Off Brand: Sony Announces the Full-frame a7R III

Mark D5 TEAM II

Proud N0ink 0wnz0r / crApple iFruitcake H4t3r
Mar 5, 2013
1,387
144
Tleilax, Thalim Star System
Wow, can't wait to get this new Sony for professional use, what with their awesomely innumerable selection of lenses and unbelievably responsive aftersales support and rad & righteous ergonomics. Now I can troll the DPR forums hard together with the other spec monkeys who never actually shoot their cameras anymore.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 28, 2015
3,369
571
Talys said:
woodman411 said:
Mikehit said:
woodman411 said:
Take a few minutes to read through this thread and ask yourself if specs are everything: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59526785

Did I read that right? The Sony does not AF wide open?

That is correct, even with Sony GM lenses. Just so that this doesn't get taken out of context, the full description of the issue would be "the Sony does not AF wide open when using higher f-stops, like f7.1. Quoting Sung Park:

The only lens I (used to) own that opens up the aperture for focusing is the zeiss distagon 35 f1.4, which unfortunately is a lens that I never use in a studio environment. The G 70-200 f4, GM 70-200 f2.8, GM 24-70 f2.8, Zeiss Planar 50 f1.4, GM 85 f1.4, Zeiss 16-35 f4 all focus stopped down so experience the issues I've described.

Well, I always thought, "of course not".

Put a Canon onto LiveView One Shot, and crank the aperture to f/14 in a dim room, til almost everything is barely visible. Tap somewhere on the screen or hit the AF button, and the screen will suddenly light up for a second or so while it focuses -- that's the camera going to max aperture when it needs more light to electronically AF. Then it returns to being dark.

Now put it into LiveView AI Servo. Now, when you press the AF button, it doesn't light up anymore. If you tap the screen, I think it lights up ONCE. Then, it tries (usually unsuccessfully) to track it in the dark.

On a Sony A7RII, the screen or EVF does not change brightness as you AF. I always assumed this meant that the aperture did not open up to AF. Makes sense, right? Otherwise, the screen would need to be artificially and gradually darkened while the diaphragm opened, and lightened as it closed, at exactly the same rate, and since they can't make the EVF look better than jello pudding, I always assumed that this was not possible.

I also assumed that this was by design because electronic viewfinder/live view is all you've got, and the screen is supposed to show you what you're going to shoot (not what you'd shoot at the widest aperture). So if it constantly went between light and dark (even between f/2.8 and f/4), it would drive you bonkers on the screen, and if it were a big jump, like f/1.4 to f/11, it probably give someone a seizure through the EVF if it was constantly tracking and taking pictures. Remember, it MUST darken (aperture blades close) in order to take the shot, so if it were to shoot at wide open aperture, or they'd have to black out the screen, and neither is really desirable.

So they pick the least offensive option, which is to assume that the electronic focusing is good enough to focus any time you have enough light that you can see what you're shooting on the screen. And, they bank on their electronic AF being so excellent (all that DR in the sensor!) that it can handle the job. Now, I admit, I kind of assumed that there was some menu option to give you the Canon situation where the screen toggles back and forth between light and dark, but I guess not. I also never found such a thing (or something that keeps the aperture always wide open until the moment you're recording), but I blamed it on myself, rather than the camera. Either way, both feel infinitely inferior to an optical viewfinder in that situation.

And, yes, yes, I know, anyone who actually takes photographs in poor lighting situations or with strobes or flashes or whatever, will scream a laundry list of reasons why this whole scheme of not opening up the aperture to focus sounds like a terrible idea. I'm just not sure how else you'd do it and not have it look ridiculous on the screens. Anyways, in the current scenario, even if the AF system and sensor are super duper amazing, I cannot be convinced that AF can't do a better job with more light than with less light.

Thank you Talys (and Woodman just above). If I think how performance of AF on Canon drops off above f5.6, and the Sony does its AF while stopped down I guess it is not surprising to see comments on reduced AF accuracy at f7.1 and narrower.
 
