[A55] Night ISO Test Shots

[albertri]

Mine's on auto WB under flourescent lighting (light is shining directly from the top)
Like I said, I had to try several different settings before I got that one (#2) which shows a slight hint of the chroma noise at the bottom.

Wait looks like my A33 suffers from it also. look at the bottom part of the photo it also shows some redish/orange color. And really lost of details. I am suing 18-250 at 18mm f3.5

 

[teikkheng]

My WB setting is under Auto.. It does seem to have something to do with the lighting, especially when the place is unevenly lit.

Yea i think we are probably pushing the ISO too much already haha..

 

[albertri]

My WB setting is under Auto.. It does seem to have something to do with the lighting, especially when the place is unevenly lit.

Yea i think we are probably pushing the ISO too much already haha..

yeah true to me at this level its really unusable already even to a small print. I have not seen this issue yet to my other ISO test

 

[Shoooters]

Can anyone test shot with/without NR? Thanks

 

[weixing]

Hi,
I think this is quite normal when using such high iso... noise is always very obvious at the shadow part of the image.

Have a nice day.

 

[doodie7]

Took a couple of low light shots for comparision earlier in the evening with the A55...


F8, 13s, ISO-100

F8, 1/8s, ISO-12800

and since it's mid-autumn ! ...here's some mooncakes for you bros and sisters. :bsmilie:

Plain mooncake!

Red bean mooncake!

Mooncakes photos are simply cropped and resized, different color is due to photo been taken several hours apart.

wow.... i realli like the moon shoot.. can tell me what lens and what setting you used?

ed

 

[Ghostfit]

wow.... i realli like the moon shoot.. can tell me what lens and what setting you used?

ed

Thanks doodie,

That moon was shot with a Sigma DG macro 70-300mm F4/5.6 with Sony A55 mounted on tripod. Picture was taken at 300mm and then cropped.
The A55 was set to center focus and spot metering, in the standard mode (with Saturation +1 and sharpness +2) trying to follow the 'agosras'-something setting :sweatsm:

...shot a series with apertures from f4, f8, f11 and f22, waited about half an hour, re-align the centre AF spot on the moon and repeated the process.

I had the A55 shoot RAW + JPEG, what you are seeing is the JPEG outputs as I was unable to access the RAW files with the software which came with the my A500 earlier.

edit: ...best results seems to be at f8 or f11.

 

[albertri]

Thanks doodie,

That moon was shot with a Sigma DG macro 70-300mm F4/5.6 with Sony A55 mounted on tripod. Picture was taken at 300mm and then cropped.
The A55 was set to center focus and spot metering, in the standard mode (with Saturation +1 and sharpness +2) trying to follow the 'agosras'-something setting :sweatsm:

...shot a series with apertures from f4, f8, f11 and f22, waited about half an hour, re-align the centre AF spot on the moon and repeated the process.

I had the A55 shoot RAW + JPEG, what you are seeing is the JPEG outputs as I was unable to access the RAW files with the software which came with the my A500 earlier.

edit: ...best results seems to be at f8 or f11.

thanks for the info bro will try shooting moon one of these days... I just dunno if 18-250 will be sharp enough like your Sigma but I'll and see what's the outcome

 

[Ghostfit]

thanks for the info bro will try shooting moon one of these days... I just dunno if 18-250 will be sharp enough like your Sigma but I'll and see what's the outcome

Good luck, bro ! ...you'll never know until you try !

...my motto: Shoot everything ! ...if it moves, shoot it ! if it doesn't moves, shoot it as well ! :bsmilie:

 

[teodesson]

thanks for the info bro will try shooting moon one of these days... I just dunno if 18-250 will be sharp enough like your Sigma but I'll and see what's the outcome

I believe the 18-250 should be sharper than Sigma?

 

[albertri]

I believe the 18-250 should be sharper than Sigma?

I haven't tried Sigma yet but I did notice the 18-250 is just a bit shoft at both ends... or maybe just my shaky hands lols

 

[Ghostfit]

I haven't tried Sigma yet but I did notice the 18-250 is just a bit shoft at both ends... or maybe just my shaky hands lols

Bro, you'll NEED a tripod to shoot the moon or for that matter anything else at night or in the dark with either of these 2 lense !

I have and tried both lense. Both are soft at the longest end, but the 70-300 has the advantage of a longer reach and a much sharper centre from f8 to f16 to give the results you see earlier. The 18-250 is soft from corner to corner at 250mm regardless of aperture, the moonshots I took with this lens earlier were not usable.
I'm not saying the 18-250 is no good, but moonshots is just not one of the strength of this lens, However in daylight the 18-250 AF speed and accuracy will smoke the 70-300.

