uraki, i thought the max shutter for the A6000 itself is 1/4000? its the camera shutter limit, not the flash.

oh no no dear uraki, u got confused.....

when Flash support HSS, it will sync to the camera max shutter speed.
HSS=yes, camera max shutter = supported. 1/4000 for common body, and 1/8000 for pro body. (generalization)

HSS=No, Camera max syncspeed = 1/160 or 1/200 (1/250)

uraki: hahaha maybe im the one confused the way u mention it is like HSS is a limited feature from the flash. as long a flash supports HSS, it will sync with the max shutter speed.... (being able to sync and will it work properly is another story thou)
so when u mention whats the HSS for A6000, u went on searching for the HSS sync speed limit from the flash (asking about F43 and F60 limit).... when u could have just find out whats the camera shutter speed limit, then walaaa.... u got the HSS max speed

yok70: you are right and wrong(misunderstood) at the same time. and explained by Uraki, X-speed (proper name is sync speed) is Not HSS

Syncspeed, erm (trouble trying to explain all in english) is when your flash can lit up the whole sensor when the first curtain (first shutter window) fully opens, and before the 2nd curtain (rear shutter window) closes.

for example for 1/160 syncspeed for Nex6, when the shutter goes 1/320, right before the first curtain fully open for full sensor exposure, the 2nd curtain starts to close, (and flash fired when 1st curtain fully open) and the 2nd curtain already closed 45% of the sensor..... causing and half black image, due to light being block by the shutter half closing.
(the example works when u have force full manual overwrite, normally the automatic system will block you from going over the syncspeed if HSS is not present, eg. pop up flash)

High Sync Speed is when the flash goes into Pulse Mode(in highspeed) when supported.

that way, each pulses will lit up each exposed segment between the first and rear curtain during the their travel...

disadvantage of HSS, normally wont support bounce, only direct fill light is supported (so dont get confuse when u can pass 1/160 for HSS in bounce).... the power will be reduce up to 1/8 (depending on shutter speed sync and the HSS algorithm), usually recommended bare direct flash, if you set it up with modifier, it may cause many issue or further power reduction and more.

only use HSS when you really really need that shutter speed (eg. high speed photography).

actually u can find more infor from wikipedia, but i have trouble copy paste linking and credit due to reply from phone. (i bet a lot typo too)

the reason i read wrong is because when sony pass me the unit(prototype), with the thick 'marketing' booklet (printed from powerpoint), its all sweet sweet marketing words... and the internet doesnt have any reviews yet(because its not time to release yet) and so, when i google for more info, it lead me back to that eye(blink) detection feature in wx1 that why i mixed up with the feature.


hahahaha paiseh, my bad also... coz misunderstood u.

i remember you send me a article last time, the fellow shot one at wide, one at tele zoomed, of the same subject. he extracted the car plate behind from both picture and put side by side and both show the exact same 'bokeh-ness'... and it was the best article ever disproof many many misconception.

Eiraku:
if i recall, HSS is pointless with leaf shutter(they cant use HSS). the leafshutter is syncspeed is base on design. some limit at 1/500, some at 1/2000. so it varies from lens to lens (or manufacturer to manufacturer)

and about HSS application... it works better when shooting still... it actually doesnt work well with fast moving subject, it actually cause motion blur effect... again, this is where a lot ppl misunderstood HSS and apply it in high motion photography, which is nothing to do highspeed photograph

although all that being said, the shutter leaf still wins... in many aspect, 1 is it can retain higher power (lets use "power" easy for us to understand, although its duration of albnok mention) uses over the syncspeed.
it can use to shoot really FAST moving subject oppose to HSS(very very technical sh*tz)

albnok: i always love your explanation, it always used the right word... im so bad in those.

bout the DOF example, i can do the sample, but i cant 'write' about it... im not good with essay... lol

For the A6000 focusing, i can vouch for it. i brought it to a club with band and tricky lights, it surprisingly focuses better then A99... i wont say it will beat A99, but better in terms like, "i dont have to think" where to lock so it will get the maximum contrast for the AF point to lock, where A6000 AF point is everywhere and it locks like a charm... in fact it locks with more confident then A99. so its like, point, teeteeet, snap... point teeteet snap. no need to brain... no need to mention they even still manage to detect faces and lock to face with confident.... crazy

to be clear, for the phase detect on A6000 to work, you are require to set the AF mode to AF-C, which the AF assist illuminator doesnt comes on to assist in AF-C mode. to means i focus the A6000 in the club without the AF assist light. unlike the A99 in AF-A with AF assist light, still struggle a little more to focus... (if i say A99 struggle, then u should understand how dark it is)

(more info)



after using it for 2 hours in the club... myself seriously got lost... as in, lost how to i going to use the A99 to overcome the A6000 potential... if u watch initial D, it like how takumi feel after driving his dad's WRX... totally duno how to use the A99 anymore.
thats why my freinds ask me about e mount, i will go crazy and say grab A6000 and no turning back... thats why you will see me Pro-A6000 aggressively

anyway, on diff topic... i come across this in 500px and tracked down his FB. Calvin Taylor with QX1...capturing startrails. im not sure if he uses app or manually(waiting his reply in FB).

