Site Sponsors
Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 9 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 350 of 526

Thread: A7s!

  1. #301
    Senior Member Rawfa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Rio de Janeiro
    Posts
    2,393
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    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. Itīs 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).







    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    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
    Last edited by Rawfa; 7th July 2014 at 13:03.
    www.rafael-lopes.com
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #302
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Northumbria
    Posts
    78
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    Quote Originally Posted by ashwinrao1 View Post
    Good to see, but way noisier than I was expecting, given the hyperbole.
    Maybe the angle, or the lighting, great for ISO 12800, but ... all the hype!

    I still want an A7S for the reasonable megapixels, call me contrary.

  3. #303
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    556
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    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.

  4. #304
    Senior Member kuujinbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pacific Northwest U.S.
    Posts
    290
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    6

    Re: A7s!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ulfric Douglas View Post
    I still want an A7S for the reasonable megapixels, call me contrary.
    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.
    "We're human, after all, and everybody's got something a little off somewhere." - Murakami Haruki, The fall of the Roman empire

  5. #305
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: A7s!

    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
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  6. #306
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    556
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    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
    Ohh... 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

  7. #307
    Senior Member Rawfa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Rio de Janeiro
    Posts
    2,393
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

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

  8. #308
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,173
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    i plan to get this to replace my long gone Monochrom

  9. #309
    Senior Member ecsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tax State
    Posts
    549
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    What was the answer to this question some years ago when 12mp was all there was?
    Joe
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  10. #310
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    556
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    Nobody knew what came after

  11. #311
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    494
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    17

    Re: A7s!

    Quote Originally Posted by mmbma View Post
    i plan to get this to replace my long gone Monochrom
    Interesting. I'm curious what Ashwin, who now has both MM and A7S, will have to say about how they compare.
    Ed

  12. #312
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    ashwinrao1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA - USA
    Posts
    3,276
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    Quote Originally Posted by erudolph View Post
    Interesting. I'm curious what Ashwin, who now has both MM and A7S, will have to say about how they compare.
    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)
    Ashwin Rao
    Seattle, WA
    My Photography
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  13. #313
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    67
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rawfa View Post
    Here is a question directed to all the pro wedding photographers out there. Is 12mp enough for printing large wedding photos?
    A wedding photographer on FM posted a few A7s images:
    Sony A7(r) Images Thread - FM Forums

  14. #314
    Senior Member Rawfa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Rio de Janeiro
    Posts
    2,393
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    Quote Originally Posted by horshack View Post
    A wedding photographer on FM posted a few A7s images:
    Sony A7(r) Images Thread - FM Forums
    By looking at his photos I really cannot tell how large would one be able to print them.

  15. #315
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: A7s!

    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.
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  16. #316
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    A7s, Canon 400mm f/2.8

    2 seconds, ISO 16000

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



    Kind regards,

    Gerald

  17. #317
    Senior Member kuujinbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pacific Northwest U.S.
    Posts
    290
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    6

    Re: A7s!

    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.
    "We're human, after all, and everybody's got something a little off somewhere." - Murakami Haruki, The fall of the Roman empire
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  18. #318
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    ashwinrao1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA - USA
    Posts
    3,276
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    Digging this camera more and more, with M lenses:



    Ashwin Rao
    Seattle, WA
    My Photography
    Likes 8 Member(s) liked this post

  19. #319
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: A7s!

    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.
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com

  20. #320
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    235
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    31

    Re: A7s!

    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.

  21. #321
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: A7s!

    Huh? It's about 3 seconds to apply a '10' of noise reduction to all images and as I said I do it anyway on high iso, and/or another 3 seconds to downrez to 12 megapixels. Per batch not per image. How many clicks does it take to make 12 megapixels work as 36 megapixels worth of resolution?
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com

  22. #322
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    235
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    31

    Re: A7s!

    I hear you, Ben. Truly I do, but there's always one or two clicks or slides to incorporate here and there. If it's not downrezzing it's flat field plug ins or cornerfix or this that or the other. It's not too long before it all just becomes a bit of a bollix! Too much for me, man.

  23. #323
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: A7s!

    I think you're not being fair in your comparison. When you are already in ACR you click on the bottom and choose your output resolution prior to output. That is all there is to it. It's just the same couple of clicks for anything from 1 to thousands of files. Added to that it's only necessary for, IMO, two iso's (6400 and 12800) while you don't bother with the rest and get 36 megapixels worth of resolution.

    Cornerfix is lens and aperture specific. So is flat field. I don't think you can compare them to simply filtering a folder by iso and outputting at a certain resolution.

    What I'm saying is that the sacrifice to go from 36 or 24 megapixels to 12 for the noise gain alone is not worth it when with a couple of clicks you can achieve close to the same results for less money and far greater versatility the rest of the time.
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  24. #324
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    235
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    31

    Re: A7s!

