Site Sponsors
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 171

Thread: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

  1. #1
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    HI There
    I did this just to satisfy my own curiosity, but it might be of interest to anyone trying to decide which camera to get. (Apologies for those who saw the other post, but it was buried in a different thread.)

    Of course - we all want to print as big as possible, but in comparing sensor pixel sizes, we think in terms of area, and when thinking in terms of printing we talk in linear terms.

    I'd been thinking - 24:36 that means that if the
    A7 is good for a 24" print then
    A7r is good for a 36" print - but of course this isn't the case - actually

    A7 is good for a 24" print
    A7r will be good for 29.5" print

    Easier to see it in graphic form.



    Of course, this doesn't take into account the lack of an AA filter in the A7r (or the bigger pixels in the A7). They will have some effect, but it's not so clear what it will be.

    I'm still anguishing whether to jump back in again - especially in the light of the excellent write up by Roger at LensRentals.com

    This hasn't actually made the decision any easier!

    all the best

    Just this guy you know
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #2
    Senior Member Ron Pfister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    661
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quite a difference between 16 and 36MP. Not that that's a surprise, but it's nice to see it this way. Many thanks, Jono!
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,034
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    You can never have too many pixels. Image quality is always maintained when downsampling and always degraded when upsampling.

    Victor

  4. #4
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Jono I think I am in and maybe all the way. Testing this week
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  5. #5
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by vjbelle View Post
    You can never have too many pixels. Image quality is always maintained when downsampling and always degraded when upsampling.

    Victor
    HI Victor
    Of course you're right - other things being equal - but I was surprised at how small the relative print size was between the A7 and A7r - and of course, other things aren't equal as A7 has:

    phase detect sensor
    electronic first curtain
    an AA filter (boo)
    . . and it's a fair amount cheaper.

    Just this guy you know

  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Knorp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,997
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    just logic over sentiment ...
    Bart ...
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,604
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by Knorp View Post
    just logic over sentiment ...



    Logic dictates returning a camera after one day and sentiment wants it back or is the other way around?
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Knorp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,997
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    Logic dictates returning a camera after one day and sentiment wants it back or is the other way around?
    Don't ask me ! Ask Mr. Spock !

    Bart ...
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  9. #9
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,604
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    That was a serious question, Bart!

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    A bit north of Copenhagen
    Posts
    1,522
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    569

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    HI Victor
    Of course you're right - other things being equal - but I was surprised at how small the relative print size was between the A7 and A7r - and of course, other things aren't equal as A7 has:

    phase detect sensor
    electronic first curtain
    an AA filter (boo)
    . . and it's a fair amount cheaper.
    + more foregivnes (= more freedom (perhaps))

    thorkil

  11. #11
    Member wuffstuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    240
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Following much discussion on here (and, believe it or not, info from the super, awesome, hyperbolic Steve Huff) I have purchased the A7 rather than the A7r. I became concerned about the vibration issue, and in the end felt that the pixel differential versus ease of use clearly indicated that for a handholder like me, this camera was the way to go.

    The camera is much easier to use compared to my Leica M240 (just take exposure compensation as an example) and the image quality is very similar. I used a 50 Lux ASPH at f8 to take my comparison images.

    At 20 x 16 I am completely unable to tell the prints apart (Leica M v A7) at normal viewing distances. Even when magnified I have difficulty - though the M240 shadow detail is just slightly improved; maybe.

    I haven't printed any larger prints as I don't have access to a bigger printer - yet.

    I paid 5100 for my M240 and 1300 for the A7. I feel like a chump.

    Leica - are you listening?
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  12. #12
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    Logic dictates returning a camera after one day and sentiment wants it back or is the other way around?
    HI Vivek
    That way round:
    the logical decision was to take it back (I didn't have many lenses I wanted to shoot on it or any RAW processing software I wanted to use with it).
    the sentimental decision would be to buy it again

    I actually had it from Friday to Monday and took something like 1000 shots with different lenses.

    . . . . . and I always said I'd review the situation in the light of the FE lenses (which are looking okay) - it also helps a bit that I now have something I like to process the RAW files in (Aperture does a good job) - I have never cancelled the order for the 24-70 f4.

