N
nei1
Guest
Show me a decent pasty,at this cameras resolution I should be able to smell it!
The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
6400 ISO on the A900
- Thread starter jonoslack
- Start date
jonoslack
Active member
Ah! The ten thousand dollar question!
I can't really tell until Aperture support the A900 natively. Certainly the DNG files are considerably smaller, and maybe something has to give . . or it's possible that Adobe are cleverer than Sony.
I have a basic feeling that I'd rather use DNG files - for futureability, and also for storage space, but mostly because I don't really trust future software to be able to access proprietary raw formats.
I suppose that the real truth of this is that there is an OBVIOUS resolution difference between the D700 and the A900, and that's what I'm subscribing to. If there is a difference between DNG and Sony proprietary raw, then it's minimal, and I don't think I'm interested in minimal!
Good luck with the files - I'm really interested in what you think.
jonoslack
Active member
Ah! We're off to Cornwall at the Beginning of November . . . maybe I should just send you a real one?
N
nei1
Guest
Your a lucky man Jono,have a wonderful time,Neil.
Robert Campbell
Well-known member
You want Brick Walls
I got Brick Walls
just say the word
Arrrrgh NO but thanks for offering.
jonoslack
Active member
I had some earlier (testing a sigma 12-24) and deleted them. Otherwise I would have punished you
V
Vivek
Guest
Jono, How did Robert's red NO become a green NO
jonoslack
Active member
Magic . . . I would have thought you had realised by now that I am really a Wizard and anyway, it was green and NOT limeJono, How did Robert's red NO become a green NO
:ROTFL::ROTFL:
V
Vivek
Guest
That (green/lime switch) really was a test to see your wizardiness.:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:
jonoslack
Active member
Ah! so I passed the test? :ROTFL:
A
asabet
Guest
I had a look at the RAW files Jono kindly uploaded earlier. There were several base ISO files and one at ISO 3200. The per pixel sharpness of the ISO 200 files sort of took me by surprise. I've seen Jono's crops, but when I viewed them in my usual workflow... Well, let's just say I had a bit of gear envy . The ISO 3200 file also looked very good. Viewed at 100%, the A900 noise at ISO 3200 resembles the D700 noise at ISO 6400. However, after downsizing the A900 file to D700 file dimensions, the noise gap between A900 at ISO 3200 and D700 at ISO 3200 diminishes while the A900 file continues to hold more detail. Impressive stuff from the Sony sensor.
. The ISO 3200 file also looked very good. Viewed at 100%, the A900 noise at ISO 3200 resembles the D700 noise at ISO 6400. However, after downsizing the A900 file to D700 file dimensions, the noise gap between A900 at ISO 3200 and D700 at ISO 3200 diminishes while the A900 file continues to hold more detail. Impressive stuff from the Sony sensor.
Robert Campbell
Well-known member
A magical Miss Whiplash? :ROTFL::ROTFL:
Robert Campbell
Well-known member
On a more serious note; my ASA/ISO clock seems to be stuck around the values for Kodachrome - 6 or 25. ISO 100 - today's baseline - for me is really quite fast.
I have diffiiculty thinking of ISO values of 6400 and above. How useful are they, and what do people need them for?
I have diffiiculty thinking of ISO values of 6400 and above. How useful are they, and what do people need them for?
V
Vivek
Guest
Bertie, I just shot my freezer still full of Ektar 25 at ISO3200 and +0.7eV exposure (with a Nikon D300/ has a Sony sensor) in candle light to check.
Yes, the outcome is more than satisfactory.
Robert Campbell
Well-known member
OK, but I don't do a lot of black cats in the coal cellar at midnight by candlelight.Bertie, I just shot my freezer still full of Ektar 25 at ISO3200 and +0.7eV exposure (with a Nikon D300/ has a Sony sensor) in candle light to check.
Yes, the outcome is more than satisfactory.
Is this high and higher ISO thing taking over from the megapixel race, now that - perhaps - FFs are around 20-25MP and crops around 15MP - and at the limits of lens resolution?
Last edited:
Quentin_Bargate
Well-known member
High ISO opens up modes of shooting not previously possible. Think of a wedding in a dimly lit church where you want to record the ambience front to back, not just correctly expose by use of flash a bride and groom (even assuming flash use is allowed inside the church). Or hand-held street shooting at dusk.
With a D3/D700, auto ISO came of age and quality images at very hgh ISO without flash are possible. No more muddy colours at high ISO either. It is very liberating whatever you shoot. But it may be with the A900, you have to trade off some of that freedom for higher resolution.
Quentin
With a D3/D700, auto ISO came of age and quality images at very hgh ISO without flash are possible. No more muddy colours at high ISO either. It is very liberating whatever you shoot. But it may be with the A900, you have to trade off some of that freedom for higher resolution.
Quentin
Robert Campbell
Well-known member
Yes, for pros, certainly - though I don't remember english churches being quite so murky. I don't do any of these things - for me, super high ISO ain't necessary.
jonoslack
Active member
HI AminI had a look at the RAW files Jono kindly uploaded earlier. There were several base ISO files and one at ISO 3200. The per pixel sharpness of the ISO 200 files sort of took me by surprise. I've seen Jono's crops, but when I viewed them in my usual workflow... Well, let's just say I had a bit of gear envy
I'm glad you enjoyed them . . . perhaps you can see why I jumped aboard so abruptly (that dealer who offered me a play was the culprit). The 100% sharpness is pretty splendid isn't it - very nearly as good as the M8 (at 100%). It does make one realise that the AA sensor on the Nikon full frames is a rather brutal affair! A sideways benefit of the light Sony filter is that less than perfect lenses behave better on the A900 than they do on the Nikons (despite what one might expect).
As for the high ISO - just because you can make them look the same (and I agree with your assesment of that 3200 shot) doesn't mean that you can do as much with them in post processing - let's face it, if you want really high ISO the Nikon is still better.
For me, the Sony is a poor man's MF camera - I'm loving it!
jonoslack
Active member
Hi VivekBertie, I just shot my freezer still full of Ektar 25 at ISO3200 and +0.7eV exposure (with a Nikon D300/ has a Sony sensor) in candle light to check.
Yes, the outcome is more than satisfactory.
the + exposure compensation is the really important thing (IMHO)
V
Vivek
Guest
Jono, Yes. You already passed the wizardiness test, you know.