    Less money, you say? I feel I might be in need of a rethink!

  25. #325
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: A7s!

    Here is a quick screenshot video (sorry about the awful quality) showing how fast it is to do. Far as I know the A7r is cheaper than the A7s?
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  26. #326
    Senior Member Rawfa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Rio de Janeiro
    Posts
    2,393
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    Some delicious RAW files for download Sony A7S: primeras muestras | Quesabesde
    They ARE ridiculously clean even at very high iso.
    I did some noise removal on the ios 51200 shot of the old lady and I'm amazed at how well it looks. The iso 8000 of the girl inside the church is soo clean.
    Darn it! I was about to settle for an A7 body! Why?! WHY?!!!
    Last edited by Rawfa; 9th July 2014 at 04:42.
    www.rafael-lopes.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  27. #327
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    235
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    31

    Re: A7s!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ben Rubinstein View Post
    Far as I know the A7r is cheaper than the A7s?
    Thanks for the screenshot, Ben. Yes the A7r is cheaper, hence my comment about a rethink!

  28. #328
    Senior Member Rawfa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Rio de Janeiro
    Posts
    2,393
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    SORRY, guys! BIG mistake here. These shots are iso 2500! So what I meant is that the A7S's iso 12800 look like the A7's iso 2500 shots. This is actually huge! I've downsized a couple of iso 6400 A7 shots that I have and they don't come close to the A7s's at iso 8000.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rawfa View Post
    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. Itīs 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).






  29. #329
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    144
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    Hi Ashwin,
    Great news on the use of M lenses. Which ones are you using? The pictures look quite wide angle.
    Thanks,

    Paul

  30. #330
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: A7s!

    Here is the A7r downrezzed to 12 megapixels, iso 2000. Albeit good light. Can't see any noise at all. Ziltch.

    Here is of me, iso 12800 shot in candle light (power cut during a forest fire) downrezzed to 12 megapixels.

    I think I can say in that last one that downrezzing a 12800 file can at least match (I'd say beat) what your A7 seems to be doing at iso 2500.
    Last edited by Ben Rubinstein; 9th July 2014 at 05:39.
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com

  31. #331
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    13
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    High ISO test with LEICA SUMMILUX-M 35mm f1.4 ASPH


    High Resolution here:
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/studiokanu/14426976189/
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  32. #332
    Senior Member kuujinbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pacific Northwest U.S.
    Posts
    290
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    6

    Re: A7s!

    Here's another example, this one taken in very low light - inside a car at 9:45 pm. The side lighting is from a single flood light at a drive-in theater located ~20 meters away (very rough estimate). This time only adjusted WB (zero sharpening / NR / exposure):

    ISO 12,800


    This is what I meant (earlier post) about letting the camera do the work in A mode and selecting ISO. The actual lighting inside the car was somewhere between 1-2 stops less. And if it matters, this is with a 60 year old lens shot wide open at ~50cm - 50/1.4 Nikkor LTM. The other samples (again, earlier post) were from a 30 year old lens - 28 Elmarit III.

    The thing I'm happy with is that there's little to no loss of fine detail at these ISO levels.
    Last edited by kuujinbo; 9th July 2014 at 12:01.
    "We're human, after all, and everybody's got something a little off somewhere." - Murakami Haruki, The fall of the Roman empire

  33. #333
    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: A7s!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rawfa View Post
    Here is a question directed to all the pro wedding photographers out there. Is 12mp enough for printing large wedding photos?
    Well, I haven't used the A7s, but I think one wants to take care here.

    First of all, 12mp is fine for a wedding book - even a big one. period.

    but you need to be careful. I did two weddings close together (5 years ago? whatever). The first was with the D700 - still considered one of the best low light cameras. The second was with the Sony A900 - still considered one of the worst. In each case the target was a book. In practical use, although when viewing at 100% on screen the D700 was much better, the book for the A900 looked much better because of the extra resolution and the 'effective' downsizing from 24mp.

    What I'm trying to say is that you do lose with less resolution - and there are much better 24mp cameras now. If someone said to me - shoot a wedding with a A7 or an A7s, I know what I'd do, I'd use the A7 - I haven't checked, but I suspect that the loss in high ISO is more than made up for by the increase in dynamic range and resolution. . . . . . .

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

  34. #334
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: A7s!

