Sony a7R III Demonstration Shots

Discussion in 'Sony/Minolta' started by dcstep, Dec 9, 2017.

  1. 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.
  2. That has a nice ring, but how does malpositioning an optic group not impact the in-focus part of the image?
  3. 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...​
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. "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).

    dcstep likes this.
  7. 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.
    Landrum Kelly likes this.
  8. I would agree, except with a 5K Apple display, pixels are barely visible at 300%. A 1080p video is only postcard sized.

    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.
    Landrum Kelly likes this.
  9. 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.
  10. Mark, this one's around a 50% crop, with my EF 500/f4 II and my EF 1.4x TC-III:

    [​IMG]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.
    Mark Keefer likes this.
  11. Despite the pixel count, 42 MP only has 1.3x the resolution of 24 MP. However the A7Riii does not have an AA filter, and that increases the effective resolution by another 50%.

    It's a good thing you can use nearly any lens on the Sony, otherwise the transition from DSLR would be prohibitively expensive. Once you've used a GM lens, or even most of the high-end Sony/Zeiss lenses, recycled DSLR lenses don't seem all that good.
    Mark Keefer likes this.
  12. Selling your 5D MK IV, wow. Guess Canon really lost you. We will miss seeing your shots in the Canon Forum. I am wondering if Canon is going to make significant improvements on the rumored release of the 5DSR Mark II in 2018. They need to do something. The 50 megapixels or more if they can increase dynamic range and improve low noise ISO might keep me if they don't seriously cripple the camera for fear it will compete against some other model. Still, I am considering selling my older 6D and 7D and possibly put toward a Sony A7RIII. It is all up in the air for me. I am not ready to give up the 5D MK IV yet. But a Sony and a Canon in my arsenal might be OK, especially since I could still use my Canon lenses. I wish Canon would have left out the AA filter on the 5D MK IV. And why didn't they go with CF Fast cards and UHS-II or UHS-III cards? And doing lame stuff like cropping 4K video and limiting the HDMI output port so it won't pass 4K. And maybe having done a bit more in R&D to get a sensor that can seriously compete with the competition...just a couple things they could have gotten better. I think they have some serious ground to makeup and a number of shooters are getting tired of waiting.. There are a lot of folks moving to the Sony and Nikon camp.
  13. Mark, I know your pain. I've only recently gotten to my current position, after starting in August, with the a9, Metabones and only my EF lenses.

    In total honesty, I actually SEE the increased dynamic range of the a7RIII vs. the 5D4. It's so flexible at low ISO that you literally look at the highlights in the EVF, get them to the color you see with your eye (in the EVF mind you), then raise shadows in RAW conversion and you're pretty well done. Then, you can turn around and shoot at ISO 20,000 or 25,600, add a bit of NR, raise the Micro Contrast a bit and you've got a quite presentable, printable, image. Anything under ISO 10,000 is a breeze.

    I do think that, if decide to try to switch, you need to budget for at least one G Master or G lens, to see the potential of the whole shebang. The eye-detection AF is truly astounding, as is the "Wide Lock-On" AF, which locks onto a subject and follows it around the EVF, so long as you keep the AF engaged. It's like cheating.

    I'm not a video guy, but everyone sings the praises of the alpha's video. The In Body Image Stabilization is another wonderful thing, so you've got five-axis IS for ANY lens.

    The Metabones MkV only starts to be challenged with the big EF super-telephotos. It works darn good, but after being spoiled by the performance the G Master lenses, which are staggeringly good. Here's a shot that I tossed off with the a9/500/1.4/Metabones combo. (I was trying to see if I thought that the a9 had better AF and I don't think it does, in this application, just 20-fps):

    [​IMG]Formation Flying by David Stephens, on Flickr

    This one still qualifies for the Canon Forum, so I'll be posting for a while, until Sony comes out with its own super-tele.
    Mark Keefer likes this.

Share This Page