Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

Photography The Sony Alpha Thread V62, From A to E Mount!

views
     
DaddyO
post Apr 25 2016, 07:04 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(Eiraku @ Apr 25 2016, 06:53 PM)
Like I said, if you don't wanna take landscapes/cityscapes/whateverscape with SiggyBiggy30 then it's really a non-issue - just throwing the warning on there for those who wanna single-carry with the 30 alone as a do-it-all prime (I used to do it with my old SEL35).

For a thing/people shooter the 1.4/30 Siggy looks quite nice really. I like the general rendering, though, as is usual with Sigma glass, it *feels* a bit on the flat side OOC. Nothing a little PP can't help though of course.

I might just get one anyway coz I'm missing the 30-35 range somewhat nowadays. I carry around the 20 and 50 for my EDC with the 5T... it's probably obvious but sometimes the 20 is just too wide and the 50 too long (+ slow AF doesn't help).

Which is funny cause when I had the 35, I used to keep it away in lieu of the Sigma 19. And here I am now hankering for a 30ish lens again lol.
*
Well, the original post I replied to was on pricing, whether it worth "RM1.5k price tag?". Not really saying it's a all rounder lens.

This post has been edited by DaddyO: Apr 25 2016, 07:05 PM
DaddyO
post Apr 25 2016, 10:04 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(kyLL @ Apr 25 2016, 09:41 PM)
lol. just comparing it for the sake of my own budget and wants/needs?
i want a wide angle, i have a 30mm. but its the sigma 30 2.8. super cheap compared to the new 30 1.4
so im just wondering if its worth the price for the speed. (:
*
An extra stop of light allows for lower iso while using high shutter speed in low light. Secondly, bokeh is pretty pronounce between 2.8 and 1.4.


QUOTE(kyLL @ Apr 25 2016, 09:42 PM)
what would u say is an all rounder lens?
*
Wait. I think I phrase that wrong. 50mm FF equivalent that is 30mm on apsc is a good all rounder BUT it's neither perfect portrait lens nor a perfect landscape lens. More like in between which is why street shots are quite good at this focal. BUT sigma 30 f1.4 is not exactly made for landscape purpose cause widest f1.4 is not going to be sharp which is why it seems to gear towards portraiture who wants to really isolate subject from background. So if you only take landscape sigma 30 f2.8 is decent enough if sharp at wide aperture though 20mm or 16mm would be my preference.

This post has been edited by DaddyO: Apr 25 2016, 10:09 PM
DaddyO
post May 16 2016, 07:25 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(ieR @ May 16 2016, 05:36 PM)
3D pop is that your subject have separation from background. but each people has diff perspective on 3D pop. some ppl prefer maximum bokeh, some ppl prefer just lightly enough to pop.
*
3D pop effect is more like a distinct (as in either sharp or contrasty look) with gradual or smooth sharp to blur transition from the subject to the background or vice versa. You won't really feel the 3D pop if there's no "gradual sharp to blur transition" even if the background is really blurred.

This post has been edited by DaddyO: May 16 2016, 07:26 PM
DaddyO
post May 18 2016, 10:44 AM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(beebee @ May 18 2016, 09:00 AM)
thanks for the explanation, will need to read further before deciding
*
Just bear in mind rx100mkiii by default has much superior quality due to zeiss lens in front than a6000 with kit lens.

DaddyO
post May 18 2016, 12:59 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(IwanAGP @ May 18 2016, 11:52 AM)
Comparable and slightly better quality la. Not until much better. The glass is the bottleneck haha
*
Seen rx100mkiii img quality compared with kit lens a6000. The lens on rx is indeed sharper. I also often hear people complain why a6000 with kit lens less sharp than rx. Bear in mind, im talking about people who buy a6000 but only sticking with kit lens. A6000 indeed can get better but you need to spend extra on glass.

