Here’s « 360Photography

RSS

Posts Tagged ‘Here’s’

Should I buy the Sony a6400? Here’s how it compares

20 Jan

Introduction

The Sony a6400 is the company’s latest midrange mirrorless camera. Its body, 24MP sensor and many of its specs are familiar from the existing model, the a6300.

And, because it’s a new model, the a6400 is, initially at least, more expensive relative to the lineup it fits into. So is it better to buy an older model at a discount price, rather than forking-out more to have the most up-to-date features?

We’ll have a look at how the a6400 compares with its immediate peers and the factors you may wish to consider if you’re in the market for a new camera.

Sony a6400 vs a6300
Sony a6400 vs a6500
Sony a6400 vs a6000
Sony or a different brand?
Sony a6400 vs Panasonic DC-GX9
Sony a6400 vs Canon EOS M50
Sony a6400 vs Fujifilm X-E3
Sony a6400 vs Nikon D5600
Conclusion

Which is better, a6400 or a6300?

The a6400 shares a lot with the model it replaces (and, for once, Sony has made clear that it replaces the a6300). They both offer 24MP APS-C sensors, oversampled 4K video and 11 fps continuous shooting. They have the same viewfinder and much of the same hardware. So what’s the difference?

The most immediate difference is a rear screen that’s now touch-sensitive and can tilt up by 180 degrees, and allows for touch control of autofocus, selfies and vlogging (though any hot shoe mic will block the screen). These are nice additions, but are unlikely to swing most people towards the (initially) more expensive model, unless you really need one of those things.

The big difference is autofocus performance and operation. Our initial experiences are that the a6400’s AF is more ‘sticky’ and consistent but also much simpler to use, offering Eye AF without a second button press and being much smarter at using its most precise focus method, depending on the target it can see.

The new, presumably more efficient, processor means there’s less risk of overheating limiting when capturing video. Unlike its predecessors, the a6400 is not limited to 29:59 minutes of recording time, either, and recorded for over 45 minutes in our initial tests.

It’s also worth considering that Sony will be selling a kit that bundles the a6400 with its recent 18-135mm zoom. It costs more and is larger than the 16-50mm power zoom but covers a wider range (albeit without such wide-angle capability), and has the advantage of not being the weakest kit lens on the market.

Which should I buy, a6400 or a6500?

The comparison to the a6500 is more difficult, since the older camera was originally a much more expensive camera and hence has at least one key additional feature: in-body image stabilization.

In-body stabilization is an undeniably useful feature for photography and is even more valuable if you’re shooting video, since it more easily allows shots without a tripod and lets you keep horizons steady in a way in-lens stabilization can’t.

The a6400’s AF is significantly better, though: both in terms of performance and ease-of-use (the new AF experience requires much less manual intervention), which is hard to ignore. The a6400 is also quicker to focus and fire off a shot from boot-up, possibly thanks to the new processor.

Which you choose will come down to which of these features you value more. Or, if you need both and your current setup is workable, can you wait long enough to see if Sony brings an a6400-like upgrade to its stabilized model?

Is the a6400 better than the a6000?

Another tempting model is the a6000. Part of the reason it sells so well is because it’s cheaper than many of its rivals but it’s very much a case that you get what you pay for (it was recognizably stripped-down even for 2014).

The a6400 is better in every respect. It has several generations of AF improvement, revised user interface and touchscreen, vastly better video capabilities (4K vs 1080) and a better viewfinder. It’s a higher-end model, as well as being much newer.

However, more fundamentally than any of this, the a6400 will offer better image quality. Partly because it has a more modern sensor, but mainly because in the time between the two cameras’ launches Sony has continually worked to improve its JPEG color. And the difference is marked: the a6400’s output will simply be more attractive, even before you look closely at the sharpening and noise reduction improvements.

Sony a6400 vs the competition

Of course, the a6400 faces competition from outside the Sony lineup. And, while this slideshow focuses on how the bodies stack up against one another, it’s massively important to consider the lens availability for different systems.

Don’t be swayed by promises of X number of lenses, or cross-compatibility with full frame (the ‘upgrade path’ might lead to manufacturer profit more directly than to the place where all your photographic problems are solved). Instead check whether the lenses you think you might want exist, for a price you’re willing to pay. After all, there’s little solace in knowing there’s a choice of manual focus 12mm primes if you primarily shoot portraits.

That said, it’s hard to think of a camera that promises the all-round capability of the a6400 in terms of image quality, autofocus and video quality. Not because the Sony’s performance is the best possible – its 4K is pretty wobbly, thanks to significant rolling shutter – but because any cameras that outdo it in any regard are all significantly more expensive.

Sony a6400 vs Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9

The Panasonic GX9 is probably the Sony’s most capable rival. It has a slightly smaller sensor, but feels better built, has more direct controls and adds in-body image stabilization. It also tends to come with a better kit zoom (and a wider range of native lens choices, generally).

The GX9’s autofocus is pretty good, but it can’t offer the dependability that we’ve seen from the a6400 so far. Equally, if you’re interested in shooting video, the significant extra crop on the Panasonic means it’s noisier and harder to shoot wide-angle with. That said, the GX9’s video will be stabilized and it exhibits much less rolling shutter, though like the Sony, you can’t attach headphones to monitor your audio.