 

[albertri]

Bro, you'll NEED a tripod to shoot the moon or for that matter anything else at night or in the dark with either of these 2 lense !

I have and tried both lense. Both are soft at the longest end, but the 70-300 has the advantage of a longer reach and a much sharper centre from f8 to f16 to give the results you see earlier. The 18-250 is soft from corner to corner at 250mm regardless of aperture, the moonshots I took with this lens earlier were not usable.
I'm not saying the 18-250 is no good, but moonshots is just not one of the strength of this lens, However in daylight the 18-250 AF speed and accuracy will smoke the 70-300.

yeah bro from my test shots I did notice that 18-250 is a bit soft at both ends. It just prove the saying "jack of all traits master of none" lols :bsmilie: you can't really have a all in one lens. hmmm let my pocket heals a bit then will invest in a much better or specialized lens

 

[Ghostfit]

yeah bro from my test shots I did notice that 18-250 is a bit soft at both ends. It just prove the saying "jack of all traits master of none" lols :bsmilie: you can't really have a all in one lens. hmmm let my pocket heals a bit then will invest in a much better or specialized lens

I believe that every tool (just like every person) has it's strength and weakness, you just have to find out what they are good at and what they are not so good at, then focus on using them for what they're good at.

For eg: the 18-250 is really good for a 'walk-around' lens and it is excellent in good daylight, refer example below, taken earlier this evening.

It doesn't performs quite so well in the dark but still managed this twilight panaramic shot.

 

[albertri]

I believe that every tool (just like every person) has it's strength and weakness, you just have to find out what they are good at and what they are not so good at, then focus on using them for what they're good at.

For eg: the 18-250 is really good for a 'walk-around' lens and it is excellent in good daylight, refer example below, taken earlier this evening.


It doesn't performs quite so well in the dark but still managed this twilight panaramic shot.

Nice ride! and wow the road so empty

Yeah 18-250 is bang for your bucks if you ask me good travel lens I must say ^_^. I am using this lens indoor at normal light and it can still capture my kids in actions well the goo part is even at low light it still can perform decent AF speed. I cant really complain much against this lens it's a well know fact that these type of lenses are superstar but not a push over also :thumbsup:

Will try to save some $$$ for these 3 types of lenses,
UWA or Wide
Wide - short/mid range
Tele zoom

I'm already good at my prime 50f1.8 this is really a cheap and good lens

 

[kennmail]

Has anyone bought the 35mm F1.8 alrd? i wondering if 35mm wud b more useful den 50mm for general shooting purposes?

 

[Ghostfit]

Nice ride! and wow the road so empty

Yeah 18-250 is bang for your bucks if you ask me good travel lens I must say ^_^. I am using this lens indoor at normal light and it can still capture my kids in actions well the goo part is even at low light it still can perform decent AF speed. I cant really complain much against this lens it's a well know fact that these type of lenses are superstar but not a push over also :thumbsup:

Will try to save some $$$ for these 3 types of lenses,
UWA or Wide
Wide - short/mid range
Tele zoom

I'm already good at my prime 50f1.8 this is really a cheap and good lens

Not mine ! ;p she belongs to a good buddy ...my riding days are over (too old + prefer the comfort of 4 wheels)

Lol, ...I don't limit myself to any plan or roadmaps of lense to own, I just get them as and when the needs arises ...balanced against their costs of course.:bsmilie: ...the choices of new lense and opportunities of 2nd hand ones is changing so fast and so unpredictably it makes no sense for me.
Having said that, my next most likely lens purchase would be the new 35f18 Sam.

 

[albertri]

Not mine ! ;p she belongs to a good buddy ...my riding days are over (too old + prefer the comfort of 4 wheels)

Lol, ...I don't limit myself to any plan or roadmaps of lense to own, I just get them as and when the needs arises ...balanced against their costs of course.:bsmilie: ...the choices of new lense and opportunities of 2nd hand ones is changing so fast and so unpredictably it makes no sense for me.
Having said that, my next most likely lens purchase would be the new 35f18 Sam.

ah the 35mm i'm thinking of that one also and maybe 85mm but thinking if I'll be able to use it often maybe 35mm will be a good indoor lens not too wide nor too narrow.

My photography is pretty mix from landscape to portraits so thats why I like to have a lens for these porposes, and thats why I've tried the 18-250 coz it covers most of my shooting needs.

Opps we OT a lot lols going back to ISO I thin A55 handles noise better than A33 seen a lot of high ISo shots and compare them to my A33 ISo test A55 much more better

 

[TME]

The red spots could be due to your sensor overheating...

 

[A Whale]

How is the a55 compared to the a500/550? Would love to hear feedbacks from those who have tried both