just a reminder that Sony can't be beaten
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1024 Image Height 861
daily reminder OP has never done a photo worth caring about.
>>2842491
Show the photos with the sony, not of the sony
>>2842491
waiting for my pentax full frame mirrorless.
>buying a camera from a company that makes household appliances
>shit lenses
>shit frame rate
>shit support
>shit resale value
>B-but muh shills XD
a6300 doesn't even have stabilization. http://cameradecision.com/faq/does-Sony-Alpha-a6300-have-Image-Stabilization
a7R and a7S are just too fucking pricey for me. I'd rather buy a camera that I don't want to kill myself if I ever broke it or it got stolen.
>>2842503
Best Canon I own.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 500 Image Height 500 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:05:18 22:51:39 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 402 Image Height 500
>>2842512
>a7R and a7S are just too fucking pricey for me. I'd rather buy a camera that I don't want to kill myself if I ever broke it or it got stolen.
while they are indeed pricy, you're a clown if you don't have insurance.
>>2842512
don't worry it will lose tons of value next when sony replaces it lol so no big woop if it gets stolen
>>2842491
>compressed RAW
what's the point?
>>2842573
When will this argument die?
They offered uncompressed RAW two or three updates ago and even then, it's a useless nit picking feature that fuji fanbois continue to cry about
>>2842593
>When will this argument die?
when all Sony cameras have an option to turn off RAW compression
>>2842593
>They offered uncompressed RAW two or three updates ago
only on a couple of cameras*
>>2842593
Can you or someone else explain why is compressed raw bad?
>>2842617
Because a RAW file should be just that: raw, uncompressed, untouched. There's literally no reason to compress a raw file.
Compressed RAW is like buying a supercar only to find out that it has a throttle limiter for gas mileage.
>>2842624
But what's the goal? Why would sony use it in their cameras? Does it take less processing power or something?
>>2842491
I really like the affordable lens lineup.
>>2842603
>They offered uncompressed RAW two or three updates ago
>only on a couple of cameras*
And only after they got a lot of bad press because castrated RAW is not RAW at all. And since it only took a firmware update to turn it off, and since they have only offered this for a small number of their cameras it's clear that they are more interested in mugging their fanboys than offering serious photographic equipment
>>2842627
Who knows. Sony is the king of bizarre, opaque decisions and bad ideas. Maybe they felt like it would make browsing through pictures faster?
What's up with OP's pic? Is that a screw-on filter that makes it look like a Zeiss lens? I think it says Takumar underneath.
>>2842638
Sonnar.
people ITT: go to https://esupport.sony.com/US/p/support-contacts.pl?mdltype_id=133
choose:
>chat support
tell sony directly, how idiotic it is than their cameras (especially the NEX series) have no option to turn off compression on RAW files.
let them hear how fucking retarded they are.
>they directly relay firmware related things for their "engineers" or so they claim
>>2842649
Not that many people on /p/ have Sony cameras and only a few bother to shoot RAW.
>>2842663
>only a few bother to shoot RAW.
>Not that many people on /p/ have Sony cameras
so what? just tell sony that they're retarded for not offering an option to disable compression.
>>2842630
Underrated.
>>2842565
>don't worry it will lose tons of value next when sony replaces it
I wish they'd hurry the fuck up and replace it so the price of 2nd hand A7II's would drop a bit more.
Not really wanting to pick up an A7 and have lossy raws.
>>2842593
>When will this argument die?
When they offer it for the 1st gen A7's too.
>>2842624
>There's literally no reason to compress a raw file.
There's also no reason to ever process your JPG's like shit in camera, but Sony also do that.
>>2842627
>But what's the goal? Why would sony use it in their cameras? Does it take less processing power or something?
Why would Sony have previously used their very own hotshoe/accessory port in the past?
>>2842663
Why would you shoot raw, those images look like shit, never open with my photo app, jpegs work great and look like I remember
>>2842624
The problem from your argument comes when the image quality of this compressed raw is still even higher quality than your Nikon or Canon raw, because the 42MP sensor is a level ahead.
