Sony Lounge Thread MKIII (All Sony cameras welcome)

digital_AM wrote in post #19055152
Yes I can do that. Just be warned that I took some creative liberties with light and color.

Here you go Bobby. Flat RAW file to start with. You can extract lots of color and dynamic range from a Sony file.

IMAGE LINK: https://www.alfredomor​aphoto.com …oads/n-mNp4Hr/i-sHfjgpK/A

That's some impressive post work Alfredo. Thank you for sharing.

I'm all for taking liberties with light and color. Most photography is a creative process not PJ, so a lot of times its about bringing the mental interpretation of the scene to life than just spitting out whatever the camera produced itself.

vinmunoz wrote in post #19055257
A recent video i created using the RIV+Tammy 17-28

Gimbal used was the Zhiyun Weebil S. I can't fly my drone, it's very close to an airport.

Nicely done Vinz. You get a realistic sense of walking through the house and at the end of the day, that's what homebuyers want.

I see a lot of real estate listing and many times the quality is either crap, or the photos are over processed and overly wide lenses are used. As a photographer I can spot the BS, but I suspect many buyers can't.

mystik610 wrote in post #19055351
That's some impressive post work Alfredo. Thank you for sharing.

I'm all for taking liberties with light and color. Most photography is a creative process not PJ, so a lot of times its about bringing the mental interpretation of the scene to life than just spitting out whatever the camera produced itself.

Thank you buddy! I agree with you. Of course we all love it when the light explodes when in the field but that rarely happens. Sometimes our raw images need that little extra kick to convey what we felt in the field.

Thank you.

David Arbogast wrote in post #19055293
Smooth!

Thanks David.

mystik610 wrote in post #19055353
Nicely done Vinz. You get a realistic sense of walking through the house and at the end of the day, that's what homebuyers want.

I see a lot of real estate listing and many times the quality is either crap, or the photos are over processed and overly wide lenses are used. As a photographer I can spot the BS, but I suspect many buyers can't.

Salamat Pre. In the world of architecture and interior design 3D modeling/rendering, they call it walkthrough video and that's what I tried to do. I used to worked as a graphic designer for an advertising agency in Saudi Arabia which also have engineering, architecture and interior design.

You can see my photos here... i'm using strobe but i try hard to make them look natural.

Also with the RIV and Tammy 17-28
https://vinmunoz.hd.pi​cs/1262-Valley-Forge-Dr

and here's all ambient manually blended in photoshop.
https://vinmunoz.hd.pi​cs/6475-Ledgestone-Ct

TRhoads wrote in post #19055324
The 135L behaves so much better with the MC-11...Eye AF felt native and it was sharp as a tack wide open...no need for the 135GM now.

Hosted photo: posted by TRhoads in
./showthread.php?p=190​55324&i=i91884526
forum: Sony Digital Cameras

Good to know. I prefer using the MC-11.

The Canon 100L is the only lens that gives me problems with the MC-11 adaptor. It seems to prefer my Metabones IV.

Timphoto wrote in post #19055385
Good to know. I prefer using the MC-11.

The Canon 100L is the only lens that gives me problems with the MC-11 adaptor. It seems to prefer my Metabones IV.

Interesting. I used to like that lens, but never owned it. It makes a decent portrait lens.

A study sentence in my Duolingo Spanish lesson today:

Esta cámara cuesta veintinueve dólares.

This camera costs twenty-nine dollars.

Duolingo sentences are chronically silly.

^^haha if only

—————-

Random question for people who do video on their mirror less bodies. When using a gimbal and a zoom lens how do you actually zoom? Would touching the lens barrel to rotate it not throw the gimbal off??

Speaking of Canon lenses. I just ordered a 200/2.8 for the Fuji system via the Fringer II but forgot it
might work on Sony via the MC-11. Anyone have any experience with that combo? I love using the Nikkor 300PF
on the Riv and bought the Canon 200/2.8 for the X-T4 but double duty is always good eh

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/2iW7​GRF

7R2 is gone..


Now just the Infra Red to go........ or do I just pick up the 200-600 and happen to forget selling the IR.... hmmmmm

I have the Canon 200/2.8L and used it on A9/MC-11. AF ok for static object, not fast enough for BIF, too short for BIF anyway. Image looks like crap if I add a TC, maybe just my copy.

Eddie wrote in post #19055427
^^haha if only

—————-

Random question for people who do video on their mirror less bodies. When using a gimbal and a zoom lens how do you actually zoom? Would touching the lens barrel to rotate it not throw the gimbal off??

It can do but you have a tolerance that the motors can hold so if you are reasonably within that you can reframe quickly without re balancing. I have a quick release plate slide the camera back and forth easily to counter. You can mark off the ranges of your lens so it’s easy as you are only going to effect one balance. Are you thinking of zooming while filming?

Anyone here own an Apple Watch?
For the last two years I’ve had the Fitbit Versa, which is nice, but it’s also annoying that there were is a bunch of data that is not visible on the watch (have to view the data externally on an app).

I’ve even mulled the idea of an Apple Watch as my main mobile phone. I rarely make calls, so it might suffice.

Main things I worry about with the Apple Watch is the heaviness of it (vs my Versa) and needing to charge it nightly. I wear my Fitbit bands out too fast already. Hopefully Apple has better built bands?