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!

A900 First Shots

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Peter quick break for me here but do you have a white balance card.Maybe take a shot of it on your next outing than WB the whole folder to it in C1 , wondering what color temp you are coming up with. I see slightly yellow at the moment
Guy,

this is true, I was using AWB - do not even dare to say:eek:

I currently do not have a WB card, but will try to get one.

Thanks!
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
HI Peter
Lovely pictures - congratulations on the new camera
I was dithering on the edge of MF last year, but the Sony really has shut me up about it for some time. I understand that the MF files will be better, just as I understand that a Maserati would be faster than my humble motor, but what I've got is fun too, and much less aggravation than the 'real deal', and on the rare occasions when I get a decent landscape shot, then the A900 will do an excellent large print.
Thanks Jono!

As you know I am currently in the same situation as you obviously have been. As I could not decide so far on any MF system (I have the fear Guy will change that during the next workshop :D) I thought I give the A900 and Zeiss glass a try. So far I am very happy. I am sure that there is a difference to MF, but considering the price difference I am also sure I can survive for a while, or maybe even longer with the A900.

I played around today with upscaled TIFF files from the A900 RAWs in PS and the files look pretty good, so I am convinced I could even go till 60"x40" prints with it. Of course the differences are there to MF but ????

I will also try stitching for landscapes, which should then give a very good final quality.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I should save these tips for you. LOL

In C1 up rez right from the raw at 150 percent than go further in PS.:grin:
 

Georg Baumann

Subscriber Member
Nice Peter!

Gretag Macbeth does a small (visa Card like) color checker. Ridiculously expensive, but well.... what can you do. I used AWB today as well, and I feel it is very good under the light siutuation I was shooting. Of course, precision work requires one calibrationshot, not a lot of hassle in deed. - the good thing about these color checkers is, like me today, they are so small, I forgot to pack it in. - :ROTFL:

Would love to join you guys on Mars. :)

Jono, I have little doubts on that as well. My god, just look at Alberts Pano in the Sony Fun picture page, 135mm 5 panels from a ballhead. OK, there will be a difference, and I look forward to try that, but what a result!!

I will start with the P45+ and shoot in identical situations. No doubt, having 12.5 f Stops DR, it just has to be better. Then again, the percentage quality advantage between MFDB and DSLR has gotten smaller in deed, and I feel what we are getting for the money on an alpha is excpetional of course 50% of that is due to ZEISS.
 
T

the_shootist

Guest
Hello Peter!
great pics you are showing us here, thanx for sharing!
can you already say something about the picture quality at high ISO rates (1600 and above).
regards,
Hans
 

jonoslack

Active member
Erm
I'm going to get on my hobby horse again here.
First of all I should say that Im talking about shooting nature in daylight. Okay?
i used AWB for years, because it was there. Then I got grown up, and used grey cards and expodiscs to get a 'real' white balance.

Then I realised that what I wanted was to capture the light, and that if there was a shadow and a sunlight, then a 'correct' white balance simply did not exist.

These days, in daylight, I shoot DAYLIGHT - because, I want to see my light with reference to daylight, this means that if it's a sunset shot the light will be warm, if it's a daybreak shot it will be cooler and pinker, if it's mid day, then it will be neutral.

Of course, I can always change it in post processing (but I rarely do).

To put it another way, if you look at an 18% grey card in the late evening it'll look yellow (okay?). Well, if I shoot in the late evening I WANT that grey card to look yellow.

Added to which, if you always leave the white balance the same (i.e. daylight) in natural light, then you really get to understand the colour response of your camera. If you're always pissing about with the colour, then you'll never understand it.
 

Terry

New member
I've taken Jono's advice and it's been serving me very well.

This is my in seat entertainment. iPhone + wifi at 30,000 ft on my way to NY. Cool!!!
 

Georg Baumann

Subscriber Member
I've taken Jono's advice and it's been serving me very well.

This is my in seat entertainment. iPhone + wifi at 30,000 ft on my way to NY. Cool!!!
Ladies and Gentlemen, there is a elctronic disturbance interfering with our landing system coming from.... The Lady in seat 4a.... ahem.... ;)
 

carstenw

Active member
Great WB advice from Jono. I would add that if you shoot indoors with tungsten lighting a lot, and you want to correct it (not a given), and you want the highest quality results possible, and are willing to suffer a little to get this, you should consider getting a tungsten blue filter for your lens. The more "final" the colour of the light landing on the sensor, the less correction it needs later, and thus the less of its latitude you will use up with WB corrections. The same would go for any other strong, undesirable colour casts in your lighting. Digital does not mean no filters!
 

APY_JR

New member
Erm
I'm going to get on my hobby horse again here.
First of all I should say that Im talking about shooting nature in daylight. Okay?
i used AWB for years, because it was there. Then I got grown up, and used grey cards and expodiscs to get a 'real' white balance.