    Just this guy you know
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,034
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    HI Victor
    Of course you're right - other things being equal - but I was surprised at how small the relative print size was between the A7 and A7r - and of course, other things aren't equal as A7 has:

    phase detect sensor
    electronic first curtain
    an AA filter (boo)
    . . and it's a fair amount cheaper.
    At native (360ppi) the A7 is 16.66 long side and the A7r is 20.44 long side. That may not seem like much difference but it is when upsampling. My experience has shown that more pixels always makes for smoother upsampling and every image I choose to print needs to be upsampled (including 80mp). I'm not talking about upsampling to the same size but rather to the same percentage amount. Of course content is important but my rule of thumb is 1.5X native size. Again, content matters and some images can withstand close scrutiny at 2.0X native size.

    Victor

  14. #14
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by wuffstuff View Post
    The camera is much easier to use compared to my Leica M240 (just take exposure compensation as an example) and the image quality is very similar. I used a 50 Lux ASPH at f8 to take my comparison images.

    At 20 x 16 I am completely unable to tell the prints apart (Leica M v A7) at normal viewing distances. Even when magnified I have difficulty - though the M240 shadow detail is just slightly improved; maybe.

    I haven't printed any larger prints as I don't have access to a bigger printer - yet.

    I paid 5100 for my M240 and 1300 for the A7. I feel like a chump.

    Leica - are you listening?
    Oh, but personally I love using a rangefinder, and I love the quiet shutter on the M and the fact that I can use all the lenses without having to think. . . . and I hope the exposure compensation will be sorted.

    . . . . but if I do go back into the water again I'm pretty sure I'll go for the A7 as well - this print size comparison really seals the deal

    Just this guy you know
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  15. #15
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by vjbelle View Post
    At native (360ppi) the A7 is 16.66 long side and the A7r is 20.44 long side. That may not seem like much difference but it is when upsampling. My experience has shown that more pixels always makes for smoother upsampling and every image I choose to print needs to be upsampled (including 80mp). I'm not talking about upsampling to the same size but rather to the same percentage amount. Of course content is important but my rule of thumb is 1.5X native size. Again, content matters and some images can withstand close scrutiny at 2.0X native size.

    Victor
    HI Victor
    I understand it's a consideration - especially if you're going to use the camera to it's theoretical limit, with tripod etc. (not something I do very often).

    Just this guy you know

  16. #16
    Senior Member JoelM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    San Diego, CA USA
    Posts
    264
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    The lack of the AA filter was the reason for me to get the A7r over the A7. I think if the A7 did away with the AA filter as well, there would be more buyers for that camera.

    There just is no perfect camera, but man, Sony hit a home run and got damn close.

    Joel
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  17. #17
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,604
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by JoelM View Post
    The lack of the AA filter was the reason for me to get the A7r over the A7. I think if the A7 did away with the AA filter as well, there would be more buyers for that camera.

    There just is no perfect camera, but man, Sony hit a home run and got damn close.

    Joel
    Next year there will be another cam, a 32MP incorporating all the good stuff. Rumored to be a "pro" grade version.

    BTW, the Sony chief in the US is fired.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  18. #18
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,604
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    HI Vivek
    That way round:
    the logical decision was to take it back (I didn't have many lenses I wanted to shoot on it or any RAW processing software I wanted to use with it).
    the sentimental decision would be to buy it again

    I actually had it from Friday to Monday and took something like 1000 shots with different lenses.

    . . . . . and I always said I'd review the situation in the light of the FE lenses (which are looking okay) - it also helps a bit that I now have something I like to process the RAW files in (Aperture does a good job) - I have never cancelled the order for the 24-70 f4.
    Hi Jono,

    1000 shots?

    I just got over that number after all this time! Perhaps the shutter lag is real after all!

  19. #19
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    Hi Jono,

    1000 shots?

    I just got over that number after all this time! Perhaps the shutter lag is real after all!
    I was trying it out Vivek - to see if I wanted to keep it (actually it was around 900). That meant trying it with lots of different lenses. The shutter lag is very real. (I didn't have much trouble with vibration though - but I agree with most that you need 2x FL for sharp shots)

    Just this guy you know
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  20. #20
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    HI There
    I did this just to satisfy my own curiosity, but it might be of interest to anyone trying to decide which camera to get. (Apologies for those who saw the other post, but it was buried in a different thread.)

