Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2019 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?

  
 
zurih
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


I've been using the A7III for the past 6 month, and about a week ago I bought the A7RIII.

I got the 55/1.8, Batis 85, and Tamron 28-75.

My question is do I need to shoot differently with the A7RIII?

I might be wrong but I do notice more blur and less sharp results with the A7RIII when I take photos of my kids. I usually shoot with SS 160+.

Do I need to raise the SS with the R3?
How about the sharpness, I notice non-tack sharp results with the R3.
As I know my lenses can do quite good job with the 42mp sensor.

I need to decide in the next 24 hour which one to keep, the A7III or the A7RIII. Can't keep both.

Your input would be appreciated.

Edited on Mar 17, 2019 at 11:26 PM · View previous versions



Mar 14, 2019 at 07:07 AM
MrTMan
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


Assuming that you use the same shutter speed on both cameras, there’s only two things that should be at play: differences in AF, and differences in resolution.

From an AF perspective, I believe that both cameras have similar AF speed, but the A7III has a wider AF coverage area. But that said, I don’t have any experience with the A7III (just the rIII), so maybe someone else can chime in to confirm that.

From a resolution perspective, any image flaws, such as suboptimal focusing, will be more readily apparent at higher resolutions than at lower resolutions. But if you were to downscale an A7rIII image to A7III resolution, that should normalize for that.

When shooting kids, I find that 1/125 is usually fine, but I don’t bother trying to shoot them if they’re moving around too much.



Mar 14, 2019 at 07:20 AM
Blueshound
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


Here's my only thought on this: do your photography interests include subjects that allow a slower paced, more deliberate technique as compared to candid shots of kids & people?

If so, it's hard to beat the resolution of the A7RIII, and you can learn how to manage the more "capture the moment" usage. Understanding the pros & cons of the camera's different focusing modes is vital. All AF systems require a certain minimum amount of time to lock on, even if measured in milliseconds.

If not, and given your reported results, perhaps the A7III is more for you.

I mostly use my A7RIII handheld, and only tend to tripod use for landscapes in nature (as opposed to, say, urban scenes). I like to think I have no issue with sharp shots handheld, but I often take around three shots of the same scene, every once in a while having to pick the sharpest. (Thinking mostly of low light scenes for this.)

Whichever camera you keep, enjoy it!

Brian



Mar 14, 2019 at 08:33 AM
echelonphoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


There was another thread on this same thing recently. I shoot professionally and was going out with 1 7III and one a7rIII. I found that the keeper rate of very sharp images was much higher with the 7III . I was shooting exclusively handheld at shutter from 1/80th to 1/160.
The 7III eye af is def. more stable and consistent..it just locks on faster and better.It also is more reliable in low light situations where the rIII would just hunt. There does seem to be more camera shake with the rIII and more af misses too. I have sold the rIII and now shoot with two 7III's. I bought a used rII for situations where I need more resolution and have the time to use a tripod or higher shutter speed..



Mar 14, 2019 at 09:34 AM
JohnDizzo15
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


I can't speak to the A73. But shooting the R3 and A9 together, I have not noticed a significant difference in the required minimum shutter speed in scenarios where I have shot them side by side unless I have a tele on one and a WA on the other.

A couple of questions for clarification. Are you regularly using the same lenses on each respective body? Which one have you primarily had on the R3? Just wondering if focal length or effectiveness of the IBIS has anything to do with it.

Also, I have been under the assumption that the A73 is somewhere between the R3 and A9 as far as AF performance goes. I could be wrong though.

Personally, if the kids are not moving much, I don't need more than about 1/125th-ish on either body unless I am using a super tele.



Mar 14, 2019 at 09:47 AM
philodelphi
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


When I first got the rIII, I was shocked at the lack of sharpness in many of my photos when I looked at them at 100% magnification (pixel peeped). When I resized to 20 mp (I had switched from the 6D), the photos had the same sharpness, for the most part. I love this about the rIII... it means that I have a way to improve my technique that I did not have before. One of my big reasons for going with the rIII was having the option of cropping in way more than I otherwise could. I only have this option if my photos are sharp at 100%. I have adapted to the rIII now, and have no wish to go back to a lower mp camera.

