Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Digital Cameras & Shooting Techniques => Topic started by: hobbsr on October 09, 2009, 08:38:51 am
-
Hi All,
I happen to have the opportunity to test the Sony A900 camera with the CZ24-70 lens, I have read with interest many discussions regarding higher iso performance of this camera. Can any of the professionals out there that are using this system give me some insights to the real world performance of this system at iso 800, 1600 and 3200? I have tested in a very limited way and of course find the level and nature of the noise (Chroma) to be much more (higher) noticeable than my current D3's. I am not so much trying to compare with the D3 but rather to find out from others that have real experience if the performance can be use at these levels when you see the final image or output? From my own tests I seem to be able with some further NR to get an ok image, that is to pixel peep at, the images above 800 do seem to lose more sharpness than I am use. I am shooting RAW and have all NR turned off in the camera, I am trying the files in the latest C1 and Aperture, I am also trying Nik Define 2.0 and Noiseware for the NR.
Thanks for any advice and experience that you can share as I am very interested to see if the A900 can support my wedding work. Of course why would I change from D3's to A900 mainly the option of the CZ lens 16-35, 24-70, 85 1.4 and 135 1.8, I also think that the Sony flash as a great design.
Regards
-
Hi All,
I happen to have the opportunity to test the Sony A900 camera with the CZ24-70 lens, I have read with interest many discussions regarding higher iso performance of this camera. Can any of the professionals out there that are using this system give me some insights to the real world performance of this system at iso 800, 1600 and 3200? I have tested in a very limited way and of course find the level and nature of the noise (Chroma) to be much more (higher) noticeable than my current D3's. I am not so much trying to compare with the D3 but rather to find out from others that have real experience if the performance can be use at these levels when you see the final image or output? From my own tests I seem to be able with some further NR to get an ok image, that is to pixel peep at, the images above 800 do seem to lose more sharpness than I am use. I am shooting RAW and have all NR turned off in the camera, I am trying the files in the latest C1 and Aperture, I am also trying Nik Define 2.0 and Noiseware for the NR.
Thanks for any advice and experience that you can share as I am very interested to see if the A900 can support my wedding work. Of course why would I change from D3's to A900 mainly the option of the CZ lens 16-35, 24-70, 85 1.4 and 135 1.8, I also think that the Sony flash as a great design.
Regards
You certainly aren't going to get D3-like high ISO out of the A900. That color filter doesn't do the A900 any favors at high ISO. However, there are some ways to get a bit better high ISO out of the camera, most notably getting exposure correct. The camera tends to underexpose, and spot metering your middle grays at +.5EV, or your detailed whites at +2.5 EV should generally do the trick. As far as RAW converters, Aperture and C1 do a much better job than Adobe, so you're good there, although DxO probably does the best job at high ISO. Raw Therapee and RPP do such a good job with A900 files overall that you may find that, instead of shooting over ISO 800, boosting exposure past that in the converter does a better job. Ultimately, the D3 and A900 are different tools that should be used together, rather than one over the other, but, keep in mind that, when you print your D3 and A900 files to the same size, there isn't nearly the difference in noise between them that you see when comparing 100% crops. Good luck!
-
I don't shoot high iso with mine (and I'm not a pro) so I don't have much to say... but you may want to do some googling on raw converters. DxO is supposedly significantly better with dealing with noise than other converters (on a900 raws).
-
Hi All,
I happen to have the opportunity to test the Sony A900 camera with the CZ24-70 lens, I have read with interest many discussions regarding higher iso performance of this camera. Can any of the professionals out there that are using this system give me some insights to the real world performance of this system at iso 800, 1600 and 3200? I have tested in a very limited way and of course find the level and nature of the noise (Chroma) to be much more (higher) noticeable than my current D3's. I am not so much trying to compare with the D3 but rather to find out from others that have real experience if the performance can be use at these levels when you see the final image or output? From my own tests I seem to be able with some further NR to get an ok image, that is to pixel peep at, the images above 800 do seem to lose more sharpness than I am use. I am shooting RAW and have all NR turned off in the camera, I am trying the files in the latest C1 and Aperture, I am also trying Nik Define 2.0 and Noiseware for the NR.
Thanks for any advice and experience that you can share as I am very interested to see if the A900 can support my wedding work. Of course why would I change from D3's to A900 mainly the option of the CZ lens 16-35, 24-70, 85 1.4 and 135 1.8, I also think that the Sony flash as a great design.
Regards
I have this exact set up (16-35, 24-70, and 135 1.8, 85 is on the way) and I love it.
The Sony is very simple, not a ton of options, just what you really need at your finger tips.
I generally avoid ISOs above 800, but honestly, processed through DxO (or even C1), I don't mind 1600 and 3200 at all. don't expect a D3, but processed properly, they look fantastic... if you size down to 12mp, they will be on par with a D3 IMO. 6400 is for emergencies, I wouldn't recommend it.
I like this set up many times more than the equivalent D700 and 5D2 set ups I have had. Try it with the mentioned lenses, I bet you'll love it.
-
[attachment=17292:_DSC8282.jpg]
I have this exact set up (16-35, 24-70, and 135 1.8, 85 is on the way) and I love it.
The Sony is very simple, not a ton of options, just what you really need at your finger tips.
I generally avoid ISOs above 800, but honestly, processed through DxO (or even C1), I don't mind 1600 and 3200 at all. don't expect a D3, but processed properly, they look fantastic... if you size down to 12mp, they will be on par with a D3 IMO. 6400 is for emergencies, I wouldn't recommend it.
I like this set up many times more than the equivalent D700 and 5D2 set ups I have had. Try it with the mentioned lenses, I bet you'll love it.
I'm a Sony convert and agree with all you say. ISO 3200 really isn't bad. I know you can't tell much from a JPG, but this is the full frame at 3200, produced at C1 defaults with no other post processing. Not a great shot - but not a great deal of noise either!