Les Leventhal
Leading Member
Why not leave sharpness at default, namely 0, and do even heavier lifting in Photoshop. Won't less in-camera sharpening and more PS sharpening produce a better result?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
A700 JPGs convince me there is a problem..
- Thread starter Ken_5D
- Start date
Dumont
Senior Member
Firstly I am not attempting to take over the OP's thread.
Secondly I do not want to change systems so all this is in the hopes that Sony continue improving and not bashing them.
Here is a link to the full size image, untouched as it came from the camera.
http://www.pbase.com/dumont/image/86535272/original (there is no reason to embed such a large file here)
Now here is a crop showing the "blue fringe" I have never noticed this sort of "fringe" before. It could be just that it never happened to me... But if you look at the back of the head and neck you will notice a darker blue "fringe" even where you would expect the glaring light blue/white bokeh to be up against those areas. Maybe it's also pixel peeing too much and this is a normal result with digital under special conditions that just never happened to me before?
Regards
Darren
--
Dumont - http://www.pbase.com/dumont - For equipment see profile.
Secondly I do not want to change systems so all this is in the hopes that Sony continue improving and not bashing them.
Here is a link to the full size image, untouched as it came from the camera.
http://www.pbase.com/dumont/image/86535272/original (there is no reason to embed such a large file here)
Now here is a crop showing the "blue fringe" I have never noticed this sort of "fringe" before. It could be just that it never happened to me... But if you look at the back of the head and neck you will notice a darker blue "fringe" even where you would expect the glaring light blue/white bokeh to be up against those areas. Maybe it's also pixel peeing too much and this is a normal result with digital under special conditions that just never happened to me before?
Regards
Darren
--
Dumont - http://www.pbase.com/dumont - For equipment see profile.
Ken_5D
Forum Pro
Can you please share a sample 100% crop from P&S so we can see. Thanks!!
------------
Ken - KM 5D (A700 Joy)
http://www.cascadephotoworks.com
Les Leventhal
Leading Member
Flame suit on!
OK, let me start by saying I am a Minolta/Sony system user, have a 7D
and an A100, have owned a 5D and own and have used tons of Minolta
mount AF lenses.
I shoot mainly in JPG and while I like to do a lot with photos in
Photoshop, and I realize images straight of the camera have their
limits, I am not so keen on adding the extra step of RAW. I am sure
many others do not like to deal with raw.
Frankly I do not think the cat image is as sharp as it should be...
yes this includes some pixel peeping on my part. Maybe this matter is
too subjective to be discussed, I look forward to reading the full in
depth reviews.
Now, I don't yet have an A700, and I may not buy one at all at least
not until the "A900" comes out, but I had a chance to test one
briefly when was in Houston last week at the Sony Style store at the
Galleria. Here is a sample of an extra fine jpg with a 50mm/1.4 RS. I
also think this image is good but not quite as sharp as it could be,
of course the DOF is very shallow at f2.
I also am a bit concerned with the blue "bleeding" (or maybe fringing
would be a better word - but it's not the usual CA/PF I believe)
behind the head of the subject. I wonder if this is something that
would happen with any lens/camera combination or is this an issue
with the sensor? Any thoughts there?
--
Dumont - http://www.pbase.com/dumont - For equipment see profile.
Les Leventhal
Leading Member
Why would you expect a jpeg to be sharp using default camera settings when you do not PP the picture to increase sharpness?
WS Schappell
Forum Enthusiast
And I'll gladly post 
.
--
No pixels were harmed in the writing of this post.
Equipment in profile.
. --
No pixels were harmed in the writing of this post.
Equipment in profile.
Ken_5D
Forum Pro
There needs to be a good JPG that can be used and printed to at least A3+ for people who do not want to PP. That is my standard and I prefer RAW.. but totally get the other need. Event people who shoot hundreds of shots.. need to be able to have very reduced workflow.
I think the + Setting meets that requirement and in my opinion people seem to think there should the equivalent of a Core 2 Duo processor running PS that can PP 5 FPS in the camera.. That I think it silly.
------------
Ken - KM 5D (A700 Joy)
http://www.cascadephotoworks.com
dennismullen
Veteran Member
I posted the original "soft" jpgs that people have used for comparison. Dave's suggestion to use .3 radius at 250 in USM has given me incredible Raw results.
I have tried boosted sharpening on jpgs. I will not call them bad, but the Raw pictures are better by a magnitude of ten when sharpened in this manner. No comparison. Raw is the way to go with this camera.
--
See my gallery at http://www.pbase.com/dennismullen
“Those who would sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” - Ben Franklin.
