Why do these A7R shots look so awful? Locked

Started 6 months ago | Discussions
This thread is locked.
stoppingdown
Regular MemberPosts: 300Gear list
Re: Are you guys completely insane?!
In reply to philosomatographer, 6 months ago

philosomatographer wrote:

I agree with you - but, just listen to my little advice, consider the thread closed as you wrote a few minutes ago. Everything useful that could be written (about merely technical issues as well as tastes) has been already written. People capable to get those useful bits of information already got those; others didn't and won't. From now on it's likely to be just noise.

Thread closed for me too. Oh, I could save some bits anticipating that: I'm a moron, I don't understand photography, I'm a pixel-peeper, I don't know how to look at a printed photo in a gallery, and what else.

-- hide signature --

Fabrizio Giudici
http://stoppingdown.net

 stoppingdown's gear list:stoppingdown's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon D5100 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF +14 more
unknown member
(unknown member)
Re: Are you guys completely insane?!
In reply to philosomatographer, 6 months ago

philosomatographer wrote:

I can't believe what I am reading. Which part of "I am not referring to artistic quality" was unclear to you all? Do you just WANT to pick a fight?

There were some very helpful responses in this - a technical gear forum - yet you come out of the blue and effectively state that performing any kind of technical analysis is a hostile act.

Why would anybody then even bother buying an ultra-high-image-quality camera like the A7 in the first place? Just get a Holga! Use your camera phone!

I posted a link to some appalling-quality images made with what is effectively the highest-performance image sensor available. I wanted community input, not owning the camera in question, but being very interested in it.

I got a most satisfactory answer from courteous replies - yet after it all, people feel they need to take this thread completely off-topic and spew bile in my direction. Please get over yourselves!

Sheesh.

I agree with you, philosomatographer.
Being an artist, having a vision can not cover badly ( technicaly speaking ) captured photos.

 5nex7's gear list:5nex7's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony a6000 Sony E 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 OSS +54 more
nevercat
Senior MemberPosts: 1,892
Re: I said nothing of artistic merit
In reply to philosomatographer, 6 months ago

philosomatographer wrote:

Dave Wyman wrote:

While I'm not a huge fan of HDR, the images Ratcliff produces go beyond ordinary photographic images, each one more an artistic digital rendering of a scene and each one less a traditional image that mimics reality. The photos seem more than sharp enough to me, in part because I don't look at them with a 100% crop.

Your comments seem, like some HDR images, over the top, as if you are spoiling for an argument. Are you not aware, from a simple perusal of Ratcliff's website, that he has a lot of fans and that your comments might seem at least somewhat insulting to them?

Hi Dave,

I said nothing of the artistic merit of the images. But if you think that those images are technically acceptable for large printing, you have very low standards I am afraid. They are noisy, blurred, and riddled with a canvas-like noisy texture.

And maybe that is theefect Radcliff wnats to get. Not everybody want the picture to be 100% sharp and noise free. This is no camera thing but an artistic rendering of the subject. You (and I) don't like it and that is OK, but you should not blim his tools. The tools are capable of rendering sharp and noise free pictures, with more details then in any 12 MP camera

If this is all part of his artistic vision, well then - more power to him. I just wanted to understand - from the community of people that use the A7 - if this is typical. I must admit, I didn't realise that almost all of these are "HDR" images - which explains a lot. Not everything (i.e. I do much less noisy HDRs with my ancient-tech E-5) - but a lot.

Yes, but you would probably not do this kind of "artistic" HDR, but more the natural way. In that way you get less noise and sharper pictures. Radcliff makes a "painting"out of the pictures he takes, you like that or not. When you don't like it, don't buy it, if you do like it, you can try to mimic the effect or you could buy his pictures.

I find it amusing that you think that I should care in the least over insulting somebody's "website fans" in a technical discussion of image quality. Ha!

And even when you started an artistic discussion, I think it is not right that people feel insulted by the opinion of somebody else. We should be more accepting that peoples tastes are not the same.

But remember, you can get the same effects out of your camera when you do the same PP, it is an artistic rendering not a technical one.

Lightshow
Senior MemberPosts: 2,356Gear list
Re: Are you guys completely insane?!
In reply to philosomatographer, 6 months ago

philosomatographer wrote:

I can't believe what I am reading. Which part of "I am not referring to artistic quality" was unclear to you all? Do you just WANT to pick a fight?

There were some very helpful responses in this - a technical gear forum - yet you come out of the blue and effectively state that performing any kind of technical analysis is a hostile act.

