Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Sony Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Sony Cameras 
Thread started 19 Apr 2017 (Wednesday) 10:51
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Sony A9 Announced

 
idkdc
Goldmember
Avatar
2,838 posts
Likes: 251
Joined Oct 2014
     
Apr 22, 2017 17:53 |  #151

mickeyb105 wrote in post #18335209 (external link)
Gonna be honest, Jake, I've got a love-hate relationship with EVF.

I love seeing what will essentially be the image I shoot before I shoot it through the viewfinder.

I hate what I suspect the EVF is doing to my eyesight. (read: making it worse)

Admittedly, I've never heard anyone else complain of this before. And to boot, I've found that my physical decline is real now that I'm a little past 40. But it is definitely something I'm worried about.

I'm under 30 and my eyes feel physically relaxed behind the OVF than looking at the EVF. Good point, I remember the first reason I decided to pick up photography was to get away from computer screens!


Nikon Z7 / D850 | Canon C200 / 1DXII | Fujifilm XT2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
rxjohn
Goldmember
Avatar
1,072 posts
Likes: 28
Joined Nov 2006
Location: Northern Cal
     
Apr 22, 2017 17:59 |  #152

idkdc wrote in post #18335223 (external link)
I'm under 30 and my eyes feel physically relaxed behind the OVF than looking at the EVF. Good point, I remember the first reason I decided to pick up photography was to get away from computer screens!

Only to spend more time staring at the computer screen to process photos? ?:-D




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,890 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2612
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 2 years ago by Wilt.
     
Apr 22, 2017 18:01 |  #153

mickeyb105 wrote in post #18335209 (external link)
Gonna be honest, Jake, I've got a love-hate relationship with EVF.

I love seeing what will essentially be the image I shoot before I shoot it through the viewfinder.

I hate what I suspect the EVF is doing to my eyesight. (read: making it worse)

Admittedly, I've never heard anyone else complain of this before. And to boot, I've found that my physical decline is real now that I'm a little past 40. But it is definitely something I'm worried about.

It isn't intuitively obvious about long term harm...you're looking a something at about 30" apparent distance, no matter what. Your pupil regulates the amount of light entering the eye.

A more immediate thing is, when you shoot in dark venues,

  • if you look thru the viewfinder of the dSLR you retain most of your prized night vision -- as along as you do not chimp the back LCD.
  • But whattabout the EVF, is it ruining the night vision of your shooting eye from its considerable difference in brightness vs. your surroundings?

You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
idkdc
Goldmember
Avatar
2,838 posts
Likes: 251
Joined Oct 2014
     
Apr 22, 2017 18:12 |  #154

rxjohn wrote in post #18335228 (external link)
Only to spend more time staring at the computer screen to process photos? ?:-D

Yeah, I didn't think that part through, LOL. Still prefer OVF's and looking around outside of the viewfinder to take in the scene and anticipate shots. The EVF screens are lower resolution and lower dynamic range so far, which kinda bugs me.

I am tapping away at this forum though too. Could be outside now, hah.


Nikon Z7 / D850 | Canon C200 / 1DXII | Fujifilm XT2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
idkdc
Goldmember
Avatar
2,838 posts
Likes: 251
Joined Oct 2014
     
Apr 22, 2017 18:13 |  #155

Wilt wrote in post #18335229 (external link)
It isn't intuitively obvious about long term harm...you're looking a something at about 30" apparent distance, no matter what. Your pupil regulates the amount of light entering the eye.

A more immediate thing is, when you shoot in dark venues,

  • if you look thru the viewfinder of the dSLR you retain most of your prized night vision -- as along as you do not chimp the back LCD.
  • But whattabout the EVF, is it ruining the night vision of your shooting eye from its considerable difference in brightness vs. your surroundings?

With my night vision and carrots, I can focus pretty well and adjust to the dark. Not quite as well with the XT2 though.


