Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

ISO 3200 performens / Sony A700
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Digital SLR Cameras
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 2:53 pm    Post subject: ISO 3200 performens / Sony A700 Reply with quote
Today I went to a Museum to test the high ISO performance on A700. This is important to me because I a going on a 2 weeks track in the Pyrenees late April.

Weight issues are most important to me on this trip, and I would like to leave my Flashgun at home.

The pictures I will be shooting are landscapes, and of course I have no problem here, but I will also like to shot inside some of the old Knights Templar churches build to protect the pilgrims on the way to Santiago de Compostela.

Settings in CS3 was like this:

No other noise reduction has been made. Besides NR my normal PP has been made.

So I am asking all of you can I leave my flash at home?

All ISO 3200
Shocked
Full size here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lahnet/sets/72157604075712142/detail/

1


2


3


4


5


6
A toymodel behind glass.


7


8


9
Me - Shot by me daughter.


PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
For ISO 3200 (!) these results are amazing! Shocked


PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
In addition to your camera's fine performance, get Noise Ninja and you could probably throw your flash away.... Laughing


PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Amazing performance ! My Oly perform this at ISO400 Shocked


PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 4:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Fantastic for such a high ISO!! Practical Photography magazine put the A700 up against the Nikon D300 and the Sony won!!! (very close though!)


PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 5:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The performance of that looks good at 3200, but isn't the inside of that museum quite well lit, with the missing floor and all?
I'd suspect any old churches or monasteries might be a fair bit gloomier, but you can tell me Smile


PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 5:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Farside wrote:
The performance of that looks good at 3200, but isn't the inside of that museum quite well lit, with the missing floor and all?
I'd suspect any old churches or monasteries might be a fair bit gloomier, but you can tell me Smile


You are of course right, but I have at least 2 stops more on shutter speed and at least 2 more f/ stops. I just remembered I still have the build in flash Smile

Looking at these again makes me think I will leave the big flash at home.


PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 6:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
amazing quality, that is detail and little noise, for ISO 3200!
colors seem a bit off sometimes, or maybe it is just me thinking that the wood was painted white instead of blue?:

but my 'correction' was just a fast desaturation of the blues, so they also got lost in the stairs and it that box


PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
let the flash home lahnet Wink superb 3200 iso result!


PostPosted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
If these pictures were taken with a Nikon D80 (my camera), I'd say ISO800. Not too bad.

Have a nice trip in Southern France. Several years ago, I hiked from the Franco-Spanish border to León over the camino. I did not start in St-Jean-Pied-du-Port, as most people do, but I followed the Camino Aragones. By far the most impressive landscapes I saw during my journey were the first few days, in the Spanish Pyrenees. Even more impressive, however, was the French side of the Pyrenees.


PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 10:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks for all comments.

kuuan wrote:
amazing quality, that is detail and little noise, for ISO 3200!
colors seem a bit off sometimes, or maybe it is just me thinking that the wood was painted white instead of blue?:


Actually they had a blue tone. But thanks anyway Smile

fotomachi wrote:

Several years ago, I hiked from the Franco-Spanish border to León over the camino. I did not start in St-Jean-Pied-du-Port, as most people do, but I followed the Camino Aragones. By far the most impressive landscapes I saw during my journey were the first few days, in the Spanish Pyrenees. Even more impressive, however, was the French side of the Pyrenees.


I will be walking the Carmino from St-Jean-Pied-du-Port to Burgos, but I will be doing some detours, because of my interest in the Knights Templar churches.


PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 11:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hooper wrote:
Fantastic for such a high ISO!! Practical Photography magazine put the A700 up against the Nikon D300 and the Sony won!!! (very close though!)


Not quite the A700 got the best buy, but the D300 was judged the better camera if money was no object.

Image quality wise the results seemed to show that the jpegs of the A700 were slightly warmer and brighter than the D300, but if the raw files were tweaked both gave near identical results. As the sensors are almost certainly the same Sony sensor I guess it's not that surprising. What's impressive is how much Sony has improved on the A100.

Both cameras seem to lead the high-ISO performance (if you ignore the unbelievable D3), but looking at the Canon 40D that's not far behind, and far better than pretty much anything produced a year ago.


PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
They all look great, except #3, why? It looks a lot noisier that others. Confused

Richard, the Nikon D300 has an extra sharpness (pixel peeping only), but the Sony has a built-in IS for all lenses. The problem with the Sony is that the Sony lens lineup (AF lenses) is quite limited and expensive.

Al always, you can't have it all...


PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Juanma wrote:
The problem with the Sony is that the Sony lens lineup (AF lenses) is quite limited and expensive.


You just have to remember that all Minoltas AF lenses fit direct on Sony. Minolta has so many good lenses, the G serie, the beercan series, Lecia made 28-135, a lot of primes and macros.
And Zeiss has a nice serie of lenses made for Sony, 28-70, 16-80, 135mm ect.

I am not missing anything, and the built-in IS Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy


PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
lahnet wrote:
Juanma wrote:
The problem with the Sony is that the Sony lens lineup (AF lenses) is quite limited and expensive.


You just have to remember that all Minoltas AF lenses fit direct on Sony. Minolta has so many good lenses, the G serie, the beercan series, Lecia made 28-135, a lot of primes and macros.
And Zeiss has a nice serie of lenses made for Sony, 28-70, 16-80, 135mm ect.

I am not missing anything, and the built-in IS Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy


I know about Minolta lenses, but they're some difficult to find, and AF lenses are more prone to broke down than good old MF lenses, so I think buying new ones is a good idea.

Nothing to say about the quality of good Minolta lenses. They are really really good. Very Happy

New Sony-Zeiss lenses are good too, but (still) few and expensive. for The new 24-70 is going to cost here something like 1900 euros... and the 70-300 f4-5,6 is to be priced at 900 euros...


PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 2:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
lahnet wrote:


You just have to remember that all Minoltas AF lenses fit direct on Sony. Minolta has so many good lenses, the G serie, the beercan series, Lecia made 28-135, a lot of primes and macros.
And Zeiss has a nice serie of lenses made for Sony, 28-70, 16-80, 135mm ect.

I am not missing anything, and the built-in IS Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy


I see the Minolta AF register distance is 44.5mm, so that's handy for manual lens use, assuming adapters are available (I haven't looked).
How do the Sony cams feel for ruggedness and ease of use?


PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 2:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Juanma wrote:
lahnet wrote:
Juanma wrote:
The problem with the Sony is that the Sony lens lineup (AF lenses) is quite limited and expensive.


You just have to remember that all Minoltas AF lenses fit direct on Sony. Minolta has so many good lenses, the G serie, the beercan series, Lecia made 28-135, a lot of primes and macros.
And Zeiss has a nice serie of lenses made for Sony, 28-70, 16-80, 135mm ect.

I am not missing anything, and the built-in IS Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy


I know about Minolta lenses, but they're some difficult to find, and AF lenses are more prone to broke down than good old MF lenses, so I think buying new ones is a good idea.

Nothing to say about the quality of good Minolta lenses. They are really really good. Very Happy

New Sony-Zeiss lenses are good too, but (still) few and expensive. for The new 24-70 is going to cost here something like 1900 euros... and the 70-300 f4-5,6 is to be priced at 900 euros...


I have 5 old Minoltas from eBay. All have been "topdollar". The 70-300 is not a Zeiss it a G and cost 800 US$ from Sony.com
I think street price in EU will be 800€. That is a lot of money, buy I do not think it is expensive for a Zomm in the best series.

Farside wrote:
lahnet wrote:


You just have to remember that all Minoltas AF lenses fit direct on Sony. Minolta has so many good lenses, the G serie, the beercan series, Lecia made 28-135, a lot of primes and macros.
And Zeiss has a nice serie of lenses made for Sony, 28-70, 16-80, 135mm ect.

I am not missing anything, and the built-in IS Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy


I see the Minolta AF register distance is 44.5mm, so that's handy for manual lens use, assuming adapters are available (I haven't looked).
How do the Sony cams feel for ruggedness and ease of use?


M42 adapters are easy to find, I do not know about other systems. Viewfinder are better than good, and screen resolution far better than Canon. It is actully possible to evaluate sharpness.

I love the feel of it, but I believe this is different from one person to another.


PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
I will be walking the Carmino from St-Jean-Pied-du-Port to Burgos, but I will be doing some detours, because of my interest in the Knights Templar churches.


That's good. Burgos is an interesting city, nice cathedral. I stopped there for a day to explore the city. Also, the countryside was nice from the Franco-Spanish border until Burgos. From Burgos to Leon was rather boring and monotonous compared to the first/second week of hiking.

A general hint: when you are tired in the evening and explore the local village, don't forget to take a look in the churches. I often found the priests playing organ. After a day of harsh sun and fatigue, the demonic sounds coming out of these instruments have a special impact on you, especially when you are sitting in a medieval setting. In Castrojeriz (between Burgos and Leon, that is), I was really exhausted after my first 40km hike of the trek. Attracted by the music when I passed the church, I went in. The music was very heavy, overpowering, I took a chair to sit down and noticed a rosette with a pentagram at the entrance of the church. As I sat down, I also noticed a bat flying around... Too much, too much... Twisted Evil


PostPosted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
lahnet wrote:


M42 adapters are easy to find, I do not know about other systems. Viewfinder are better than good, and screen resolution far better than Canon. It is actully possible to evaluate sharpness.

I love the feel of it, but I believe this is different from one person to another.


Thanks for that. I'm trying to get a feel of what will be worth considering for my next cam. I'm still leaning towards a K10D and the new Sonys are suddenly looking appealing.


PostPosted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 8:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Farside wrote:
lahnet wrote:


M42 adapters are easy to find, I do not know about other systems. Viewfinder are better than good, and screen resolution far better than Canon. It is actully possible to evaluate sharpness.

I love the feel of it, but I believe this is different from one person to another.


Thanks for that. I'm trying to get a feel of what will be worth considering for my next cam. I'm still leaning towards a K10D and the new Sonys are suddenly looking appealing.


For more info on Sony you shout take a look on this site:
http://www.dyxum.com/index.asp
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Digital SLR Cameras
Page 1 of 1