This post has been edited by DaddyO: May 18 2016, 01:00 PM
DaddyO
post May 18 2016, 01:33 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(IwanAGP @ May 18 2016, 01:22 PM)
I'm just trying to say yes it's less sharp than A6000 on kit lens but not that far off biggrin.gif
*
Depends if you pixel peep or not but to me seems much sharper. But generally if one only wants to buy a single camera without investing further into the ecosystem, rx100mkiii is better solution. And as added bonus, you get extra portability.
DaddyO
post May 27 2016, 11:36 AM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(Loseeker @ May 26 2016, 09:43 PM)
Yeah, i need the extra zoom. I think you pretty much helped me sum up what I really need in a lens. Thanks  cool2.gif
Thanks for input. What I want to know is, is the quality different of zeiss lens worth the extra premium, which if I am not wrong, able me to buy another lens say E 50mm f1.8 with some change still....if i go with 18105g....
*
Thats very subjective. If you are not pixel peeping or obsess too much with sharpness by comparing side to side, zeiss may not be worth it. I'm not too obess with sharpness so zeiss to me is overpriced and i rather get larger aperture primes over f4. However love the feel and img frm the zeiss. If same price with 18105g, i rather go 1670 zeiss cause barrel distortion in 18105g is pretty severe.
DaddyO
post Jun 3 2016, 11:47 AM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(remix2040 @ Jun 3 2016, 07:52 AM)
I know I just bought the A7. But I'm extremely tempted to buy the A7SII just for the IBIS. I shoot a lot of handheld style videos. Just run and gun.
*
I would upgrade a7 to a7ii for the shutter button location alone. Who is the wise guy who thought putting the button there on a7 is a great idea?
DaddyO
post Jun 3 2016, 01:02 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(remix2040 @ Jun 3 2016, 12:28 PM)
I actually don't have have an issue with the shutter button location. It was a big deal to the reviewers but when I got it. I'm like it seems fine. No issues whatsoever.
*
I tried the demo set and first thing i noticed my right eye and cheek kept touching my thumb. If you view the evf with left eye, not recommended.

DaddyO
post Jun 6 2016, 11:39 AM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(Loseeker @ Jun 5 2016, 11:48 PM)
Lwliam, thanks for your explaination about the image circle as respect to the sensor size. I already understand that mft lens will have a image circle optimised for mft sensor, and apsc and full frame lenses to their respective sensor size. The reason why i brought this up was because this particular lens samyang 12mm f2.0 was released for both emount and mft (fuji x mount included). And  emount version was released before mft mount. So, i was guessing that, since apsc image circle size is bigger than mft image circle size, samyang may simply selling the same lens for mft user with slight modification (by making the flange range longer for mft) but keeping the image circle optimised for apsc. Anyway, I've found my answer which confirmed my guess. Thanks again for your input thumbup.gif
*
Just to add up just because the bigger image circle meant for apsc or FF can be used on m43, doesn't mean you will get same img quality or sharpness if used on non-native mount. This is due to the megapixel density on sensor vs lens ability to produce sharp focus within pixel size.

This post has been edited by DaddyO: Jun 6 2016, 11:43 AM
DaddyO
post Jun 6 2016, 01:50 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(Loseeker @ Jun 6 2016, 12:20 PM)
I know what you mean, but for this particular lens, it seems that Samyang merely just modified the flange range to be mounted on MFT from APSC size. At least, according to lavikka photography on you tube.  hmm.gif

Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdpeV86yuFo
*
That maybe the case, who knows. Only samyang knows.

What im saying is those who say is sharp on apsc may not necessary have same experience on m43 even if the lens construction is the same despite the flange difference.
DaddyO
post Jun 6 2016, 05:15 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(Loseeker @ Jun 6 2016, 03:21 PM)
Is true that only samyang knows the true story. But if u watch the lavikka photography youtube video, he said he initially bought the lens emount version, sold it and then bought a mft mount version for his olympus camera. And then bought an adapter( mft to e mount) and use it on his sony a6000 in the same video to show why he didnt like it on sony a6000 at the first place. And there was no vignetting, which is the answer to my question about this lens, and led me to draw the conclusion as he did in the video that same lens, only different mount.

As regards to what you said about the sharpness, of apsc lens may not be sharp on mft mount I agreed, and lwilam also mentioned similar  about different lens mount optimized for diff sensor size. Thanks you also for your inputs  icon_rolleyes.gif

That's why, with all these factors, I think not worth getting the mft mount just to save RM 200++. Better get the native e mount version. sweat.gif
*
He may have point there......except a6000 has 24mp, whereas m43 generally only 16mps. If he so wish, he could have cropped that vignette out without losing much res. And the vignette can be easily solved in pp.
DaddyO
post Jun 6 2016, 08:21 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(Loseeker @ Jun 6 2016, 07:12 PM)
Err......sorry, I hope you dont mind me pointing out this. In the video, he was using the mft version on the sony a6000 and he was pointing out the corner softness and CA problem. And the corner softness could be the reason why he sold the e mount version he got at first. Unless I understand him wrongly, there is no vignetting problem of this lens mft version on sony a6000 as he mentioned, mft version simply just cropped out the corners, that's why the image he get out of this lens for his olympus was outstanding.  sweat.gif

But I totally agreed with you. same principle applied. He could just have cropped the corners for what ever reason (vignetting or soft corner) without losing much res.
*
Didn't see the video so meh. Corner softness and CA is rather common in most lenses even top end one. I have seen so called "pros" making fuss of corner softness but when view at normal distance is just fine. I think they forgot people don't usually print image the size of a whole wall.

