munro harrap: And, as writers in forums here have confirmed, a couple of drops of water, and it'll just die, wont work, finished! FYI, I have several Sonys, but I just wish I could rename their files in-camera, as I can on my Nikon whose sensors are Sony, and whose batteries last for THREE times the number of shots at least.
I have lost irretrieveably valuable work overwriting RAW files by mistake because I cannot rename them.
What soes this tell you about Sony, as a company??
1. As @setaside2 said, naming folders in date format is a good first step.2. Other tools do this but in Windows I use "XXCOPY" (not XCOPY) to transfer files with Archive attibute set AND to add folder name in middle of file name so it is MUCH closer to unique - this also gives you 1nnYMMDD in file name so you can see at a glance the date the photo was taken from the name. If desired the date part cam be removed once the file is safely stored. Using rename if there are two files that would then be identical the 2nd rename is not done. Very safe and useful overall. 3. Using XXCOPY allows me to progressively download even to multiple destinations if desired as the in card files records whether it has been copied already. This works superbly. 4. Once you have day folders and progressive copy you can delete copied folders on the fly if desired. Due care is of course needed but it is "easy enough" to not lose files this way. Sample: DSC06511`10101105 <- Folder 101, 5th November, (201)0.
Russell McMahon: @Onlooker - Yes. I'm aware of that. It would be useful if the other website made some comment on the photo collection's origin. (It may do so and I may have not been able to find the information). I only found the site using an image search (looking for the "Strength through Joy" muraled building. This (DPR) site said they were 'found in a flea market'. Quite possibly true, although the majority of "found in an old camera/album/..." claims turn out to be a gloss over a just as useful reality. Knowing where the claim came from and being able to trace some of these back a little more would be interesting.
Barney - that's brilliant! One gets accustomed to internet stories speciously wrapped round 'interesting stuff'. You'll be aware of the Pearl Harbour "Found in a Box Brownie" photos that turned out to be from US Naval records. So nice to have a definitive source. A shame that the original collator is (presumably) unknown - probably an additional layer of story there. Alas no flea markets here (NZ) ever come close to that.
@Onlooker - Yes. I'm aware of that. It would be useful if the other website made some comment on the photo collection's origin. (It may do so and I may have not been able to find the information). I only found the site using an image search (looking for the "Strength through Joy" muraled building. This (DPR) site said they were 'found in a flea market'. Quite possibly true, although the majority of "found in an old camera/album/..." claims turn out to be a gloss over a just as useful reality. Knowing where the claim came from and being able to trace some of these back a little more would be interesting.
I'm not sure how these relate to these
Interesting to me is the proportion of people who say that they have never heard it pronounced with a hard G. I've never heard it pronounced with a SOFT G. FWIW (possibly little :-) ) I've been using computers actively for almost 40 years. "Down here" in New Zealand we speak "The Queen's English" [tm] and British English is, I'm assured by experts, slowly morphing to follow our lead :-).
BryMills: I have to be honest and say I'd never even heard of them prior to all this kicking off!
I paid for 10 years about 18 minths ago. I have about 100 GB on the site :-).I have copies of it all (of course) but it's a great way to access material. Or was.They were always very slow to make what seemed like obvious improvements, I have suggested a number over the years but few get actioned even when they would have made the site more ike superior look+ feel competitors (non patent aspects I think). But for me it was manifestly good value for money. At a minimum I hope they allow me to use my preaid $ to offset new storage costs - altrhough that seems morally and legally wrong on their part I understand their predicament. Taking my prepaid $ for no return would be worse.I think a service running on my own server looks the way to go, with the cost of bandwodth becoming very low. The actual hard disk cost of 100 GB costs about $10 at retail rates .
The D800 uses a Sony sensor. Just think what Sony's new Full Frame camera will be able to be like if they let it. Alas, the A700 took 3 firmware changes to catch up to the D300 with essentially the same sensor.What will Sony choose to do ... :-). Stay tuned.
ISOs seem to all be relatively low or rather high. A few more shots in ISO ranges where quality is beginning to drop but reasonable quality out of camera material might be hoped for. Say ISO 3200 - 12,800 range.
I'm looking forward to the D700s. I wonder when they will announce it? :-)
I weep. I've not yet had time to search out D800 produced high ISO u=images but the few comments I'v seen noted "noi starting to show at ISO 800. That sounds consistent with what you'd expect from a Sony 36 MP sensor, alas. Using Sony sensors is fine, as long as you can make them perfprm, but it's sad to see Nikon pursuing Sony camera performance as well.
Maybe, and hopefully, they'll decide to make a D700S next :-).
Graystar: Wasn't the new Sony EVF supposed the spell the end of the optical viewfinder? Or maybe it was the EVF before that one...or maybe it was the one before that which was supposed to kill the optical viewfinder...I can't remember.
I like my optical viewfinder...stop trying to take it away!
I own a Sony A77 - Sony's best EVF attempt so far. The A77 EVF is utterly marvellous and in many situations is far more useful than an OVF would be and one can grudgingly forgo the OVF advantages in such situations. ***BUT*** in low light the A77 EVF is very bad and in very low light it is close to useless. It happens that I greatly value the ability to take good low light photos. Anything that needs more than say 1 second at f3.5 at ISO1600 (maybe around 1 lux) is an indistinct noise dominated mess in the EVF. Framing for a flash photo is about impossible. In that light my eye can still distinguish detail well and of course there is no "noise". Focusing manually on the moon is OK. Even finding bright stars (one noise dot amongst many) is problematic. For night time street photography and similar it's a disaster. An order of magnitude improvement (3 stops) is probably needed before it would be noisy but acceptable in most low light situations.
Re "Sony managed to squeeze 24mp into an APSC sized sensor, and retain very good ISO performance. ... " ha ha ha ha ha ha...., I wish it was true. I own an A77 ... ha ha ha .... ". The A77 is a lovely camera and with some useful bells and whistles that the D4 lacks. BUT a year from now I anticipate selling my years long acquired Minolta / Sony stable and buying a D800. Will wait for the early adopters to adopt and price to stabilise. A77 has much to investigate. But my 6 MP 7D Minolta has lower noise!. A77 - "very good high ISO performance ...". Alas no. Very sadly no. Terribly horribly no. HDR / DRO / 6 shots merged night mode, more - not a patch on an A700. Marvellous camera. But at ISO 800 it is starting to show its noisiness. At 6400 ISO, where a D700 starts to get a wee bit noisy an A77 is unusable.
(1) I look forward to taking up this generous offer.(2) @W5JCK - PDF is the pre-eminent standard document transfer format where consistency of formating and widest possible freedom of access is important. Almost anything else tends to have commercial fish-hooks. PDF file size can be small relative to many alternatives when small size matters.PDF would be by far my preferred choice as file format.
This is Xiangqi or "Chinese Chess", not Go. Go is played on a symmetric 19 x 19 board with only white and black unmarked 'stones".
13 110630 1820