Menu
What's new
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!

A7s!

Rawfa

Rawfa

Active member
Sorry, I must be going dyslexic. I forgot to type "look" :) But yes, I mean that the iso 12800 results from the A7S look like the results I get with iso 6400 with the A7 in low light.

I would really love seeing a direct comparison between A7S photos vs downsized A7 photos. It´s the difference between me spending us$1200 or us$2500 on second camera for the A7 I already own!

Here are some samples from my A7 and a Canon FD 50mm 1.4. I had high hopes to have much cleaner iso 6400 with the A7S in similar conditions...and much better iso 12800 (which for me is useless for professional work with the A7).







fotografz said:
Noise from the A7S using ISO 12,800 @ 12 meg is like A7 using ISO 6400 @ 24 meg … is that what you mean? One stop difference sounds like a wash when comparing similar print sizes.

If that is true, then why would one want to be stuck with 12 meg at ISO 100 to 400 for a majority of images one would normally shoot where noise isn't an issue?

I think you are right, it is very hard to evaluate images and ISO performance without access to the RAW files. It would be interesting if someone had both the A7S and A7 (or A7R) and could shoot a low light image at the same distance using the same lens (especially with people in the frame), then compare the full image on A3 prints for noise and color.

- Marc
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
G

G43

New member
I am making noise about the Sigma DP2Q over at *Other cameras* covering my needs for printing large and keep my gear easy to lug around. I am yet in a terrible doubt whether to go for this new Foveon compact series. Something indeed I like and something I don't. Or should I aim at the A7R with its quirks? Yeah.. all those considerations and with all possibilities to wait for the next generation of whatever mirrorless.

But this one, A7S, I see as a possible replacement of my soon worn out and beloved Fuji X100 (12 MP Bayer) stealth camera. The A7S files has this fat pixel look that I adore and 12 MP is very suitable for smaller and up to 20 x 30 prints.
From some of the shots here I find the rendering as unique or better than X100. It's far more versatile, have exchangeable lens possibilities and what more.

I have a Zeiss 21 mm f2.8 Distagon left from my 6D days waiting for a maid. Seems that the A7S handles wide angle lenses with glamour.
 
kuujinbo

kuujinbo

New member
Ulfric Douglas said:
I still want an A7S for the reasonable megapixels, call me contrary.
Click to expand...
You're not the only one. Personally I found 24mp to be way more than I needed. Although to be perfectly honest, somewhere in the range of 16-20 would have been nice. Can't have everything.
 
Guy Mancuso

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
That lens will work on any of the 7 series bodies. People are getting bad info or confused here but almost any DSLR style lens will work on the 7 series cameras. Its rangefinder lenses where the issues are. You just need a metabones eos to e adapter for your 21
 
G

G43

New member
Guy Mancuso said:
That lens will work on any of the 7 series bodies. People are getting bad info or confused here but almost any DSLR style lens will work on the 7 series cameras. Its rangefinder lenses where the issues are. You just need a metabones eos to e adapter for your 21
Click to expand...
Ohh...:confused: Really. I've got it upside down in my head. This is great news for me should my choice be the R for large print files, I already have one of the most beautiful rendering 21 mm's then.
Really cool, thx. Guy :)
 
Rawfa

Rawfa

Active member
Here is a question directed to all the pro wedding photographers out there. Is 12mp enough for printing large wedding photos?
 
ashwinrao1

ashwinrao1

Active member
erudolph said:
Interesting. I'm curious what Ashwin, who now has both MM and A7S, will have to say about how they compare.
Click to expand...
Hi guys, in my opinion, they don't compare other than both sensors are full frame and both handle M lenses well :).

The MM is such a unique creature, and there's nothing like it, for the type of midtone dynamic range and malleability of files. The A7s is fantastic, mind you, and does the high ISO and color thing well. Files feel "smaller" than the A7 or A7r...it is noticeable, but that being said, I have made gigantic (22x28 prints) with the original 5D, that people have hanging up, so I don't think it would be much of an issue to print reasonably large....that being said, for the pixel peepers out there, you would notice the difference. For me, the file size, ability to handle M lenses, color reproduction, lack of color shifts, less vignetting, etc. all make it an appealing second body for M lenses. For example, if someone was primarily a MM shooter and wanted a cheaper 2nd body for color, this would do smashingly (if one didn't want to invest in an M9 or M240)
 
B

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
I regularly printed images from my 5Dc's that I shot weddings with for 7 years, as double page spreads on Graphistudio 14X10" albums. That means a 22" spread on a book usually viewed at knee to eye height. Wedding photographers have been using the 5D, D700, D3/s, etc cameras for many years and still continue to do so. I do not think that you have to worry about resolution shortcomings with 12 megapixels for wedding work.
 
G

gerald.d

Well-known member
A7s, Canon 400mm f/2.8

2 seconds, ISO 16000

I'm not an astrophotographer. But I want to be one now :D



Kind regards,

Gerald
 
kuujinbo

kuujinbo

New member
Not sure about everyone else, but I didn't buy the camera to shoot in near dark, just moderate low light (indoors at night or after 4pm in fall/winter) with relatively clean ISO 6400-12,800. Kind of like the following:

ISO 8000


ISO 10,000 - white tag under "star student" is perfectly readable, click for original size.


ISO 12,800 in the garage


-- In-camera high ISO NR set to low.
-- LR zero sharpening and zero NR.
-- Multi metering, A mode - let the camera choose shutter speed and ISO. Then back off exposure in LR to match the approximate actual lighting.
 
B

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
Looking at Kuujinbo's picture above I decided to try an experiment. Took out my A7r and took a picture a part of my apartment which is in lowish light. ISO 12800. I pushed it one stop in ACR and added a noise reduction of 10 (my default for over iso 1600). Sharpening is 60/1/30/0. I then downrezzed to 12 megapixels in ACR and outputted from there.

You tell me folks. A7r at iso 12800 and then pushed a stop (to 25600). Once downrezzed to 12 megapixels, am I losing anything in comparison? I'm not sure that I am.

Here's the full sized JPG.
 
S

Steve P.

New member
Having to process every low light shot that way would get old very quickly. I don't think I'd have the patience for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top