It just becomes a technicality at this point.
Then you have to ask yourself what is more important to you, absolute image quality or technicality?
>go to Fuji thread
>thread is full of shots from anons
>go to Pentax thread
>thread is full of shots from anons
>go to Ricoh gr thread
>thread is full of shots from anons
>go to Sony thread
>thread is full of spec sheet shitposting and not a single shot
every fucking time
>>2842747
These threads are mostly made/bumped by very biter and jealous people who and angry Nikon doesn't have 42MP camera even now, a whole year after Sony revealed theirs.
>>2842617
Because of you have an area of very high contrast, then rape the shadows, then observe at 3:1. Occasionally you can see very slight artifacts.
>>2842624
If i could over double my mpg and the only negative being an ever so slight loss of power whilst over 9k revs in top gear, I'd probably see that as a pretty neat feature ;)
>>2842627
File sizes are less than half, you get a longer raw burst
>>2842630
The lens lineup is phenomenal so far, the 28mm f2 is completely unmatched at its price point, stunning 55mm sonnar for about an 1/8th of what leica want for theirs, 90mm macro, 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 2.8 are the very best in their class, there's more exotics from zeiss and voigtlander than are necessary. Canon lenses work fantastically with the sigma adapter (lock ups and aperture problems were fixed in the latest firmware), sigma lenses work even better. Thanks to techarts new adapter EVERY LENS EVER gets autofocus.
>>2842631
"Mugging there fanboys", like how canikon gimp their cameras purely through software? Like how canon haven't invested in sensor research and are a decade behind? Or like how fuji, pentax and nikon all pay sony top dollar for their sensors?
>>2842747
Well its not like they can discuss the technical prowess of their cameras is it, lel.
Also, im too busy getting perfectly usable shots at iso 3200, checkmate fuji fags, pic related. Doot doot.
>>2842772
im a GRfag, not a fuji one
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Photographer AMockus Image-Specific Properties:
>>2842778
My point still stands, the sony 16mp sensor is coming up to being a decade old... in a body with a mediocre fixed lens... and DUST.
WHAT A PREMIUM PHOTOGRAPHY EXPERIENCE!
>>2842518
>when you see it you will shit keks
>>2842733
They look like you remember because you were looking through an evf displaying the very same jpeg profile when you took the shot?
>>2842772
So theres a practical reason for the compressed files and the pros outweigh the negatives. Thanks for laying to rest all the concerns i had with buying sony, and after reading what you put and googling the "issues" its really fucking obvious that these things are nothing compared to the arbitrarily long list of problems other makers have.
Also, sony have added features and listened to their customers and addressed concerns through firmware updates, which is amazing! Especially when you consider canon users had to wait for magic lantern and nikons problems dont get addressed at all - until a replacement body comes out - where your likely waiting around 5 years (or almost instantly if your body flicks oil all over the sensor).
A7ii is on it's way, along with an mc-11 and 28mm f2, I'll probably get the new nifty fifty once it lands properly, can't quite justify the 55 at triple the cost.
>>2842772
>stunning 55mm sonnar for about an 1/8th of what leica want for theirs
Daily reminder everything's better when you shoot film, not sonys.
http://www.verybiglobo.com/sony-fe-55mm-f1-8-z-vs-canon-fd-50mm-f1-2-l/
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties:
>>2842861
$500+ to play sample lottery on ebay on an ancient lens with no electronics... no thanks
Also that article shows the canon sucks dicks in the corners, even at f8
>>2842772
buy new lenses goy goy. Always buy new and shill shill shill. Image quality is great goyim.
That's real fucking neato, but I just want to take pictures.
>>2842864
>he needs a crutch to take photos
>>2842911
Didn't OP suggest that this was the best solution for both buying new lenses - as they are the best in their class AND using old lenses - because who wouldn't want the best possible sensor, ibis, focus peaking and autofocus for use with old manual glass? Pic related, precise manual focusing and exposure at f1.4 with zero chimping.
