Sony Lounge Thread MKIII (All Sony cameras welcome)

eriet30 wrote in post #18575258
Utah and the AZ border are 5 hours away. I have 2 trips planned there this year. I also may have two trips in North New Mexico as well.

If I could quit my job I could shoot so many wonders within just a few hours of Phoenix. Sad I dont get out more.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/U4zo​ze _DSC8926.jpg by Paul, on Flickr

Awesome in spades Eriet.

Hey, you'll have a guiding tour to do first of December too

Peter Lik has a gallery that out here in the wealthier parts of town. At one point his gallery was in the high end mall that I used to take my lunch breaks in and I'd wander in there to kill time.

The stuff that he's passing off as fine art are over processed photos of the most overphotographed landscapes (I. E. Horseshoe bend). Seriously, the stuff shot by the likes of David, Eddie, Travis etc etc here are of a higher caliber creatively and technically. The thing is, Ive talked to the people who work at his gallery and yeah a lot of really wealthy people who know nothing about photography buy his stuff all the time. But to them, it's more a matter of owning a Peter Lik print than the actual photo itself.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18575243
Ugh, I think I'm toast. I just got through praising the CV 40mm, then I go look at the CV 40mm thread on FM and I'm slayed: http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/15125​30/77

As I mentioned in my latest post on that thread I'm coming to the realization that the CV 40mm has the most beautiful appealing rendering of any e-mount lens I've seen. I don't want to sell my Loxia 35mm or FE 35mm 1.4, so what's a love-struck 35mm polygamist like me supposed to do? Just add the CV 40mm I guess.

I guess I'll sell the FE 55mm and try to come up with some other not-lens gear to sell too.

oh my lord! i saw the paranormal huff site. i was speechless

Looks like the a7III is a low light high performer. At least 1 stop of low-light performance improvement over the a7RIII according to this tester:

https://petapixel.com …ng-low-light-performance/

ccp900 wrote in post #18575354
oh my lord! i saw the paranormal huff site. i was speechless

Hehe...he's been a ghost buster for a long time, so it's not news for me. I don't know why anyone would be taken aback. Sure, he's a nutjob and a con man, but I'm also 100% sure that there are anti-science things believed by people in this very thread that I'd regard as sheer lunacy as well.

I don't think Steve Huff brings anything substantive to the table regarding gear reviews, but I do enjoy watching his gear videos even though I know he's a nut case.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18575360
Hehe...he's been a ghost buster for a long time, so it's not news for me. I don't know why anyone would be taken aback. Sure, he's a nutjob and a con man, but I'm also 100% sure that there are anti-science things believed by people in this very thread that I regard as sheer lunacy as well.

I don't think Steve Huff brings anything substantive to the table regarding gear reviews, but I do enjoy watching his gear videos even though I know he's a nut case.

He now runs the Phoenix version of Beers and Cameras where you meet drink then stumble in the street and shoot .... go back and drink. I missed last weekends.

Looks like the A73 has better low light performance than the 7R3

https://petapixel.com …ng-low-light-performance/

Question:

If I use the silent shutter on my a7R II is the resulting image a 14-bit or 12-bit raw?

How about the a9? a7R III?

Per Gordon Lang, the a7 III produces full 14-bit files on silent shutter.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18575404
Question:

If I use the silent shutter on my a7R II is the resulting image a 14-bit or 12-bit raw?

How about the a9? a7R III?

Per Gordon Lang, the a7 III produces full 14-bit files on silent shutter.

a7r2 = 12 bit

a7r3 = 12 bit with continuous compressed raw otherwise it's 14 bit. Keep in mind, that this newer 14 bit uses the slower readout of 1/15, so more prone to distortion/jello effects/ banding. When doing 12 bit, it uses 1/30 readout, which tends to be much more banding resistant. Ultimate readout goes to the A9, which is way faster with 1/160, which should be 99.9% banding resistant.

Charlie wrote in post #18575419
a7r2 = 12 bit

a7r3 = 12 bit with continuous compressed raw otherwise it's 14 bit. Keep in mind, that this newer 14 bit uses the slower readout of 1/15, so more prone to distortion/jello effects/ banding. When doing 12 bit, it uses 1/30 readout, which tends to be much more banding resistant. Ultimate readout goes to the A9, which is way faster with 1/160, which should be 99.9% banding resistant.

Thanks!

I've noticed image degradation in my a7R II silent shots and was wondering if that was due to being only 12-bit.

You didn't specifically say it, but a9 also has full 14 bit raw with silent shooting?

I really really like silent shooting, and it seems like the a9 is the clear winner on that front.

This new 28-75 Tamron looks promising. The guy explains the reason why they went with 28mm instead of 24mm on the wide end.

digital_AM wrote in post #18575462
This new 28-70 Tamron looks promising. The guy explains the reason why they went with 28mm instead of 24mm on the wide end.

Take my money

digital_AM wrote in post #18575462
This new 28-75 Tamron looks promising. The guy explains the reason why they went with 28mm instead of 24mm on the wide end.

Exciting!

Charlie wrote in post #18575477
Take my money

David Arbogast wrote in post #18575486
Exciting!

I’m also excited about this lens. It will be interesting to see how it compares to the Sony GM version and the 24-105 f4.

David, the CV40 looks pretty great to me. Lots of 3D pop. Fred’s samples looked nice.