still a good focal length and aperture!

Banzai_san: Given that your 16-80mm already reaches 80mm... telling you to look at the Opteka/Samyang 85mm F1.4 would not give you more reach. Just that you don't have to pump up ISO as much. The next longest bright prime would be the Minolta 100mm F2.0 but that is very rare.

If you still want a zoom, I'd prefer the Sigma 50-150mm F2.8 EX DC HSM II - it's light, 780 grams only, and sized like the beercan. The 70-200mm F2.8 lenses are all 1.4kg monsters!

Boring.

The Canon 7D and Nikon D300s will be the highlight of current APS-C cameras... until the A700 replacement comes out.

I already know how the 7D does video and their orientation-detecting zone focusing (which was a major disappointment), and how the D300s is. They have the same noise performance as the A550 by the way.

Compare that to the phase-detect-on-main-sensor patents that Sony have registered, and I would say potentially, Sony has a true APS-C video dSLR killer which gives smooth AF in video.

If you want jello shake (rolling shutter), manual focus video and jumpy auto-exposure, you can buy the EOS7D/D300s now.

kev da man: Er, the A550 does have an Exmor APS-C sensor! You mean Exmor R, using backlit technology, which I've explained, will not work on current APS-C cameras.

Backlit technology on a big sensor only makes sense when the pixel density is as high as the point-and-shoots. Let's say a 12 megapixel point-and-shoot sensor has a crop factor of 6x - multiply that to APS-C's 1.5x and you get 12 * 4 * 4 = 192 megapixels.

Conservatively, we could say that backlit technology will make an improvement once APS-C sensors have 192 megapixels.

There is also quantum technology, which we have yet to see how it performs in a practical scale.

Some people have modified the Carl Zeiss 135mm F1.8 to mount on EF mount. They don't mind the manual focus or aperture because they prefer the Zeiss optics.

Nice shot, by the way, and I like how in-your-face your picture of her is!

MechaHerc: CMOS sensors only read from the sensor one line at the time. So if something moves across the frame during the exposure, it will get diagonally stretched, or in some cases, people walking past or swaying side to side can look like flickering holograms. (You can see it in the vimeo video, too!) Personally I can't stand the rolling shutter effect.

I have a infrared-modded CMOS camera which does not have a mechanical shutter; when shooting out a moving car it looks like this:


Also, the video resolution is limited by the resolution of the sensor - why do you think the D3s can only handle 720p while the 5DMkII does 1080p? Here's a hint: The sensor doesn't really do 24 FPS video readout, but 8 FPS video readout and taking pixels from every 3rd line. Therefore to have 1080p you need 3240 pixels vertical resolution... where the D3s only manages 2832 pixels vertically.

I'm trying to Google where I originally read about this. There were more interesting things in that article.

Here's one example of the rolling shutter artifact:
http://www.talkgraphics.com/showthread.php?t=42036

That is why professional video cameras have mechanical shutters despite going at high framerates. They use a rotating shutter (and the mirror is attached to the same rolling shutter.)

lugiamcg: Yes the D90 has a bad case of rolling shutter (a few of my colleagues have it.) I haven't played with the 550D but the 7D does have the rolling shutter effect.

I have a Cybershot WX1 with Exmor R but I haven't really recorded video from it. I'll try to.

Sony has recently launched a full-frame 35mm format CCD video camera:
http://www.sonyinsider.com/2010/04/12/nab-...r-and-pl-mount/

CCDs have global shutters - they capture everything at once instead of scanning, so you don't get that effect.

Gouki: The CMOS has a rolling 'scan' (to avoid confusion with shutter). However SLRs have a mechanical focal plane shutter so that takes care of the rolling effect.

cjlai: Congratulations!

mastering89: The 24-105mm is a classic full-frame lens, the smallest in its class. However it isn't so good at the corners wide open on full-frame, which is ironic since it's a full-frame lens. On APS-C the lens is good!

There is no Minolta 35-50mm F4. A Minolta 24-50mm F4 is worth it, though!

gizmo_pony: Bridge cameras and some superzooms do show focal length. Canon, until today, never shows their focal length when you're looking at picture information! This makes it a problem if you've set your camera on a tripod and shot for a specific framing, then you can't refer to the focal length in the previous picture to set the zoom ring to the same composition.

kev da man: Contrast AF point? There is no contrast detect AF on the A550. It is phase detect AF just like all the Alphas. If you're complaining that the picture appears to have a shallower DOF than what you see in the viewfinder, it is because the viewfinder limits the apparent DOF to F3.2 or thereabouts. This is the same for all film or digital SLRs of all brands, which have AF.

The A700, A850 and A900 have changeable viewfinder screens (the A700 viewfinder needs to be changed at a service center but the A850/A900 is user-changeable.) The default screen is the Type G which is bright and shows DOF until F3.2 - any brighter and it will still look like F3.2.

The Type M screen is like a classic ground glass - it shows DOF accurately to F1.4! However, if you put a F4.0 lens on it, it will appear to be darker, like a manual focus camera would.

Kul | Mo0: Congratulations?

colbert89: Take off the Sony 18-70mm F3.5-5.6 DT lens and turn on the camera. If there is no loud, whirring sound, that means your kit lens has gotten "gear stripping". Send it for warranty.

There is no motor in the 18-70mm; it is screw-driven. The 18-55mm is not prone to gear stripping.

lwliam: Seems a bit of a grab shot. Guess I'd prefer a portrait shot.

kev da man: What is Sony's official response?