Why are you so butthurt?
[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 Uncalibrated
>>2842798
>mediocre fixed lens
I like Sony (video guy) but don't be a retard.
>>2842772
Damage contrololololol
>>2842864
You mean only half as much for a lense that's a whole stop faster, achieves its resolution, distortion and chromab performance without leaning on digital corrections, and isn't plastic trash that lasts only as long as sone decides to keep using that completely electrical lense mount (or more likely only as long as the shitty glue folding the focusing elements in place holds up)?
>sounds like a bargain
Also,
>sucks dicks in the corners
W/ever ya minger.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 550D Camera Software GIMP 2.8.14 Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.0.8 Serial Number 1132529712 Lens Name EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2016:05:04 10:20:03 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/8.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/8.0 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 100.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 581 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Partial Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode One-Shot Drive Mode Timed Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Self-Timer Length 10 sec Macro Mode Normal White Balance Custom Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 160 Color Matrix 129
>>2842778
>>2842798
>>2843036
>t great fw just toggin w/ my
>D U S T
>U
>S
>T
>in auto ISO aperture priority mode w/ film simulation creative filtered jpegs
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD. Camera Model GR Camera Software GIMP 2.8.14 Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 28 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:05:20 00:00:47 Exposure Time 1/40 sec F-Number f/5.0 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 800 Lens Aperture f/4.9 Brightness 2.4 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 18.30 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 530 Image Height 800 Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal
>>2842491
Not getting any help from /g/.
Can someone answer this::
I'm looking for a video camera with better life than this. I want it to have similar stats and functionality, but with a ~90+ min battery life, preferably more.
I kinda would like a camcorder, like those little handheld ones, but I'm not sure what's actually good.
See, this one looks nice:
https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B01CHWTZPE/ref=ox_sc_act_title_11?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A3MXAQFA0VQPBJ
However, someone said all the reviews are fake... and they kinda look it.
Then there's, like, this one:
http://smile.amazon.com/dp/B00YX6KPQ6/ref=twister_B00YX6KJZ8?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1
Seems pretty good also, but I can't find any results about battery life, other than people saying it's "good", but "good" would mean 2h+ for me.
I have a few others listed, but this last one here seems like the best option, but I wanna know what y'all think:
http://smile.amazon.com/Sony-HDRCX240-Video-Camera-2-7-Inch/dp/B014X23ATS?ie=UTF8&psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=ox_sc_act_title_1&smid=A5W45QDYAHWB2
So, ultimately, I guess, what's a good camcorder for YouTube vids? I do NOT want to exceed $200, if at all possible.
If it can record for 2 hours in 720p, I'm more than happy.
But my Olympus
>pic related
only gets, AT MOST 70 minutes, and it has a automatic record end after 46 minutes
Any suggestions?
Is the $159.95 one good?
>>2843358
good post
>>2843359
So, can you answer my question or give me an alternative suggestion?
>>2843283
I like your colors
post process tips?
>>2843371
thanks. sorry, I've never used /p/ before. I'm new to this board.
I'll repost it there.
>>2843376
Well, crap...
I guess I'll repost it there, too...
or link it since I already posted
>compressing raws
what won't sonycucks put up with?
>>2843386
You're outing yourself /v/tard.
The thing you don't get is their raw is higher image quality than your raw, despite being compressed. Because their sensor is better than your sensor.
>>2843498
I believe the A7rii achieved a dxo high score despite the compressed raw.
That's why the criticism comes off as "concern troll". Because if sony already has the better image quality, we really should be concerned about the other companies, and not Sony.
>>2843498
500nm canon sensor.
>>2842751
>42 Megapixel camera
>looks alright
Love mine but claiming it's the best is stupid. There is no best...