Why would anybody then even bother buying an ultra-high-image-quality camera like the A7 in the first place? Just get a Holga! Use your camera phone!

I posted a link to some appalling-quality images made with what is effectively the highest-performance image sensor available. I wanted community input, not owning the camera in question, but being very interested in it.

Maybe if you stop using hostile words like "appalling" when describing others pictures you would not receive that hostility back.

I got a most satisfactory answer from courteous replies - yet after it all, people feel they need to take this thread completely off-topic and spew bile in my direction. Please get over yourselves!

Sheesh.

 Lightshow's gear list:Lightshow's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha 7R +1 more
noegd
Senior MemberPosts: 1,232Gear list
Re: Are you guys completely insane?!
In reply to Lightshow, 6 months ago

Maybe if you stop using hostile words like "appalling" when describing others pictures you would not receive that hostility back.

Exactly.

Back to the first image linked above, when looked at 100%, it is indeed not ideally sharp. It could be motion blur, or even already a tiny bit of diffraction: it was a 55mm shot at 1/60s and f/11.

Now, I'm pretty sure it would make a darn good print and nobody would notice the lack of pixel-level perfection.

-- hide signature --

Equipment in profile...

 noegd's gear list:noegd's gear list
Leica V-Lux 30 Nikon D40 Nikon D2Hs Nikon D700 Leica M9 +21 more
OvinceZ
Senior MemberPosts: 2,585Gear list
Re: Why do these A7R shots look so awful?
In reply to philosomatographer, 6 months ago

The large size photos look fine to me. The fence and grass seem sharp. But the original size is blurry. I suspect that he hasn't posted full resolution photos there because he offers them for sale. The 'original' isn't the full original but a highly reduced one.

 OvinceZ's gear list:OvinceZ's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 60D Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha 7R +14 more
LeicaBOSS
Regular MemberPosts: 425Gear list
Re: Nothing to do with taste
In reply to mdavidp, 6 months ago

mdavidp wrote:

Blur due to camera shake. A tripod may be a necessity due to sensor size.

Mike P.

This is it. Simple case of camera shake. 3-7 pixels or so. He probably was shooting in A mode - which insanely chooses 1/60sec all the time. With this sensor - you need like 1/[3x focal length] to be confident.

The amazing thing is that with just a little processing and downsampling to (still very big files!) you'll have very crisp images even with shake like this. (Below - bottom is "corrected". Maybe even too much)

Click to view at 1:1

-- hide signature --

From time to time, I point my camera at the right things. This is generally when I forget everything I've learned.

 LeicaBOSS's gear list:LeicaBOSS's gear list
Leica M9 Sony SLT-A77 Canon EOS M Sony Alpha 7R Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II +17 more
sean lancaster
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,184Gear list
Re: Why do these A7R shots look so awful?
In reply to philosomatographer, 6 months ago

I enjoy Trey's enthusiasm for photography, but I don't have a lot of experience with his work other than watching his first impression video with the A7/R and seeing something about Google Glass previously. However, I do find it unfortunate that the first image above is a landscape shot and there's not a single pixel sharp in the whole image at f/11. That's really strange to have the result with a super sensor and lens. However, I also understand that A LOT of people love HDR and this is what happens when you process that extensively. I know enough to know you don't just a shot at the pixel level ager this much processing because you're no longer judging the camera or the lens . . . just the composition and the wow factor from software.

 sean lancaster's gear list:sean lancaster's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony Alpha 7 Voigtlander 35mm F1.2 Nokton Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +2 more
JohnK
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,413Gear list
@LeicaBOSS
In reply to LeicaBOSS, 6 months ago

Agree that it's simply camera shake.

LeicaBOSS wrote:

(Below - bottom is "corrected". Maybe even too much)

Wow! How did you do that?

Click to view at 1:1

-- hide signature --

JohnK
Take a picture, it'll last longer.

tesilab
Senior MemberPosts: 1,989Gear list
A (hopefully) constructive answer...
In reply to philosomatographer, 6 months ago

I'm not going to speculate on many factors to consider, but here is one crucial point:

If you wish to compare your 12MP output to the A7r, then get A7r output that has been skillfully scaled down to 12MP. Then peep at the pair of images at any ratio you choose, included 1:1.