    Of course - we all want to print as big as possible, but in comparing sensor pixel sizes, we think in terms of area, and when thinking in terms of printing we talk in linear terms.

    I'd been thinking - 24:36 that means that if the
    A7 is good for a 24" print then
    A7r is good for a 36" print - but of course this isn't the case - actually

    A7 is good for a 24" print
    A7r will be good for 29.5" print

    Easier to see it in graphic form.



    Of course, this doesn't take into account the lack of an AA filter in the A7r (or the bigger pixels in the A7). They will have some effect, but it's not so clear what it will be.

    I'm still anguishing whether to jump back in again - especially in the light of the excellent write up by Roger at LensRentals.com

    This hasn't actually made the decision any easier!

    all the best

    Jono, jump. C1 shows that the files don't have to look 'reticulated' (not suggesting that you use it, just so's you know that it's down to decoding not hard-coding) and the 35 and 55 are both very good (if you can get a good copy).

    The water's lovely, come on in!
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  21. #21
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by vjbelle View Post
    At native (360ppi) the A7 is 16.66 long side and the A7r is 20.44 long side. That may not seem like much difference but it is when upsampling. My experience has shown that more pixels always makes for smoother upsampling and every image I choose to print needs to be upsampled (including 80mp). I'm not talking about upsampling to the same size but rather to the same percentage amount. Of course content is important but my rule of thumb is 1.5X native size. Again, content matters and some images can withstand close scrutiny at 2.0X native size.

    Victor
    Why do you choose 360 as 'native'?
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  22. #22
    Senior Member Ron Pfister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    661
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    I think 240 does the job well.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  23. #23
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    I agree - or even 180 if the file is good. But none of them is 'native' AFAIK….
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  24. #24
    Senior Member Ron Pfister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    661
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Well, there are 'native' printer resolutions. Epson drivers, e.g. up-res images to 360ppi if you're using standard settings, or to 720ppi if you're using 'finest detail'. Best to up-res yourself, and don't let the driver do it - the results are superior.

    Edit - here some rules that work well for me:
    - if your image is <360ppi, up-res to 360ppi and use standard settings (but not 'high speed')
    - if you image is between 360 and 720ppi, up-res to 720ppi and use 'finest detail' (again not 'high speed')

    LR makes this up-ressing very easy (just check the box in the print module)
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  25. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,034
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Pfister View Post

    LR makes this up-ressing very easy (just check the box in the print module)
    Ron.... don't get sensitive - please. I would never, ever use lightroom to upsize anything!

    I print 36 to 40 inches all day long with IQ180 files and D800e files on my 9900...... I know what works and it sure ain't lightroom.

    Victor

  26. #26
    Senior Member Ron Pfister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    661
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    I've been happy with it so far. What do you use? ImagePrint? Mirage? I've tried a number of things and came to the conclusion that the combination of print quality and workflow efficiency LR offers is hard to beat...

  27. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,034
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by tashley View Post
    Why do you choose 360 as 'native'?
    Because I print with an Epson 9900. My usual print is minimum 36 inches in the long direction and more than likely 40 inches. I am very fortunate to have done well in life and have a large home designed for gallery space..... so I print for my own enjoyment. 40 inches is a large print on a wall and yet you'd be surprised at how many people want to get six inches away to 'peep'.

    I should add that I won't allow the printer driver to do any upsampling....... I do all upsampling in PS and send the file to my 9900 at 360ppi.

    Victor

  28. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,034
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Pfister View Post
    I've been happy with it so far. What do you use? ImagePrint? Mirage? I've tried a number of things and came to the conclusion that the combination of print quality and workflow efficiency LR offers is hard to beat...
    I use my own methods....... I've been doing this for more than 40 years so please understand that I've really been around the block. When I was a kid I was learning color printing on a Kodak drum..... now that really dates me. Image print is a rip off..... for upsampling I have found through the years that nothing beats Fractals - now owned by OnOne. Experience is the teacher...... you can't just click away. Little finesse touches make a difference in the print. No matter what...... more pixels means better prints.

    Victor

  29. #29
    Senior Member Ron Pfister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    661
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Thanks, Victor. So am I understanding correctly that you're still using the Epson driver and not a 3rd-party RIP?