    Guess i will way in here as sexy as the A7s looks to be in the very high ISO range for some of us we may never have the NEED to go over ISO 3200 which with some good raw processing you can get nice results from any of the Sony cams. This camera is a very specific type of beast and sure the very low light stuff if you shoot a lot of it than very appealing but as a still shooter you take a big hit on resolution. For me it may work for 2 gigs a year, maybe nothing else but if your a night shooter it certainly will have advantages. IMHO the end of the day without getting to involved in the tech side of the house i look at this cam as a two stop benefit over the current A7 series. That to me is a fair estimate and we are also talking about noise mostly here and we all have very different views on what is and what is NOT acceptable. Personally I would rather have 24mpx for everyday usage but for the 2 gigs I do a year ( runway stuff than sell on Line) this is almost perfect at 12mpx but it does not have the focus tracking I need like the A77II and heck even the A6000. To me this is a third cam in the bag kind of camera but for others that maybe different. I think far too much goes into this big high ISO debate that in reality only a few REALLY need.

    Okay the sarcastic side of me is did anyone every hear of lighting. LOL It just had to be said.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  35. #335
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: A7s!

    let me add one more thing if I was a wedding shooter I am not sure i would put my reputation on the line with 12mpx. I have been here before with the M8 and clients going far far past what was printable and that is downright embarrassing and can be deadly to a Pro.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  36. #336
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: A7s!

    Don't know Guy, I didn't go over 12 megapixels till after I'd retired from wedding photography. Most wedding shooters I know today are still using the D700 or D3. We/they put their reputation on the line hundreds of times over the past few years with 'just' 12 megapixels.
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  37. #337
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: A7s!

    I know I'm just a pig I think. lol

    I am just nervous about it since i been beat up on this before. Really big client too, fortunately they still use me today but I was throughly embarrassed and sold my M8 immediately
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  38. #338
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: A7s!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rawfa View Post
    I would really love seeing a direct comparison between A7S photos vs downsized A7 photos. Itīs 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).
    Rawfa, if it was me (please forgive me if I overlooked some detail important to you that you might have posted) I would:

    1. Sell A7 and buy A7S.
    2. Spend money I got from A7 sale on lighting.

    Here is why:

    a) I feel 12 MP vs. 24 MP will not make a difference in how clients like printed book if one is thinking solely in terms of dots per printed inch but overall better performance of A7S across ISO range might in the end result in perception of better image quality.

    b) Even if A7S shots end up not looking any better than A7 ones when downsized I think I heard A7S focuses much much better in low light.

    c) No matter how good some sensor is at high ISO shots taken by it will never look as good as ones taken with lower ISO and extra light.

    Or you can just keep the A7 for now, get that lighting that you would need anyway, and see is A7 cutting it now that you can use lower ISOs thanks to more light. You can always sell A7 and get A7S later.

  39. #339
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    363
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    3

    Re: A7s!

    For event photographers 12Mp is very good, the subjects are not likely to feature in huge prints often. Most who know their way around Sony files can pick them up at high ISO and the regularly quoted figure for the a7r is a ceiling of 6400, and it's really good below 4000. The a7r looks very decent at 6400 being the point, and not much mainstream photography is not covered with an f2 lens.

    If you want (or need) versatility the still medium size pixels of the a7r accommodate you better - much better in fact, for crops and tonal gradation. There is a good strong case for the a7s but I feel it will sell on greater 'tactile utility' - silent shutter, better EVF display, faster writing, more assured focusing. And of course dual stills/video use.

    Had it been 16Mp, more buyers would go for it, no need to pause.
    And looking at Ashwin's images a little up, the truism that low Mp cameras need better lenses looks to hold true, making the a7s a little more expensive than it appears for top results.

  40. #340
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    16
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    I dunno...the more I consider it the more I think it's better just to get the A7 and save $1000.00. You have to ask yourself how often you're going to shoot at these super high ISOs.

  41. #341
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    235
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    31

    Re: A7s!

    The biggest differentiator for me will be how the A7s performs with my wide angle M lenses. I was never interested in the 36mp sensor of the A7r and I was not happy enough with the performance of the 15mm Voigtlander or the 25mm ZM biogon on the A7. If, ( and it's a BIG if at this point), the A7s is sufficiently improved over the two previous models, then it becomes a real possibility for me. I'd prefer 16mp over 12, but I'll settle for it in return for a full frame body for my favourite lenses with state of the art EVF and silent shutter. The low light capabilities would be more of a bonus for me than a reason to choose the A7s over the A7.

  42. #342
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: A7s!

    I've heard that it cures the colour cast but what about the smearing?
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com

  43. #343
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    235
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    31

    Re: A7s!

    It's very early days so there's not much info available , but Steve Huff's review of the A7s contains several images from the VM15 which, while not sharp right into the corners, would appear acceptable to my eye. Of course this is far too little evidence to draw firm conclusions on just yet so I'm still at the hopelessly over-excited prior to bitter disappointment phase of the process!

  44. #344
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: A7s!