This post has been edited by DaddyO: Jun 6 2016, 08:22 PM
DaddyO
post Jun 7 2016, 12:59 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(Loseeker @ Jun 6 2016, 10:43 PM)
By the way guys, another noob question: How to do downsampling with capture 1 express for Sony Raw file? Does it simply mean process the raw file and export it in JPG format? I've read that down sampling can greatly improved image quality by reducing the noise...
*
Downsampling to my knowledge is just making image size or resolution smaller, less to do with exporting to jpeg.
DaddyO
post Jun 7 2016, 07:11 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(soket @ Jun 7 2016, 06:01 PM)
he meant oversampling is it?
*
Downsampling. When you capture and reduce a high resolution to smaller resolution, it can yield a perceivable better quality (sharper, less noise) as oppose to straight capture the smaller resolution picture by default. Though the term I mostly heard on video as in downsampling 6k footage to 4k or 4k to 1080p to bringing better result depending on what player you intend to play it on.
DaddyO
post Jun 7 2016, 07:58 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(ieR @ Jun 7 2016, 06:00 PM)
... from what i understand downsampling in video term is shooting at higher resolution and export at lower resolution.

eg: record in 1000x1000, export to 400x400. basically it means resize down.

*edit: so downsampling only works when you initially over-sample your first recording....

basically what they practice today is record in 4k, down-sampling to FHD, hence getting very sharp details and reduced noise.

you wont get much diff if you down-sampling from 1080 to 720.
*
You don't over-sample it. You record it natively at higher res and then downsample it. A6300 for example take 6k footage at 20mp per frame right off the sensor, and then downsample it to 4k at 8mp per frame (I don't own a6300 so correct me if im wrong).

This post has been edited by DaddyO: Jun 7 2016, 07:58 PM
DaddyO
post Jun 7 2016, 08:07 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(Loseeker @ Jun 7 2016, 07:29 PM)
I guess the term "downsampling" is more suitable for use at video then. What I'm really interested in is about what this guy "tomhongkong" said on dpreview forum as shown below.....anyone know how to do what he said ? resize 24mp to 16mp?  hmm.gif

user posted image
*
It's actually also applicable to still image like when you hear stuff like "good enough for instagram", they are referring to "reduced small enough for web that viewer won't notice blurriness".

Downsampling term is talked a lot for videos cause videographer can't avoid using the word "downsampling" when describing how editing is done.
DaddyO
post Jun 7 2016, 09:03 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


Errr...downsampling is a legit technical word to describe how signal is processed, bit rate etc. whereas "resize" is more convenient term. That said, if you don't know how downsampling works, better to stick with "resize". Just note "resize" could also mean "make bigger" so actually it can be more confusing than downsampling, haha. And I don't think downsampling applys to "crop".

And actually downsampling also have benefit of reducing files size to manageable level. 6k itself already have 20Mp per frame which translate into (if not mistaken) 20Megabyte per frame, jpeg worth of data. You do the math how much space that takes for a whole clip. To most people, 6k is overdone unless you like looking at 6k TV screen at really close up.

This post has been edited by DaddyO: Jun 7 2016, 09:20 PM
DaddyO
post Jun 8 2016, 07:46 AM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(ieR @ Jun 8 2016, 01:41 AM)
.....20Megabyte per frame, jpeg RAW worth of data..
*
I don't know about video much as i don't deal wih them. Just studied signal processing before. So again, correct me if im wrong.

You are right partially right on the raw part except depending how you export and detail of the image, you can get around 20MB of jpeg (for stills). Video, i dont know how they compress the frame shot.
DaddyO
post Jun 13 2016, 10:02 AM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,255 posts

Joined: Aug 2011
QUOTE(chinti @ Jun 12 2016, 04:37 PM)
sharing few photos taken at Acosta 1st day. more photos can be viewed in my portfolio but all the older pics r taken using canon. just jumped to sony not long ago and Acosta is the 1st event i shoot using sony. wont upload them on my portfolio yet as im still doing the post processing.  biggrin.gif

shot using sony A7 and Zeiss 55mm F1.8. Sharp sharp eyes~

user posted image

user posted image

user posted image
*
Overexpose is a common use in cosplay shot but too much can be glaring especially if the white cloth and hair becomes blob of white. Need to lower the highlight a little.

This post has been edited by DaddyO: Jun 13 2016, 10:02 AM
« Next Oldest · Photography, Digital Imaging & Video · Next Newest »
 

3 Pages < 1 2 3 >Top
Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
 0.0543sec    0.37    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 22nd December 2025 - 12:37 AM
All Rights Reserved © 2002- 2025 Vijandren Ramadass (~unite against racism~)
Removal Request
Powered by Invision Power Board © 2025  IPS, Inc.