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=101...86089230&type=1

This post has been edited by edpaul: Sep 27 2014, 09:19 PM

dont forget the possibility the cable might have issue like contact pin dirty or damaged somehow.

try with other cables just in case.

i am going to write explanation bout DOF. give me some time.

btw, the article i going to write, is not entirely correct also. but it helps to debuff some myth about how aperture, focal length, dof and bokeh (CoC) in relation with each other. if i write something wrong, feel free to correct me or chip in more info that i might lack.

This post has been edited by edpaul: Oct 12 2014, 07:19 PM

this might be even more confuse to you all. and to make it worst, with my bad english and explanation might make from confusion to WTF.

i seriously dont know where to start and what to write. so i will be writing whatever sh*t comes to mind. the purpose of this post is to stop the confusion of more bokeh = shallow DOF. DOF is determine by aperture. CoC (bokeh) is determine by distance and focal distance. blah blah blah yadaa yadaa. i hope albert can come and help me fill this up with better explanation.

here are two example of image... the fig A is taken at 70mm with aperture of F4, and fig B is taken with 200mm with aperture of F4. both image, the subject (lets name her Jane Doe, lol) Jane is composed to have the same height in the photo, but the fig A seem to look a lot wider, due to the wider field of view (FOV), then the fig B, seem to have more background blur, resulting more decrease in DOF....



i apologies coz i couldnt go into those 70 page of calculation formulas to proof any of this, and its boring to read through those formula too. actually, there is that old article i mention a while back that albert show me, they have full detailed of how the calculation works.... but we (me and albert) failed to find the article.

here is a big void that need explanation that i need albert help to write in.

from the two figure above, you can notice the amount of in focus area, the DOF is fairly the same amount (If i am able to write out all the formula, the DOF of both image should be the same amount). but then if the DOF is the same, how is it possible the bokeh of figure B is more.


From this 2nd set of figure, both are crop and one photo is reduced size to match the other. from the figures, both looked identical. can you guess which is from the 200mm photo?



for this set of photo, figure A is now know as Figure C, and figure B know as figure D.

figure C is from the 200mm photo. the reason why the 200mm photo on the top most shows more bokeh, is due to the prespective compression that enlarge the background from the focal length. this does not proof that the DOF is shallower or larger to cause more bokeh like a Aperture of F8vs F2.8 does. The Bokeh(CoC) is simply being enlarged because of the Perspective compression.


CoC (bokeh) is caused by the field of view, or perspective compression from field of view. its relation with DOF is very small.


edit: ah shit, i forgotten to shoot one more sample photo to show you guys the difference with bokeh caused by bigger aperture eg F1.4 type of bokeh. but i will try explain a bit, not sure if it sound logical or not.

look back up above the photo example. seeing the 200mm photo and bokeh of the black thing behind with 2 white spot (thats my 50mm actually) and thats why i forgotten to do the F1.4 example because if i take away the 50mm, i have no sample bokeh to compare to... ok, if the bokeh is created by F1.4, instead of focal length. the result photo will look similar like the 70mm, just a little wider, the black thing behind will look smaller due to perspective. but when turned to F1.4, what happen is the two white dot on the black thing, that 2 white dot will be enlarge until it crosses each other, so big, that *(^$@&%#%$ i dunno how to explain, i'd just use photoshop to manipulate the picture above to show it how it will look like. it is as big as the two white spot in figureB


(albert, please help correct me, im pretty sure i make a lot funny mistake here, im not sure if my entire way of writing is right at all)

This post has been edited by edpaul: Oct 12 2014, 11:22 PM

here the thing. two people standing in the same point, one with FF, one with MFT. both with 50mm lens. shooting a bird on a tree. both shoot at F4. both image gives the same DOF, even thou the MFT give a 100mm equivalent focal length. what changes? the FF could just crop the photo out and still get a 100mm equivalent photo. same bokeh, same DOF.

but if the FF user pop in a 100mm, vs MFT with 50mm, the 100mm focal length itself will cause a perspective compression, hence making the FF looks 'more' bokeh (enlargement of CoC).