Just don't compare different res output at 100% because it doesn't make any sense.

 tesilab's gear list:tesilab's gear list
Sony RX1 Sony Alpha NEX-5 Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/100 Sony E 50mm F1.8 OSS Sigma 19mm F2.8 EX DN +11 more
11saje
Forum MemberPosts: 60Gear list
Re: Are you guys completely insane?!
In reply to Greynerd, 6 months ago

philosomatographer: Why do these A7R shots look so awful?

"I have a very strong interest in the Sony A7 series of cameras - I think they are refreshingly forward-looking, and have enormous potential.

I am curious, however, as to why the images in a certain A7R review (by Trey Ratcliff) look so absolutely awful when viewed at 100%. Take this one, for example:

http://stuckincustoms.smugmug.com/Portfolio/i-trvCWfM/A     "

I understand you post as having three objectives:

-criticize a photographer,

-put some doubt on a camera,

-make publicity to your own work.

Points 1 and 3 are linked and have already been put in perspective. Point 2 can be appreciated

looking in details the pictures taken with Nikon cameras on the site you are criticizing.

cosmonaut
Senior MemberPosts: 1,866Gear list
Re: Why do these A7R shots look so awful?
In reply to philosomatographer, 6 months ago

Just the process of making HDRs especially with full frame causes the image to lose sharpness. My a7R is as sharp of a camera as I have ever used. That's why I stay away from HDRs.

-- hide signature --

www.gregmccary.com

osv
osv
Senior MemberPosts: 1,431
Give 'em books, send 'em to school, this is what you get :-)
In reply to Lightshow, 6 months ago

what i find interesting is that some people didn't see any problem with that photo, while others blamed it on hdr.

which proves that there is a photography lesson to be learned here for some of us.

the o.p. should be thanked for elevating forum intelligence, rather than attacked for pointing out an obvious problem.

-- hide signature --

dan

unknown member
(unknown member)
Re: Give 'em books, send 'em to school, this is what you get :-)
In reply to osv, 6 months ago

osv wrote:

what i find interesting is that some people didn't see any problem with that photo, while others blamed it on hdr.

which proves that there is a photography lesson to be learned here for some of us.

the o.p. should be thanked for elevating forum intelligence, rather than attacked for pointing out an obvious problem.

.. or at least for revealing the forum intelligence level...
Yes, thanks o.p.

 5nex7's gear list:5nex7's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony a6000 Sony E 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 OSS +54 more
PVCdroid
Senior MemberPosts: 1,741Gear list
Re: Why do these A7R shots look so awful?
In reply to philosomatographer, 6 months ago

Trey does not apologize for his use of HDR and heavy handed post processing. I like it and bought a package of LR presets from him. I caught an interview with him where he was recommending the NEX-7 which is why I bought it last June. I loved the fact he had the guts to tell off and switch from Nikon for their behemoth cameras. He has been a strong advocate for mirrorless and EVF and does very well without being paid by Sony.

Photography is art and with the tools available today, why not use them to express your creativity. I don't think most on DPReview like his work because they don't get it or spend their time looking at corners or how sharp they can get a photograph. Trey has 11 million followers on Google, FB, etc. so I think he can ignore the heavy PP criticism. Even Ansel Adams was very creative in his developing with very high or low contrast at times. I think if he were alive today he would say go for HDR if you please. Some of my best and most praised photos from friends/family are heavy handed HDR work done in LR with multiple images. Posting them here is futile considering the narrow minded reactions. Printing HDR large is where you really get surprising results.

Also, Trey nearly always uses a tripod because it was a work around for when he was shooting the NEX-7 and its' 3 shot or EV difference limitations. He starts with LR and then uses Topaz Adjust and Photomatix Pro a lot with his work.

 PVCdroid's gear list:PVCdroid's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha 7R
PVCdroid
Senior MemberPosts: 1,741Gear list
Re: Are you guys completely insane?!
In reply to philosomatographer, 6 months ago

philosomatographer wrote:

I can't believe what I am reading. Which part of "I am not referring to artistic quality" was unclear to you all? Do you just WANT to pick a fight?

There were some very helpful responses in this - a technical gear forum - yet you come out of the blue and effectively state that performing any kind of technical analysis is a hostile act.

Why would anybody then even bother buying an ultra-high-image-quality camera like the A7 in the first place? Just get a Holga! Use your camera phone!

I posted a link to some appalling-quality images made with what is effectively the highest-performance image sensor available. I wanted community input, not owning the camera in question, but being very interested in it.

I got a most satisfactory answer from courteous replies - yet after it all, people feel they need to take this thread completely off-topic and spew bile in my direction. Please get over yourselves!

Sheesh.