Sony a6400 vs Canon EOS M50

The Canon EOS M50 is the other obvious rival to the Sony. It’s slightly less expensive and fits into a system with even fewer native lenses than the a6400 but, like the Sony, it’s an unstabilized APS-C mirrorless camera with a built-in viewfinder.

The Canon’s main appeal is that it’s comfortable and easy to use. Its AF performance isn’t in the same league as the Sony, and its cropped 4K video is distinctly soft by comparison. But, despite a sensor with less dynamic range for Raw shooters, its JPEG output is very pleasant. So, while it falls a little behind in just about every regard, it’s still a likeable option if you just want a small, easy-to-use camera that takes good photos.

Sony a6400 vs Fujifilm X-E3

The Fujifilm X-E3 is also a 24MP APS-C rangefinder-styled mirrorless camera without built-in stabilization, so why do the two cameras seem so un-alike? Part of the reason is that the Fujifilm is a much less expensive body paired with a much more expensive lens (the 18-55mm F2.8-4 OIS is one of our favorite kit lenses, which is not something anyone has ever said of the Sony 16-50mm power zoom).

The X-E3 shoots beautiful images, thanks to one of the best JPEG engines in the business. However, while it’s a nicer camera to take control over than the Sony, it’s not the best-handling Fujifilm, with a bit too much dependence on the little fiddly command dials. It also can’t come near the Sony in terms of AF speed or dependability and is one of the only 4K cameras to exhibit more rolling shutter than the Sony.

Sony a6400 vs Nikon D5600

The other camera that falls into the ‘cheaper body, better lens’ category is the Nikon D5600 DSLR. The twin-dial D7500 is rather more expensive, as well as being larger, so we’d consider the D5600 and 18-140mm F3.5-5.6 VR kit to be most directly comparable. The single dial setup of the D5600 also ends up making you as dependent on the function menus as the Sony does.

Despite being a DSLR (meaning fewer AF points, more tightly grouped near the center,) the D5600 perhaps comes closest to matching the Sony for ease of getting the AF point to stay on your chosen subject. However, its video specs are nowhere near that of the mirrorless cameras: offering only 1080 capture and essentially unusable video AF. Like the Fujifilm, you’d only choose this over the Sony if you exclusively shoot stills.

Conclusion

Sony’s a6000 has always been a popular camera, but the more advanced a6300 and a6500 models don’t stand out from their peers quite so well, despite the more advanced technology and impressive looking specifications. We’ve always found them capable all-rounders but not always the most enjoyable to use (especially if you want to take control over what’s going on).

The a6400 has immediately impressed us in this regard: the revamped autofocus performance and, just as importantly, usability means there’s one less thing to wrestle against the camera over.

As with every system, it’s worth checking the lens lineup offers you the options you want, but our early impressions are of a camera that’ll turn itself to a bit of everything gaining possibly the most capable and usable AF systems we’ve encountered. Which may just be the cherry on the cake.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

Here’s why I won’t be swapping my Nikon D750 for a Z6 (but maybe you should)

20 Nov

I’ve spent a few weeks shooting around with the Nikon Z6. And in that time, I’ve made up my mind that as a current D750 owner of 3+ years, I will not be trading it in for its mirrorless sibling. But maybe you should. Here’s why…

Marginal size/weight advantage

The Z6 offers a size and weight advantage over the D750 but it’s less than you might think. At 675g, it’s about 10% lighter than the D750 (750g). And though the D750 feels a little chunkier in hand, I prefer its grip. I can get my pinky on it comfortably and access the front function button with ease. On the Z6, there’s no room for a pinky and its two front function buttons are awkward to reach. Of course, everyone’s hands are different, and the Z6 might fit more comfortably in your hands.

No image quality advantage

Raw image quality between the two cameras is nearly identical. As a music photographer, I shoot a lot of personal work in low light environments. And in extreme cases of shadow pushing, the Z6’s on-sensor AF points can show up as banding. This isn’t the case for D750 files.

Less reliable low light AF

Shot on the Nikon D750. I love to shoot live music in underground/DIY venues, like basements and living rooms; places where lighting is dim and flash photography is generally unwelcome. The D750 is my go-to camera for this and all kinds of still photography work because it’s reasonably small and light, offers great dynamic range and, most importantly, has rock solid low light autofocus, not to mention reliable tracking.
ISO 3600 | 1/320 sec | F2.2 | Shot using the Nikon 35mm F2 D

In my experience, the D750 is a more reliable autofocus performer in dark conditions than the Z6. Nikon even rates it as 1EV more sensitive, -3EV vs -2EV, when using normal AF modes (the Z6’s ‘low light AF’ mode is sensitive to -4EV, but Contrast Detect-only). Simply put, I found the Z6 hunting in conditions the D750 doesn’t. And when using the D750’s central cross-type points, it has proven to be a top performer, whereas initial impressions suggest the Z6 is about as good as the Z7: which is to say, not great.

Difficult to use AF tracking

While I stick to a single, central point on the D750 in very low light, I like to use 3D-Tracking in brighter conditions. And it couldn’t be easier to use – simply hit the AF-on button and watch the camera track whatever is under the current selected AF point. From a compositional standpoint, the AF focus area can be somewhat limiting, but the reliability of the system is top notch.

