Alain Deflesselles
Nina…
A7 II 24-70 mm f4@f4 1/200s Led.
Less PS as possible, camera works…
Low Resolution for the Web.
1) Submit your picture with a message and picture here: facebook.com/sonyalpharumors or on the SonyAlphaForum image section.
2) Like and comment the pictures from other readers here: facebook.com/sonyalpharumors/photos_stream?tab=photos and on SonyAlphaForum.
3) A selection of most liked pictures by the community and by me SAR admin will be posted weekly on SAR.
Note: When sending a pic feel free to also add a link to your site to promote yourself!
Pavel ‘Pasharome’ Vavilin
“Noname (right)”
ILCE6000
OM Zuiko Auto-W 28/2.8
Patrice Michellon
Shot with Sony A7R and FE 24-70mm f/4. You can see a larger version at 500px http://bit.ly/1xPZ2t7
James Backer
A7R FE 16-35 at 20mm f6.3
Robert Collins
Sony A7ii + zeiss 135 1.8
Fute77 on SonyAlphaForum.
30 Responses
James Backer : I like the graphic picture nature has composed, and the apparent simplicity the photograph has captured.
And the lines on the sand left by the waves really drag you in the image.
Wow. For all the complaining the Sony fan boys do about needing better equipment from Sony like 50MP sensors, their photos are very average. All I read here in this forum is the death of Nikon and Canon. If these are the best Sony pics of the week then I would say Canon and Nikon are safe, haha. All the talk here about flange distance, stacked sensors, etc is laughable. sony fans should talk less about tech and more about composition and light.
We all await your world-class photos with baited breath.
I love the image of “baited breath.” Do you use worms or lures?
Oh, sorry, Nikon humor = fail. I’m off to bed now or mom will take my Teddy away.
I await your next comment with “baited” breath.
TRY LISTERINE creeper…….
Popular with the ladies too. Nice job NikonTroll!
Creeper……
your statement is true but its very easy to make and addresses anybody who buys a camera in the present or in the future – no matter what brand.
Gear FBs of every brand are always dissatisfied about what they have and are complaining that they’d be better if the equipment would be better. Anything new on that?
You are right, most images are (objectively rated) just average, but – did you consider, that most of the guys posting their images are “just” amateurs (or advanced amateurs)?
Are you examining every image you watch for the photographic rules to be kept?
Are you only taking images when being able to capture it perfectly?
I don’t have my studio kit always with me, and during my vacation I am not using my system flash and/or a reflector for every image.
If photography feeds you, than of course you have to adapt the quality to your customers expectations – and the more pro you are, the more perfectionism is required.
But that does not concern everybody ownign a camera independently of its class.
Coming to the point – imperfectionism does have its peculiar charm, don’t you agree?
And we are all still waiting for a proper troll, but we just have guys like you.
If Sony would stop limiting their customers to compressed raw files and develop a full set of high-quality lenses for the system, the A7 Series would be a very good option, despite the poor design. That said, I think 50 megapixels in a full frame sensor is pointless, as there are very few, if any, lenses that can resolve that much resolution and diffraction will likely set in well before the optimal aperture for sharp center to corner images. A 24 megapixel sensor without an AA filter would be suffice – the A7 ii would be better without an AA filter.
A Mamiya 6/7-like medium format camera with a set of high-quality primes would be interesting. Perhaps 50 megapixels isn’t necessary for that as well, I am not sure.
If they could develop a 1:1 sensor, there would be no need for the ridiculously high megapixel count. They are in part compensating for the weaknesses of the Bayer sensors, and in part trying to wow people into buying the camera(s).
What’s the problem with the raw’s? I’ve yet to find any problems and I’ve yet to read any credible evidence that there are any real world issues.
Can you provide any credible evidence?
Honest question as I’ve not seen any real world issues with the “compressed” raws.
ok ok, just in some rare cases differences between a true 14bit uncompressed raw image and a compressed sony’s 11+7bit it’s evident, anyway the pro canikon standard is 14 bits uncompressed. full stop. Digital medium format backs have still more and differences are very very evident.
So, still nothing to show? Or, will you link to that lonely RAW file that all this nonsense is based around?
Pics please.
If you don’t care, there is no problem. Personally, if I spend my hard earned money on a camera, I don’t want any unnecessary limitations, especially in image quality. The A7r should have the same image quality as the D810, but it doesn’t, because Sony has chosen to limit the image quality ~ even though they design the sensor.
If you don’t notice it, and you are fine with this limitation, that is great ~ don’t worry about it. I wont spend $1600 or $2000 on a camera with such a limitation. Since they are claiming the A9 is going to be pro-level, it better not be limited to compressed RAW files ~ if so, it is not a pro-level camera.
I’m going to assume you are a pro. And as a pro, you want to invest your money on the best tool available to offer the best result possible for your clients. Which is just fair and noble of you.
However… what kind of clients do you have that can pin-point a “compressed” RAW file developed from an A7r from an “uncompressed” RAW file from a D810?
Some things just get a bit out of hand here.
Where is that limitation? Where are these horribly compressed files and what is that output that suffers so much? I’ve seen one single file presenting a problem. Is that it? Trying to turn the argument around by saying that those who disagree can’t see it is completely ridiculous.
It is amazing how sensitive people are about camera gear. I am just speaking for myself. I won’t be buying any camera that is limited to compressed raw files because I want the best quality from the cameras I buy with my hard earned money.
I like Sony’s innovation with camera bodies, but in my opinion the A7 Series is still not optimal. When they have a sufficient set of high-quality native lenses, a camera without an AA filter that doesn’t suffer from shutter vibration like the A7r does, and uncompressed RAW files (I would prefer a better design too), then I may consider buying one.
At the moment, the A7 Series is just coming out of its beta stage (for instance, they just fixed the ridiculous wobbly mount issue). They are interesting, but not mature yet. That is just my opinion, and you don’t have to agree.
You continue to be patronizing and to twist the argument. Nobody is sensitive about a camera. It is simply bewildering how people can invent an issue. But now that you decided to add the “wobbly” mount “problem”, it is clear that you are just a troll.
Discussing pre-cooked RAWs is so 2000’s…
That makes no sense…
Of course it does.
Since Sony A700 (IIRC), people started discussing “pre-cooked RAWs”. Be it ‘compressed’ RAWs or RAWs with certain Noise Reduction already applied to them. And that discussion went onto another cameras as well, like Pentax and Nikon.
Thing is: the most likely thing is that no RAW file today is “pure” RAW, fresh from the sensor. And I guess most people got OK with that.
I want it so raw that it comes with a warning…just like at the bottom of a restaurant menu.
I won’t buy the A7II for the very reason that it still has the stupid filter. 50MP isn’t pointless however, and many newer lenses are being designed to handle such resolution. If you can afford the camera, you should be able to afford those lenses. Consider it two class systems within full frame.
I agree – I won’t go back to a camera with an AA filter, as I don’t want the unnecessary blurring (sharpening doesn’t bring back details).
There aren’t many lenses, or any native lenses, that can resolve 50 megapixels centre to corner. And, like I said, diffraction will likely set in to early.
In my opinion, the camera industry needs to focus on developing 1:1 sensors. The 15 megapixel Fovean sensor in the DP Merrills (not the Quattro) is better at lower ISO settings than the 36mp Bayer sensors in the D800/D810/A7r, because Bayer sensors are subject to interpolation. At the moment, Bayer sensors are only better at higher ISO settings, which could change with sufficient R&D.
I like the James Backer one.