Nikon Z7 / D850 | Canon C200 / 1DXII | Fujifilm XT2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
idkdc
Goldmember
Avatar
2,838 posts
Likes: 251
Joined Oct 2014
     
Apr 22, 2017 22:49 |  #156

Rolling shutter is still there. Sony press embargos lift next week for footage and images to be released. According to Max Yuryev: https://youtu.be/Ztcf_​6sp-Kg (external link)


Nikon Z7 / D850 | Canon C200 / 1DXII | Fujifilm XT2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,890 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2612
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 2 years ago by Wilt.
     
Apr 23, 2017 12:18 as a reply to  @ idkdc's post |  #157

I guess the issue is what is meant by 'rolling shutter'. I saw two still photographs in a YouTube video, and the photo from the camera with rolling shutter issues showed major curvature in the rendition of a baseball bat swung thru space, while the A9 photo showed it fairly normal looking.

Yet on the video by Max Yureyev, his comment was (paraphrased) 'rolling shutter...reduced significantly'


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
idkdc
Goldmember
Avatar
2,838 posts
Likes: 251
Joined Oct 2014
     
Apr 23, 2017 12:41 as a reply to  @ Wilt's post |  #158

It's the "jello" effect that skews the entire frame when the camera is moved. We'll have to see how reduced it is...a6300 and a7sii are notorious for jello...Max said reduced significantly, but still there.


Nikon Z7 / D850 | Canon C200 / 1DXII | Fujifilm XT2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rantercsr
Goldmember
Avatar
3,238 posts
Gallery: 57 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 6744
Joined Mar 2014
     
Apr 23, 2017 13:22 |  #159

Was max referring to video?..

That is his thing after all



My portraits IG (external link)
MY flickr (external link)
My latest YT video -->https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=mgkaaPZt47U (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bpaulette
Senior Member
Avatar
635 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 402
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Kansas City, USA
Post edited over 2 years ago by bpaulette. (2 edits in all)
     
Apr 23, 2017 13:45 |  #160

rantercsr wrote in post #18335904 (external link)
Was max referring to video?..

That is his thing after all

Yes, he was seeing it in quick pans while doing video. But the sensor readout time that causes that to happen in video is the same thing that causes banding under pulsing lights like LED's. So, while I'm happy to hear that it's been "reduced", the big question for me will be whether it's been reduced enough to make shooting silent under LED's viable.

One thing gives me hope. In Jason Lanier's hands-on video, he's speaking with a Sony rep, and asks the rep what are the big differences between the A9 and A7Rii, aside from resolution. The rep specifically brings up silent shooting under "pulsing lights". As if that's not a problem anymore.

https://youtu.be/QNKOv​LL-xUw?t=3m34s (external link)

But one would assume that if that's caused by the same thing that causes rolling shutter jello in video, and that has only been reduced, not eliminated... you'd think there would still also be banding under LED's. But the bands might simply be larger.

BUT... if this rep is correct, and there's somehow still jello in quick pans in video, yet no banding in stills under LED's, I'm frickin sold. Silent shooting (at whatever frame rate) would be hugely useful to me, whereas now I'm only able to take advantage of it safely in specific circumstances


- BP -
---------------
Sony A7R II | Sonnar FE 55 | Zeiss Batis 85 | FE 90 Macro G | Metabones IV
24L II | 85L II | 135L | 24-105L | 24-70 f2.8L II | 70-200 f2.8L IS II | 40-Shorty | Bower 14mm | Rokkor 58mm f/1.2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
idkdc
Goldmember
Avatar
2,838 posts
Likes: 251
Joined Oct 2014
Post edited over 2 years ago by idkdc.
     
Apr 23, 2017 13:54 |  #161

bpaulette wrote in post #18335927 (external link)
Yes, he was seeing it in quick pans while doing video. But the sensor readout time that causes that to happen in video is the same thing that causes banding under pulsing lights like LED's. So, while I'm happy to hear that it's been "reduced", the big question for me will be whether it's been reduced enough to make shooting silent under LED's viable.

