I notice the last two shots posted have +0.7EV dialled in. Is that just coincidence or are you both finding the a7riii needs a bit of ettr? Still finding my feet with mine (sorry for the off topic question. Waiting on stock of the cv40)
xpfloyd wrote:
I notice the last two shots posted have +0.7EV dialled in. Is that just coincidence or are you both finding the a7riii needs a bit of ettr? Still finding my feet with mine (sorry for the off topic question. Waiting on stock of the cv40)
I'm using the EV-Wheel a lot. Just to set the right exposure while shooting in aperture priority. See the differences in these three shots.
I'm noticing that many images in this thread are shot at 1/60 second and very high ISO. Which probably means that aperture priority was used combined with auto ISO. For static scenes, you can easily hand-hold the Nokton at 1/10-1/30 second with IBIS.
So, my tip is to simply switch to manual mode and keep auto ISO on when you're shooting at low light and the subject doesn't move. Then you can change shutter speed on the fly and keep exposure the same, as long as ISO is higher than minimum.
Edit: I also find that my a7II tends to underexpose a bit (with all lenses), so I generally keep it at +0.7 stops or so.
KarmaKramer wrote:
Are all these photos straight out of camera or LR'd...I'd like to see some unedited if anybody's kind enough. Give me a better idea of its "look"
"Straight out of camera" doesn't tell anything if you don't know the settings (contrast, color, sharpening, et cetera). Also, you won't know what the light was like, so... I doubt it helps at all.
A OOC-jpg is a standardised style. No one know the algorithm inside the camera and for which lens they made it. The good thing about OOC-jpgs you can compare them if the settings are the same. But as long as you don't know if AWB was correct or how the daylight was it is impossible to compare.
Here are three version of the same picture:
1. out of camera raw without any color profile, sharpening, lut-curve, compensation,...
2. out of camera jpg. AWB didn't worked and the picture has a green cast. And the typical strong S-curve for brightness does blow out almoust the bright parts. definitely not like in the reality. The clouds were very good to see.
3, my processing as I already posted. This one is heavily processed. The massive over-saturation was my artistic decision for this one, but the rest looks closer to my reminded reality than the OOC-jpg.
out of camera without color profile or curve.
out of camera jpg
my processing
Mar 24, 2018 at 12:05 PM
imagesfromobjects Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Don't have anything new worth posting from this lens because I just picked up an RX100 III (amazing!!!) and have been trying to wrap my head around using an AF camera. Here are a couple from a few weeks ago. I've noticed that, depending on the background, some of the OOF areas (not gonna use the B Word) could be described as "busy", but it doesn't bother me much. These are both wide open, shot in bright sun.
Mar 24, 2018 at 12:15 PM
imagesfromobjects Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
KarmaKramer wrote:
Are all these photos straight out of camera or LR'd...I'd like to see some unedited if anybody's kind enough. Give me a better idea of its "look"
Everything I've posted with the exception of my "test" images has been ARW processed in C1. Mostly using ICC profiles meant for other cameras, but ones that I find much more neutral than the default Sony ones. My general PP philosophy is that, if I can't get an image where I want it in 5 minutes of processing, it probably wasn't meant to be. So these are all very basic levels adjustment, some shadow/highlight recovery, light sharpening and possibly a crop. I generally don't use any lens corrections and try to avoid noise reduction, so you're pretty much seeing things as-is.
Not a fan of Sony jpegs (spoiled by Fuji) so I almost never use them.
PEKA62 wrote:
Straight out of camera in my understanding is a jpg cooked by the camera with settings for that, not a raw file from any converter
Nope, it's a RAW file cooked by the camera and saved as a JPG in the camera. If you used the same software and settings, you would get the exact same results by cooking it yourself from a RAW file.
SOOC doesn't say squat, but is unfortunately still used by some as a sort of statement of "real" images ("no PP").
There is always PP. A true RAW from the camera would be all green since there are twice as many green pixels as red and blue. The Gamma would be unbearable to look at since the sensor is linear but images are not.
So, all images worth seeing are "cooked". That's a fact.
xpfloyd wrote:
I notice the last two shots posted have +0.7EV dialled in. Is that just coincidence or are you both finding the a7riii needs a bit of ettr? Still finding my feet with mine (sorry for the off topic question. Waiting on stock of the cv40)
The back lighting in aperture mode would have underexposed the girls faces, so I dialed in some +0.7 EC.
I shoot alot of dogs both for my rescue and my work. I love using shallow DOF but I always struggle with shots where the nose / snout is so out of focus. Dog's head shapes are so different to ours.
Then you can change shutter speed on the fly and keep exposure the same, as long as ISO is higher than minimum.