So stick it out!



Mar 14, 2019 at 09:56 AM
zurih
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


philodelphi wrote:
...I love this about the rIII... it means that I have a way to improve my technique that I did not have before.

...I have adapted to the rIII now, and have no wish to go back to a lower mp camera.


What new techniques have you learned to get 100% sharp photos with the A7RIIII? And how you adapted?

I think it's a learning curve thing for me.



Mar 14, 2019 at 10:01 AM
zurih
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


JohnDizzo15 wrote:
I can't speak to the A73. But shooting the R3 and A9 together, I have not noticed a significant difference in the required minimum shutter speed in scenarios where I have shot them side by side unless I have a tele on one and a WA on the other.

A couple of questions for clarification. Are you regularly using the same lenses on each respective body? Which one have you primarily had on the R3? Just wondering if focal length or effectiveness of the IBIS has anything to do with it.

Also, I have been under the assumption that the A73 is
...Show more

I used the Zeiss 55/1.8 yesterday and switched the lens between the bodies for around 20 minutes.

About the AF, one thing I notice as a different is when I choose "Lock-on AF:Expend Flexible Spot" with the RIII, it shows a box on the subject, whether on the A7III I just the AF points dancing on the subject. I'm not sure if it's supposed to be like this or if there is a way to change it.



Mar 14, 2019 at 10:05 AM
nandadevieast
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


I posted a similar thread recently and post many experiments i have concluded that (for me) for tack sharp results, a7R3 needs 1/250 for people/street. 1/500 will be ideal. That’s the nature of the beast.
Unless you down sample or don’t look at images at 1:1.
Unfortunately, that affects the ISOs also because at 1/250-500 we need to raise them.



Mar 14, 2019 at 10:05 AM
philodelphi
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


Probably the single biggest change is I use variable ISO and up'd the maximum ISO; I think it's set to "Faster". I've found that, as long as I'm exposing accurately, ISO's of 10000 or so are fine for most purposes.

In addition, I just have to be a bit more disciplined about my posture when shooting, leaning on things when I can, coordinating my breathing when shooting (breathing out right before pressing the shutter), etc. Another poster mentioned taking a few pics and choosing the sharpest... this is also very effective.



Mar 14, 2019 at 10:07 AM
zurih
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


nandadevieast wrote:
I posted a similar thread recently and post many experiments i have concluded that (for me) for tack sharp results, a7R3 needs 1/250 for people/street. 1/500 will be ideal. That’s the nature of the beast.
Unless you down sample or don’t look at images at 1:1.
Unfortunately, that affects the ISOs also because at 1/250-500 we need to raise them.


If I down-sample an image to 24mp it should look the same as an image A7III? Is this correct?



Mar 14, 2019 at 10:16 AM
theacguy71
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


zurih wrote:
I used the Zeiss 55/1.8 yesterday and switched the lens between the bodies for around 20 minutes.

About the AF, one thing I notice as a different is when I choose "Lock-on AF:Expend Flexible Spot" with the RIII, it shows a box on the subject, whether on the A7III I just the AF points dancing on the subject. I'm not sure if it's supposed to be like this or if there is a way to change it.


Maybe try these action settings? These are from Mark Galer's website. www.markgaler.com

9B5DBBF2-0857-49FA-8823-E76C45F3EBF3 by Vaughn Adams, on Flickr



Mar 14, 2019 at 10:17 AM
KarmaKramer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


Keep in mind those aren't indoor settings. Auto ISO or aperture priority indoors may not go well


Mar 14, 2019 at 10:41 AM
stripedrex
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


I also have the A7III and A7RIII. For sure the higher megapixels is less forgiving. When shooting casually and editing lets say in light room. I change zoom to check sharpness to 1/3 or 1/2. 1:1 is just too much and disappointing if you even slightly miss focus. If it's family for me it's the moment captured that's prioritized.