One thing gives me hope. In Jason Lanier's hands-on video, he's speaking with a Sony rep, and asks the rep what are the big differences between the A9 and A7Rii, aside from resolution. The rep specifically brings up silent shooting under "pulsing lights". As if that's not a problem anymore.

https://youtu.be/QNKOv​LL-xUw?t=3m34s (external link)

But one would assume that if that's caused by the same thing that causes rolling shutter jello in video, and that has only been reduced, not eliminated... you'd think there would still also be banding under LED's. But the bands might simply be larger.

Are you talking about household/architectura​l LED's or cinema-oriented LED's? I've personally worked with Jason Lanier...wouldn't recommend his videos, although I'm sure there's some good spec content there for Sony shooters.

I think the proof in the pudding will be how Jello compares to the 1DXII and C300 II.


Nikon Z7 / D850 | Canon C200 / 1DXII | Fujifilm XT2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bpaulette
Senior Member
Avatar
635 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 402
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Kansas City, USA
Post edited over 2 years ago by bpaulette.
     
Apr 23, 2017 13:59 |  #162

idkdc wrote in post #18335938 (external link)
Are you talking about household/architectura​l LED's or cinema-oriented LED's? I've personally worked with Jason Lanier...wouldn't recommend his videos, although I'm sure there's some good spec content there for Sony shooters.

I think the proof in the pudding will be how Jello compares to the 1DXII and C300 II.

I've seen banding happen under theatrical LED's, and LED projectors. As well as one non-theatrical instance where I could've sworn the whole place was lit just by fluorescents

But I'll tell you what, when there aren't any LED's in use, there's nothing quite like silent shooting a live performance.


- BP -
---------------
Sony A7R II | Sonnar FE 55 | Zeiss Batis 85 | FE 90 Macro G | Metabones IV
24L II | 85L II | 135L | 24-105L | 24-70 f2.8L II | 70-200 f2.8L IS II | 40-Shorty | Bower 14mm | Rokkor 58mm f/1.2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
idkdc
Goldmember
Avatar
2,838 posts
Likes: 251
Joined Oct 2014
     
Apr 23, 2017 14:05 |  #163

bpaulette wrote in post #18335943 (external link)
I've seen banding happen under theatrical LED's, and LED projectors. As well as one non-theatrical instance where I could've sworn the whole place was lit just by fluorescents

But I'll tell you what, when there aren't any LED's in use, there's nothing quite like silent shooting a live performance.

Gotcha, yeah. I'm currently using the 5DIV for concert hall stuff, picked up a Fuji XT2 for the silent shooting, but it doesn't do low-light quite as well.


Nikon Z7 / D850 | Canon C200 / 1DXII | Fujifilm XT2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bpaulette
Senior Member
Avatar
635 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 402
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Kansas City, USA
     
Apr 23, 2017 14:07 |  #164

idkdc wrote in post #18335946 (external link)
Gotcha, yeah. I'm currently using the 5DIV for concert hall stuff, picked up a Fuji XT2 for the silent shooting, but it doesn't do low-light quite as well.

Are you seeing a lot of LED's lately in concert halls? They were almost non-existent in theatre a few years ago, and now they've just exploded in popularity. I hate them with a passion


- BP -
---------------
Sony A7R II | Sonnar FE 55 | Zeiss Batis 85 | FE 90 Macro G | Metabones IV
24L II | 85L II | 135L | 24-105L | 24-70 f2.8L II | 70-200 f2.8L IS II | 40-Shorty | Bower 14mm | Rokkor 58mm f/1.2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alex66
Member
247 posts
Likes: 25
Joined Feb 2006
     
Apr 23, 2017 14:12 |  #165

bpaulette wrote in post #18335948 (external link)
Are you seeing a lot of LED's lately in concert halls? They were almost non-existent in theatre a few years ago, and now they've just exploded in popularity. I hate them with a passion

There a right pain, a lot of the small venues I shoot bands in use them and they wind me up, our local venue for some reason has on one of the stages set the main lights up so they light the audience more than the band.


Stuff
Feed Your Head

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

36,174 views & 178 likes for this thread
Sony A9 Announced
FORUMS Sony Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Sony Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is cossk12946
942 guests, 308 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.