Sony Lounge Thread MKIII (All Sony cameras welcome)

David Arbogast wrote in post #19217697
After a day of experimentation, I am very impressed with Adobe's Super Resolution. It makes me wonder if I shouldn't just buy a used a9 II (24MP) instead of the a1 (50MP). Thoughts pro/con?

Man that looks like something I could really use from time to time! I guess is should be available though LRC soon enough.

David Arbogast wrote in post #19217781
I think you should give the super res a try on some of your a9 II images..it’s pretty astounding. It’s a bit of a hassle to do right now since you can’t do it through LR just yet, but I don’t think we’ll be waiting long for that LR update.

The processing is quite slow on my 8 year-old PC, but I don’t care because 1. I’m upgrading this year and 2. I’ll only ever need to super-res a very limited percentage of my images anyway.

This is a (potential) gamechanger for me because, until now, the only realistic way to generate a authentic high res image from a low res camera was via stitched panos.

BTW, how are you liking your a9 II?

idsurfer wrote in post #19217899
Man that looks like something I could really use from time to time! I guess is should be available though LRC soon enough.

I just used it in LR and it was fairly quick. I do crop any if necessary so that may help.

Wildflower bloom, Merced River Canyon.

Bianchi wrote in post #19217760
I have the same tiny set up for travel & long hikes, but you can get the very similar head from Leofoto at a more cost effective price point. If you are going to encounter high winds, I might opt for the 324 instead of the 284.

Hudson has lots of great content on his channel.

Excellent. Yes I also enjoy his channel.

alfredomora wrote in post #19217973
Excellent. Yes I also enjoy his channel.

These are pretty handy to have on your tripod for filters, phone etc etc

https://www.amazon.com …tle_o05_s00?ie=​UTF8&psc=1

I think I've got 3 photos from 2 mornings out.......

I've taken more photos with the Contax 80-200 than I have the 40/1.2 this year so the Voigtlander got some use this weekend! The 21mm hasn't even been on the camera yet!

Do I risk tomorrow too? Will it be a nice sunrise if I switch the alarm off? Will I be third time lucky? Will it be another grey morning?

Bill in Texas wrote in post #19217928
I just used it in LR and it was fairly quick. I do crop any if necessary so that may help.

I don't think the "Super Resolution" option is available in LR yet. According to my Adobe CC my LR is up to date and it's not available in my LR. Are you sure you didn't use the older "Enhance Details"?

Currently the easiest way to get to the feature is to launch Adobe Camera Raw via Adobe Bridge.

David Arbogast wrote in post #19218013
I don't think the "Super Resolution" option is available in LR yet. According to my Adobe CC my LR is up to date and it's not available in my LR. Are you sure you didn't use the older "Enhance Details"?

Currently the easiest way to get to the feature is to launch Adobe Camera Raw via Adobe Bridge.

That is likely what is occurring. Lack of clarity on my part. Thanks, David.

David Arbogast wrote in post #19218013
I don't think the "Super Resolution" option is available in LR yet. According to my Adobe CC my LR is up to date and it's not available in my LR. Are you sure you didn't use the older "Enhance Details"?

Currently the easiest way to get to the feature is to launch Adobe Camera Raw via Adobe Bridge.

I experimented with a couple of raw files, "Super Resolution" was impressive on the Fuji X100F file and the A9 file, but not so much on an A7Riv file.

My initial sense is that it did a better job on the Fuji file, but I need to shoot the same scene with the Fuji and the A9 and then do a better comparison.

Timphoto wrote in post #19218097
I experimented with a couple of raw files, "Super Resolution" was impressive on the Fuji X100F file and the A9 file, but not so much on an A7Riv file.

My initial sense is that it did a better job on the Fuji file, but I need to shoot the same scene with the Fuji and the A9 and then do a better comparison.

It makes sense that if the source file has a high resolution there will be diminishing returns.

David Arbogast wrote in post #19218107
It makes sense that if the source file has a high resolution there will be diminishing returns.

I’m going to try this with some a6000 images I took from my recent trip. Thanks David.

I have a confession to make: I’m enthralled with the Sony FE 50mm 1.2 GM sample images by Gordon Laing and Mark Galer. My favorite lens of all time is the Zeiss Otus 55mm 1.4 ZE and the sample GM images are reminiscent of the Otus. So, I’m trying to decide how to come up with $2000. Buying a used a9 II instead of the a1 (which I’ve budgeted) frees up the $$.

I know that 50mm isn’t as popular as 35mm here (I already own an amazing 35mm bokeh master!), but when I had my Otus 55mm I used that lens more than any other. Of all the photo genres my favorite is capturing urban life and 50mm is a fantastic FL for that imo.

Zeiss Otus 55mm 1.4:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/GEvt​xw

This is an old a7S (12 MP) image I took six years ago. I applied the Super Resolution on it to turn it into a 48 MP image.

I'm not generally a fan of sky replacements, but they do have usefulness. In this image the sky was mostly blown out. The Luminar AI sky replacement, though, is only at 50% opacity against the original sky. I wanted the replacement sky to look like it fits the image without creating a distraction.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2kQU​P29