Let's be honest. Your effort wasn't to obtain opinion. You were on Trey's site and know what he is about and that he does heavy HDR/PP work. You were not only taking a shot at his work, but were really trying to attack the A7R and the JPEG engine used on it. The sample road and mountains picture would have shown too much gravel detail had he sharpened the image too much so you used this image to cause a stir attacking the camera. Shame on you. Go back to your Oly forums.

 PVCdroid's gear list:PVCdroid's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha 7R
David Kieltyka
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,350Gear list
Does the gear serve you or do you serve it?
In reply to stoppingdown, 6 months ago

stoppingdown wrote:

It's a matter of taste; but please explain me why one should use an A7(r) + Sonnar 55mm to take unsharp photos.

Do you use cameras to take photographs, or do you take photographs to use cameras? If the former you should already understand that your demand above is absurd. Just because someone owns an A7r they're required to maximize sharpness?! I think not. The cameras serve us, period.

-Dave-

 David Kieltyka's gear list:David Kieltyka's gear list
Leica M8.2 Pentax 645D Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M1 +7 more
gil
gil
Forum ProPosts: 16,516
Strange that you were focusing only on shots from...(more)
In reply to philosomatographer, 6 months ago

one photographer. If one is curious/interested in a camera model, it is but natural to sample as many sources/samples/reviews as possible to have  a bigger view on what you were looking for. You say you are a photographer and yet you have a somewhat narrow vision on what you are interested in. There are tons of samples in the net that could account for camera sample variations, photographic and pp skills of users, subject matter, etc.

I looked at your first link and I was not excited - composition was bland, colors were HDR results and Danny pointed out the horizon thing. I sampled your own site and I was not excited either. I am more into nature photography and my visible site is not exciting as well :=).

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
gil - San Jose, CA
Cheap Lens, JPG and 100% Handholding Provocateur
Like happiness, photography is often better created than pursued.

ghohan422
Junior MemberPosts: 40
Re: Nothing to do with taste
In reply to LeicaBOSS, 6 months ago

LeicaBOSS wrote:

mdavidp wrote:

Blur due to camera shake. A tripod may be a necessity due to sensor size.

Mike P.

This is it. Simple case of camera shake. 3-7 pixels or so. He probably was shooting in A mode - which insanely chooses 1/60sec all the time. With this sensor - you need like 1/[3x focal length] to be confident.

The amazing thing is that with just a little processing and downsampling to (still very big files!) you'll have very crisp images even with shake like this. (Below - bottom is "corrected". Maybe even too much)

-- hide signature --

From time to time, I point my camera at the right things. This is generally when I forget everything I've learned.

Ha! The first thing I did was paste it in photoshop, use a little high pass sharpening, downsample a bit, and then use a final unsharp mask.

And I agree completely about it looking like camera shake. Why wouldn't he use a tripod for this?

Astrophotographer 10
Senior MemberPosts: 4,605Gear list
Re: Strange that you were focusing only on shots from...(more)
In reply to gil, 6 months ago

A good selection of sample A7r images is at the Fred Miranda site. Wow, some of them are breathtaking.

I have the A7r and it replaced my beloved D800e. I find it to be about the same or perhaps a tad better overall than the D800e but considerably better in terms of ergonomics - lightness, smallness, evf, lcd, adjuting the parameters. Plus I found with the D800e I used to fiddle with the camera too much trying to get the image just right. The A7r WYSIWYG display makes that take a second. Also the intelligent auto mode is very useful when you simply want to take a quick shot and there's not a lot of time to fuss with the camera. So its great that way. I also love Sony video.

The clear zoom is handy as well, so a full frame lens can be used a t 3 focal lengths - native, crop (1.5X) and digital zoom 2X. So if you set it to APS crop and then use the digital zoom you are something like 3X.

Also crop mode is still 24mp. The latest Fuji XT1 that has many people drooling is 16mp APSc and 24mp is only in Nikon and Nex cameras.

As far as one photographers work goes its too small a sample to make a judgement call. I quite like his style and impactful colour but as pointed out its a developed style just like Carlos Santana has a developed guitar style.

A7r does need a fast shutter speed or a tripod for maximum sharpness and to get away from any shutter vibrations.

I generally use my A7r and Fuji XE1 in Shutter priority set to min 1/320th sec outdoors (often 1/1000th for a sunny day) set ISO to auto (these cameras have very low noise at high ISO) and set aperture to suit the DOF I want to have in the image.

Works a treat.

Greg.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads