Menu
What's new
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!

A7s iso 12800

J

jfirneno

Member
Rawfa said:
It doesn't really look like the miracle worker Sony sells it out to be, but I guess it's too early to say.

Full size image right here: DCFever.com - ??????o????????????????
Click to expand...
Rafael:
I'll agree that shot is not noise free, but let's look at what it is. It's a jpeg but it does not specify what the NR level is. It's obviously a night shot but also it's 1/100th of a second exposure. I'm no expert on low light exposure levels but for the dark sky areas of the scene, that might make the amount of light available as signal for those areas very low. Possibly the exposure time was too short. Of course I may just be whistling past the graveyard because I'm very excited by this camera. I want it for indoor occasion shooting. I have an order to rent this camera for the third week of July so hopefully right afterwards I'll be able to report back that this is the greatest low light image processing invention since the candle, but I can't say that I'm already completely sold yet.

Regards,
John
 
Rawfa

Rawfa

Active member
jfirneno said:
Rafael:
I'll agree that shot is not noise free, but let's look at what it is. It's a jpeg but it does not specify what the NR level is. It's obviously a night shot but also it's 1/100th of a second exposure. I'm no expert on low light exposure levels but for the dark sky areas of the scene, that might make the amount of light available as signal for those areas very low. Possibly the exposure time was too short. Of course I may just be whistling past the graveyard because I'm very excited by this camera. I want it for indoor occasion shooting. I have an order to rent this camera for the third week of July so hopefully right afterwards I'll be able to report back that this is the greatest low light image processing invention since the candle, but I can't say that I'm already completely sold yet.

Regards,
John
Click to expand...
John, I'm with you. I find the A7s to be a very interesting and promissing camera. Even if iso 12800 it's not as amazing as advertised, I would be extremely happy with clean iso 6400 when the bride and groom hit the dark dance floor. What I don't know is how well a 12mpx sensor will print on a large wedding photo album.
 
J

jfirneno

Member
Rawfa said:
What I don't know is how well a 12mpx sensor will print on a large wedding photo album.
Click to expand...
Maybe one of the Nikon shooters can chime in. The D3S is 12 megapixel and it was the top of the line 4 or 5 years ago for Nikon wedding shooters so I think 12 megapixels is good enough but we'll have to see.

Regards,
John
 
P

philip_pj

New member
From how it is shaping up - and having due faith in Sony - it will be wonderful esp. with RAW files. Pre-release, pre-s/w catchup is often this way. With the a7/a7r we already had those sensors out there and all worked out.

The combination of the shutter silence and two stops better ISO will see this one as the master stealth camera as well, even better than current champion RX1.

The DSLRs also claim a 'silent mode' but...they aren't:

Nikon D4 vs D800 vs D7100 vs F5 vs Canon 1D X vs 5DMKIII: DSLR Silent Mode Shootout | Fro Knows Photo

The a7s I presume does the same with RAW as jpeg:

Shutter test: There is no Full Frame as silent as the A7s! | sonyalpharumors

I had thought you may 'just' get two stops of flexibility with shutter speeds - so ISO 25600-f2-1/60s would equal an a7r at ISO 6400-f2-1/15s with equal IQ...but other important factors sound promising, after reading another well thought out report:

'AF: Noticeably quicker than the A7 and A7R in this dimly lit environment. It had about zero trouble locking on to anything, I find my A7 is super quick in good light but becomes quite poor in low light. In dim light the A7S was noticeably better than the a6000 which would hunt a bit more in certain scenarios.'

'Viewfinder: Noticeably cleaner than A7 in lower light. This comes down to the sensor's cleaner output / live view feed.'

'The A7S just soaks in light and seems to maintain colour and DR so much better than anything I have ever used.'

more:
A7S Hands on experiences and samples: Sony Alpha/NEX E-mount Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
 
Jorgen Udvang

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
That does it for me. The Sony is off my list. Unless that photo has noise added, it's totally unacceptable for a camera in this class and age. My GH3 is maybe 1-2 stops worse without NR, and improves dramatically with moderate noise reduction. According to DxO, the GH4, which is the alternative upgrade for me, has DR just short of the best 35mm cameras. Add to that f/0.95 and f/1.2 lenses in native mount and in-camera 4K recording with the GH4 plus vastly superior ergonomics, and there's simply no competition.

This saves me a bunch of monies too :)
 
Jorgen Udvang

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
And just in case anybody wonders; this is a photo taken with the GH3, ISO 12,800 at night-time with slight NR applied. Lens is the PanaLeica 14-50mm. The people sitting behind the motorbikes, I could hardly see with my eyes.

 
Rawfa

Rawfa

Active member
Jorgen, I do agree that at the A7s's price range this camera has a LOT to prove, but I have to say that even though I don't want to start a peeing contest, I don't have a single customers that would see your 12,800 sample as usable. It's really REALLY WAY worst than the A7s's sample. I could throw all kinds of technical mabo jumbo at my customers to try to justify why the GH3 or the GH4 might be a better camera because of this or that reason, but at the end of the day you're getting paid for the results you present and at the moment I cannot see ANY micro 4/3 camera that can be used under REALLY poor light for professional work.
 
Jorgen Udvang

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Rawfa said:
Jorgen, I do agree that at the A7s's price range this camera has a LOT to prove, but I have to say that even though I don't want to start a peeing contest, I don't have a single customers that would see your 12,800 sample as usable. It's really REALLY WAY worst than the A7s's sample. I could throw all kinds of technical mabo jumbo at my customers to try to justify why the GH3 or the GH4 might be a better camera because of this or that reason, but at the end of the day you're getting paid for the results you present and at the moment I cannot see ANY micro 4/3 camera that can be used under REALLY poor light for professional work.
Click to expand...
None of those cameras are really useable for professional work at ISO 12,800 judged from the samples above, but the message Sony sent out when the A7s was launched indicated strongly that it was. The GH3 photo was btw. taken under a very yellow/orange street light, so the colours are totally off and would have to be adjusted individually to get anywhere near correct colours. Unfortunately, it's the only ISO 12,800 photo I have available taken with that camera.

However, by using one of the f/0.95 lenses for the Panasonic, one would constantly be 1-2 ISO stops lower than with the Sony, so ISO 12,800 with the Sony would mostly be 3,200 or 6,400 with the GH3, which is now a $1,000 camera. The difference in price to the Sony would buy me 2 of the f/0.95 Voigtl̈änder lenses or the PanaLeica 42.5mm f/1.2, all extremely solid performers and all native m4/3 mount lenses.

I've been holding back m4/3 purchases lately to see what I could gain by going the A7 route. From what I've seen so far, it seems to be a pointless exercise in my case unless I need a 36MP camera, and I can as well start selling off my 35mm lenses and go all m4/3, adding a GH4 and more lenses to what I already have.
 
S

Steve P.

New member
Jorgen Udvang said:
None of those cameras are really useable for professional work at ISO 12,800 judged from the samples above, but the message Sony sent out when the A7s was launched indicated strongly that it was. .
Click to expand...
It may still be. There's really not sufficient evidence available yet to make a fully informed decision. Once P.P. software is brought up to speed it's still possible we'll be pleasantly surprised. I wouldn't write it off just yet.
 
S

Steve P.

New member
Noisy, but nice. And it looks slightly better when clicked through to your photobucket page. Nice rabbits, by the way!:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top