  30. #30
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Geez Im feeling small, I only have a Epson 7900. LOL
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  31. #31
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Pfister View Post
    Well, there are 'native' printer resolutions. Epson drivers, e.g. up-res images to 360ppi if you're using standard settings, or to 720ppi if you're using 'finest detail'. Best to up-res yourself, and don't let the driver do it - the results are superior.

    Edit - here some rules that work well for me:
    - if your image is <360ppi, up-res to 360ppi and use standard settings (but not 'high speed')
    - if you image is between 360 and 720ppi, up-res to 720ppi and use 'finest detail' (again not 'high speed')

    LR makes this up-ressing very easy (just check the box in the print module)
    I have read so many studies that say the exact opposite: always allow the printer to do the up-resing. Truly this is Juju land!

  32. #32
    Senior Member Ron Pfister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    661
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    All I have ever read says the opposite (at least as far as Epson printer drivers are concerned). Their up-sampling is clearly sub-par. Compare it with the up-sampling in LR. Definitely an improvement...

  33. #33
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    I never had a large format Epson - I hate the ink switching. On HP and Canon 36" printers from all my cameras up to IQ180 I have always let the printer upres - i wish I could find the definitive article I read on it by some master printer dude but it backed up what I learned from a bunch of other places including LuLa videos and Schewe books. But like I say, it's Juju land and the only rule is that whatever works for the individual is right, as long as they have a good eye! However, I never print at home larger than 36" long side and when I send out for larger, never more than 50".

    I did try genuine fractals for a year and I really thought the results were nasty. We all see differently.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  34. #34
    Senior Member Ron Pfister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    661
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Do you print directly from LR, Tim?

  35. #35
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Pfister View Post
    Do you print directly from LR, Tim?
    Hi Ron. And Victor. I'm not equips to get involved in this argument. But I dd d a pretty comprehensive comparison between LR and Aperture for printing, and much prefer the results from Aperture (which also seems to do a nice job with the A7r files. )

    Just this guy you know

  36. #36
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by tashley View Post
    Jono, jump. C1 shows that the files don't have to look 'reticulated' (not suggesting that you use it, just so's you know that it's down to decoding not hard-coding) and the 35 and 55 are both very good (if you can get a good copy).

    The water's lovely, come on in!
    Hi Tim
    Aperture does a good job as far as I can see, so that's one obstacle down. Next problem is which camera. (And where to get the 55 from!)

    Just this guy you know

  37. #37
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Pfister View Post
    Do you print directly from LR, Tim?
    For ages I didn't but for about a year now, I do. I use one printer (these days an iPF6300 Canon) and mostly just two papers (Canson Platine and Hanny German Etching) and I just got into the groove with them after endless decking about. Exactly what I do depends on the way the subject of the image itself relates to the resolution of the file and the intended output size and paper but I did send some stuff out to a very expensive, classy print shop (they print for the Tate, for example, and many serious London galleries) and then compared the results to my own home brew and there was little difference and no clear winner.
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  38. #38
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hi Tim
    Aperture does a good job as far as I can see, so that's one obstacle down. Next problem is which camera. (And where to get the 55 from!)
    I haven't tried Aperture with A7R files but I am in deep correspondence with a chap who has tried every permutation of sharpening and NR in LR, Ap and C1 and the best results he has had so far seem to be from C1, which is a bummer because, err, it's C1… LR clearly isn't doing a good job.

  39. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Massachusetts and Vermont
    Posts
    948
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by tashley View Post
    I haven't tried Aperture with A7R files but I am in deep correspondence with a chap who has tried every permutation of sharpening and NR in LR, Ap and C1 and the best results he has had so far seem to be from C1, which is a bummer because, err, it's C1 LR clearly isn't doing a good job.
    It's a scary thought, Tim, but I wonder if anyone has had a look at how Sony's own software handles the A7R files.

  40. #40
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by hcubell View Post
    It's a scary thought, Tim, but I wonder if anyone has had a look at how Sony's own software handles the A7R files.
    Image Data Converter (Sony's understanding of what the acronym IDC stands for, I have other ideas ) crashes all the time on my main machine. On my Retina laptop it works, but the screen res is too high for fine work. However I have managed, painfully, to ascertain that there is no apparent logic to the sharpening sliders and that Zero does not mean Zero - so I gave it a mess. Sorry, miss.

  41. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Massachusetts and Vermont
    Posts
    948
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by tashley View Post
    ....but I did send some stuff out to a very expensive, classy print shop (they print for the Tate, for example, and many serious London galleries) and then compared the results to my own home brew and there was little difference and no clear winner.
    In its own way, that assessment is the most extraordinary part of the revolution brought about by digital imaging. That you, a guy with a printer sitting at home who knows what he is doing, can produce 30"x40" color prints that are the equal of the very best print shops in the UK. This would have been inconceivable 10-12 years ago.
    hcubell
    www.howardcubell.com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  42. #42
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by tashley View Post
    I haven't tried Aperture with A7R files but I am in deep correspondence with a chap who has tried every permutation of sharpening and NR in LR, Ap and C1 and the best results he has had so far seem to be from C1, which is a bummer because, err, it's C1… LR clearly isn't doing a good job.
    Well. NR and sharpening in Aperture aren't that great anyway, but I like the "hands off" conversions, I never use noise reduction, and I usually only use sharpening when printing - and I like the prints from Aperture.

    I've spent a great deal of time using LR because Apple don't see fit to support new cameras (over a year for the MM). But I dislike LR, and I've made a pact with myself to stick to Aperture, certainly I'm not going to change for the A7!

    Just this guy you know

  43. #43
    Senior Member Ron Pfister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    661
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Or A7R?

  44. #44
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Pfister View Post
    Or A7R?
    Exactly Ron. Not for either of 'em!

    But which one should I get?

    Just this guy you know

  45. #45
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by hcubell View Post
    In its own way, that assessment is the most extraordinary part of the revolution brought about by digital imaging. That you, a guy with a printer sitting at home who knows what he is doing, can produce 30"x40" color prints that are the equal of the very best print shops in the UK. This would have been inconceivable 10-12 years ago.
    I bet I had to throw away a few more than they did while I worked out how to do it
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  46. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,034
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Pfister View Post
    Thanks, Victor. So am I understanding correctly that you're still using the Epson driver and not a 3rd-party RIP?
    Yes..... no third party rips. Only the Epson driver. I have dabbled with Qimage which also uses the Epson Driver with some good results but really prefer to use my own upsampling methods as I can 'see' with certain accuracy how the print will turn out ahead of time on my monitor. All of this comes with practice.

    Victor
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  47. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,034
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hi Ron. And Victor. I'm not equips to get involved in this argument. But I dd d a pretty comprehensive comparison between LR and Aperture for printing, and much prefer the results from Aperture (which also seems to do a nice job with the A7r files. )
    I have never used Aperture but should try it. However I would never use it to print...... processing up to the print point is another matter. I just get upset over the Apple Fans and the Windows hatters who just don't get it that software is software and its really all about how the end user makes it all work.

    Victor

  48. #48
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    123
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Quote Originally Posted by tashley View Post
    Why do you choose 360 as 'native'?
    Here's a column from Ctein that should clarify some misconceptions (also read the linked article in the column).

    The Online Photographer: More On Print(er) Sharpness

    Graham
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  49. #49
    Senior Member Ron Pfister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    661
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Nice set of articles, Graham - many thanks! However, they don't touch upon different up-sampling methods. It's a fact that the Epson LF printers operate either at 360 or 720ppi (depending on settings used) and that the drivers up- or down-sample accordingly if they don't receive files at these resolutions.

    It is clear that more pixels (in your source file) will deliver better results - until you hit a certain limit, as discussed in the articles you linked to. But our cameras are what they are, and the the discussion here centered around how to get the best prints out of the files we've got. When printing at 36", all of my cameras produce files that are well below 360ppi (assuming I'm not stitching), and I think it will be a good while until we have cameras in our hands that will deliver 450-500ppi @ 36-44"...

  50. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Eads, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,034
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Print Size Comparison - A7/A7r (andNikon DF)

    Most important is to realize that for Epson printers every inch is going to have 360 pixels. Once beyond the native size of the file those pixels have to be generated from something. I prefer to generate them in PS and send the file to the printer at 360ppi. YMMV

    Victor
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •