WHAT THE FUCK?
so this is a picture from the 1900€ camera I bought today.
Even my fucking phone makes better pictures.
is this normal?
going to return this piece of garbage and kick the sellers face in.
I mean WHAT THE FUCK MAN
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7M2 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.8 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 52 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 3936 Image Height 2624 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2016:05:03 23:15:32 Exposure Time 1/100 sec F-Number f/1.8 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 800 Lens Aperture f/1.8 Brightness -2.8 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 35.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3936 Image Height 2624 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
nice b8 m8
>>2830823
>exposure program: manual
>ISO speed rating: 800
stupid faggot
Return it so someone who isn't a faggot can enjoy it.
(you)
>>2830832
quality looks fine actually no real noise in the shadows, subject is just very poorly lit and kind of boring
Do you think you can just buy an expensive camera, point it at anything and just make magic happen or what
>>2830838
no I didnt thought that.
But I expected some sort of details or sharpness.
When I zoom into the picture its just grainy and zero details and sharpness..?
>>2830827
What's wrong with ISO 800?
>>2830840
I mean zoom into the picture.
Its just blurry and looks like shit... ;_;
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7M2 Camera Software ILCE-7M2 v2.00 Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.8 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 52 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2014:01:01 03:07:06 Exposure Time 1/100 sec F-Number f/1.8 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 800 Brightness -0.7 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 35.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3936 Image Height 2624 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
>>2830843
>roidniggas logic.
>if i just buy this expensive stuff and inject it ill get BIG
>if i just buy expensive camera ill become saul leiter
>>2830843
Stop shooting small jpg's.
>>2830843
>roid rage
It all makes sense now.
>>2830840
1)indoors lighting is fucking dark, when you see a low key studio shot they still use pretty strong lighting, your camera is basically shitting itself trying to interpret information that just isnt there when you shoot at conditions like this
2)lenses, especially entry level lolzeiss is rarely sharp wide-open (1.8) and especially not in the corners of the sensor (where the subject is)
3)its hand held, 1/100 is fast but will still cause some bluriness
if you really want to do some kind of gay benchmark, go *outside* in the morning or an hour before sundown, set the ISO to 100, set the camera on a flat surface, stop down the lens to f/5.6-f/11 ish and let it take a picture by self timer
and that is 1/10 of the effort better photographers exert to take actual really good pictures
have fun
>>2830847
even 24mp looks like shit, u mean raw would look better?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7M2 Camera Software ILCE-7M2 v2.00 Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.8 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 35 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2014:01:01 03:17:23 Exposure Time 1/100 sec F-Number f/1.8 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 800 Brightness -1.2 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 35.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 6000 Image Height 4000 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
>>2830852
hmm... so I should better get another lens snd do a better job with lightning etc. instead of turning the camera in?
I only know back then I had a 5d mk II and every picture looked fucking awesome and sharp as hell.
>>2830853
its dark and you are underexposing the sensor
just put it in P Mode, Auto ISO, download Google Nik, Denoise with Dfine in Photoshop and then use the output sharpener before exporting
>Manual
>-1.2EV
>jpg
there's no shame in using P Mode, seriously
It's a video camera. You might think it was made for taking pictures, since it resembles a "normal photo camera" more than a video camera. But it's not.
I got a 600D and a GH4, and the 600D definitely superior to the GH4 in terms of taking pictures, although the model several years older much cheaper. And that's because the GH4, like your Sony, is a video camera and not a photo camera, like my Canon.
Don't be sad though. It may not be as good as a dedicated photo camera, but that doesn't mean it's shit. It's still a very capable photo camera. And it records stunning video, something I'm sure you will appreciate more than you might think right now.
Still, you might be able to increase the quality of your photos. Do you shoot in RAW?
If you're serious about getting into photography though I'd suggest returning it and get a Canon or a Nikon.
>>2830862
Don't listen to this person.
You do need to shoot RAW, and learn to process the RAW images.
Getting a canon or a nikon wont make you take better photos. The a7ii is a great camera, and will out perform any of the canon or nikon cameras at the same price point.
>>2830868
>The a7ii is a great camera, and will out perform any of the canon or nikon cameras at the same price point.
Give me one reputable source.
>>2830871
He's talking bullshit.
