Sony a7R III Demonstration Shots

Here are some of my first demonstrations shots with my new a7R III:

Sony a7R III Demonstration Shots.

David, yes, it's OOF highlights, look along the road, what are those light rings? Look at those two cars, they comprised from multiply round shapes.Birds are in focus, no questions about that. I don't think it is camera, I think it is lens, bokeh isn't that great for $3000 lens.

Nick, sorry, but I still don't know what you're talking about. I look at it at a pixel level and don't see light rings around the cars or on the road. (It's a $2,500 100-400mm zoom).

Maybe I'm looking at the wrong image. Here's what I think we're talking about:

Pelicans Stay Calm As Gulls React To Blackbird by David Stephens, on Flickr

It is next image. Here is screenshot. I was quoting Canadian price, special thanks to our central banker.

I still think, it is VR problem.

It is next image. Here is screenshot. I was quoting Canadian price, special thanks to our central banker.

[ATTACH=full]1223456[/ATTACH]

I still think, it is VR problem.

Yeah, sorry about the Canadian dollar. A bad situation was greatly aggravated when Canon raised its prices to keep us yanks from buying from Camera Canada at a really sweet price. (Saved over $1,000 on my EF 500/f4 II). Not that I'm buying Canon anymore, but if I were, it'd cost more than buying in US from B&H.

It's not a stabilization problem. If that were so, you'd see it on the in-focus pelicans.

You're looking at an OOF area at 300% to evaluate a lens. I think you're headed down the wrong road.

PN won't allow me to post the original size. My Flickr account is set to prevent viewing and downloading the original image; however, if anyone would like to see it, I'd be happy to email or provide a link in Dropbox. Taking reduced pixels and then blowing them up to view closely is not too good for critical inspection.

looking at an OOF area at 300% to evaluate a lens" David S.

Wow Nick D., David's right. Talk about "focusing" in on the minutiae.

You do realize that this zoom has 22 pieces of glass (elements) in it ?

In fact, it will be difficult for any lens manufacture on the planet to exceed this zoom's 'bokeh' & overall performance (Yes even Leica).

i.e. "in terms of sharpness levels, it outperforms them all, even those mounted on the Canon EOS 5Ds R" <<< click

David, I am not evaluating sharpness of the lens , it is sharp and I didn't enlarge it, it is just screenshot. It is what is not sharp I am talking about, I think Tom Hogan was posting something about VR actually creating funky backgrounds, if it is left ON when it's not needed.

You do realize that this zoom has 22 pieces of glass (elements) in it ?

It may have 122 pieces as well, who cares. I can clearly see some patterns in the background, which are not supposed to be there.

David, I am not evaluating sharpness of the lens , it is sharp and I didn't enlarge it, it is just screenshot. It is what is not sharp I am talking about, I think Tom Hogan was posting something about VR actually creating funky backgrounds, if it is left ON when it's not needed.

It's really unrelated to this thread, BUT I'd love to read an explanation of how stabilization can impact OOF background while keeping in-focus subjects sharp. Do you have a link? Then, I'd like to get off a subject that has nothing to do with the performance of the a7R III.

"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

David, Sony make fine cameras, censors are amazing, just lenses not quite there yet. What is the point to spent money on top notch body if there is only overpriced mediocre optics available for mainstream photographers.

Nick, how do you know that? I own the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II, as well as my Sony FE 100-400mm G Master and the Sony is superior. My conclusion is validated by DxOMark. I'm a "mainstream photographer", what are you?

"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.

Start your own thread in the Nikon forum if you think this important. You certainly haven't convinced anyone around here. BTW, sensor, not censor.

how image stabilization can be detrimental to one part of an image and not to the rest

I am pretty sure if you dig online, you will find scientific explanation how VR or IS or OSS kept subject in focus plane sharp by moving small lens element, but in the same time, out of focus elements of the picture moving around creating patterns, look at the highlights, tree branches or buildings.

It doesn't really matter Nikon, Sony or Canon, in lens vibration reduction works all the same. Try with OSS off and look at the backgrounds. Vibration reduction is amazing opportunity for lens manufacturers to charge extra money, but old sturdy tripod tramps them all.

But if you happy with what you see, it is up to you. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I am pretty sure if you dig online, you will find scientific explanation how VR or IS or OSS kept subject in focus plane sharp by moving small lens element, but in the same time, out of focus elements of the picture moving around creating patterns, look at the highlights, tree branches or buildings.

It doesn't really matter Nikon, Sony or Canon, in lens vibration reduction works all the same. Try with OSS off and look at the backgrounds. Vibration reduction is amazing opportunity for lens manufacturers to charge extra money, but old sturdy tripod tramps them all.

But if you happy with what you see, it is up to you. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I read the article that you linked me to and the author gave no explanation of how part of an image could be damaged and not the entire image. He gave some crap justification about asking sideline photographers if they had their VR off, as recommended by Nikon when on tripod or monopod, and the "pros" had it off. No, the pros were shooting Canon. Canon says that you can leave IS on when on a tripod, with their latest generation of lenses.

The author of your linked article doesn't give us a demonstration. BTW, neither do you. All you do is talk. Why not start your own thread and demonstrate what you're talking about? If it's so clear, it should be easy for you to demonstrate. Put actions where your mouth is. You have some half way decent equipment, so have at it.

It is next image. Here is screenshot. I was quoting Canadian price, special thanks to our central banker.

[ATTACH=full]1223456[/ATTACH]

I still think, it is VR problem.

BTW, this is more than 300%, not a "screen shot."

I read the article that you linked me to and the author gave no explanation of how part of an image could be damaged and not the entire image. He gave some crap justification about asking sideline photographers if they had their VR off, as recommended by Nikon when on tripod or monopod, and the "pros" had it off. No, the pros were shooting Canon. Canon says that you can leave IS on when on a tripod, with their latest generation of lenses.

 

The author of your linked article doesn't give us a demonstration. BTW, neither do you. All you do is talk. Why not start your own thread and demonstrate what you're talking about? If it's so clear, it should be easy for you to demonstrate. Put actions where your mouth is. You have some half way decent equipment, so have at it.

Sorry, don't have my equipment with me, I am working offshore. Some people have jobs:)

Sorry, don't have my equipment with me, I am working offshore. Some people have jobs:)

So now you want to compare paychecks?

We can wait for you to get back onshore. Just deliver, first chance you get. Seems like a simple and reasonable request to me. If you're going to pontificate, off topic, in the Sony forum, then get out your Nikon, when you get home, spend and hour or two and show us what you're talking about.

Nick is talking about a different image, in case this has gotten confusing to those trying to compare images:

Pelicans and Gulls by David Stephens, on Flickr

It would have been nice if he'd offered that when I posted the one I thought it was. Maybe his boat is rocking too much.

Nick is talking about a different image, in case this has gotten confusing to those trying to compare images:

 

Pelicans and Gulls by David Stephens, on Flickr

 

It would have been nice if he'd offered that when I posted the one I thought it was. Maybe his boat is rocking too much.

I did- "It is next image. Here is screenshot. I was quoting Canadian price, special thanks to our central banker."

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.