dcstep Posted December 12, 2017 Author Share Posted December 12, 2017 Mr. Stephens thanks for the pictures. As usual your photographs are simply amazing. Are you keeping or using your Canon gear? Mark, thanks you very much. I will be selling a few pieces, but several people have dibs on my EF 500/f4 II and my 5D MkIV. I've got an one-year old EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II and a 5DS-R body. I have really thought about prices, but I'm interested in offers. I'm sending the 5DS-R into CPS for clean and check and to get a shutter count. (I'm guessing around 50,000-clicks for that body). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcstep Posted December 12, 2017 Author Share Posted December 12, 2017 Another example is your pic of bold eagle "Don't point at me", look at out of focus tree branches behind of eagle. Yes, i am working on the ships, that's how I found that VR or IS doesn't necessary help and sometimes it make things worst. Please stop going off topic. You refer to an image taken with an a9 in a thread about the Sony a7R III. Others can see it below, so they're not in the dark: Don't Point At Me by David Stephens, on Flickr You may not like the bokeh, but you have no way of knowing how it'd look with the IS off. Why not show us, IN YOUR OWN THREAD, how being shipboard helped you discover that IS is bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Vongries Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 Guys, this is silly - one shows off his new toy, the other picks on it and so it goes. Life should be more interesting than that! Use what you have, buy what you want, do what you do & move along. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Ingold Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 (edited) Here are some of my first demonstrations shots with my new a7R III: Nice photos, however the A7Riii's claim to fame is resolution. Your demonstration photos would benefit from web output sharpening, based on the image size in pixels. You might look at PhotoKit Sharpener (www. pixel genius.com), and look through their tutorials. Images taken in Iceland with a Sony A7Rii + 24-70/2.8 GM lens. Shown below, before (L) and after ® sharpening with PhotoKit Output Sharpener Edited December 12, 2017 by Ed_Ingold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcstep Posted December 12, 2017 Author Share Posted December 12, 2017 (edited) Nice photos, however the A7Riii's claim to fame is resolution. Your demonstration photos would benefit from web output sharpening, based on the image size in pixels. You might look at PhotoKit Sharpener (www. pixel genius.com), and look through their tutorials. Images taken in Iceland with a Sony A7Rii + 24-70/2.8 GM lens. Shown below, before (L) and after ® sharpening with PhotoKit Output Sharpener Thanks. Dynamic ranges is another big "claim to fame" of the a7R III. The following shot at ISO 20,000, with only default noise reduction is a game changer for us wildlife shooters that are out pre-dawn and post-dusk: I see you... by David Stephens, on Flickr Edited December 12, 2017 by dcstep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcstep Posted December 13, 2017 Author Share Posted December 13, 2017 "Don't you get some effect from VR even if your shutter speed is above 1/500? After all, the VR elements are probably moving between samples." Yes, sometimes you get a VR-like effect above 1/500, and it's probably because the elements are in near constant motion and the designers have picked a movement frequency and smoothing curve that takes advantage of the known sampling frequency of the motion detected. But the problem with using VR above 1/500 is that you will get clear image degradation often enough that you'll get burned by it. And I believe you get burned by it more often than you'd get burned by having VR off. Moreover, I don't know of a working sports or wildlife pro using the long lenses that hasn't discovered the same thing by practice: VR tends to degrade edge acuity above 1/500." All About Nikon VR | DSLRBodies | Thom Hogan If this is a problem at all, it's a Nikon problem, not Canon or Sony. Also, you haven't explained how image stabilization can be detrimental to one part of an image and not to the rest. Show me the "clear image degradation" in the sample we've been discussing. There is none, the birds in the focus plane are sharp as tacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick D. Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 "VR is essentially a element group in the lens that is moved to compensate for any detected camera motion. Because this element group is usually deep in the middle of the lens, typically near the aperture opening but not exactly at the opening, you have to think about what is happening to the optical path when VR is active. Are there times when it shifts where it imparts a change to the image quality other than pure stabilization? I believe there are, though the impact is visually subtle. Some of the mid-range distance bokeh of certain VR lenses appears to be impacted by VR being on. Put another way, the background in the scene is moving slightly differently than the focus point in the optical path. This results in what I call "busy bokeh," or bokeh that doesn't have that simple shape and regularity we expect out of the highest quality glass." It's from Tom Hogan's, "All about Nikon VR", highlights are mine. Nikon lens, Canon lens or Sony lens, they all using the same in lens image stabilization system.Sony also using IBIS, don't know how that effects image background. I never said anything about birds in focus plane being out of focus or blurred, I was always pointing to out of focus background being blurred in kind off strange way. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcstep Posted December 13, 2017 Author Share Posted December 13, 2017 "VR is essentially a element group in the lens that is moved to compensate for any detected camera motion. Because this element group is usually deep in the middle of the lens, typically near the aperture opening but not exactly at the opening, you have to think about what is happening to the optical path when VR is active. Are there times when it shifts where it imparts a change to the image quality other than pure stabilization? I believe there are, though the impact is visually subtle. Some of the mid-range distance bokeh of certain VR lenses appears to be impacted by VR being on. Put another way, the background in the scene is moving slightly differently than the focus point in the optical path. This results in what I call "busy bokeh," or bokeh that doesn't have that simple shape and regularity we expect out of the highest quality glass." It's from Tom Hogan's, "All about Nikon VR", highlights are mine. Nikon lens, Canon lens or Sony lens, they all using the same in lens image stabilization system.Sony also using IBIS, don't know how that effects image background. I never said anything about birds in focus plane being out of focus or blurred, I was always pointing to out of focus background being blurred in kind off strange way. :) Have you read what you've posted? It does nothing to explain how one part of an image can be disfigured and not the rest of the image. If it were a "focal point" (his term) instead of a "focal plain" his explanation might make some sense. ;-) Your demonstration shots are eagerly awaited, IN YOUR OWN THREAD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick D. Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 Again, have you read it? "Put another way, the background in the scene is moving slightly differently than the focus point in the optical path. This results in what I call "busy bokeh," or bokeh that doesn't have that simple shape and regularity we expect out of the highest quality glass." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcstep Posted December 13, 2017 Author Share Posted December 13, 2017 Again, have you read it? "Put another way, the background in the scene is moving slightly differently than the focus point in the optical path. This results in what I call "busy bokeh," or bokeh that doesn't have that simple shape and regularity we expect out of the highest quality glass." It's crystal clear that you read it without thinking about what he's proposing. Just demonstrate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick D. Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 Tell me that you got amazing bokeh here, and here it is the same lens, isn't it? Anyway, if you completely satisfied with it, enjoy it.:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcstep Posted December 13, 2017 Author Share Posted December 13, 2017 Tell me that you got amazing bokeh here, and here it is the same lens, isn't it? Anyway, if you completely satisfied with it, enjoy it.:) Nick, you may not like the bokeh, but demonstrate a difference for the cause that you state. You can't simply look at bokeh and say, I don't like that because the IS was on. You need a reference. Patiently awaiting your demonstration. Maybe you give us a time estimate so we can start watching the Nikon Forum at the appropriate time, OR you could even post a link in this thread to tie up the off topic discussion that you started here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick D. Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 Nick, you may not like the bokeh, but demonstrate a difference for the cause that you state. You can't simply look at bokeh and say, I don't like that because the IS was on. You need a reference. Patiently awaiting your demonstration. Maybe you give us a time estimate so we can start watching the Nikon Forum at the appropriate time, OR you could even post a link in this thread to tie up the off topic discussion that you started here. Some time after Xmas, and what it has to do with Nikon Forum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcstep Posted December 14, 2017 Author Share Posted December 14, 2017 Some time after Xmas, and what it has to do with Nikon Forum? It doesn't belong in the Sony Forum, so why not where you usually haunt? Pick your favorite forum to start your own thread and we'll flock to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick D. Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 It doesn't belong in the Sony Forum, so why not where you usually haunt? Pick your favorite forum to start your own thread and we'll flock to it. I didn't know that Sony doesn't use vibration reduction, my bad:). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gus Lazzari Posted December 19, 2017 Share Posted December 19, 2017 the scene is moving slightly differently than the focus point" Nick D. At 500th & above, it isn't the 'MOTION' of the IS Group that alters the shape of the Out Of Focus (Bokeh), its the alignment of the glass element at the moment of the shutter firing. In other words, with IS in a lens, there are going to be shutter firings when your entire optical path isn't PERFECTLY centered. So yes ever so slightly, this can affect the bokeh... Therefore, it's safe to state that in body stabilization alone, can't have this 'optical' variable bokeh issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcstep Posted December 19, 2017 Author Share Posted December 19, 2017 At 500th & above, it isn't the 'MOTION' of the IS Group that alters the shape of the Out Of Focus (Bokeh), its the alignment of the glass element at the moment of the shutter firing. In other words, with IS in a lens, there are going to be shutter firings when your entire optical path isn't PERFECTLY centered. So yes ever so slightly, this can affect the bokeh... ... That has a nice ring, but how does malpositioning an optic group not impact the in-focus part of the image? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gus Lazzari Posted December 19, 2017 Share Posted December 19, 2017 how does malpositioning an optic group not impact the in-focus part of the image?" David S. That's a very good question David. To illustrate an EXTREME, think of a 'less than perfect' Russian made lens. What with their poor centering, alignment, design and construction; there's a lot going on in them. Even so, with their wacky swirly backgrounds/bokeh, they can still manage an image with a correct focus plane/point. Of course beautifully engineered, designed and constructed modern lenses, aren't even close to inhabiting the deep 'pit' that these "crude" lenses of the past inhabit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodeo_joe1 Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 Personally, I'd just have cloned out the distracting white vehicles in the background, or cropped the image along the road line. End of problem and end of argument! Anyway, the bokeh shown by that lens looks far better than most of the expensive 70-200 f/2.8 zooms sold by 'the rest'. And they're mainly used for portrait work where bokeh is relatively important. A barely visible bit of hard-edged bokeh in a long tele zoom is totally acceptable and forgiveable IMO. You can find fault with any lens if you look hard enough and long enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcstep Posted December 21, 2017 Author Share Posted December 21, 2017 Personally, I'd just have cloned out the distracting white vehicles in the background, or cropped the image along the road line. End of problem and end of argument! ... Agreed, but these were demonstration shots, not preparation for printing, so processing was limited to RAW conversion. With a strong horizon, like that dam, I would likely have checked the levelness of the horizon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Landrum Kelly Posted December 22, 2017 Share Posted December 22, 2017 "You're looking at an OOF area at 300% to evaluate a lens." I'm not sure what the point would ever be in using 300% to look at a file for anything remotely concerning esthetic concerns. Yep, Sony is there optically speaking, but I won't change brands. Too much vested in Nikon at this point. I still buy Canon for long stuff, though. Just a preference from way back. I haven't done any comparisons with my own gear, because I have never had long Sony or Nikon super-tele lenses (except for one old 600mm f/4 Ai-s which I keep for sentimental reasons). Lannie 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcstep Posted December 23, 2017 Author Share Posted December 23, 2017 ... Yep, Sony is there optically speaking, but I won't change brands. Too much vested in Nikon at this point. I still buy Canon for long stuff, though. Just a preference from way back. I haven't done any comparisons with my own gear, because I have never had long Sony or Nikon super-tele lenses (except for one old 600mm f/4 Ai-s which I keep for sentimental reasons). Lannie Yeah Lannie, the dynamic range and resolution is compelling, both in regards to the bodies and lenses, but I'm changing primarily because of the incredible autofocus system, as a bird and wildlife photographer. It's a game-changer in that application. For everything else, it's nice, but you can easily get by without it. Although, eye-detect AF is pretty damn amazing for portrait guys and gals. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Ingold Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 I'm not sure what the point would ever be in using 300% to look at a file for anything remotely concerning esthetic concerns. I would agree, except with a 5K Apple display, pixels are barely visible at 300%. A 1080p video is only postcard sized. Yep, Sony is there optically speaking, but I won't change brands. Too much vested in Nikon at this point. Good point! From my experience the disadvantages of using foreign lenses on a Sony eventually outweigh the cost of upgrading to native glass. However, it's great that you don't have to do it up front. Sony cut some incredible deals for the A9, ending only three weeks before the A7Riii was introduced. Looking back, should I have waited (deals like this always precede a major release)? I'm happy to say no. I traded an A7ii, which I rarely used for two years, for $300 over cost with the bonus. I value the speed, silence and top-panel controls more than resolution. I kept the A7Rii, but otherwise the A7Riii would have been high on my list as a backup or alternative. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Keefer Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 Here are some of my first demonstrations shots with my new a7R III: Thanks for doing this, Dave. This camera is so tempting me for the higher resolution and dynamic range and Low light ability. I particularly enjoyed seeing the vivid color of the Pelican shots. Please keep it up. I don't know how many Canon lenses you have, but I would like to see how they are resolving to the higher resolution of the Sony and use with Metabones adaptor. I am heavily invested in Canon lenses and the 5D MK IV IS still pretty good though a few things I wish Canon would have done better that would not seem to purposely cripple the camera. The Sony is very tempting, so I am enjoying what you are doing and I hope you do more. Hope to see samples with camera flash and portraiture and street. Anyway keep up the good work. Cheers, Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcstep Posted January 3, 2018 Author Share Posted January 3, 2018 Thanks for doing this, Dave. This camera is so tempting me for the higher resolution and dynamic range and Low light ability. I particularly enjoyed seeing the vivid color of the Pelican shots. Please keep it up. I don't know how many Canon lenses you have, but I would like to see how they are resolving to the higher resolution of the Sony and use with Metabones adaptor. I am heavily invested in Canon lenses and the 5D MK IV IS still pretty good though a few things I wish Canon would have done better that would not seem to purposely cripple the camera. The Sony is very tempting, so I am enjoying what you are doing and I hope you do more. Hope to see samples with camera flash and portraiture and street. Anyway keep up the good work. Mark, this one's around a 50% crop, with my EF 500/f4 II and my EF 1.4x TC-III: Red-tail Hawk Takes Flight by David Stephens, on Flickr When I had only the a9, I took the 5D4 on vacation to France, for it's higher resolution. Today, I'd take the a7RIII and the 5D4 is for sale. What I've found myself doing is replacing all my EF-L with Sony G and G Master lenses, where available. The Canon lenses all worked well with the Metabones, but you don't get eye-detection and several "lock-on" AF modes. The image quality was as good or better and each replacement was a little lighter and smaller than the equivalent EF. Instead of EF 14/f2.8-II, 24-105/f4-II and 100-400/f4.5-5.6-II, I now have FE 12-24/f4 G, 24-70mm f/2.8 GM and 100-400mm GM. I suspect that my EF 500/f4-II will be part of my kit for the foreseeable future. (When the FE 400/f2.8 GM comes out, I'll borrow one to see if 800mm makes me happy, but I'm doubtful. Still, we'll see...) Using the EF 500/f4 is a bit of a compromise, to get the improved dynamic range and resolution. I have to be sure to prefocus. Occasionally, the AF is stuck OOF and I have to spin the MF ring to get it started. Once it latches on, it's as good or better than the 5D4, but it's not automatic, like with the Sony lenses. A 1D-X would blow away AF with either the a9 or a7RIII, with a teleconverter on a big EF lens. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now