Sony a7s – worlds best HIGH ISO? (Matt Granger)
Shooting with Sony A7s, the most underhyped camera of 2014 (Mike Kobal).
Sony A7S Test – Gonzalo Ezcurra Custom Picture Profile (Vimeo).
The Mitakon Speedmaster “Dark Knight” Pro 50mm f/0.95 and Samyang 50mm f/1.4 on the Sony A7s (Mirrorlessons)
Trying the new Leica Summarit-M-lenses on the Sony A7s (Mirrorlessons).
1 day trip to Alaska with the A7s at https://vimeo.com/107334872.
Sony A7s store links:
Sony A7s in USA/CA at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Sony USA, Sony Canada.
Sony A7s in Eu at Sony DE, UK, ES, FR, IT, NL, BE, AT, CH, SE, NO, FI, PL. And Wex UK.
A7s Gariz leather case in [shoplink 27569 ebay]Black (Click here)[/shoplink], [shoplink 27570 ebay]Brown (Click here)[/shoplink], [shoplink 27571 ebay]Red (Click here)[/shoplink] and [shoplink 27572 ebay]Orange (Click here)[/shoplink].
0 Responses
The Alaska trip is very nice. Not perfect though but it shows that we sometimes lose ourselves in stupid technical discussions instead of enjoying the usage of our gear.
Are the Sony cameras high ISO performance in part due to their use of lossy raw? You can do this to an image from any camera in PP, so is it just a cheat?
So you mean RAW compression actually improves the picture quality? Explain that to the people who have a problem with compressed RAW files 😉
Raw is raw, nothing is lost. Only the embedded preview picture is compressed, thats why fioe sizes vary a bit.
Also noise reduction also would mean losing plenty if detail. Which tests show is not the case.
This is incorrect. Sony compresses its RAW files in a lossy manner. In some specialized situations, this results in visible loss of information. There is plenty of information on this available on the internet. It is a real issue for some and it was a bad choice by Sony in comparison to other brands which offer a truly lossless RAW compression. Here is one article describing the issue:
http://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/sony-craw-arw2-posterization-detection
This “lossy Raw” topic is extremely overrated.
Admittedly it is an issue, but that affects only a very small percentage of (real) pro photographers.
Your assumption, that lossy raws improve noise performance is absolutely crap.
Not an assumption, a question. Reducing resolution of an image improves noise performance so I wondered if it were the same for compression. The compression algorithm will have to be averaging the data in some way to be able to do the compression.
Speed of image recorded to the media maybe. You really have to shoot these cameras, judge the files objectively on the screen “for what you shoot” and go from there. There’s so much rubbish talked on these forums about this & that.
The lossy raw simply reduces the size of the files with a corresponding very small loss in image quality. All manufactures perform processing during raw conversion including noise reduction and sharpening, some more than others and it has nothing to due with the process being lossy or not. The reason the A7s has the best high ISO performance is primarily the sensor.
No. Personally I wouldn’t trade to a larger “lossless” file size. When you’re out actually shooting images, larger file-sizes, less compressed video codecs can soon become practical issues. Smaller cameras, smaller file sizes are often preferred by practical photographers, image quality is more than good enough for most clients. And this guy is absolutely correct about the A7S, its a photographers camera, I’ll reach for the A7S over my A7R 9 times out of 10, its such a well rounded still & multimedia camera.
Yep, it definitely has its benefits, and for video its a must. But for stills having the option of lossy or lossless would be ideal. The compression is the one thing that is stopping me buying into Sony and this great camera. Budget is a constraint so I want to be 100% happy in my next direction and I’m no hurry so can afford to wait.
Personally, its a non-issue, there are other issues that are proper concerns IMHO. I came from the 5D3 and both the A7R & A7S give me a far more flexible quality of image. If you want to rail on Sony, their Auto-ISO is the big issue, it needs to offer a minimum shutter setting as does the 5D3, without this its basically useless for my stills shooting style. Again, with the file compression, the files I’m getting are hands down more flexible than from my 5D3’s. But, being objective, for a stills only shooter, the 5D3 is by far the better “black box” i.e., user camera.
Just shoot M instead of A if you don’t want shutter blur.
Manual with a floating ISO is fine if you’re shooting more pedestrian imagery in relatively static light levels, a good example would be landscapes, but for faster paced photojournalism it’s not so good.
This video is also pretty good: a Nikon pro explains why he jumped to Sony (he talks about why the A6000 and A7 series are genre breaking compared to CaNikon).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wM_5nROeaw&feature=share
Sham, Any idea as to what phone/operation system works the most seamlessly?
Ive only had experience with the QX10 (!), and with that, NFC is far better than WiFi. That limits you to devices that have NFC if you want fast remote liveview. that said, it looks like he uses WiFi in the video, so if that update rate is good enough or you (it looks like about 0.5fps), then there are no issues… but perhaps someone who has the A6000/A7 would be better placed to answer if this is for a buying choice!
I noticed Apple now have NFC, but I’m told its all but closed off, typical……. I’m an Apple user, therefore no very little about this stuff. 🙂 Maybe, its time for a Sony phone, it should work “better” with their camera/apps. I do like the idea of a remote monitor, especially for video or when sitting in the middle of nowhere in order to check clips on something larger than the camera back. Good ideas, but I don’t know wether the tech is up to speed yet.
@christophergibbs:disqus There may be another option that is often overlooked or not even known… even the cheapest Android can actually download the files from any Sony Alpha camera if you connect it via a cable. You might want to try that with iOS as there’s a good chance it will work there as well. It only works for JPEGs of course (android Image gallery doesn’t recognise raw and probably never will), but if you want to upload/view something you’d shoot both raw and JPEG, and get the JPEG over. That’s all actually worked forever, I used to upload from my A500 to a 10 inch tablet and use it as an on-location image viewer (pinch to zoom and all that stuff works on the tablet of course). Even for an A77 24MP file, the download time over cable is less than a second, so its actually far far faster than any of the new fangled stuff 🙂
Hi Sham, Thanks for the info, its appreciated! My interest is more for video, for still shooting I’m not really interested in anything other than passing the images straight to card, I rarely if ever chimp (former film shooter). But the video files, that’s a different matter………..I’d love a simple and effective way of using a larger phone as a live monitor AND a monitor for chimping footage after the fact. I figure the easiest way is simply to buy a 5-7″ monitor, but then we need different batteries, cables etc, etc. I just wonder if we’re near that point where (in a pinch) we could easily turn the phone in our pockets into a field monitor for video? I mainly shoot documentary imagery, not really got the time nor inclination for piles of kit or multiple steps to perform simple tasks.
Usually I think videos like this are garbage. But, the guy makes some good points and wraps it in the context of a professional shooter. Price and the whole memory card compatibility- great points. He uses the stuff and he doesn’t seem to just be trying to draw attention to himself. Nice vid.
I hear it’s so sensitive to light it’s practically allergic.
Stills from the same productions of Skin Tones Test (Gonzalo Ezcurra)
https://500px.com/photo/84644797/minicyclops-+-a7s-by-gonzalo-ezcurra