Sony A7/(r) image sharing thread

[tntrue]

m43 @ an equivalent of 600mm can give nice moon shots, better than cropped full-frame photos. That also goes for some birding shots I saw here. Gomen... If you need reach either you better be prepared to carry more kg and to fork out more money for the best quality in full-frame or you use a smaller sensor for that job. Cropping full-frame shots into the nirvana doesn't look that amazing...

Alternatively, anyone interested in birding could take a much shorter lens, even a P&S camera, to a bird park or any place birds are tethered and wouldn't have to worry about cropping. Gomen…

Animals in a non-captive environment don't pose like people do; most times a critter photographer has to take what he can get and make the best of it. That's what makes cameras like the A7 and NEX-7 such valuable tools. They produce RAW files that can be cropped heavily if it makes a difference between getting a shot and not getting a shot.

Those of us who aren't too chicken-$hit to post our own photos in a picture-post thread probably aren't using those pics to try to sell to stock. Nor are we seeking the idle musings of a self-designated arbiter of taste/quality. Rather, we're sharing our experiences with the capabilities of the gear we're using, ostensibly in a constructive manner.

 

[ricleo]

m43 @ an equivalent of 600mm can give nice moon shots, better than cropped full-frame photos. That also goes for some birding shots I saw here. Gomen... If you need reach either you better be prepared to carry more kg and to fork out more money for the best quality in full-frame or you use a smaller sensor for that job. Cropping full-frame shots into the nirvana doesn't look that amazing...

I will challenge you to find a proper moon shoot from a m4/3 camera and lens combo that is not cropped then. Full shot from the longest quality m4/3 lens you can find.

 

[ageha]

I will challenge you to find a proper moon shoot from a m4/3 camera and lens combo that is not cropped then. Full shot from the longest quality m4/3 lens you can find.

Alternatively you could simply get onto a mountain and closer to the moon, APS-C sized sensor (1.5x).

I thought those shots aren't bad though they come from an APS sized sensor (1.6x):

Higher pixel density on a smaller area isn't a bad thing when doing those kinds of shots.

 

[vibranze]

Two shots of Taipei 101 during my recent trip to Taiwan. Taken with Konica Hexanon AR 40.

 

[ricleo]

Alternatively you could simply get closer to the moon, APS-C sized sensor (1.5x).
I thought this shot isn't bad though it comes from an APS sized sensor (1.6x):

Higher pixel density on a smaller area isn't a bad thing when doing those kinds of shots.

no one is disputing the longer supposed reach of a smaller sensor with higher pixel density.

i still want to see you post an uncropped native m4/3 or 4/3 combo that gives "nice moon shots, better than cropped full-frame photos"

best if you can share some from your own specticular shot archives rather than random flickr links with shots from telescopes

Even with my previous OMD and 75-300 m.zuiko II. you need to crop to get the moon to fill more of the frame.

this was with the OMD + 75-300 @ 300 on a very clear night. cropped

 

[tsammyc]

m43 @ an equivalent of 600mm can give nice moon shots, better than cropped full-frame photos. That also goes for some birding shots I saw here. Gomen... If you need reach either you better be prepared to carry more kg and to fork out more money for the best quality in full-frame or you use a smaller sensor for that job. Cropping full-frame shots into the nirvana doesn't look that amazing...

I've compared the EM5/100-300 vs the NEX 5N/70-400 at 600mm shooting newspapers and the 70-400 was much sharper than the 100-300 so I don't think M43 has anything at 600mm EFL that is competitive for moon shots. However, M43 is still a 600mm EFL package that I can carry all day without a tripod with decent image quality and I'm grateful for that.

 

[ricleo]

nice hehe this is y i like the sony sensor for its wide dynamic range. graduations between the sky, buildings and the mountains look good

Two shots of Taipei 101 during my recent trip to Taiwan. Taken with Konica Hexanon AR 40.

 

[tsammyc]

Alternatively you could simply get onto a mountain and closer to the moon, APS-C sized sensor (1.5x).

I thought those shots aren't bad though they come from an APS sized sensor (1.6x):

Higher pixel density on a smaller area isn't a bad thing when doing those kinds of shots.

Heh! Can you take some shots to see if we can see the Chinese moon lander?

 

[ageha]

no one is disputing the longer supposed reach of a smaller sensor with higher pixel density.

i still want to see you post an uncropped native m4/3 or 4/3 combo that gives "nice moon shots, better than cropped full-frame photos"

best if you can share some from your own specticular shot archives rather than random flickr links with shots from telecopes

Even with my previous OMD and 75-300 m.zuiko II. you need to crop to get the moon to fill more of the frame.

this was with the OMD + 75-300 @ 300 on a very clear night. cropped

I didn't say native lenses. The lens on your A7 isn't native either. Just mount your 600mm Sigma onto your 16MP m43 body, should be an improvement at 1200mm. I agree my first post wasn't clear on that and misleading. If you want to sneak out my moon shots you can simply go though my galleries linked below.

I've compared the EM5/100-300 vs the NEX 5N/70-400 at 600mm shooting newspapers and the 70-400 was much sharper than the 100-300 so I don't think M43 has anything at 600mm EFL that is competitive for moon shots.

Indeed, it doesn't but you aren't limited to native lenses. There is no such native FE lens either.

 

[vibranze]

nice hehe this is y i like the sony sensor for its wide dynamic range. graduations between the sky, buildings and the mountains look good

Thanks bro.

 

[ricleo]

actually i did. the sigma 120-300 + 2X TC doesn't work as well on the OMD. Too much lens aberations and softness when used on that small sensor.So it wasn't worth posting vs the result from the 75-300.

Just questioning your logic about "not cropping" with a m4/3 camera. I shoot with the gear available to me, and crop to reach the composition needed. In order not to crop, you need a lens/telescope that can get you that close in the first place without loosing image quality.

I did take a quick look at your gallery and sorry nope, didn't see any amazing shots of the moon.

I didn't say native lenses. The lens on your A7 isn't native either. Just mount your 600mm Sigma onto your 16MP m43 body, should be an improvement at 1200mm. I agree my first post wasn't clear on that and misleading. If you want to sneak out my moon shots you can simply go though my galleries linked below.



Indeed, it doesn't but you aren't limited to native lenses. There is no such native FE lens either.

 

[ageha]

actually i did. the sigma 120-300 + 2X TC doesn't work as well on the OMD. Too much lens aberations and softness when used on that small sensor.So it wasn't worth posting vs the result from the 75-300.

Just questioning your logic about "not cropping" with a m4/3 camera. I shoot with the gear available to me, and crop to reach the composition needed.

I did take a quick look at your gallery and nope, didn't see any amazing shots of the moon.

I didn't say they are amazing either. Where do you take those quotes from? I said previously my initial post was misleading but I guess an apology isn't easy to comprehend. I think what I meant was clear in my later posts. Too bad you can't post your 1200mm moon shot, I like to see it as a comparison.

 

[ricleo]

I didn't say they are amazing either. Where do you take those quotes? I also said previously my initial post was misleading but I guess an apology isn't easy to comprehend. I think what I meant was clear in my later post. Too bad you can't post your 1200mm moon shot, I like to see it.

aiyo...that 1200mm moon shot was so soft that i trashed it without trying to PP. A 2x TC crops the optics by half, and another 2X crop from the m4/3 sensor means the OMD was only using a very small part of the lens optics.

lend me a m4/3 camera and i can try again hehe.. still have that EF to m4/3 adaptor lying around somewhere.

edit: maybe i shld just get the GM1 for my wife. pair up the tiny GM1 with the 600mm sigma combo. Sure will be a funny looking combo!

 

[Atarandas]

Speaking of which, any bros into astrophotography ? Did a read up , the techniques and knowledge too scientific for me already T_T

 

[ageha]

Speaking of which, any bros into astrophotography ? Did a read up , the techniques and knowledge too scientific for me already T_T

Very exciting photos in the flickr groups but pretty much all of them fall apart above SVGA resolution or earlier. I like to give it a try but I feel the quality might not be worth it without more effort and a proper telescope.

 

[ageha]

Walking around Kansai with my kit &35mm

A German in Japan for Xmas?

 

[achtungbaby]

Walking around Kansai with the kit/35mm

[/url][/IMG]

[/url][/IMG]

[/url][/IMG]

[/url][/IMG]

[/url][/IMG]

 

[tntrue]

After seeing some great indoors shots by the bros in this thread (and since I was stuck inside anyway) I decide to give it a try. Suffice it to say I still like everybody else's shots better than my own… ;p …although I do like what this piece of glass can do on the A7.

A7 with 35mm Summicron-R:

 

[AJR7R]

12mm I would go B&W esp for those Long Exposure minimalistic style because of the 'natural' vignetting. The ability to use filters from 12mm - 14mm is like 'priceless' lol

Hi Drawde, first and foremost, fantastic shots/edits! I just got the 10-18 and removed the rear baffle(I cant wait that long for the FE wide angle to be out..lol), don't mind me asking, what 62mm lens filters are you using for this lens? Thanks in advance.

 

[AJR7R]

some shots from last night to share. first few from the SEL 10-18 full frame uncropped mode

After I saw your pics and Drawde's pics using the 10-18 lens I had to get it and removed the baffle as well. Really wonderful shots. What were the focal distance you shot with? any lightroom correction?