With the Z6, the 273-point system with 90% coverage offers virtually no compositional barriers but engaging tracking is needlessly cumbersome to do when shooting with an eye to the finder. It’s only available in the camera’s Auto AF area mode and requires you to first press the camera’s ‘OK’ button in the center of the directional pad, which I can’t quite reach without compromising my grip.

Shot on the Nikon Z6. As a Nikon DSLR shooter, the Z6 has a familiar feel to it. Still, I prefer the reliability and usability of the D750’s AF system to that of the Z6 (even if the point coverage on the Z6 is way better), as well as the D750’s greater usable dynamic range.
ISO 100 | 1/320 sec | F4 | Shot on Z 50mm F1.8 S

Limited support for Nikkor AF-D lenses

Almost all of my lenses are Nikkor AF-D, which use a Nikon DSLR’s internal focus motor to drive focus rather than having a motor in the lens. These lenses represent excellent value for Nikon DSLR users and are generally very fast to focus, though noisy. Jumping into the Z-mount would render these lenses useless from an AF standpoint, as Z mount cameras have no motor. However most newer Nikon lenses have built-in motors and work with no noticeable penalty adapted via the F to Z adapter.

But…fabulous video

Video is the one area the Z6 has me hung up because it absolutely smokes the D750. If you have even the slightest interest in video capture, the Z6 is a far better choice than the clunky, prehistoric video offering found in the D750. The Z6’s 4K quality is excellent (sorry, only 1080p on the D750), in-body image stabilization is super useful (not available on the D750) and the camera’s touchscreen for AF point placement (also not available). Focus during video is solid on the Z6 in contrast to the downright awful Contrast Detect video AF found on the D750. And did I mention it shoots 10-bit log over HDMI?

Bottom line

As I’m primarily a stills shooter, at the end of the day, image quality and AF reliability (especially in low light) are the two things that matter most to me and the D750 holds its ground in both regards to the Z6; all the touchscreens and in-body IS systems in the world can’t change that. For these reasons I’ll be holding on the my D750 and waiting at least another generation before making the move to Nikon mirrorless.

But those interested in video would be wise to give the Z6 some serious consideration because it really is that good. Plus other features, like better AF precision without a need to micro-adjust, live exposure and depth-of-field previews in the finder, and greater AF coverage, might also win you over.

If you’re even remotely tempted, consider this: used D750’s sell for upwards of $ 1000, depending on the condition, which puts you about halfway to a Z6. Just don’t forget the adapter…

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

Viewfinder Image Blurry? You May Need to Adjust Your Camera’s Diopter – Here’s How

23 Jul

Have you ever looked through a camera’s viewfinder and only been able to see a blurry image even after focusing? If you are always seeing a blurred image the diopter is not set correctly for your eyes. This happens every time I pick up my wife’s camera. She is near-sighted and I am far sighted.

Demonstration of diopter blur photo - Viewfinder Image Blurry? You May Need to Adjust Your Camera's Diopter - Here's How

What your viewfinder looks like when the diopter is not set correctly for your eye.

What is a diopter?

The diopter is a small lens in your camera’s viewfinder. It allows you to match the focus of your viewfinder to your eye. So before I can see anything clearly through the viewfinder on my wife’s camera I must focus this small lens. She has to do the same when she uses my camera.

If your eyesight is good and you are using a camera that’s had the diopter adjusted, you will see a blurry image in the viewfinder. You will need to adjust the diopter to correct this so you can see a sharp image.

I am surprised by the number of people who join our workshops here in Thailand that tell me they never see anything sharp in their viewfinder. After a quick adjustment, they are often surprised by how sharp the image is appearing in their viewfinder.

sharp photo illustrating diopter setting - Viewfinder Image Blurry? You May Need to Adjust Your Camera's Diopter - Here's How

When your diopter is adjusted properly you will see a sharp image and a sharp information display.

The easiest way to see if your diopter needs adjusting is to look at the information and guidelines you see in your viewfinder. If you cannot clearly see the numbers and lines sharply this means your diopter is not set correctly for your eyes.

How to Adjust the Diopter

DSLR cameras with optical viewfinders and mirrorless cameras with electronic viewfinders all have diopters.

Locate the Diopter Adjustment Control

The diopter adjustment control will most likely be a small wheel or slider close to your camera’s viewfinder. Most diopter controls are labeled with + and – signs.

Mount Your Camera

When you want to adjust the diopter it is best to have your camera mounted on a tripod or somewhere it will not move. You want to do this where you have a scene with good contrast. Something that your camera can autofocus on easily.

Focus Your Camera

Focus your camera using the autofocus. If you are using a camera or lens without autofocus you will need to look at the focus indicators in the viewfinder to ensure the lens is in focus. If your diopter is adjusted incorrectly for your eyes you will not see a sharp image in the viewfinder at this point.

Adjust Your Diopter

Start to turn the diopter wheel or move the slider. As the image comes into focus keep adjusting until you see a blurred image again. Now dial back your control so you see a sharp image (go back and forth until it’s as sharp as you can get). Now your diopter should be set correctly.

If you cannot see a sharp image in your viewfinder at any point of the adjustment you need to look at the display information. The exposure display in the viewfinder will come into focus at some point. If the display info is sharp in your viewfinder but the image is still blurry, you have a different problem.