Upvote 0
Feb 26, 2012
1,729
16
AB
Mikehit said:
OSOK said:
Sales to new, first time buyers of pro DSLR maybe. They are all going Sony. But the majority of the market is already invested in a system. That's what Canon has been riding on.

Problem is, for the first time buyer pro DSLR, they will look at the Sony lens line up and think 'Why....'?
I know there is all this talk about using adapters for existing Canon/Nikon lenses you already own but surely the way to build brand loyalty is to bring people into the system lower down the scale and have them grow up with your cameras. As an example, one reason I chose Canon instead of Nikon all those years ago was the range of lenses available knowing that whatever line of photography I chose Canon had a lens for it and that still holds.

Seems a bit like choosing a car for the tire selection.
 
Upvote 0
Feb 26, 2012
1,729
16
AB
neuroanatomist said:
Jello is appropriate at suburban block parties and on hospital lunch trays...but not in images of fast-moving subjects. ;)

Unless global-electronic, ALL shutters make jello. Just a matter of how much.

Anyone know the sensor scan speed of this thing yet?

Some new sensors can scan pretty darn quick tho not sure if they're quite up there with fast mechanical FP at 1/250s
 
Upvote 0
Dec 11, 2015
1,054
0
Aglet said:
Mikehit said:
OSOK said:
Sales to new, first time buyers of pro DSLR maybe. They are all going Sony. But the majority of the market is already invested in a system. That's what Canon has been riding on.

Problem is, for the first time buyer pro DSLR, they will look at the Sony lens line up and think 'Why....'?
I know there is all this talk about using adapters for existing Canon/Nikon lenses you already own but surely the way to build brand loyalty is to bring people into the system lower down the scale and have them grow up with your cameras. As an example, one reason I chose Canon instead of Nikon all those years ago was the range of lenses available knowing that whatever line of photography I chose Canon had a lens for it and that still holds.

Seems a bit like choosing a car for the tire selection.

Excellent comparison, the only problem it's completely wrong ;) Lenses is what give you an image, a unique lens gives you a unique image. Any digital sensor or film can capture it. If you think lenses are not relevant, I'm not sure what kind of photography are you doing (if any)?
 
Upvote 0
-pekr- said:
I need Sony being the best it can be, so that Canon lowers the 5DIV price lower ... which ... most probably will just not happen. We need to buy in two months. Hey, Canon, please do something :)
They wont lower it because they know it's expensive for people to switch system.

If only those lens adapters had native performance then this wouldnt be an issue.

I always cheer for the other side so my side improves.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,236
13,097
Aglet said:
neuroanatomist said:
Jello is appropriate at suburban block parties and on hospital lunch trays...but not in images of fast-moving subjects. ;)

Unless global-electronic, ALL shutters make jello. Just a matter of how much.

Well, I don't get distorted images of fast-moving subjects at 12 fps on my 1D X, but oh-so-innovative Sony warns of jello.
 
Upvote 0
Mikehit said:
Talys said:
woodman411 said:
Mikehit said:
woodman411 said:
Take a few minutes to read through this thread and ask yourself if specs are everything: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59526785

Did I read that right? The Sony does not AF wide open?

That is correct, even with Sony GM lenses. Just so that this doesn't get taken out of context, the full description of the issue would be "the Sony does not AF wide open when using higher f-stops, like f7.1. Quoting Sung Park:

The only lens I (used to) own that opens up the aperture for focusing is the zeiss distagon 35 f1.4, which unfortunately is a lens that I never use in a studio environment. The G 70-200 f4, GM 70-200 f2.8, GM 24-70 f2.8, Zeiss Planar 50 f1.4, GM 85 f1.4, Zeiss 16-35 f4 all focus stopped down so experience the issues I've described.

Well, I always thought, "of course not".

Put a Canon onto LiveView One Shot, and crank the aperture to f/14 in a dim room, til almost everything is barely visible. Tap somewhere on the screen or hit the AF button, and the screen will suddenly light up for a second or so while it focuses -- that's the camera going to max aperture when it needs more light to electronically AF. Then it returns to being dark.

Now put it into LiveView AI Servo. Now, when you press the AF button, it doesn't light up anymore. If you tap the screen, I think it lights up ONCE. Then, it tries (usually unsuccessfully) to track it in the dark.

On a Sony A7RII, the screen or EVF does not change brightness as you AF. I always assumed this meant that the aperture did not open up to AF. Makes sense, right? Otherwise, the screen would need to be artificially and gradually darkened while the diaphragm opened, and lightened as it closed, at exactly the same rate, and since they can't make the EVF look better than jello pudding, I always assumed that this was not possible.

I also assumed that this was by design because electronic viewfinder/live view is all you've got, and the screen is supposed to show you what you're going to shoot (not what you'd shoot at the widest aperture). So if it constantly went between light and dark (even between f/2.8 and f/4), it would drive you bonkers on the screen, and if it were a big jump, like f/1.4 to f/11, it probably give someone a seizure through the EVF if it was constantly tracking and taking pictures. Remember, it MUST darken (aperture blades close) in order to take the shot, so if it were to shoot at wide open aperture, or they'd have to black out the screen, and neither is really desirable.

So they pick the least offensive option, which is to assume that the electronic focusing is good enough to focus any time you have enough light that you can see what you're shooting on the screen. And, they bank on their electronic AF being so excellent (all that DR in the sensor!) that it can handle the job. Now, I admit, I kind of assumed that there was some menu option to give you the Canon situation where the screen toggles back and forth between light and dark, but I guess not. I also never found such a thing (or something that keeps the aperture always wide open until the moment you're recording), but I blamed it on myself, rather than the camera. Either way, both feel infinitely inferior to an optical viewfinder in that situation.

And, yes, yes, I know, anyone who actually takes photographs in poor lighting situations or with strobes or flashes or whatever, will scream a laundry list of reasons why this whole scheme of not opening up the aperture to focus sounds like a terrible idea. I'm just not sure how else you'd do it and not have it look ridiculous on the screens. Anyways, in the current scenario, even if the AF system and sensor are super duper amazing, I cannot be convinced that AF can't do a better job with more light than with less light.

Thank you Talys (and Woodman just above). If I think how performance of AF on Canon drops off above f5.6, and the Sony does its AF while stopped down I guess it is not surprising to see comments on reduced AF accuracy at f7.1 and narrower.

There is a menu setting to select whether the camera focuses wide open or stopped down. "live view setting effect" on or off.
 
Upvote 0
Dec 11, 2015
1,054
0
candc said:
There is a menu setting to select whether the camera focuses wide open or stopped down. "live view setting effect" on or off.

As far as I remember this setting only affects what you see - either normalized brightness or full exposure simulation + post effects. The first one is nice when you're shooting in studio with strobes, so you can see at least what you're shooting; the second one is good outdoors - like a "preview" mode. The camera always focuses stopped down. It's not necessary bad - you won't get any focus shift related problems.
 
Upvote 0

Mark D5 TEAM II

Proud N0ink 0wnz0r / crApple iFruitcake H4t3r
Mar 5, 2013
1,387
144
Tleilax, Thalim Star System
Seems a bit like choosing a car for the tire selection.

Of course, the fans of the brand that has only 2 tire types to choose from would be expected to say that. :p But then again, many car buyers choose a model because it has the highest horsepower at a certain RPM point that 99% of the time they would never get to reach in typical usage.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,236
13,097
Jopa said:
The camera always focuses stopped down. It's not necessary bad - you won't get any focus shift related problems.

