Sony A7x lounge

Finally caught up! Been a busy week (been in meetings all week) so I was way behind.

David. You really bring KC to life with your shots and processing. It looks so full of color over there (and yet another reminder at how brown and drab SoCal is these days).

Haven't much chance to shoot lately. Which is a shame, since i have new lenses to play with. Nothing like having new toys and not being able to enjoy them.

Maybe tomorrow night. I've temporarily given up shooting in the daytime since the light and the colors are so awful here lately. But night shooting is another story. I had some very good luck a few weeks back shooting the Vincent Thomas Bridge, for example.
Need to find some new spots though.

Puckman wrote in post #18043763
Finally caught up! Been a busy week (been in meetings all week) so I was way behind.

David. You really bring KC to life with your shots and processing. It looks so full of color over there (and yet another reminder at how brown and drab SoCal is these days).

Haven't much chance to shoot lately. Which is a shame, since i have new lenses to play with. Nothing like having new toys and not being able to enjoy them.

Maybe tomorrow night. I've temporarily given up shooting in the daytime since the light and the colors are so awful here lately. But night shooting is another story. I had some very good luck a few weeks back shooting the Vincent Thomas Bridge, for example.
Need to find some new spots though.

Griffith observatory, worth a few trips IMO. It's like the first time, you miss you many angles. I still need to visit elysian park...

Been to Elysian park. Nice spots.
Have been meaning to go to Griffith for years. I haven't been since the 90s.

bpaulette wrote in post #18043682
Since I got the Batis 85 at Christmas, I've been plagued by the feeling that it's red-headed stepbrother, my 90mm macro, was totally redundant (not to mention clearly inferior, perhaps simply because of the Sony G vs. the sexy blue Zeiss badge, and it's less svelte exterior). I would've sold it... was going to sell it... but my tendency for procrastination prevented that. Thankfully.

Today was my first full day of headshot sessions without the Batis, after having to send it in to Zeiss for repair. And man oh man, I'm so glad I didn't sell the 90. Was a great reminder that this thing is seriously good for portraits. Especially tight headshots. In that niche, it really leaves nothing to be desired. The slower aperture does make it a less ideal candidate for dreamy 3/4 or full body portraits, where you might want the ability to melt the background, but at tight headshot distance, it melts it nicely. Of course, I knew that before I ever had the Batis, but new gear always tends to get the love.

A couple from today (un-retouched, obviously)

Hosted photo: posted by bpaulette in
./showthread.php?p=180​43682&i=i148011519
forum: Sony Digital Cameras

Hosted photo: posted by bpaulette in
./showthread.php?p=180​43682&i=i136307374
forum: Sony Digital Cameras

Very nice. The FE 90 is one of my favorite lenses for shooting portraits.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18043710
Thanks. And another great Hawaii shot from you as well!

The water is about two inches deep and the basin is clad with stone panels...the lines are the joints in the stone.

I seriously thought about cloning them out as I anticipated they might be confusing to viewers, but I also strangely like them (which is never true regarding overhead lines). What would you do about them?

BTW, another potential for viewer confusion is that when you view the image large on Flickr you can see the texture of the stone in the basin through the thin pool. It interacts with the sky reflection as to make it look like some sort of color compression artifacts. So, I even thought about doing a "noise reduction" to kill the stone texture.

Really undecided whether I want to "fix" these potential areas of viewer confusion. I am typically very liberal when it comes to those editing out distractions, but here I have been more conservative.

My apologies for clouding the issue even more for you David by disagreeing with Alfredo but to my eye, the lines in the pool, when viewed large anyway, have no counterpart in the sky and so aren't confusing to me. Perhaps that's because I knew what they were caused by beforehand. As for the texture showing through the water, it seems to be something actually in the scene rather than some sort of digital artifacts so I would leave it alone.

It's a tough one. Whilst they don't bother me I wonder if a viewer might think you had cloned the power lines out the top half and forgot to clone them out the water. On the other hand would a non photographer even think about cloning or would they just accept the scene for what it is?

With regards to the texture I wouldn't do anything with that personally

I'm happy to report that my inclusion of the a6300 in my kit has a happy beginning. The AF seems more accurate compared to the older a6000 that I had and I'm assuming because of increased DoF it seems more accurate than the a7rII I had. With the a6000 I would probably have a hit rate of say 85% or so and with the a7rII probably around 80%. This is critical sharpness hit percentage and again the a7rII is at a disadvantage is my testing because I ended up shooting at 1.8 with the 55 for the majority of my indoor shots. No amount of Eye AF or IbIS will help when you're shooting at 1.8 at lower shutter speeds when it comes to motion blur. Happy to say that the a6300 is at about 90-95%.

I ended up recommending it to a friend of mine who is equally happy with the camera but sad because he ended up going to B&H and also buying a Vello screen protector which is labeled as one for the NeX-7/a6000/a6300. Sadly he put it on and the black sections are not lined up resulting in about a 1/8" of the screen text on the left being covered up. Can't remove it either because as a hard acrylic protector the glue is so strong that trying to remove it will result in the actual screen's coating to peel off. Disappointing to say the least they would sell him a screen protector that isn't a proper fit and he can't remove out of damaging his screen.