The problem may be with the camera’s autofocus system or the lens. Here are a few suggestions for what to do in this situation:

Try changing lenses or zooming.
Make sure your lens is set to autofocus.
Attempt to focus manually.
Check focus using your camera’s LCD screen and Live View
Take your camera for repair.

Chinese Woman Photographer - Viewfinder Image Blurry? You May Need to Adjust Your Camera's Diopter - Here's How

Wearing Glasses or Contacts

If you normally wear glasses or contact lenses you can adjust your diopter to suit. If you prefer wearing glasses while using your camera, adjust the diopter with your glasses on.

But if you prefer not to wear your glasses while using your camera’s viewfinder, make the adjustments while you are not wearing them. If your eyesight is quite bad you may not be able to adjust your diopter sufficiently though and may need to keep your glasses on.

Add-On Diopter Accessories

If your diopter will not adjust to give you a clear image in your viewfinder you might need an add-on accessory diopter. Not all camera models will accommodate these so you will need to check your camera manual.

Boy with glasses - Viewfinder Image Blurry? You May Need to Adjust Your Camera's Diopter - Here's How

Diopter adjustment is simple but can make a significant difference to your photography enjoyment. It is always good to see a sharp image when you look through your viewfinder.

The post Viewfinder Image Blurry? You May Need to Adjust Your Camera’s Diopter – Here’s How appeared first on Digital Photography School.

Digital Photography School

Comments Off

Posted in Photography

Here’s what happens when you attach a 70-200mm F4 to a Game Boy Camera

05 Jun

Why? The better question: Why not?

There’s an unlikely vintage camera enjoying something of a resurgence these days: 1998’s 0.5MP Game Boy Camera. Attached to a game cartridge, Game Boy Camera brought digital photography to the youth 2 bits at a time. Lately, its legacy has continued to evolve as clever DIYers repurpose it for astrophotography and motorsports photography, and have even trained neural networks to convert the camera’s low-res monochrome images into photorealistic color.

Clearly, it was time for somebody to step up and work out how to attach EF lenses to the thing. And that’s just what Bastiaan Ekeler did. He’s a designer and self-proclaimed tinkerer, and feeling inspired by recent projects reviving the Game Boy Camera, saw an opportunity for a little fun. His 3D-printed adapter fits to a partially disassembled camera, and with a 1.4x teleconverter and 70-200mm F4 attached, produces an impressive 3026.8mm equivalent view.

With all of the parts in place he took a stroll on the beach to put the rig to use, and even managed a few photos of the full moon despite contending with a dim screen and a 1 fps refresh rate in low light.

Long Beach Bar “Bug” Lighthouse. (Canon 70-200 f4 + Canon 1.4x extender). Photo by Bastiaan Ekeler.

A Seagull at Norman E. Klipp Marine Park (Canon 70-200 f4 + Canon 1.4x extender). Photo by Bastiaan Ekeler.

The full moon on 2018-05-30 in Greenport, NY. (Canon 70-200 f4 + Canon 1.4x extender). Photo by Bastiaan Ekeler.

Head to Ekeler’s website for a full-write up of the project and more sample images. You can also follow him on Twitter and Instagram.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

Brands, breakthroughs and bias: Here’s why you’ve heard so much about Sony recently

15 May

If it feels like we’ve been writing a lot about Sony recently, you haven’t been imagining things: we’ve been writing about its products and technologies quite a bit. But there’s a good reason for that – the company has simply given us a lot to write about.

A period of intense, sustained activity, set against a backdrop of relative inactivity from its competitors has seen Sony receive probably more coverage than any other brand.

Ever since it bought Konica Minolta’s camera business, Sony has been trying to find a foothold in a market sector that’s historically been dominated by two camera makers. Its first attempts were to crowd-out the shelves with ‘me-too’ SLRs. Actually, that’s not quite fair, the a350 was pretty innovative, in its own way. But despite offering lots of models often at low prices, this didn’t yield the desired results.

Sony’s attempts at innovation don’t start with the RX and a7 cameras, but the relentless pace of its updates are a relatively recent trend.

But Sony’s more recent moves, particularly the embrace of full-frame mirrorless and 1″ sensor compacts, along with numerous additional features arriving in the realms of video, sensor technology and autofocus, have included some significant steps forward for the industry. And ones that are relevant for a broad range of photographers.

This has left us with a lot of technology and features to write about. Sometimes this comes in the form of a standalone tech article, other times in the reviews themselves, as we try to explain the real-world benefits and shortcomings we’ve encountered while using them.

Of course we’ve seen this before: periods of innovation from various manufacturers as the industry grows and changes. The introduction of the first mirrorless camera by Panasonic, for example, or its subsequent improvements in video (we often joke that the launch of a GH series camera means we all have to learn more about film-making). Fujifilm was the first to offer on-sensor phase detection and, while divisive, its X-Trans color filter array and DR Modes have given us plenty to talk about.

Mirrorless cameras, as pioneered by Panasonic and Olympus have been the area with most innovation in recent years. Again, this has meant we’ve written about them a lot, as the technology has improved.