D610 is better than A7ii, and cheaper.
>>2830868
>Getting a canon or a nikon wont make you take better photos.
This is true. Your skill as a photographer is not determined by your gear.
>The a7ii is a great camera, and will out perform any of the canon or nikon cameras at the same price point.
This is not true. A Canon or Nikon in the same price range as the A7ii will produce better image quality.
But the A7ii is a great camera, and will probably cover your photography needs. And it has really nice video. But if you're planning to get serious about photography just get a Canon or Nikon.
>-2.8EV
>literally trying to take a picture with a single candle light
If there's no light, there's no picture. Stop being a NEET and apply yourself. Go outside.
>>2830855
No you should just learn how cameras work...
>>2830843
What did you expect whit this shitty light?
>>2830880
>But if you're planning to get serious about photography just get a Canon or Nikon.
Sorry, already bought a Fuji.
sell it to me for $1000 I'm in the market for one
>>2830901
>JPG
>under exposed
>absolutely nothing in focus
>0 processing for sharpening and pulling detail into shadows
>no tripod
>no IBIS or OSS
millions of reasons why you and your photographs are shit
>>2830874
>no ibis
>plastic all over
>double the size
>can't effectively use pre-ai lenses
>dat tiny viewfinder
>worse sensor performance
>woefully inaccurate autofocus
The d610 is a childs toy in comparison to the a7ii
>>2831135
The K1 pisses over the D610 and lolA7
>>2831138
but they haven't even shown the lens lineup yet
>This is your average Sony user
>I'll buy an expensive camera
>My pictures will be better
>I'll shitpost on /p/ that my camera system is the best until everyone else buys one
>I don't regret my purchase at all
;____;
Buyers remorse/Sony general?
>>2831146
>shitting on these people
I'm grateful for people like OP that spend a lot buying a sony and then put it up on ebay or craigslist for far cheaper. I got my a7s for 900750 after a guy told me 'it's half the megapixels of his phone'
I say thank god for retards
>>2831147
why the fuck did my phone autocorrect the number
I got it for 900
>>2831138
It also costs more than an a7rii, which it doesn't piss all over.
Also, it hasnt hit the shelves yet, lets not forget this is a product thats been promised for over 5 years now...
>>2831154
How do you figure? A new a7rii is 3200 dollars on b&h and a new k-1 is 1800 dollars
Thats nearly half as much
>>2830843
>f1.8
>wafer thin DOF crisp sharp on keyboard, blurry because everything else is out of focus
>wide open soft lens rendering
>why is the photo blurry, /p/eee?
>>2831140
Thats because they already have one.
>>2831161
I mean I understand a couple of the crop lenses will work and you can adapt the 6x7 pentax and use the fa lineup but what is their lineup for new FF lenses looking like?
>>2831162
They already have a bunch of FF lenses. Even some of their "crop" ones are actually FF
>>2831163
There's 8 D FA Listed here. I was asking whether or not there was better information on the new FF lenses that they'll be releasing alongside the k-1. I've got a k-50 and it would be nice to know that in the future I could upgrade but the fact that the da 15mm and 21mm don't work is worrying because I don't see any information on there being some new wider primes available aside from the 15-30mm (which does look like it could be a killer lens)
http://www.pentaxforums.com/lenssearch/?inproduction=0&series%5B%5D=D+FA
I did just say before that there's a couple of crop lenses that will work fine, especially the da 35mm 2.4. They've been compiling a list of which DA lenses will work straight up on the forums but like I said it's worrying that some of my favorite crop lenses might not even work outright
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/54-pentax-lens-articles/31629-da-lenses-full-frame-test-shots-thread.html
>>2830843
You (or more like the camera) were shooting at full aperture, which means depth of field is narrow, which means only a limited part of the view is in focus. For that scene you would have needed at least f/8 and either a tripod or a flash. Basically you bought an expensive camera without even knowing about these very elementary things. Do the world a favor and trade it in for a point and shoot. If you're shit at photography, an expensive camera will do nothing to make it better.
>>2831179
>favor
>abusing the comma
Get out of here you illiterate buffoon.
>>2831146
>I'll buy an expensive camera
>My pictures will be better
>I'll shitpost on /p/ that my camera system is the best until everyone else buys one
I do not understand this logic, dont everyone want to have the worst camera possible and be able to take great pictures with it.