Then I realised that what I wanted was to capture the light, and that if there was a shadow and a sunlight, then a 'correct' white balance simply did not exist.

These days, in daylight, I shoot DAYLIGHT - because, I want to see my light with reference to daylight, this means that if it's a sunset shot the light will be warm, if it's a daybreak shot it will be cooler and pinker, if it's mid day, then it will be neutral.

Of course, I can always change it in post processing (but I rarely do).

To put it another way, if you look at an 18% grey card in the late evening it'll look yellow (okay?). Well, if I shoot in the late evening I WANT that grey card to look yellow.

Added to which, if you always leave the white balance the same (i.e. daylight) in natural light, then you really get to understand the colour response of your camera. If you're always pissing about with the colour, then you'll never understand it.
Hi Jono!

So... you're saying you shoot everything at 5500??

That can't be right... 'cause warm light (evening) will look blue and cool will look warm!

Surely you're click balancing or shooting everything with a CC card (or expodisc, shootsmarter, WhiBal etc...) from wherever the light is coming from.

Albert
 

Terry

New member
Ladies and Gentlemen, there is a elctronic disturbance interfering with our landing system coming from.... The Lady in seat 4a.... ahem.... ;)
4A would be nice. I ended up with a middle seat (late booking). All my electronics are flight legal. Wifi supplied by VirginAmerica. Internet and TV can keep me occupied and happy. For those who haventbflown them yet Virgin America does a good job.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Back in my DMR days I used specific WB presets like daylight very often, because AWB did not work at all - at least for long times.

AWB also did not work great in my D2X. It started working pretty good from my D3.

Now in the A900 as I see so far it works good and consistent, although it seems (in my case) to deliver a bet yellow cast. I will try next the daylight preset. And I will try the grey card stuff, although this seems to be more work upfront.

But in general I would say that the A900 AWB works great for what AWB can do - and AWB will never be right 100%.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Hello Peter!
great pics you are showing us here, thanx for sharing!
can you already say something about the picture quality at high ISO rates (1600 and above).
regards,
Hans
Hans,

not yet, but I will share some results as soon as I have done some experiments. Depends when I am going to get into a nice situation to shoot at ISO1600 and above.

Stay tuned ;)
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Followed the advise of Jack in another thread and uploaded a 900 pixel JPEG. I also did color correction and played a bit with the curves in C1 to get the mood of the scene as I have in mind from yesterday shooting.

A900 - 16-35 at f9, 1/80th second and ISO 100
 

jonoslack

Active member
Hi Jono!

So... you're saying you shoot everything at 5500??

That can't be right... 'cause warm light (evening) will look blue and cool will look warm!

Surely you're click balancing or shooting everything with a CC card (or expodisc, shootsmarter, WhiBal etc...) from wherever the light is coming from.

Albert
In daylight, yes I always use Daylight. And it doesn't make evening light look blue, it makes it look like evening light!

The argument is that in mixed lighting, where you have light and shade, you can't get it 'right' anyway, because there will be a huge difference between the correct white balance in the light and shade areas. What's more to the point is that you don't want it right either! If you do a proper WB in evening light, then you are getting rid of the nature of the light by correcting it.

Of course, you can take an incident reading, but what's that got to do with the price of beans?

I started doing it one day with the D3, I took a walk in the evening with the dog, and checked the white balance frequently, in steady sunlight the camera varied between something like a little under 4000 to a little under 7000 . . . in the same lighting conditions!!!

The two other advantages are:

1. you really learn about the colour response of the camera - it's like using a single film stock for outdoor work - with different speeds of course.

2. if you really need to change the WB in post, then it's easy to do it as a batch.

Truth be told though, using Aperture with the A900 I don't believe I've messed with the white balance for more than a handful of shots since I started using it last October.

Of course, this doesn't relate to shooting indoors, or in mixed artificial and natural lighting.

You should give it a go, it's a real freedom!

I should give credit where it's due, it was Robert here who suggested it last year when I was having dreadful trouble with colour with the D3
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Have not used AWB since maybe the canon days. That was awhile ago. Looking forward to trying this cam soon
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
This one done with WB set to Daylight (4900 as displayed in C1 Pro)

Lens 16-35 at 35, f7.1 and 1/100
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Normally most of my P30+ files run right at 5200 for daylight shots but a 300 plus or minus on that works just fine depending on light and mood. With a white balance card Peter we can find your normal WB than deviate around that according to taste. Outside shots there really is no standard per say it depends on what mood you are trying to convey so WB sort of get's thrown out the door. But knowing the sweet spot or your standard with C1 is what you want to know. Than take it from there. George this goes as well for you since you both are C1 users. Now I like the ISO 100 shots here with c1 and that is something I want to see up North on the workshop.
 
Top