How do you figure that? Focus shift, with lenses that exhibit that problem, occurs when a different aperture is used for focus than for image capture. On a dSLR, it occurs when focus is performed wide open and the image is captured stopped down, and that results in back-focus. But if focus is achieved with the lens stopped down, and the image is captured wide open, focus shift will still occur...the only difference is that it will result in front-focus instead.

The problem is that no autofocus system is perfect. If you focus using the shallowest DoF achievable (lens wide open), stopping down will serve to mask any focus errors; but, if you focus stops down then shoot with a shallower DoF, any focus errors will be exacerbated.
 
Upvote 0
neuroanatomist said:
Jopa said:
The camera always focuses stopped down. It's not necessary bad - you won't get any focus shift related problems.

But if focus is achieved with the lens stopped down, and the image is captured wide open, focus shift will still occur...the only difference is that it will result in front-focus instead
Is this a hypothetical, or do you know of AF systems that work this way? (AF focuses stopped down, then opens for image capture)
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,236
13,097
BeenThere said:
neuroanatomist said:
Jopa said:
The camera always focuses stopped down. It's not necessary bad - you won't get any focus shift related problems.

But if focus is achieved with the lens stopped down, and the image is captured wide open, focus shift will still occur...the only difference is that it will result in front-focus instead
Is this a hypothetical, or do you know of AF systems that work this way? (AF focuses stopped down, then opens for image capture)

That was hypothetical, based on Jopa's statement, "The camera always focuses stopped down." If the camera always focuses at the selected aperture for the shot, that does indeed eliminate the problem of focus shift.

However, in that case if shooting stopped down in low ambient light, there would likely not be sufficient light for the camera to achieve focus. The use case of 'stopped down in low ambient light' describes a very common scenario in a studio setting, where one wants all the illumination for the shot to come from the strobes, so a low ISO and a narrow aperture (for me, typically ISO 100-200 and f/10-14) are used to kill the ambient light contribution. I have no problems shooting in that situation with my Canon gear, but if I bought an a7-series and needed to flip flood lights on/off or change aperture between every shot to achieve focus, or switch to continuous lighting, well...I'd be righteously pissed off.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 14, 2012
910
7
Jopa said:
Aglet said:
Seems a bit like choosing a car for the tire selection.

Excellent comparison, the only problem it's completely wrong ;) Lenses is what give you an image, a unique lens gives you a unique image. Any digital sensor or film can capture it. If you think lenses are not relevant, I'm not sure what kind of photography are you doing (if any)?

You're right, of course. But if, like me, you prefer manual focusing, there's almost no limit to the number of lenses you can attach to an a7xx; and thanks to the focus magnification and focus peaking available via the EVF, manual focusing is far easier than on dslrs. (Plus, they all get image stabilization.) With luck, the same will be true of the FF mirrorless camera(s) Canon eventually releases (assuming it will).
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,236
13,097
sdsr said:
But if, like me, you prefer manual focusing, there's almost no limit to the number of lenses you can attach to an a7xx; and thanks to the focus magnification and focus peaking available via the EVF, manual focusing is far easier than on dslrs. (Plus, they all get image stabilization.) With luck, the same will be true of the FF mirrorless camera(s) Canon eventually releases (assuming it will).

I'm sure it would be, because 3rd parties would make adapters. But I'm not convinced we'll see in body image stabilization from Canon.
 
Upvote 0

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,620
1,651
-pekr- said:
I need Sony being the best it can be, so that Canon lowers the 5DIV price lower ... which ... most probably will just not happen. We need to buy in two months. Hey, Canon, please do something :)

Ask and ye shall receive:
http://www.canonrumors.com/the-canon-store-restocks-popular-refurbished-lenses/

Effectively it's as good as new (my 35 f/2 IS Canon refurb was pristine), one year warranty, $2349, zero chance of a ripoff that you might get from eBay/craigs/etc.

That's the best (risk-free) deal you'll see for quite some time, I'd wager. #giddyup

- A
 
Upvote 0