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 0 mm 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 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2015:08:28 15:47:33 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/0.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 200 Brightness 1.0 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Daylight Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 0.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1000 Image Height 667 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
>>2843566
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 0 mm 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 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2015:08:08 16:38:48 Exposure Time 1/200 sec F-Number f/0.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 400 Brightness -1.6 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Daylight Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 0.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1000 Image Height 667 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
First time dicking around with star shots.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 0 mm 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 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2015:07:27 20:33:10 Exposure Time 1/80 sec F-Number f/0.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 1600 Brightness -4.4 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Daylight Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 0.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1000 Image Height 667 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
>>2843568
Wrong photo...fuck posting it though. Have a seal instead...
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 0 mm 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 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2015:08:28 14:02:44 Exposure Time 1/500 sec F-Number f/0.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 400 Brightness 2.3 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Daylight Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 0.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1000 Image Height 667 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 0 mm 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 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2015:08:28 13:40:07 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/0.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Brightness 1.0 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Daylight Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 0.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1000 Image Height 667 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 0 mm 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 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2015:08:28 11:39:00 Exposure Time 1/500 sec F-Number f/0.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 200 Brightness 4.0 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Daylight Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 0.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1000 Image Height 667 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 0 mm 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 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2015:08:09 19:34:36 Exposure Time 1/800 sec F-Number f/0.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 200 Brightness 4.2 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Daylight Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 0.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1000 Image Height 667 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 0 mm 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 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2015:08:09 20:00:08 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/0.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Brightness 0.5 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Cloudy Weather Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 0.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1000 Image Height 667 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 0 mm 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 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2015:09:29 19:23:27 Exposure Time 1/60 sec F-Number f/0.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Brightness 0.6 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Daylight Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 0.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1000 Image Height 667 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
/dump
All shot on a Canon FD 28mm or 50mm.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 0 mm 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 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2015:10:04 18:58:40 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/0.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 200 Brightness 0.4 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Daylight Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 0.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1200 Image Height 800 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
>>2842491
> Autofocus
> Native lenses choice
> Battery
> Ergonomics
Wow, that wasn't hard. Still my A7ii can't be beaten for adapting muh vintage glass.
>>2843619
>af
A6300 does better than any dslr
>native lens
Bring out many more each year than any other brand, with objectively better quality optics, has the best in class 24-70, 70-200, 85mm, 28mm and 55mm; what else do you need?
>battery
Mine lasts for about 800 shots, they're also tiny
>ergonomics
Sorry, what? Have you ever held one? Unless you're a fat handed twat like sugar they sit great in the hand. Unlike canons where it feels like your grabbing onto a downies face.
>>2843630
>Have you ever held one?
lrn2read
He owns an A7ii, fanboy
>>2843365
DSLR scan.
Use a flash.
Edit using curves and luminosity masks in GIMP.
Git gud.
>>2843630
>af: A6300 does better than any dslr
lol no. But I'm probably going to get one anyway.
>>2843630
>>af
>A6300 does better than any dslr
- what Sonyfags ACTUALLY believe.
>>2842617
>explain why is compressed raw bad?
It shouldn't be.
The Nikon lossy compressed raw files are perfect: no visual loss of quality whatsoever, even after extreme editing.
I never use anything else.
But for whatever retarded reason Sony decided to use a compression scheme that causes very visible artifacts.
>>2842491
i use mahagonXG4000
which has way better features
>>2843949
Nikon is the one who needs to improve their image quality.
Come back when your Nikons get higher dxo score than the a7rii.
>>2843958
Well Nikon gets most of their sensors from Sony but the difference is that Nikon makes the most out of them.
If and when Nikon gets the 42MP sensor, it will probably outscore the A7RII. Their "only" 36MP D810 has a higher score, A7RII excepted, than ALL the other Sony's. They've got 6 spots out of the top 10. But now that Sony is going forward with uncompressed RAWs, maybe that will erase Nikon's advantage there.
>>2843972
Just keep in mind none of the Sony cameras on dxo have been retested with the updated uncompressed raw.
>If and when
It's more a question of if and not when in this case.
Nikon is in the beggars position and Sony doesn't have to give them that sensor. Canon has their own newly updated 180nm factory, they will surpass Nikon soon, and maybe surpass Sony as well.
>>2843958
Nikon image quality is perfectly fine.