Also, are you sure your kids are just not moving too much? How old are they and what activities are you shooting? When I'm at home and I'm grabbing relatively still moments 125th is my preferred ss. Outdoors it's much higher unless I have them posing. My son's lacrosse for example 1/500th is too slow to get a sharp image unless i'm looking to track and motion blur background I need to be very fast.



Mar 15, 2019 at 10:44 AM
milkod2001
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


I have set my A7R3 to 1/250 minimum SS with Auto ISO for 55 1.8 and 24-105. For 100-400 it is 1/1000.


Mar 15, 2019 at 01:46 PM
rwwright
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


I just learned that in LR using a sharpness setting of 100 ruined my photos at 100 percent viewing. they looked like they were not sharp. changed default sharpness to 40, .8 and photos looked sharp again. I used the 100 setting a lot on my nikons with less resolultion.


Mar 15, 2019 at 03:23 PM
theacguy71
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


rwwright wrote:
I just learned that in LR using a sharpness setting of 100 ruined my photos at 100 percent viewing. they looked like they were not sharp. changed default sharpness to 40, .8 and photos looked sharp again. I used the 100 setting a lot on my nikons with less resolultion.




The masking slider can also help just to sharpen what you want



Mar 15, 2019 at 04:11 PM
mjm6
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


Here's how you could test the two to determine whether you should keep the R or not...

Shoot a series of images at a few SS from clearly too long to clearly OK for hand held shooting (presumably with IBIS activated for both). Also, make a few reference images on a tripod of the same subject with IBIS turned off. Make sure there is details in the subjects, and make sure that the images are all accurately focused. You aren't testing that (I don't think), so you should eliminate that variable. You'll probably need to shoot a few at each SS so you can get a sense for whether you can reliably make a good image by looking at a handful of them to see what the keeper rate is for the images when you are at the threshold.

Then, take copies of the R images and resize them down to 24MP. Make the comparisons. If everything is equal in the cameras, you probably won't see any substantial difference.

Then, take copies of the non-R images and resize them to 42MP and make the comparisons again.

I suspect that what you will find is that the R will at least match the non-R images at the 24MP setting, but will beat the non-R images at the 42MP setting because it has more resolution capability built into the system. So for non-critical work, either camera will be fine, but for more critical work (like images you intend to enlarge, or images you intend to crop substantially), the R will prove to be a better source.

All this means is that you have to rise up to the challenge that a high MP camera presents when you are trying to get the most out of the image, but if you shoot both in a similar manner, you will probably achieve a similar final result regardless of the resolution when you are in the threshold region, and certainly when the shots aren't critical in nature.

Ultimately, you have to decide what you really need. My impression of comparisons between the two is that I'm spoiled for the higher resolution in the R. I wouldn't choose to use an a7III over the R unless I didn't have a choice. The only real penalty is the larger files from my testing, but I didn't aggressively compare IBIS between the two.



Mar 15, 2019 at 04:48 PM
nandadevieast
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?


Thank you
One thing that i find odd is people saying that slow shutter induced shake/blur will be similar if you down sample the 42mp to 24mp. I will tend to think that a blur, once happened, will be there irrespective of the resolution.

mjm6 wrote:
Here's how you could test the two to determine whether you should keep the R or not...

Shoot a series of images at a few SS from clearly too long to clearly OK for hand held shooting (presumably with IBIS activated for both). Also, make a few reference images on a tripod of the same subject with IBIS turned off. Make sure there is details in the subjects, and make sure that the images are all accurately focused. You aren't testing that (I don't think), so you should eliminate that variable. You'll probably need to shoot a few at each SS
...Show more



Mar 17, 2019 at 03:09 AM
kimknapp
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · A7III vs A7RIII - minimum SS for sharp photo?




nandadevieast wrote:
Thank you
One thing that i find odd is people saying that slow shutter induced shake/blur will be similar if you down sample the 42mp to 24mp. I will tend to think that a blur, once happened, will be there irrespective of the resolution.



That's true for an amount of blur that is there, but so small that it does not go beyond 1 pixel at 24 more, but does go beyond 1 pixel at 42 mp. The chances of having that exact amount of blur is extremely small.



Mar 17, 2019 at 08:22 AM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.