    The general theme is looks like a lot of us are not convinced yet. That makes sense since its a new release and maybe smart to not jump on it out of the gate. To me this cam just might be the video king and stills as a afterthought. But will see.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  45. #345
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    ashwinrao1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA - USA
    Posts
    3,276
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    While the debate rages, I am thoroughly enjoying the A7s...It does play better with M lenses, in terms of vigntetting and color casts, which don't appear to be bad, or at least are easily corrected. The jury is still out on smearing at the edges with wides. I have seen it and posted earlier regarding the 28 summicron, which still smears. While this may not be a huge issue for street, or when stopping down, it could be an issue with critical work at the edges, landscapes, etc....and for those purposes, I wouldn't use the lens. I did see a drop off in detail at the edges with the 21 Super Elmar as well, but it wasn't as objectionable as I recall with the A7 or A7r (not accounting for file size, resolution, etc).... FOr me, the biggest deal is that the camera seems to produce files that require less correction after the fact than the A7 or A7r, when specifically using M mount rangefinder lenses. As a M lens user, with a substantial investment in glass, coupled with Sony's limited lens lineup, this is the biggest deal for me. I often shoot wide open to f/5.6, and require center sharpness to my images, and what I am seeing from the camera is enough to make me pause and consider whether I need my M240 (I am keeping my M monochrom)....

    Given that, a few more images from my photo shoot of 2 evenings ago, with the WATE (works well on all bodies, not just A7s):





    Ashwin Rao
    Seattle, WA
    My Photography
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  46. #346
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,187
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    Quote Originally Posted by ashwinrao1 View Post
    While the debate rages, I am thoroughly enjoying the A7s...It does play better with M lenses, in terms of vigntetting and color casts, which don't appear to be bad, or at least are easily corrected. The jury is still out on smearing at the edges with wides. I have seen it and posted earlier regarding the 28 summicron, which still smears. While this may not be a huge issue for street, or when stopping down, it could be an issue with critical work at the edges, landscapes, etc....and for those purposes, I wouldn't use the lens. I did see a drop off in detail at the edges with the 21 Super Elmar as well, but it wasn't as objectionable as I recall with the A7 or A7r (not accounting for file size, resolution, etc).... FOr me, the biggest deal is that the camera seems to produce files that require less correction after the fact than the A7 or A7r, when specifically using M mount rangefinder lenses. As a M lens user, with a substantial investment in glass, coupled with Sony's limited lens lineup, this is the biggest deal for me. I often shoot wide open to f/5.6, and require center sharpness to my images, and what I am seeing from the camera is enough to make me pause and consider whether I need my M240 (I am keeping my M monochrom)....

    Given that, a few more images from my photo shoot of 2 evenings ago, with the WATE (works well on all bodies, not just A7s):





    Nice images Ashwin.

    While I am mostly interested in more FE lenses, I am actually pretty convinced that the A7s is different enough that there COULD be room in my bag for a third body. All things said I'm waiting until after Photokina before anymore body purchases happen as I'm still crossing my fingers for a Sony MF camera or A7 Monochrom.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  47. #347
    Senior Member Show Performance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: A7s!

    Thanks for the early work Ashwin.

    I could care less about the ultra high ISO but I am very interested in the 7s for its low light AF capabilities. I couldn't remember if you have any native lenses.

    I did a concert shoot last night with the 7 and the 55/1.8. Still amazing results but painfully slow focus. If the 7s gives me a steady (non-hunting) focus in low light, I may be in.

    Best,
    Chad

  48. #348
    Senior Member Show Performance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: A7s!

    Quote Originally Posted by kuujinbo View Post
    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....
    Agreed. I think all these flat low light photos are disappointing some people that had unrealistic expectations. Just because you can gain up the sensor, doesn't mean you are going to magically get an aesthetically pleasing scene.

  49. #349
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    494
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    17

    Re: A7s!

    Quote Originally Posted by ashwinrao1 View Post
    ...what I am seeing from the camera is enough to make me pause and consider whether I need my M240 ...
    Quote Originally Posted by Show Performance View Post
    ... could care less about the ultra high ISO but I am very interested in the 7s for its low light AF capabilities....
    Quote Originally Posted by Show Performance View Post
    ... I think all these flat low light photos are disappointing some people that had unrealistic expectations. Just because you can gain up the sensor, doesn't mean you are going to magically get an aesthetically pleasing scene.
    More and more interesting. I confess, I'm one of the ones with high expectations but have been unmoved by the high-ISO low light shots I've seen so far.

    I'd hoped this camera would be a game changer for me. Ashwin, I'm wondering if you can consider giving up your M for an A7S in part because you haven't had the M that long, have not bonded with it?
    Ed

  50. #350
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    ashwinrao1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA - USA
    Posts
    3,276
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A7s!

    The 28 cron does well for real world shooting...no color shifts, and in this type of work, I don't detect the smearing, as it just adds to the OOF lol...





    And complements the 50 APO well



    Ashwin Rao
    Seattle, WA
    My Photography
    Likes 5 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
  •