>>2831184
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Width 679 Image Height 516
>>2831219
There is no disagreement here.
I only care about how the post was written, I don't care for the content of the post.
>>2830823
I did this with the First A7. AND legacy glass. You just suck.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 6000 Image Height 4000 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:05:04 10:45:24 Image Created 2016:05:01 11:46:24 Exposure Time 1/400 sec F-Number f/0.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 250 Brightness 2.4 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1200 Image Height 800 Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
>>2831164
Don't fall for it. All these "tests" from raving fanboys are not to be trusted. Look at the official Pentax compatibility list:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/7158808396/worth-the-wait-a-look-inside-the-pentax-k-1?slide=12
You hear these fanboys saying shit like the DA* 55mm F1.4 is a full frame lens. Sure it covers the full frame but the performance wide open in the corners is not acceptable. It's not just me saying that, pentax says this lens should be used stopped down. If you don't believe me look at this sample from pentax:
http://k-1-lab.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/IMGP0142_R-2000x1335.jpg
If that is acceptable to you go ahead. I see a lens that is not made for full frame.
Pentax finally launched their lens lab where they have sample images of a lot of lenses:
http://k-1-lab.com/en/
Personally I would not bother with DA lenses. Sure you can probably stop them down and get usable results but I don't want to take a picture and later find out that I use an aperture where the corners look terrible. You can try your luck with FA lenses but which will also perform well stopped down. I just don't want to get a modern camera and slap old lenses in front of them. It would be fun to experiment but I want lenses to match my sensor.
Pentax knows this and the have a nice roadmap with some prime lenses that will hopefully be up to the standard of DFA lenses. Maybe even better. The 15-30mm is indeed a killer lens. It's already proven because it's just a Tamron 15-30mm with a pentax badge. There are also some wide primes in the future that might be just what you need.
I'm looking forward to the K-1 and it's future lens lineup. I'm not a blind fanboy who has unrealistic expectations of using old lenses on new cameras. The A7 can adapt almost any lens yet people still want more native lenses for it. Adapting and using old lenses is fun but not a substitute for native lenses.
Image is the pentax lens roadmap.
>>2831284
Thank you very much. I'd love to see the supposed large aperture standard single focus lens
I've been wary of this shit from the start though. As much as I love my k-50 I never planned to use any of my crop lenses on it and I really have to see the lineup they have before I decide on if it's worth it or not considering I could get an a7s for a couple hundred less and it'd do more of what I want
That one example for the 15-30 is pretty fantastic though hot damn. I too am excited to see if they can pull out some stops and get a solid lineup
>>2831285
Look at images of the tamron 15-30mm, it's the same lens. It's hard to find a better wide zoom out there.
I'm waiting for the large aperture standard lens too. My wish list is a 28mm f1.8 and a 50mm f1.4 with at least one having weather sealing. Throw in an 85mm f1.8 and I'm set for life.
>>2830915
Is this OP? What model did you get?
>>2830823
>Even my fucking phone makes better pictures.
No, it doesn't.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7M2 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7.1 (Windows) Photographer david mornet Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 35 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 282 dpi Vertical Resolution 282 dpi Image Created 2016:05:04 18:32:19 Exposure Time 1/250 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Normal Program ISO Speed Rating 200 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Brightness 7.5 EV Exposure Bias -0.3 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 35.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
>>2831306
Post a 100% crop, please.
>>2831322
Anything that you can only see at 100% has no bearing on whether a photo is "good" or not.
>>2831322
Mind that it's taken with the Tamron 24-70. So consider it's taken with a low-end zoom.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:05:04 19:19:31 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 1000 Image Height 1000
>>2831323
ITT we're discussing gear and image quality, mate. A 100% crop is relevant.
>>2831322
here's an unsharpened 100% crop from my a7ii with a 200 quid zoom on it.
Ain't nothing wrong with your camera m8o, just you
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Color Space Information sRGB
>>2831334
It's a troll thread, man, literally nothing in this whole string is "relevant".
It's porn for sony users. Hey come here and post your 100% crops! It'll justify your purchases!
>>2830823
You posted this same thread months ago with the original A7.