What’s unique, though, is the continued drive, this sustained flood of products and of new technologies that Sony has recently been responsible for. And, more starkly, this has come at a time when the industry’s largest two companies have been comparatively quiet. Over the past four years, Sony has released around 60% more new high end (>$ 1000) models than any of its rivals.

This has come at a time when the industry’s largest two companies have been comparatively quiet

This has meant that we write a lot about Sony right now. Not because it’s Sony, specifically, but because they’re the company doing so much of the running at the moment. And of course, our coverage isn’t always positive. Our job is to cover technology and innovations regardless of how well they perform, so in addition to being impressed by the capabilities of DRAM-backed Stacked CMOS sensors, we’ve also written about banding, striping, and work that still needs to be done on the menu systems.

Sony isn’t the only brand innovating, of course. We continue to be impressed by Canon’s Dual Pixel AF design, particularly in terms of the benefits it brings for video shooting, and Nikon launched the D850, arguably the best DSLR the world has seen. But neither brand is delivering the constant innovation that currently sets Sony apart right now.

This is to be expected: the dominant players in the industry will be keen not to change an apparently winning formula, while the insurgent newcomer needs to offer something suitably different to entice people away from the tried and tested ‘safe’ choice.

Canon didn’t achieve its market dominance by chance. Cameras such as the EOS 5D and EOS 300D/Digital Rebel offered something none of its rivals did.

Looking back, we’ve been here before. Canon didn’t achieve its recent market dominance solely by chance: a combination of investment in CMOS technology and aggressive pricing of its mass-market DSLRs played a big role. This combination gave it several years in which its cameras had a distinct edge over most rivals.

Similarly, Nikon made great strides forward around the time of the D3 and D300. These two cameras brought hugely improved autofocus as well as a move to CMOS sensors which greatly increased low light performance (and dynamic range, in subsequent iterations).

The Fujifilm S3 Pro was the first DSLR to offer live view. It could be argued that we failed to recognize its significance at the time.

The long-expected thinning-out of the camera industry hasn’t yet happened: there are still plenty of players in the market. The thing that’s changed is that they’re all competing for a slice of a much smaller pie than they were, just a few years ago. This is likely to mean more brands trying the aggressive, fast-iteration, constant innovation approach that Sony (and, to a lesser degree, Fujifilm) is taking. It’s also unlikely that Sony can continue at this rate indefinitely: there’s every chance that its strategy is to capitalize on being first mover by staking out as much territory as it can before everyone else responds.

Manufacturers are all competing for a slice of a much smaller pie

As the remaining camera brands fight for recognition and search for tech and features to distinguish themselves, we should have plenty more to write about. Especially if, as all the rumors suggest, Canon, Nikon or both end up introducing high-end mirrorless cameras in the next twelve months. After all, despite being well-entrenched in the DSLR market, they’ll both be relative newcomers to serious mirrorless, so may feel the need to be more innovative than we’ve seen in a while.

Busy times, then. And we will cover these with the same vigor and enthusiasm we try to show for every innovative launch. Regardless of which name is on the front of the product.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

Here’s how to create a super resolution photo with any camera

25 Apr

This is a super resolution image, creating by combining four photos in Photoshop.

We recently tested out the Pentax K-1 II’s new hand-held Pixel Shift mode which combines four images to create a ‘super resolution’ file in-camera with better detail, dynamic range and lower noise. Sadly, it also results in some unwanted processing artifacts.

But you can also create a super resolution photo without using Dynamic Pixel Shift by shooting a series of handheld images and combining them in Photoshop. Super resolution works essentially by sampling a scene multiple times with slight shifts in framing, which allows details to be localized with sub-pixel precision (since shifts are unlikely to be perfect multiples of one pixel). The result is a file with improved resolution, less noise, more dynamic range but no artifacts. The best part is you can do this with the camera of your choosing. For the sake of this example, we did it with the Pentax K-1 II.

$ (document).ready(function() { ImageComparisonWidget({“containerId”:”reviewImageComparisonWidget-10980295″,”widgetId”:603,”initialStateId”:null}) })

Following a simple step-by-step Photoshop recipe (listed below), we created a super resolution file stacking four images – the same number used by Dynamic Pixel Shift – and one stacking 20 images, just for fun. We down-sampled the files to the original resolution (36MP). Right off the bat, the difference between our four image stack and a standalone Raw file is like night and day.

Similarly, the difference$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-4014–1567822084”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(4014); }); }) between our 4 image stack and Dynamic Pixel Shift mode is also substantial. Areas where Dynamic Pixel Shift displays artifacts$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-4010-939092746”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(4010); }); }) look clean in our 4-stack. This is observable throughout our sample scene$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-4011–1901282620”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(4011); }); }). Interestingly, the difference between the 4 image and 20 image super resolution examples is less noticeable$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-4012–1917693503”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(4012); }); }). While there is some advantage$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-4013–396364473”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(4013); }); }) to stacking more images, returns are diminishing.

You’ll notice we’ve included two versions of our 4-stack and 20-stack: Median and Average, which refer to the stacking method used in Photoshop (described in detail below). Overall, the median method handles ghosting from moving objects$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-4015-104250703”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(4015); }); }) better than the averaging method.

