March 2009 SONY new bodies, new lens
- Thread starter thinkvision
- Start date
- Status
Wow...ISO3200..
And they say Sony is not good at high ISO :sweat:
jammerwong
New Member
I really envy the pictures taken by fellow Clubsnaper @ high ISO....I am having problem with ISO800 or higher...
Like many has said, those who thrashed Sony's high ISO performance are those "modern photographers" who only goes for the latest technology, keep updating their kits, IT savvy and keep looking their pictures at 100% on PC but have not been taking pictures that are worthy to show or even for self-usage. Sometimes I wonder why they need cameras in the first place if it's just to show what equipment they have but dun really take pictures that are memorable or important to them.
Real photographers look at how to compose their pictures and makes them look better. And the pictures that they take are very much important for them as good memories that are priceless to non other than themselves which is more than enough to justify for photography in the first place.
I rather have a camera that is useful to me (Quick AF Liveview) to help me take good nice photos that are sharp and the object is of my interest (like my family/son,etc) with some noise,
rather than taking all pictures that are clean of noise but with action motion blurness (slow af liveview and no IS using prime lens) which makes the pictures useless to me...
godzilla60
New Member
that sounds like a sweeping statement. :nono: everyone strives for perfection in their own right. High ISO performance is essential to low-light event photography which doesn't allow flashes since it provides the latitude of possible shots unobtainable with low ISO.
Does that make photographers who hunger for high ISO performance any less real? If striving for the best equipment there is makes anyone less real, then we should all ditch DSLRs and go for normal film cameras. Normal disposable cameras can take perfectly good priceless pictures too.
Need a bit of post processing for that (i'm using Noiseware pro).
Straight from the camera, Sony ISO still isn't quite the level of C/N yet, but it's not as bad as many like to think.
boombox
Senior Member
Okay lah... many people who started out in the digital realm doesn't know that they are in "wonderland"
Like - if you see even the "worst" Sony body, the pixel-jammed A350 shooting at ISO800 on that body's more or less like shooting ISO160 on film. :sweat:
Nah, I am not giving a sweeping statement nor am I aiming at those who treasure high ISO performance as I know many brothers here do make a living by shooting non-flash photography.
I myself also uses high ISO often at home.
I am only trying to comment to those who bash Sony's ISO performance like dirt....and before they do that, they should try to see what good pictures people can do with their Sony gears.
And I totally agree with you. If the subject I am taking is of interest to me, I will treasure the pictures as well (even if it's not in best IQ) though it's taken by disposable cameras.
I second that.
But then just wondering, pros/shooting for living normally shoots in raw and maybe sometimes jpeg. However the case, noise should not be a concern for them since PP is almost done on every pictures they take.
For consumers like myself, I shoot in jpegs most of time as I am lazy to PP every photos and I feel I can accept the noise level for my point of view, at least it's way much better than my pns...
kingfishers
New Member
Hi, since we cannot perfect even in human life, not to talk about camera, I slowly learn to accept some fine noise to make it more soothing in viewing.Let us see others Cam like N & C doesn't they have noise as well.There are many software for noise reduction, What are theirs present for???? Don't they also reduces noise from theirs N & C as well. So, Sony will become very strong in the coming markets, they have already make theirs present known.:bsmilie:
Galdor
Senior Member
I agree with you bro. I have seen some straight from cam high ISO shots from Canon also and they are just slightly cleaner than the rest and like you said, most of the pictures have gone through noise reduction, so really no big deal.
Yes, even the best product will have it's set of weaknesses.
When we bought our equipment, it means that we have pretty much convinced ourselves that the weaknesses of it have more or less been compensated by it's strengths.
If we are overly concerned abt it, we should not have bought it in the first place.
kingfishers
New Member
Yes Brothers & Sisters of Sony Cam photographers :bsmilie:let set our eyes on further vision ,awaiting the long marathon of wats Sony going to prepared us to another breath of length,with greater transformation into news ages of cam.:thumbsup:
jammerwong
New Member
Sorry if I sparked off a quarrel. What I was trying to say, was that I envy fellow clubsnapper using Sony A-300 as myself, not somebody using C or N brand. As a nobbie,
I would need an answer : Does noise reduction software like :Noiseware pro only worked with RAW pictures, or does it work with JPEG.
No worries, no quarrel of any kind here. Just want to state the fact that Sony is still a step behind and definitely can be improved. It isn't bad, but far from the best also, of which some Sony users tend to think :bsmilie:
I do noise reduction after raw convertion, not sure if that's the usual way.
Last edited:
thinkvision
Senior Member
new list of rumors:
Nikon D300s
Canon 60D
canon 1Dmk4
Sony A-800
Sony A-770
Pentax K-M2
Nikon D300s
Canon 60D
canon 1Dmk4
Sony A-800
Sony A-770
Pentax K-M2
- Status