And without resorting to retardedly huge uncompressed raw files.
I'd still prefer the raw files from the D810 over the A7ii.
>>2843980
>Nikon is in the beggars position
Sonyggers have to be the biggest retards on the planet.
>>2844012
Anyway, you shouldn't worry about someone who has higher image quality than yourself.
It comes off as illogical, and strange.
>>2844014
Nikon actually has to beg for the 42MP bsi sensor. It's not something they are automatically privileged to.
>>2844016
I was just answering a question.
No need to get all butthurt.
>>2844022
The one who is hurt is usually the one who needs to attack other camera makers.
There is a strange false concern over sony's iq/filesize decisions, when in reality they're doing just fine and are topping the sensor benchmarks.
>>2844020
Lol. Sony needs Nikon far more than Nikon needs Sony.
>>2844027
Maybe they don't need each other as much as you think.
How many months has it been where Nikon has neither 42MP sensor nor 50MP sensor?
And how many more months will it take before you admit Sony doesn't need to give that sensor to Nikon?
>>2844026
>in reality they're doing just fine
They could be doing a whole lot better.
>>2844029
>muh megapixels
Literally all Sonyfags still have.
It's funny, becasue when the D800 came out most Nikon shooters said 36MP is too much and 24 would have been better.
>>2844032
>Nikon shooters said 36MP is too much
No that was Canon shooters. Nikon shooters were tempted by the technical specs and bought into it.
>>2844030
The lower file size ensures faster processing and faster transfer.
So it's a balancing decision made by the engineers, they could keep the files small, and still score the top placement of the sensor benchmarks.
>>2844035
The dynamic range and the autofocus, not the pixel count.
Many people wanted a D600 sensor in a D800 body.
>>2844029
I would bet real money that Sony makes far more money supplying sensors to other manufacturers than they do with their own lineup (with what, a 3% market share lmao).
Plus, do you retards really believe that Sony is in for the long haul? They drop their own proprietary bullshit so quickly and so often, it's not worth the investment. Buy Nikon glass, it'll probably be around in ten or fifteen years. Who knows if the A-mount will even be around in six fiscal quarters.
>>2844040
Nikon keeps their files just as small, but without losing quality.
Like I said I'm all in favor of lossy compression and use it 100% of the time.
...but only the Nikon implementation, not the shitty Sony implementation.
And the way Nikon does it isn't even hard.
They just remove some tonal range from the highlights (which have way more tonal range than you could ever need)
>>2844043
Yes, Sony is making a lot of money selling 36MP sensors to Nikon.
But I'm talking about the latest bsi full frame sensor, because it's evident that sony doesn't want to sell it to Nikon.
>>2844045
You may call it shitty, but that shitty raw implementation offers the highest image quality measured among full frame sensors to date.
>>2844046
Is it? Nikon isn't Sony; they don't deprecate their own lineup by releasing bodies too frequently. It takes time to design and release a new body, so for all you know there's already a D820 or whatever with the 42mp sensor in the works.
>>2844046
How is it evident?
Nikon hasn't released any camera that could use it yet.
This will shock Sony users, but not all camera makers refresh their entire body lineup every 3 weeks.
>>2844052
Who knows how many months? I guess until Nikon announced their next high resolution body.
>>2844048
>You may call it shitty
It is shitty
>that shitty raw implementation offers the highest image quality measured among full frame sensors to date.
No, the sensor is responsible for that.
The compression has no effect on the measurements, since looking at artifacts isn't part of the synthetic tests.
>>2844053
I meant how many months until you stop believing.
2 months from now? 5? 10? 1 year from now? 2? 3?
There has to be some point where you can admit you were probably mistaken.
>>2843980
>>2844020
ofc Sony doesn't have to give them the sensor. But they aren't the only game in town. Samsung is on the smallest node out of everyone and Toshiba's APS-C sensor in the D7200 beats out every Sony camera in dynamic range, A7 series included - though not the D810. Both Sammy and Toshiba scaled to FF would outresolve and out DR the Sony 42. So why wouldn't Sony sell it to Nikon? They also compete in the sensor industry, not just consumer cameras. Selling to Nikon, Panasonic, Olympus, Ricoh etc. probably makes them more money than if they kept it to the alpha series.
It's only Sonyfags with an irrational attachment to their camera brand who think otherwise.
>>2844053
Which I doubt will happen this year.
>>2844054
>No, the sensor is responsible for that.
>The compression has no effect on the measurements
No, DXO measures the sensors by measuring the RAWs they output.
So that shitty sony RAW is actually outperforming your Nikon RAW.
That means you think they're both really shity.
>>2844062
DXO only measures dynamic range, tonal range and high ISO performance.
Artifacts around high contrast objects have no effect on either of those 3 measurements.
Which is probably why it slipped passed Sony's QC in the first place.
>>2844059
>So why wouldn't Sony sell it to Nikon?
Good question. but the onus to answer this is on you.
I can just note that plenty of time has passed, and Nikon still doesn't have that sensor.
>>2844064
>plenty of time has passed
The D810 is less than 2 years old.
It took Nikon more than 2 years to update the D800 - which was only a minor refresh.
>>2844046
Maybe they don't want to sell to Nikon and the others (yet). But Sony's been plenty willing to sell its even higher resolution and larger medium format sensors to Ricoh, Hasselblad, and whoever else does medium format.
>>2844068
>It took Nikon more than 2 years to update the D800
2 years and 1 month.
That's why I'm curious about a timeframe of when you will stop believing it will happen.
For what it's worth I've talked to other Nikon enthusiasts they they fully believe Nikon will make their own sensor which surpass even 50MP.
>>2844071
>But Sony's been plenty willing to sell its even higher resolution and larger medium format sensors to Ricoh, Hasselblad, and whoever else does medium format.
Makes sense. Since Sony doesn't have any cameras to compete with them to begin with.
Sony niggers hugely overrate how much importance Nikon shooters put in sensors.
Our biggest story in the past 4 years is the D500.
A fucking APS-C camera with meh tier image quality.
>>2844072
Like I said: probably 2017, possibly 2018.
>>2844075
That's pretty optimistic.
I would say they might as well make their own sensors with other manufacturers if they're going to wait until 2018. The 42MP will be really old news by then.
>>2844077
I honestly don't give a shit becasue I have no intent of replacing my D800 any time before 2025.
>>2844081
>presuming the overlords of Atlantis will allow digital filth to sully the aesthetic perfection of our post-apocalyptic underwater utopia
BUILDS BIODOME
>>2844074
>overrate how much importance Nikon shooters put in sensors.
If Nikon shooters didn't put importance into the sensor, they wold have been Canon shooters.
The truth is both Nikon shooters and Sony shooters are sensor enthusiasts.
The yellow bar you see in this image is the Nikon marketshare. It's shrinking.
That's for Danish market and German market.
Nikon is shrinking, and in its place Sony is growing. Like I said, because bother types of shooters value the sensor's specs.
The red bar remains stable no matter what Sony does. That's the Canon market share, they are the ones who truly don't care about sensors.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software paint.net 4.0.5 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 96 dpi Vertical Resolution 96 dpi
>>2844085
hahaha this fucking stupid obviously incorrect graph again.
In six months, 30% of all full frame camera owners dropped Canon and mostly Nikon to buy Sony! That is definitely a real thing that happened!
>>2844077
They might if they think there's a market for it. Growth in the market for digital cameras has slowed down quite a bit and it's the smaller formats that seem to be booming.
>>2844073
Not that Sony has cared all that much about selling their sensors to other companies even in segments where it competes. They provide one of the versions of the cameraphone sensors used in the Galaxy S7 even though it competes with the Xperia. They didn't care about supplying the 36MP D800 sensor to Nikon and putting an inferior one in their own A99. It's all about where they think they can make money. I wouldn't be surprised if Sony pulled a Samsung even and left the consumer camera market to focus on selling sensors, playstations, and catering to the professional video market where they probably make huge profits on $30,000 cameras and similarly marked up pro equipment.
>>2844086
>dropped Canon
Did you read the graph right? Canon isn't being dropped. Nikon is.
>>2844089
Did YOU read the fucking graph?
June : Brand "C" = 45%
October : Brand "C" = 30%
"Brand N" didn't go up, which means that "Brand S" must have! Oh shit!
Not that it matters, because no they absolutely didn't.
>>2844088
You're right about the 36MP sensor.
But for as long as Nikon doesn't have camera with the 42MPsensor , I think it's only fair that you give my argument the benefit of doubt here.
>>2844091
So October was a slow sales month for Canon. That doesn't mean anything since they still kept it high.
And for your information, Zeiss has confirmed those statistics as well.
>>2843036
yes, we know.
just get a smegma 19mm.
>>2844092
It looks like Sony is giving a serious attempt at the full frame market which enjoys closer to luxury market margins than commodity ones so it's a good strategy to keep their 42MP sensor to their own cameras.
Who wouldn't want to skim that rich Leica market? And I hope they succeed because I want a full frame system with small lenses, like Leica has but I don't want to pay $10,000 for it.
I'm not sure which argument you were making since I quoted two posts. If it's that Sony isn't selling their 42MP sensor to Nikon because they want to protect the A7 and that's why Nikon doesn't have a camera with it, that's a reasonable theory.
It could also be that Nikon isn't seeing that much demand for it. Most working pros aren't even making poster sized prints and most consumers aren't using prints at all but viewing on 2 megapixel (or in the case of 4K, 8 megapixel screens). Maybe Sony is offering but at a price Nikon isn't willing to pay. And that's something Sony can afford to do as long as other imaging sensor companies decide the FF market is not worth it.
>>2844094
>buying a canon in october/november
>just before all those cashback deals start
wew.
>>2844102
> I want a full frame system with small lenses, like Leica has but I don't want to pay $10,000 for it.
I couldn't agree more on this one with you.
>>2844095
>smegma 19mm
It's closer than the Sony lens, but still not as sharp and is much thicker.
The Zeiss Loxia 21 is as sharp (13 megapixels effective) but is even larger, weighs more than the entire GR, and is $1500.
>>2844106
it's called voigtlander.
>>2844156
One, voigtlander doesn't make a FF digital rangefinder.
Two, its lenses tend to perform quite a bit worse on Sony's camera compared to the FF leica e.g. M240. If Sony came out with a camera with the microlenses like M240 so the Voigtlanders would perform well, I'd be all over it.
>>2844180
cosina fixed the latest voigtlander. get the fe mount version.
>>2844194
>voigtlander. get the fe mount
Looks like there is only one FE mount voigtlander that became available a couple weeks ago. It's a start I guess. Don't need normals and teles since they can be adapted from the M mount ones but seems like it's going to be a while before they adapt wideangles that I'd use. 10, 12, and 15mm probably need a Sony specific design the most but I can't help but think that a more typical wideangle should have been a higher priority.
Cheers though, looks like I'll be able to do a fairly compact FF system in a couple years if they keep up the releases. 24, 35, 50, 85 being what my dream setup.
>>2844206
Maybe he means getting M mount Voigtlanders and an M to E mount adapter.
>>2844217
This. I was reading reviews on Fred Miranda and very spotty quality control for the 15. It's also larger than the m-mount so I'd rather they do microlenses like the Leica to keep the overall system smaller.
Went to ebay and saw people are still paying almost a thousand dollars for the R-D1. what the fuck
>>2844102
>Maybe Sony is offering but at a price Nikon isn't willing to pay.
I think it's worth mentioning the 42MP sensor officially isn't for sale at all.
http://www.sony.net/Products/SC-HP/IS/sensor2/products/index.html
That is the list of sensors Sony is offering to the 3rd party camera makers.
And for that matter, the A6300 sensor isn't for sale either, and neither is the RX100 mark 4 sensor.
This latest trend seems to suggest Sony is keeping their top end technology to themselves.