Methodology

There are numerous tutorials providing instructions for creating a super resolution image in Photoshop – this one by Ian Norman on PetaPixel is among our favorites. Distilled down to its simplest terms, there are four easy steps:

Bring all images into Photoshop as a stack of layers
Resize the image to 200% width and 200% height using ‘Nearest Neighbor’
Auto align all the layers
Average the layers by setting each layer’s opacity to 1/layer number (the 1st layer will be 1/1 so 100% opacity, the 2nd layer will be 1/2 so 50% opacity, and the 4th layer will be 1/4 or 25% opacity, and so on).
Sharpen the image using a Radius setting of 2, and a suitable Amount setting (we used 200% for the 4 image stack and 300% for the 20 image stack – the more images you stack the more amenable the composite will be to aggressive sharpening)

Alternatively, for the fourth step you can convert all layers to a ‘Smart Object’ and change the stacking mode to ‘Median’. This can help deal with ghosting from movement in your final image, but can also take longer to process.

Finally, you can resize the final output by 50% width and height (we prefer Bicubic resampling for this step) to get the shot back to its original resolution, but with far more detail and cleaner output. Or, you can opt to save the high-resolution file if you print big, but just keep in mind that for a 36MP camera, that’s a 144MP file. You can always re-upscale a super resolution file you’ve shrunk, and if you use the ‘Preserve Details 2.0’ resampling method in Photoshop to do so, the results are often impressive and hard to distinguish from the higher resolution super resolution file.

Takeaway

You don’t need any particularly special camera to generate images that look like they were taken with a higher resolution, larger sensor camera. Just use the technique outlined here or in Ian’s article.

And if you’re shooting landscapes and cityscapes, you likely already have multiple photos of the same composition captured with changing light. Chances are that due to the wind, natural vibrations, etc., the shots have at least some sub-pixel movement between them (you can always gently nudge your camera between exposures to ensure there’s at least some shift). So why not go back through your library and take advantage of super resolution?

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

Sony ‘striping’: here’s the fix

19 Apr

Take a look at the PDAF stripes across the female model’s face in this image (cropped from an original vertical shot). The bad news is that it looks terrible. The good news? There’s a fix.

Among the major pieces of feedback we received when we published our Sony a7 III sample gallery concerned some odd striping artifacts viewable in some images, such as the one above.

It’s known as ‘PDAF striping’ and it’s not limited to a single camera, or even a single brand. It’s likely due to light reflections off the metal masks of on-sensor phase-detect pixels. PDAF striping is one of those annoying issues which only shows up sometimes, and which depending on the kind of photography you practice and your set of lenses, you might never see. But if you do see it, it’s pretty unpleasant, and very distracting. Particularly if you print large, or pixel peep.

The striping does seem to be limited to certain lenses: the Sony FE 85mm F1.8 is particularly prone to this issue

In our shooting with the a7 III, prominent examples of bright stripes tended to show up up in images that contained a significant amount of flare or backlit subjects. It seemed to mostly be an issue with shots taken with the FE 85 F1.8, when subjects were captured with the intent of deliberately inducing flare (we saw it in a couple 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 GM shots, but it wasn’t offensive).

We investigated the issue further with the help of our very own knowledgable forum members, and are pleased to announce that as of today there is at least one fix available, and another is coming in the near future.

See the results for yourself:


JPEG processed from original Raw	JPEG from corrected (fixed) Raw

This fix is courtesy of Professor Hank Dietz, who is none other than the fellow who developed a fix for Sony compressed Raw artifacts. His tool is available here. For now, it only works on compressed Raw files, but it works with Raw files from any Sony camera exhibiting the issue. That’s important, because this issue is not isolated to the a7 III by any means (though its predecessor the a7 II doesn’t appear to have any issues). It occurs with the a7R II/III, a9, R100 V – i.e., most cameras with masked pixels for on-sensor phase-detect AF (and not just limited to Sony).

Higher resolution bodies are less problematic because a single pixel stripe is a smaller proportion of the image. The a7 III and a9 also have more phase-detection pixels than any other camera Sony has introduced, which makes the issue slightly more pronounced on these cameras.

Striping does appear to be isolated to certain lenses though: the Sony FE 85/1.8 is particularly prone to creating this issue, and we were easily able to induce striping even in modest backlit shots like the one above (zoom into 1:1 on the flare above the toddler’s hat). However, we’ve had less luck recreating the striping with many other lenses like the 55/1.8, FE zooms, or the various 35mm primes we’ve tested. There doesn’t appear to be much aperture dependence, based on Jim Kasson’s analysis of our test shots.

You need not worry… just run problematic Raws through Prof. Hank Dietz’s repair tool, and you’ll get a Raw file largely devoid of any issues

What does all this ultimately mean? Well, if you shoot a lot of backlit subjects and love flare, don’t worry: you don’t have to steer clear of the a7 III or Sony mirrorless cameras. Instead, you may wish to steer clear of certain lenses like the 85mm F1.8 or 50mm F1.8. But even then, you need not worry too much: just run your problematic (compressed) Raws through Prof. Hank Dietz’s repair tool, and you’ll get a clean Raw file in return.