This post has been edited by edpaul: Oct 12 2014, 10:47 PM

50mmF1.4 MFT vs 100mmF1.4 FF. DOF will not be the same.
50mmF1.4 MFT vs 50mmF1.4FF. DOF will be the same. due to diff working distance, causing diff focus point, definately the dof change with different focus point.

hope u get what i am saying, coz im damn bad in explaining.


what i was pointing out is actually the length of lens(focal length) will have perspective compression... this was the term most ppl left out when comparing longer lens is bokeh-er.... instead of plain F2.8 vs F4

lets put it this way.

you can shoot with a 50mm @ F/1.4.... which give you a pretty nice bokeh, but ridiculous amount of shallow DOF
with a 200mm @ F2.8, but having a F2.8 DOF, which is much larger then F1.4 when shooting the same composition means getting more and sharper details on in focus area.... the BOKEH will not be same as the CoC is simply enlarged from the F2.8 DOF, but the CoC size is comparable to the 50F1.4 (but they are not the same)

bunnykiwie:
i)18200
if i recall, there is 3 18-200.
first generation,
2nd Gen, the LE,
3rd Gen, powerzoom.

the first gen many say optically sharp. i dont know bout that, but i do know 2 major key point for me.
i) the aperture doesnt close down that fast, unlike the LE, until 100mm still F4.5 but the LE already F5.6.... <maybe this is the issue ppl talk about?
ii) push pull, due to the lens design, the first gen can be used as pushpull, so u get a slight smoother zoom feel when doing video. dont worry bout zoom creep (issue from pushpull lens), they have a zoom lock.

the 2nd gen aka LE, is ACTUALLY a re-badged Tamron.

3rd gen has power zoom, like the 1650pz, with a switch to control the zoom. not manual hand zoom like previous 2 generation.


ii)Tripod,
the differences between a tripod and non tripod is, iso100 vs iso1600/3200/6400.
with a tripod, i can slowly collect the light, with iso100 F8. the dynamic range gained vs at iso3200 is so much diff, u can easily edit out the missing popping colors from iso100 photo.
tripod is always good. if you slowly gain momentum in landscape photography or cityscape, u will really need a good tripod.

example what tripod allows you to do...

used as my wallpaper, 3 monitor setup.

iii) 24Zf1.8
only get this lens, after you have been in photography for at least 6 months. for at least you know what are you getting into. its a great lens, crazy sharp and reliable in focusing in low light situation. problem is, it is not designed for everyone. not everyone will appreciate this range, like few other mention, the 35mm is nicer rounded lens to have, and a lot cheaper.

iv) try hang around more, ask question when in doubt and see everyone's feedback. generally you will find common feedback among experience people knowing which is good, which is great, which is struggle. from the way you mention blur issue etc, i assume you haven fully understand the purpose of shutter speed in daily photography yet, stay awhile and listen

there is wide range of Adapter... they can range from rm30 all the way to 2k+. as for quality, you get what you pay. you pay rm30 get rm30 product, you pay rm300 get rm300 quality, you pay 1k, u get 1k reliability.

Main disadvantage from using adapter, is that you will lose several Nex - E mount benefit like, Lens profiling, CA/vignette control, distortion control, On sensor Phase detect ability like from nex6 to lastest A5100.

other for different design of adapter give diff disadvantage and perhaps, advantages too.

Alpha Lens, i assume you mean A mount lens. aside it got bigger and heavier, basically the Original Adapter will turn your NEX into a SLT, so u get everything u can get from an SLT, not sure about the lens profile is provided or not thou.

Panoramic nightscape.

shoot take 10+ minute, stitching automation take 3 min, readjusting, realign, repair take 2 hours not easy... then when pulling color need watch out for noise level etc. u can download the photo and view the larger scaled photo, the lyn spoiler automatically scale it to fit your screeen, right click download u get larger size one.

its combined from 20+ pic.

nice, its a male white breast king fisher.

usually if possible, avoid ultra wide angles. and dont have your scape start within 5 meter... if can, have a 24mm(crop) or a 35mm(ff) starting range, and have scape starts at least 10 meter away. shoot as many pan angle as you can get (the more, the better for repairs) remember to lock your exposure. the secret is, remember we only use 1/3 of the middle area... with the rules of third, both 1/3 left and right side usually are discard. so how many degree i cant really say, but just try to match the next 1/3 to the middle of the 1/3 then you are good.

not really, their diet is very wide from frog to mouse to snakes they only catch fish in certain period (season), river, pond and sea(river mouth).

erkk.. no la... my best friend is bird shooter, he always tell me bout his journey and photo of birds he shoot. he has shot over 500 birds species, 300+ from sarawak alone. i guess my knowledge is part from him

samyang 14mm?