chrisgibbs wrote:
Ok, think of it like this. You're out shooting PR stills on Willy's tour bus, then all of a sudden he says "I've got a new tune, see what you think" you press the red button and prey you get it without any extraneous noise, and yes, camera handling and breathing noises do come into play. This is as realistic as it gets, no on-camera XLR mic or dual audio.
This is exactly the reason those of us who shoot stills and now entertain the notion of video actually shoot Sony over the other brands!!!
what i am saying is, that the few times i've recorded audio with my a7r2 and in all the videos i've ever seen with it - i've never heard breathing from the person shooting the video - it sounds either like a horror flick soundtrack or a porn over-dub. so, if i'm hearing the breathing that loudly then i have to assume all of the other sounds that are recorded appear louder in the video than they would normally be perceived in person.
as i mention above, i did a quick video test with the lens and neither my breathing nor the lens noise were picked up on the recording.
chrisgibbs wrote:
TWAS I. Reason for mentioning it, I see that 'weirdness' time after time on the FE 1.8/55, especially when the light gets a little harsh and you're 'that certain distance' from the OOF areas. You can see it on those two Batis shots above of the girl, tree & bluebells, there's the full-length (#20) where the OOF region looks fugly, then there's the tighter shot (#18) that just looks sublime, that tree & flowers looks beautiful, I'd love to to a B&W conversion off that RAW.
The GM's simply look good across the board to my eye.
I agree with Australian harsh lighting the GM 85 will be amazing. Yet the Batis 85 is superb in lower lighting and contrast. I notice a huge difference just in Queensland with the harsh lighting and then Bali where there always appears to be some filtered lighting.
charles.K wrote:
I agree with Australian harsh lighting the GM 85 will be amazing. Yet the Batis 85 is superb in lower lighting and contrast. I notice a huge difference just in Queensland with the harsh lighting and then Bali where there always appears to be some filtered lighting.
good point - all of my shots outside today were under cloudy skies, perhaps nearly ideal for people shots but would have also leveled the playing field a bit between the 2 lenses.
charles.K wrote:
Thank you Chris The AF-C seems slow as the fastest AF technique I have found so far is using wide and AF-C. The GM 85 appears to be as slow as the 85L II with MB IV v .47. Maybe you need to set up the AF speed and sensitivity separately to FAST and SENSITIVE, as will definitely move the AF along. Also this may just be a firmware issue with the lens too.
That's not my test Charles, found it on YouTube, not had chance to try the lens yet. Hopefully a FW could address what you're seeing. ~Chris
ecarlino wrote:
look j@ck@ss, you've posted 10 times on this thread, 3 about noise, 3 about af speed, 2 about weight and 2 complaining about me posting too many big photos.
what value are you adding?
it's pretty freaking easy to scroll past some photos - i do it all the time with your dumb@ss posts.
i'd suggest you 'hide' me already because on this thread, i'm probably going to "dump" some more photos this week if i have a chance to shoot some more.
btw - the title of this thread is 'testing' (as in shooting photos) not 'talk about noise problems'
wow..saw your daughter that old..i thought you would be an old man but damn..talk like those young thug kid. You win..hope that your daughter read this thread to see how good role model a dad you are.
All i asked is you to respect the viewer by resize your image and not just dump all the same image to the thread so we can see how good image the lens can produces but you just took it to another level.
ecarlino wrote:
what i am saying is, that the few times i've recorded audio with my a7r2 and in all the videos i've ever seen with it - i've never heard breathing from the person shooting the video - it sounds either like a horror flick soundtrack or a porn over-dub. so, if i'm hearing the breathing that loudly then i have to assume all of the other sounds that are recorded appear louder in the video than they would normally be perceived in person.
as i mention above, i did a quick video test with the lens and neither my breathing nor the lens noise were picked up on the recording....Show more →
Easy to test Eric. First note the position of the A7's mics. Plug in some headphones, hit record with your eye to the EVF, breath hard, notice its pretty quite. Now take your eye away from the EVF, tilt the LCD 45 degrees and repeat, note the breath sounds are directed right at that mic now, and its louder. The original tester was looking at the LCD would be my bet.
Bubble wrote:
wow..saw your daughter that old..i thought you would be an old man but damn..talk like those young thug kid. You win..hope that your daughter read this thread to see how good role model a dad you are.
All i asked is you to respect the viewer by resize your image and not just dump all the same image to the thread so we can see how good image the lens can produces but you just took it to another level.
Actually, I did show her the whole thread, and your posts and my replies in particular.
I believe it's a father's responsibility to teach his children to spot and avoid morons.
The comments you directed at me were loaded with selfish nonsense, but my favorite was
"It is just ridiculous that i have to scroll all the way down just to read other member posted."
Classic.
There are a lot of discussions about bokeh but my 10 cent's worth is that the more buttery the better a la the EF 85 1.2 or 135 f2L. Creamy, buttery, take your pic but the 'classic' look? I am kinda over distracting bokeh.
Paul Mo wrote:
There are a lot of discussions about bokeh but my 10 cent's worth is that the more buttery the better a la the EF 85 1.2 or 135 f2L. Creamy, buttery, take your pic but the 'classic' look? I am kinda over distracting bokeh.
FE 85 bokeh is on the buttery side of "average", but doesn't put all the background through a mixer/blender to render just a smooth, undefined result. In particular, the FE will leave well-defined colours in the out-of-focus areas, which gives "life" to its bokeh IMHO. It is still early days for me, so I am not going to make definitive statements about such a delicate subject, but, so far, whereas on my Otus 55 I would sometimes go wide open in order to defocus to the max, on the FE, I would stop down one notch to keep just a bit more structure to the background and make it more "legible". But that is a highly personal taste, so YMMV.
I have never uploaded pics here before. Please bear with me. Some minimal editing on exposure and levels. These were quick snaps this weekend in suboptimal lighting conditions.
GMPhotography wrote:
Yea should be interesting to see changes
Thanks Guy (and Fred and Roger and others as well) for working so hard and sharing the results.
Much appreciated. I am certainly looking forward to your new results and Roger's tear down.
Originally I was more interested in the GM 85/1.4.
But unless Sony addresses the issues identified in this thread I might reconsider.
The noise and related issues simply don't pass the smell test IMHO.
I have the FE 90/2.8 MACRO G OSS and find it all around performing well.
It's such a pleasure to use for portraits when the focus hold button has been set up for Eye-AF.
Also the rubber eyecup for A7r/2 cameras that was pointed out on your forum has made a huge positive difference for my eyes.
If I need f/1.4 I can also use my Summilux-R 80/1.4, but no Eye-AF.
Now the results here and on your forum might eventually get me to buy the GM 24-70/2.8.
That lens seems to have impressive performance and so far I haven't seen copy variation issues mentioned.
So, that lens seems to be a safe buy.
The lens I am primarily interested in is the GM 70-200/2.8. We'll see when that is available.
I'm actually quite surprised by the zoom. Usually mid zone zooms don't have any character to them never mind nice bokeh either. But what's really surprising every focal length is good. Yea at 70you need F4 on center but that's still pretty darn good. At 24mm I'm in shock even with its distortion the corners are better than a lot of primes at 24. Impressive thing in the 85 is its sheer full frame coverage almost at wide open. That's unheard of. Then it renders so nicely. I honestly don't have need for any prime between 24-85 . I do want the Loxia 50 for lighter adventure stuff like travel but I'm actually finally quite impressed. Been waiting 2 years to get impressed. Both lenses are on balance in every category except maybe size and weight . But that's physics not sure we can really change and keep these IQ levels. Btw thanks for the compliment as I know Fred and Roger appreciate it as well. Both great guys
Question: What causes the Batis to render the swirly out-of-focus background in some situations but not others?
I got my 85 GM a few days ago, and it has the same loud AF noise as shown in all the videos, and it's also a bit slow in AF. But it nails the focus in all the shots and is very sharp.
I don't do any serious video stuff these days, so whenever I shoot videos (all are just casual home videos) I just use the 28mm f/2 on my a7RII and then stabilize the whole thing with a Pilotfly H1+. This setup allow me to just run & gun and follow the subject walking around. I wouldn't use the 85 GM to shoot videos at all, so the noise doesn't bother me.
HOWEVER, if I were to shoot serious video projects where I want the 85 GM as a close-up lens for certain shots, the noise would bother me a little. But at the same time, for serious video projects, you'd use a dedicated mic that's directional, so the AF noise probably wouldn't be picked up, although in a very quiet setting, maybe it'll get picked up.
Lunatique wrote:
Question: What causes the Batis to render the swirly out-of-focus background in some situations but not others?
I got my 85 GM a few days ago, and it has the same loud AF noise as shown in all the videos, and it's also a bit slow in AF. But it nails the focus in all the shots and is very sharp.
I don't do any serious video stuff these days, so whenever I shoot videos (all are just casual home videos) I just use the 28mm f/2 on my a7RII and then stabilize the whole thing with a Pilotfly H1+. This setup allow me to just run & gun and follow the subject walking around. I wouldn't use the 85 GM to shoot videos at all, so the noise doesn't bother me.
HOWEVER, if I were to shoot serious video projects where I want the 85 GM as a close-up lens for certain shots, the noise would bother me a little. But at the same time, for serious video projects, you'd use a dedicated mic that's directional, so the AF noise probably wouldn't be picked up, although in a very quiet setting, maybe it'll get picked up. ...Show more →
Try shooting video in AF mode. The focus transitions are very slow and smooth and there is zero noise when the lens is switching from one focus point to another. IMO, for video, there is no AF noise.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Try shooting video in AF mode. The focus transitions are very slow and smooth and there is zero noise when the lens is switching from one focus point to another. IMO, for video, there is no AF noise.
That's GREAT to hear, just had a report from a video pro that his copy was too noisy. Looks like there are good and bad copies out there, hope they can identify the bad batch by a narrow serial number range.
The AF-C seems slow as the fastest AF technique I have found so far is using wide and AF-C. The GM 85 appears to be as slow as the 85L II with MB IV v .47. Maybe you need to set up the AF speed and sensitivity separately to FAST and SENSITIVE, as will definitely move the AF along. Also this may just be a firmware issue with the lens too.