Click here for the fix on The Aggregator

To take advantage of Professor Dietz’ work, you simply drag-and-drop a compressed Sony Raw file into the web application, wait a few seconds, and download the resulting file (you’ll want to add ‘.ARW’ to the end for your Raw software to read it properly). And voila – almost every trace of the striping is removed. In extreme cases, you may see some remnants of striping, but out of the files we tested, this only happened once. Oh, and if you have any feedback, please PM Hank via his DPReview profile.

We’ve been in touch with one of the contributors – forum member pippo27 – for the open-source RawTherapee Raw converter as well, and he’s integrated a fix in the Raw processing pipeline based on an understanding of the exact locations of the masked PDAF pixels.¹ It’s already available in development versions you can download here, and will be included in the next major release. There’s even a Photoshop fix developed by DPR forum member Magnar W, if you’re past the Raw development stage or have a problematic JPEG.

While we’re still trying to nail down the root cause of these issues to help us predict when, where, and with what lens this will be an issue, rest assured that you needn’t worry too much: the occurrence is rare, and when it appears, you’ll likely have a (quick) workaround. We do hope though that Sony itself addresses the issue in-camera, especially as Prof. Dietz suggests it shouldn’t even be too computationally burdensome.

¹Thanks to extensive investigations led by Jim Kasson, Bill Claff and forum member Horshack.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

Ex-Lexar execs have launched a new memory card company, here’s why you should care

24 Feb

ProGrade Digital is a brand new memory card brand founded by former executives of memory maker Lexar.

In June 2017 parent company Micron unexpectedly announced the end of Lexar, but the brand was shortly after acquired by Chinese company Longsys. Now, a group of former executives from both managerial and technical backgrounds has teamed up to produce and market high-quality memory cards, directly competing with Lexar itself and other high-profile storage brands, such as SanDisk.

Initially the new company will offer two lines of cards: The CFast 2.0 cards will be available in 128GB, 256GB, and 512GB capacities for $ 230, $ 350, and $ 700, respectively, and offer transfer speeds up to 550MB/sec. The UHS-II SD-card line comes in 64GB, 128GB, and 256GB capacities for $ 55, $ 95, and $ 190, respectively, delivering speeds of up to 200MB/sec.

ProGrade says the controllers in all cards are optimized for use in professional cameras, and will each be tested from component-level down to individual memory chips before leaving the factory. Add a three year warranty into the mix, and the new cards look like an enticing alternative to the established brands for photographers who demand maximum reliability.

$ (document).ready(function() { SampleGalleryV2({“containerId”:”embeddedSampleGallery_5449192392″,”galleryId”:”5449192392″,”isEmbeddedWidget”:true,”selectedImageIndex”:0,”isMobile”:false}) });

The brand was officially announced last week, but rather than simply cover the news, we decided to send ProGrade a few questions instead. Specifically, we wanted to know what sets the brand apart, how they expect to compete with the big guys, and why they started the company in the first place.

Mark Lewis, Vice President Marketing for ProGrade Digital, was kind enough to answer these questions:

Do we really need another memory card company?

Yes. With Micron’s sale of the Lexar brand and Western Digital’s purchase of SanDisk, there seems to be a shift in market focus for these two iconic brands and the future is uncertain.

Their decisions to realign product lines and focus solely on higher margin industrial and OEM SKUs opens up an opportunity for a new player—one with laser-focus on the professional market and whose intent it is to fill the void and service this market of professional photo, video and cinema customers. We at ProGrade Digital are that new digital memory card company who will champion their cause.

How will your company be different than the rest?

We bring several competitive advantages to help us stand apart. First, it’s about the people involved. At the executive and engineering level our team brings extensive experience, having worked for numerous years with leading components suppliers and vendors in the design and delivery of precision products specifically for this niche. Our marketing and sales group also has deep roots within the imaging industry, including professionals who not only produce still and motion capture for ProGrade Digital, but who also regularly create for private clients. Plus we acknowledge our growing family of influencers and ambassadors from both the still and motion capture worlds, individuals whom you will soon be reading more about.

The second way that we will stand apart from the competition is our product. I’ve already touched on the fact that, through our past employment, we bring a deep level of experience having built integrity into both the Lexar and SanDisk product lines. Our work here with ProGrade Digital not only lets us expand upon that foundation but, as a smaller firm, we now have the latitude and drive to make even better products specifically for the imaging markets. Two such ProGrade Digital imaging industry firsts include 100 percent in-factory test (to help us sustain a goal of zero percent failure), plus laser-etched serial numbers on each memory card. The serial number enables us to track firmware, controller and memory type. This ability to track a card’s manufacture gives us one more tool for being that much more proactive when it comes to supporting our customer base.

Other product strengths: as executive members of the SD Association and Compact Flash Association (CFA) we work with device manufacturers and other industry leaders on the development of new technologies. ProGrade Digital products are competitively priced, and distribution is limited so that we may preserve quality and control, plus maintain a direct relationship with our customer.

How can a David hope to compete against a Goliath?

If you know the story about David and Goliath you may recall that, despite Goliath’s physical size, level of experience and massive army to back him up, it was a young, small and nimble David who took precise aim and used the right weapon. ProGrade Digital is tightly focusing on a customer that we know, and specifically developing best-in-class products able to meet the needs of the professional imaging market.

What’s the future for card form factors such as SD, CFast, CFexpress and XQD?

The future for all memory cards continues to evolve. It is difficult to predict exactly what will happen to any particular form-factor, but the standards work currently being developed by the two memory card associations will help drive the direction.

Specifically, plans are in the works to move to the PCIe interface; the PCIe interface will allow for speeds to advance beyond some of the limits of the SATA interface. Of particular note are efforts being done by the Compact Flash Association (CFA) on the CFexpress form-factor. Their work has support from the major device manufacturers, and ProGrade Digital is at the forefront of those developments. As new standards gain in popularity, I believe that we will see some current form-factors slowly begin to phase out.

A big thank you to Mark for taking the time to answer these questions. If you want to learn more about this new memory card company or browse through ProGrade’s whole product line, head over to the ProGrade Digital website.

Press Release:

ProGrade Digital Launches New Line of Professional-Quality Memory Cards and Card Readers for Use with Digital Cameras, Camcorders and Cinema Cameras

Former Lexar Executives Start New Company: Pledge to Focus on Developing and Marketing Products of Superior Performance, Quality and Reliability

SAN JOSE, Calif. – Feb 15, 2018 8:00 am EST-ProGrade Digital, anew company founded on a mission to provide the highest quality, professional grade memory cards and workflow solutions available, today announced a new line of products designed to uniquely fill the needs of today’s high-end DLSRs, camcorders and digital cinema cameras. Memory cards will be offered in a variety of formats and industry-leading capacities. The company will also design and market a selection of card readers, starting with a CFast & SD Dual Slot Workflow Reader that boasts a USB 3.0, Gen. 2 transfer protocol. ProGrade Digital’s new memory cards and card readers will become available in the month of February at www.progradedigital.com, Amazon.com and B&H Photo and Video

ProGrade Digital was founded by former executives from Lexar who held management or technical leadership positions at the company recognized as the pioneer in memory card development for digital photography. The team has more than 60 years of combined experience in the design, development and manufacture of memory cards gained while working for Lexar, SanDisk and other firms. Leveraging its experience and industry relationships, the team will focus exclusively on developing and marketing memory cards, card readers and software optimized for use within professional cinema and photography markets.

“Our goal is to be the professional’s source for top performing, professional grade memory cards and workflow solutions,” says Wes Brewer, founder and CEO of ProGrade Digital. “We will be committed to focusing our efforts on the digital imaging pro who is meticulous about his equipment and workflow-delivering the best service, plus best product quality and reliability.”

Memory Card Key Features

Professional-level capacities for CFast 2.0 and SDXC UHS-II memory cards
Optimized controllers specifically designed for use in professional-grade cameras
Rigorous full-card testing with serialized tracking of key components and manufacturing data for the highest quality control
Component-level testing down to individual memory chips for optimal quality
3-year warranty

Card Reader Key Features

Dual slot reader for CFast 2.0 and SDXC UHS-II card formats
USB 3.0 Gen. 2 transfer speed of up to 10Gb/second
Supports concurrent full-speed flow of data from cards in each slot
Portable and compact
Includes two 18? connection cables: one for Type A to Type C and one for Type C to Type C
Magnetized reader bottom firmly connects reader to laptop (using included metal mounting plate)
2-year warranty

ProGrade Digital memory cards are designed to provide the highest levels of performance, quality and reliability in high-end DSLRs, camcorders and digital cinema cameras from manufacturers such as Canon, Nikon, Sony and Blackmagic.

ProGrade Digital cards and card readers are available online at www.progradedigital.com, Amazon.com and B&H Photo and Video.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

It’s not the low light king, but here’s why we’re excited about the GH5S

26 Jan

There’s no getting around physics. The GH5S uses an oversized Four Thirds type sensor – pretty big for a video camera – but still kinda small when compared with the 36 x 20.3mm expanse of silicon the Sony a7S II uses to shoot video. As you’d expect, the GH5S can’t simply leap this vast chasm using only some sensor improvements, better noise reduction and a little moxie. It’s good but, in spite of anything you may have read, it’s not magic.

Read our analysis of our side-by-side shooting with the Sony a7S II

And yet, the more we test and use the camera, the more excited we are by it.

For a start, our shooting suggests that GH5S can outperform the a7S II whenever you require a depth-of-field that the Panasonic can offer. That alone means the GH5S will perform better than the Sony in some circumstances and can work across a greater range of lighting conditions than its IS-enabled sibling, the GH5.

But that’s not the end of it. The ability to shoot Log footage in 10-bit means that it can retain a lot more subtle tonal information than the 8-bit output of the Sony. So although the deep shadows might be more susceptible to noise than the a7S II, the quality of the midtones in the final footage may well be better preserved and more tolerant of grading.

That’s before you consider the features such as waveforms and vectorscopes that the GH5S inherits from the GH5, features that really aid setting exposure when shooting Log. Add to this the existing ecosystem that’s grown up around the GH series and the full picture reveals itself. We’re currently shooting the GH5S with a 0.71x SpeedBooster and a Sigma 18-35mm T2.0 CINE lens and can’t wait to show the results. If only Seattle would drop out of Log mode for a moment…

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

So you got a brand new camera? Here’s what you need next

26 Dec

If you’re the proud owner of your first camera, congratulations! Now the fun starts. We’ve got some ideas to help you get started and get the most out of your new gift.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized