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!
It's because people like Tim Ashley, Son, Matt and Ashwin are all posting, and some of them are in nice places!Is it just me, or are most of these images look spectacular?
It's just GAS . . . . but if it's any consolation, I now have the A7/zoom and the E-M1 with the 12-40, I should only keep one, but it's causing me some anguish. I'm not having much trouble with the AF on the A7, and the files are lovely. The kit lens is also great . . . but not, I think, on the A7r, so if you want the combo with the kit lens I'd stick to the A7r.Am I just suffering from GAS, or is there something to it? I did get to handle these and was surprised at how much I liked the A7/zoom combo. It was shower to AF than the EM1, but…those files...
Fantastic Tim - I love the recapitulation of the shape . . . . . and then the realisation that it's a breast .Some from the morning stroll... all with the 28-70 which I have tamed but not mastered. Taming involves always either using MF or 'double press AF' and always using a higher shutter speed than feels necessary...
I think one of the things which has surprised me most with the A7 in the few hours I have had it is the AF which in my experience, even in dark rooms (testing last night) has been surprisingly fast. So fast in fact that I've taken shots when not meaning to and they are in focus. Below is a case in point.Fantastic Tim - I love the recapitulation of the shape . . . . . and then the realisation that it's a breast .
As for the kit zoom - I was taking grab shots of bridges on the A7 whilst Emma was driving up the motorway today - only once missed focus - whatever the cause, it must be an A7 / A7r distinction
All the best
the pink makes the shot ..Nice catch Matt! I will have to visit Pike Place one of these days. Too bad, it is so far from NYC!
Nice to see you posting againA7R + Noctilux 50mm F1 Version 3 (E60 detachable hood) test
100% crop
I keep going back and forth. I still have good u4/3 glass and shoot the GH3, though mostly video. I was about to pull the trigger on the EM1 but held off. It feels a bit better in my hands than the A7, and my head says EM1 since I've got a good set of lenses (12-35/2.8, 35-100/2.8, 25/1.4, 45/1.8) and also the GM1 which is a fun little camera. My head says that staying in the same "family" gives the most bang for the buck, and the touchscreen on the EM1 makes for quicker shooting and the IBIS solves a lot of issues in low light and for run-and-gun video. I find the IBIS works better than the Panny OIS.Hi Todd
It's just GAS . . . . but if it's any consolation, I now have the A7/zoom and the E-M1 with the 12-40, I should only keep one, but it's causing me some anguish. I'm not having much trouble with the AF on the A7, and the files are lovely. The kit lens is also great . . . but not, I think, on the A7r, so if you want the combo with the kit lens I'd stick to the A7r.
All the best
This is exactly the type of shot that I want to be able to get. Crappy lighting so likely very high ISO, but enough dynamic range so the stage lights aren't totally blown out and you can still get detail from the shadows. This is one area where I think u4/3 struggles - if I protect the highlights then the shadows become a mess and vice versa.A7 + 24 Elmar ASPH
Yeah that's pretty much straight out the camera at ISO 6400 and f/4. There's some noise at 100% but it can be cleaned up reasonably well very easily. The color are pretty much like this out the camera.This is exactly the type of shot that I want to be able to get. Crappy lighting so likely very high ISO, but enough dynamic range so the stage lights aren't totally blown out and you can still get detail from the shadows. This is one area where I think u4/3 struggles - if I protect the highlights then the shadows become a mess and vice versa.
To make a valid comparison with m4/3 (as mentioned by the poster above):Yeah that's pretty much straight out the camera at ISO 6400 and f/4. There's some noise at 100% but it can be cleaned up reasonably well. The color are pretty much like this out the camera.
Thanks Hermann. Both of those shots where taken at the same place whilst on holiday. The colour of the sky and the water there were beautiful. Only get there once a year over Christmas normally though.Ben: Particularly like the first one - also a perfect fit to the one of your daughter (?) on the swing you shared a few days ago.
People aren't static in concert settings and I could very easily put my 35/1.2 lens (or just about any FF lens out there) on the A7 or A7r to cover the ISO concerns or I could've shot it at a lower ISO. I was mostly testing to see how clean I could go. Most of my shots were in the ISO 1600-3200 range at f/4.To make a valid comparison with m4/3 (as mentioned by the poster above):
The same DOF would require f/2 with the smaller sensor and the ISO could then be reduced to 1600. Since an E-M1 at ISO 1600 is vastly superior to any of the two A7 bodies at ISO 6400, the Olympus would be the better camera for this particular shot. The E-M1 obviously also adds IBIS to the equation, adding the possibility of reducing the ISO further for static subjects.
Just sayin'
There will obviously always be varied options for the two systems. What I'm pointing out is that the two Sony bodies aren't much better suited for than an E-M1 for low light photography. The 17.5mm f/0.95 will do away with some of the advantage the A7/r might have with an f/1.2 lens. The advantage to either camera will vary with focal lengths and available lenses for that length obviously.People aren't static in concert settings and I could very easily put my 35/1.2 lens on the A7 or A7r to cover the ISO concerns or I could've shot it at a lower ISO... I was mostly testing to see how clean I could go. Most of my shots were in the ISO 1600-3200 range at f/4.
Some yes but not all and one could put a Noctilux on an A7/r. The bottom line is one can't argue physics when needed despite however much Micro 4/3 has come (and I still love my G1.) It's more than adequate for most applications no doubt but when a larger sensor is needed or wanted then you just need a larger sensor. Believe me the GF1 really made me want an M9 more for those instances.There will obviously always be varied options for the two systems. What I'm pointing out is that the two Sony bodies aren't much better suited for than an E-M1 for low light photography. The 17.5mm f/0.95 will do away with some of the advantage the A7/r might have with an f/1.2 lens. The advantage to either camera will vary with focal lengths and available lenses for that length obviously.
For extreme low light photography: See Nikon Df/D4