Contrast detect AF is the slow, stuttering, hunting AF you see on other brand dSLRs.

If the center point is hit or miss I'd hate to say it would be user error. It might also be backfocus, but often people misdiagnose user error as backfocus.

Do you mean Quick AF LV or MF Check LV? Quick AF LV with a F1.4 lens might show a different focus (I found this too; probably the LV sensor is not focused on the viewfinder properly, as I don't experience this when looking through the optical viewfinder.)

As for either mike or ears, you're using a bright aperture, you can't get them all in focus! Use a darker aperture.

kev da man, show us a picture with EXIF that shows the problem.

kev da man: Try not to recompose (half-shutter and drag).

http://www.mhohner.de/recompose.php

The 16-80mm might cause the body to show backfocus at 16mm. That said F5.6 is not really deep enough for this shot, and pixel-peeping a 14 megapixel shot makes shallow DOF more obvious - the man in the center is nearly in focus compared to the boy who appears to be in focus. His head appears to be at the same focal plane as the board but everybody is behind him.

I am not dismissing your claim of backfocus, but I am saying there are so many other factors to consider and eliminate.

But yes #2 exhibits it obviously if you were using the center point.

I do have a friend who experienced frontfocus with his A900 + 16-35mm; then I saw him shoot and knew the problem straight away! After he half-pressed, his body moved backward a bit!

As for #3 - sometimes, you can see in the viewfinder, that it locked onto the collar and not the chin. So you just need to half-press again.

Maybe the 16-35mm just causes people to move slightly due to its weight, LOL!

He was not using AF-C. That is not what AF Microadjust does - it's to correct for aperture-related focus shift and other cases where due to optical complications the AF unit brings the lens to front/backfocus. If he got it in focus correctly, and locked focus, and moved back, that is user error already!

Also, have you maximized your camera?

I say, I have not maximized my A900. Why? Because it has the potential to print LARGE. Huge like walking-past-floor-height in KLCC tunnel LARGE.

I haven't gotten to the level where I have clients with budgets where I can afford to have a make up artist, hairstylist, art director (and me, to press the shutter.) The A900 was designed to be a studio camera for making high-resolution prints. You can even print a billboard with it!

The biggest I've ever printed is 30x20".

Sometimes I look at pictures I took 4 months ago, and think "hmmm, I could've done better." And I keep thinking that whenever I look back. There is still so much to improve or make better, or a different angle to shoot, or a different expression to express.

So, long way for me to go.

lugiamcg: CCD has 'blooming' where bright lights can leak and streak across the entire row. You see it in video (live view) but not in pictures, because of the mechanical shutter (on point-and-shoots lah.)

kev da man: Sony 11-18mm F4.5-5.6 DT = Konica Minolta 11-18mm F4.5-5.6 DT = Tamron 11-18mm F4.5-5.6 DT. The coating might be different.

The Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 HSM is interesting; so is the Tokina 11-16mm F2.8 and the Tamron 10-24mm F3.5-4.5.

naimadam: I LOVE the color in the traffic light shot. I've never seen such shiny traffic lights! Of course, you could get a cleaner shot of it. The bowl one I like because it has highlights around its edges, but you could align the table it is on.

The leaf shot, if you didn't put all 4 pictures together, would stand out more. Shoe shot doesn't appeal to me.

freaky_deity: Give more space, stand back, or recompose so that it's just her and the pole, perhaps in landscape orientation.

Kul | Mo0: I'll be in Bangsar Saturday afternoon for David Corio's talk:
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=110834308928514

#1 - Last year, I had the opportunity to shoot my favorite local metal band, Dragon Red!

Although their sound is modern, I can't call them nu-metal - there are solos, and pinch harmonics to remember Dimebag Darrell by. This is one of the few bands I would let my hair down for to headbang with (and now, I don't need to let my hair down to headbang!)


#2 - From left to right: Amil the shredder, Camero the bassist, Adam the screamer/crooner, Slyde the rapper, Manshaan the drummer.

The light setup was simple - one F42 from left, one F58 from right, and one F58 on my A900 to trigger them both (this was before the F20 came out.)


#3 - The Minolta 24-105mm F3.5-4.5(D) does admirably in the element of F8 with good light. In that sense I say it's suitable to be a studio lens when stopped down to F8-F16.


#4 - The belt is so metal, it doubles as a lighter!

mastering89: Wow I didn't know Sigma made such a close-focusing kit lens at 19.7cm! I mean, there is the more premium 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 DC Macro, but this is the FF version of it perhaps.

No, the Minolta 28-80mm F3.5-5.6 is nothing like this (I had the silver version before with my Minolta Dynax 7.)

lwliam: Nice #1 #5! #3 could be more in focus but then I guess you were shooting in low light from the color. #6 could be cropped. Nice series of dolls in #7.

#5 - One light from above left, held by a tripod. I pulled out two JPGs from the RAW file, and merged them on the faces. Makes for a less fake HDR look.


#6 - Feeling restless? Let's go outside.


#7 - The fire-breathing dragon did it. Really.

If there is one thing I've learnt from shooting bands outdoors - do it quick while the sun is hot. At 75mm F14 ISO400 I was getting a weak 1/40s at 5:32pm in the evening. I needed the 75mm to get the desired perspective, while F14 was to get everyone in focus.


#8 - EXIF data is included in all shots. More to come!

mastering89: RM560 for a Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 Macro? You serious? That's RM1000 cheaper than a new set!

ieR: That's good, fall in love with your own lenses!