TMaG82 wrote in post #18043834
I'm happy to report that my inclusion of the a6300 in my kit has a happy beginning. The AF seems more accurate compared to the older a6000 that I had and I'm assuming because of increased DoF it seems more accurate than the a7rII I had. With the a6000 I would probably have a hit rate of say 85% or so and with the a7rII probably around 80%. This is critical sharpness hit percentage and again the a7rII is at a disadvantage is my testing because I ended up shooting at 1.8 with the 55 for the majority of my indoor shots. No amount of Eye AF or IbIS will help when you're shooting at 1.8 at lower shutter speeds when it comes to motion blur. Happy to say that the a6300 is at about 90-95%.

I ended up recommending it to a friend of mine who is equally happy with the camera but sad because he ended up going to B&H and also buying a Vello screen protector which is labeled as one for the NeX-7/a6000/a6300. Sadly he put it on and the black sections are not lined up resulting in about a 1/8" of the screen text on the left being covered up. Can't remove it either because as a hard acrylic protector the glue is so strong that trying to remove it will result in the actual screen's coating to peel off. Disappointing to say the least they would sell him a screen protector that isn't a proper fit and he can't remove out of damaging his screen.

I'm in the opposite camp , I've realised my a6300 purchase was complete GAS. Whilst I think the camera is truly amazing I'm struggling to find its position in my lineup. Initially when I purchased the plan was to carry the a6300 and a7rii together to save lens changes but that has been problematic in that my bags are not big enough and getting a bigger bag goes against my small setup that I like. Also when I take just one camera I'm loving the x100t too much to pick the a6300.

So I'm trying to decide if I should keep it or not. I made the purchase without having an actual need for it. If I didn't have the a7rii it would be a definite keeper

So far, I'm pleased with the images I get from the a6300. Just using the FE 35 f2.8 lens on it makes a terrific combination. I do need to get back in the habit of dealing with a non IBIS camera again though.

I hope no one minds but here's a better shot of my ribs after two hours cooking shot using the a6300 + FE35

navydoc wrote in post #18043847
So far, I'm pleased with the images I get from the a6300. Just using the FE 35 f2.8 lens on it makes a terrific combination. I do need to get back in the habit of dealing with a non IBIS camera again though.

I hope no one minds but here's a better shot of my ribs after two hours cooking shot using the a6300 + FE35

Hosted photo: posted by navydoc in
./showthread.php?p=180​43847&i=i73893053
forum: Sony Digital Cameras

Looks tasty. The FE35 f2.8 is a seriously good lens. Underrated for sure.

uljens wrote in post #18043449
and thats correct.

i thought there were more A7s shooters here, but looks like higher percentage is shooting a7R/a7RII. My fault. Will try to find answers on my questions elsewhere.

Yeah the a7s is sort of a specialized model IMO....so not too many users here. It looks to me that Sony intended this to be primarily a video camera, but obviously there are advantages when shooting stills too. If I still shot weddings, I, like you, would probably consider adding one for the sake of its high ISO performance. BUT the a7rII performs phenomenally at high ISO as well and it might be worth considering that as your main body.

If we look at the DXO mark numbers, in terms of noise (SNR), the a7rII actually performs similarly to the a7s:

Really missing my FE70-200 It locked on and focused so much faster. But I do like the reach of the 300

Missed a lot of BIF ... here is one I got

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/HTDa​vW

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/Ho9V​hj

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/HTDd​PE

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/JakM​xs

mystik610 wrote in post #18043857
Looks tasty. The FE35 f2.8 is a seriously good lens. Underrated for sure.

a lot of people ignore it due to price, a bit to pricey for what it is.

eriet30 wrote in post #18044032
Really missing my FE70-200 It locked on and focused so much faster. But I do like the reach of the 300

Missed a lot of BIF ... here is one I got

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/HTDa​vW _63K6711.jpg by Paul, on Flickr

We were on a boat looking for Big Horn Sheep along the river but they were way up the edges not down close so I had to severely crop the 300mm on 6300 shots ... Course they were badly lit as well

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/Ho9V​hj _63K6629.jpg by Paul, on Flickr

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/HTDd​PE _63K6880.jpg by Paul, on Flickr

Found another group actually farther up but light was better still a sever crop

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/JakM​xs _63K6992.jpg by Paul, on Flickr

thanks for your 70-200 will put it to good use.

anyway, gotta clean your sensor I can see a spot on the right in third pic.

This is one thing that really irritates me with mirrorless cameras, sensors get dirty really really quickly and easily. I wish Sony would make some type of "curtain" that closes when the camera is off to protect the sensor from all the crap that can get stuck to it.

nekrosoft13 wrote in post #18044055
thanks for your 70-200 will put it to good use.

anyway, gotta clean your sensor I can see a spot on the right in third pic.

This is one thing that really irritates me with mirrorless cameras, sensors get dirty really really quickly and easily. I wish Sony would make some type of "curtain" that closes when the camera is off to protect the sensor from all the crap that can get stuck to it.

My answer would be a body for every lens!!!! then i wouldnt have to clean sensors!!!!

My a7RII with Canon zoom was on the tripod so I quickly grabbed my a6000 and captured a few frames handheld. I wanted to capture the clouds as they were passing around the mountains with the sun coming up behind.

I'm always open to constructive feedback on composition and editing of my photos. Let me know what can be improved.

a6000 + FE55

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR