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!

A7r Crop Mode Vs A6000

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Guy

A question, just because I have no idea of the answer, if you are using the A7r in crop mode, aren't you forcing it to be basically an aps sized sensor? In which case, why would there be a difference between a crop A7r and the A6000, you've effectively made them the same? Wouldn't the test be better to upres the A6000 file to match the A7r? That way you'd see what the differences are when wanting to match files, basically as you're not using the A7r in crop mode. I'm guessing the advantage of the A6000 is the af speed or reliability otherwise there's no point having it, just use the A7r in crop mode. Matching the A6000 file to a reduced A7r file just doesn't seem to make much sense to me, especially if you aren't planning on using the A7r in crop mode.

It's quite possible that I just don't get it!

Mat
Great question . Maybe the only reason since really nothing changes in the A7r file except size it's just a easier comparison to see what the A6000 is doing given the exact same framing. Not really should I use one over the other but just more clear to see the A6000 given the same crop. Now agree with you why would I use crop mode on the A7r over the A6000 well I would not now since I do have the APS sensor. Before I had just the A7 and A7r and on one gig was forced to use crop mode. So the reason I bought the A6000 was I get a full 24mpx sensor instead of reduced A7 or A7r file size. Now I have the A6000 on board and a A77ii on the way than I won't have to use crop mode. In this test it's far easier to see and identify the differences since it's exactly the same framing and far easier to spot what I need to do to bring the A6000 into the fold of the A7r.

Maybe I should have been more clear on that point why I did it this way but more for convenience and identifying things better. I think it helps others see just how good the A6000 is much better too since there is no effect on changing the A7r except the file size. If I was testing noise and some other things sure test would have been diffrent.

For me also is getting a handling on the raw processing better too since I can match easier seeing the exact framing. So bottom line more a convenience and identity method more than this cam versus that cam. Those tests I hate doing
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Once good post work is done, especially if it includes heavy cropping and recovery at both ends, most cues are gone and in a small jpeg it's anyone's guess.

And you are using the same sweet spot of the lens in both files. So: same lens 'crop area', but only 16Mp for the cropped a7r file against 24mp for the a6000. The a7r is a far superior camera but not when you reduce its file size so drastically. I thought it did well here.

The a6000 is very good indeed - about halfway between the a7r and the a77 (with SLT).

There are as many sharpening formulas out there as there are photographers ;-) They all think they do it the right way! FWIW, Adobe's starting point is a very safe 25/1.0/25/0, because 90% of all photos are of people - very few people limit detail to that low a figure of 10. Guy, you are only really doing the large edges. The landscape guys go crazy with ultra high Detail and Radius of 0.5 for greenery and distant objects but use quite a lot of masking for skies etc. It maybe works best to balance Amount and Detail against each other with an Alt key check of smooth areas, then add masking. Most start Amount at 40-60 and work from there - it's also very content dependent, and your preferences, and output needs.

FWIW, the technical info behind 'Detail' is that low Detail is USM but protected against halos; and high Detail is Deconvolution.

Finally, a lot is happening that we don't know about. Jeff Schewe of Adobe had this to say recently:

"Although the answer is indeed yes, these are default capture sharpening settings, it's actually a bit more complicated...

ACR/LR does do a level of normalized default sharpening and color noise reduction but these are not hard specific numbers, they are normalized for the camera and ISO settings...the engineers try to arrive at a useful starting point but that starting point will vary by camera model and sensor. By default there is no luminance noise reduction–even though a small amount of luminance noise reduction should prolly be applied."

Sony's sensors are getting better in leaps and bounds, and it's good Adobe leave that very nice lum noise alone! I only knock out a little, say 10 between ISO 400-1600, and 30-40 at ISO 6400. Thanks for posting.

And this is my basic problem is I don't use ACR so I'm a little baffled by how certain functions work. C1 does not do behind the scenes adjustments raw is raw and you go from there. This is more my issue than anything else as I don't know what the hell they are doing and what things are applied. I'm just looking at stuff at 100 percent when processing but heck I could certainly be wrong since it's very rare I use this program. I'm far more efficient with C1 since that's all I been using for many yeas like maybe 10.

Thanks
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
An a7 and a nex body is the perfect travel one two punch.
Exactly what I have been thinkng as well. Its a great backup, nice second body and a great travel cam. For me not the primary but I it's a nice second cam when shooting side by side. Another reason to match things up as well.

But regardless I see some difference like DR , color and saturation that I need to adjust in the A6000 to match better. Until I get full C1 support for the A6000 and A77II. I'm just plugging along. I'll have a far better idea when that happens
 

Professional

Active member
Test A77-II with Canon 70-200 f2.8 for us please, i want to know how good or fast the AF speed with non native lenses on A77-II, i don't think i am really wanting to go with Sony 70-200 lens, and hope my 300 2.8 can work fast on A77-II.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Once good post work is done, especially if it includes heavy cropping and recovery at both ends, most cues are gone and in a small jpeg it's anyone's guess.

And you are using the same sweet spot of the lens in both files. So: same lens 'crop area', but only 16Mp for the cropped a7r file against 24mp for the a6000. The a7r is a far superior camera but not when you reduce its file size so drastically. I thought it did well here.

The a6000 is very good indeed - about halfway between the a7r and the a77 (with SLT).

There are as many sharpening formulas out there as there are photographers ;-) They all think they do it the right way! FWIW, Adobe's starting point is a very safe 25/1.0/25/0, because 90% of all photos are of people - very few people limit detail to that low a figure of 10. Guy, you are only really doing the large edges. The landscape guys go crazy with ultra high Detail and Radius of 0.5 for greenery and distant objects but use quite a lot of masking for skies etc. It maybe works best to balance Amount and Detail against each other with an Alt key check of smooth areas, then add masking. Most start Amount at 40-60 and work from there - it's also very content dependent, and your preferences, and output needs.

FWIW, the technical info behind 'Detail' is that low Detail is USM but protected against halos; and high Detail is Deconvolution.

Finally, a lot is happening that we don't know about. Jeff Schewe of Adobe had this to say recently:

"Although the answer is indeed yes, these are default capture sharpening settings, it's actually a bit more complicated...

ACR/LR does do a level of normalized default sharpening and color noise reduction but these are not hard specific numbers, they are normalized for the camera and ISO settings...the engineers try to arrive at a useful starting point but that starting point will vary by camera model and sensor. By default there is no luminance noise reduction–even though a small amount of luminance noise reduction should prolly be applied."

Sony's sensors are getting better in leaps and bounds, and it's good Adobe leave that very nice lum noise alone! I only knock out a little, say 10 between ISO 400-1600, and 30-40 at ISO 6400. Thanks for posting.
Okay now i see what the detail is doing along with the masking.If you load up on detail the sky gets nasty artifacts and when you apply masking it knocks it back down. Its okay still seems like a lot of detail applied though. Ill play some more as I can see what your talking about now.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Test A77-II with Canon 70-200 f2.8 for us please, i want to know how good or fast the AF speed with non native lenses on A77-II, i don't think i am really wanting to go with Sony 70-200 lens, and hope my 300 2.8 can work fast on A77-II.
I don't have any Canon glass at all. A77II i need to order here in a couple days. As far as the Sony 70-200 2.8 either the older model or newer they are very good lenses. The latest just has faster focusing from what I am told but same lens formula.

As far as third party lens like canon on a Sony body with the Metabones III adapter there very slow to focus( probably hunt bad as well) and not anywhere near the speed of a Sony 70-200 2.8 Native on a A77II thats going to be like lightning fast. If you really need the focusing speed and fast AF on a Sony body than really your only choice will be Sony. If you have the A7 or A7r than the 70-200 F4 will be faster since your not using the Sony Adapter. On the A77II than you want the A glass and the 70-200 2.8

Here really is the bottom line if your staying manual focus on these 7 series cams than almost any lens that works would be fine but as soon as you start wanting AF speed and accuracy than you need to think native glass and even with using the Sony 4 adapter it will not be as fast as the native glass to that mount. In this case talking the longer zooms the A series cams you want the 70-200 2.8 and the FE mont cams you want the new 70-200 F4 FE mount.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Just playing here with a A6000 shot intentionally with a glare on the highlights. This is pretty extreme between a overblown reflected in camera highlight and deep shadows. First image is as shot except I do have my sharpening included than second image is lets make it work correctly. Very malleable file to be able to handle this and this is pretty extreme DR going on here.



Corrected

[/IMG]
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Worked very well without going overboard and looking like a HDR files. Final result looks very normal
 

Professional

Active member
Ok thanks, i saw that Sony 70-200 f2.8, it is a big option, i can wait and see if this lens is really good quality and fast AF speed compared to Canon/Nikon competitors.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
The newer 7A-mount 0-200/2.8 has nano coatings on the lens elements and improved weather sealing I'm told. It's also quite a bit pricier than the old model. The old model is great though. I had one up until about a week ago. It's just too heavy for the A7 bodies on a normal basis and the FE mount 70-200/4 looks pretty damn good.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
For me having the 135 1.8 my need for the 70-200 is not worth buying but I do rent them twice a year for 10 days each to do a big runway gig. I actually use 300mm effective so going APS with the A77II is ideal for me. Outside of that my 135 with effective 200mm on a APS sensor I'd perfect. I just did a big job like that with the A6000 and the 135 which worked great. End of day the A77ii will be the primary on those kind of gigs. Just need to sell a few items and I'm ordering it. Release date is June 10th. I have 3 gigs starting the 24th so would love to put that into action.

Last Jan. I rented the 70-200 2.8 older version with the Sony 4 adapter on my A7 in crop mode. It did okay but I think the A77II APS will AF track far better and faster. Why I'm buying the A77II
 

Professional

Active member
And surprisingly it is even pricier than Canon/Nikon ones, so i am not sure it will be worthy to buy it for sports over my 1DX + Canon 2.8 L lenses, just the specifications of A77II is better and outperforms that of 1DX [24mp, APC-s, smaller and lighter, fps are almost the same and high ISO is not a big deal and A77-II is a new camera so maybe better technology than 1DX].
 

Professional

Active member
If i didn't hear about that A77-II i was a hair away from getting A6000, or maybe A77 I, but good i wasn't in rush, Sony A7r is my first ever Sony still camera or mirror-less and i have no regret, so the second camera i hope it will be a right/wise decision as well.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Yea it's a tough call. There saying the AF on the Sony with continuous tracking is outstanding and you get AF points out to the edges. I see that as a advantage. But yes the zoom is very pricey.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
If i didn't hear about that A77-II i was a hair away from getting A6000, or maybe A77 I, but good i wasn't in rush, Sony A7r is my first ever Sony still camera or mirror-less and i have no regret, so the second camera i hope it will be a right/wise decision as well.
The A6000 with the new FE 70-200 F4 zoom is going to be very good at tracking but here is where it lacks. No vertical grip and its a slower lens in F4. I need 2.8 so big reason I am adding the A77Ii. I get a vertical grip and a fast 2.8 lens in the mix plus shooting thousands of images on the jobs it should hold up better.

This here is a need issue as I'm pretty sure the A6000 with its fast AF would do well with its new zoom. But it maybe a little limiting for certain things so for me the A77II will be added. The A6000 will play a secondary roll and travel cam.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
This is another reason I'm checking out this A6000 sensor as it's supposedly the same on the A77II.
 

Professional

Active member
And your posts are a good strong reason that i should pass/neglect A6000 and look directly to A77II, i am not like you and i don't want 2 cameras while i have already one, so this Sony will be either my main camera then 1DX is a backup or vise-versa, i don't see myself any point buying A6000 and then A77II, definitely i will use A77II extensively and i will never touch A6000, you are different level/league and i understand, but i have time to wait until that A77II will be released in markets and been tested as you do then i can have my final decision.
 
Top