I have tried boosted sharpening on jpgs. I will not call them bad, but the Raw pictures are better by a magnitude of ten when sharpened in this manner. No comparison. Raw is the way to go with this camera.
--
See my gallery at http://www.pbase.com/dennismullen
“Those who would sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” - Ben Franklin.
Dumont
Senior Member
Here's a crop of a similar scene take with a Tamron 18-200mm
Hmmm, perhaps it is a combination of lens performance and/or aperture and/or combined with the focal length? This is at 28mm and f3.5 and 320iso (the 50mm photo was at f2 and iso 125)
There is no blue where the white/light blue meets the back of the head/neck
Regards
Darren
--
Dumont - http://www.pbase.com/dumont - For equipment see profile.
Hmmm, perhaps it is a combination of lens performance and/or aperture and/or combined with the focal length? This is at 28mm and f3.5 and 320iso (the 50mm photo was at f2 and iso 125)
There is no blue where the white/light blue meets the back of the head/neck
Regards
Darren
--
Dumont - http://www.pbase.com/dumont - For equipment see profile.
suffer from a lack of controlled conditions for comparative testing. Actually both sides of the controversy seem to make a lot of their statements without too much actual knowledge, it seems to me. What I can definitely see is this:
1) There is a marked difference between jpgs and raw conversions (some at least)
2) Some jpg settings are a bit better than others
3) Viewed at smaller sizes some jpgs look very good (see Papasha's threads)
4) Some jpgs at 100% look fairly bad
... etc.
But none of these fairly clear observations lends itself immediately to general claims, in particular, if you compare different cameras under different conditions, with different lenses, in good or bad light, etc. - Personally I come from the KM 5D experience where jpgs were so good in practice that it wasn't necessary to fiddle with raw, and I don't yet know whether I would feel the same, in practice , with the A700, but that's about it.
And so? Either we rely on serious controlled testing, or we forget about all this and go out practicing...
Cheers,
Maurus
--
http://www.pbase.com/maurus_e/
1) There is a marked difference between jpgs and raw conversions (some at least)
2) Some jpg settings are a bit better than others
3) Viewed at smaller sizes some jpgs look very good (see Papasha's threads)
4) Some jpgs at 100% look fairly bad
... etc.
But none of these fairly clear observations lends itself immediately to general claims, in particular, if you compare different cameras under different conditions, with different lenses, in good or bad light, etc. - Personally I come from the KM 5D experience where jpgs were so good in practice that it wasn't necessary to fiddle with raw, and I don't yet know whether I would feel the same, in practice , with the A700, but that's about it.
And so? Either we rely on serious controlled testing, or we forget about all this and go out practicing...
Cheers,
Maurus
--
http://www.pbase.com/maurus_e/
Ken_5D
Forum Pro
I have read it.. but there are two points:
A) he is dealing with 0+ sharpened jpgs which should be designed to allow for the PP type photographer to Sharpen.
B) He actually says they are not that bad but that the RAW is SO good that they have lots of room for improvement.. but you notice to get to the RAW in his sample he spent a few minutes in $600 worth of software on $1000+ worth of machine. We need to compare with other camera realtime output that is form lower power, processors (specialized but still low power) that need to do what they do in 5FPS and soon even faster.
To me some of this feels like "Thank you Sony for givings us amazin RAW files, now I will beat you until bloddy because you can reproduce hand PS work at FPS on battery driven camera."
------------
Ken - KM 5D (A700 Joy)
http://www.cascadephotoworks.com
B
Barry Fitzgerald
Guest
Yes lame. I can get great 13x19" prints off my 6mp SLR.
Why bother to buy a 12mp APS SLR to get weedy jpegs? And yes they are weedy for detail shooters (landscape etc) Why chop down the res by using jpegs?
Frankly I am amazed anyone is accepting 11mb files that frankly pale to a huge degree next to RAW. Its so clear..crystal clear in fact. Go get the samples..see for yourself.
Huge difference.
--
Clint is on holiday! Soon to return! ;-)
Dumont
Senior Member
I set my A100 to sharpness level +1 and I did the same when using the A700 (although I am not sure if had done so by the time I took the sample photo above). But I do sharpen in post processing. So my initial sample has some sharpening and some levels adjustment. I just posted the original untouched full size photo. I believe you can see that the first sample sharpened in PS shows the glasses sharper than the original. I don't mind sharpening (and other adjusting in PS) but even after doing so feel the results are not as sharp as they should be.
Once again I look forward to reading what the reviewer here has to say about the jpg quality.
Regards,
Darren
Dumont - http://www.pbase.com/dumont - For equipment see profile.
Once again I look forward to reading what the reviewer here has to say about the jpg quality.
Regards,
Darren
--
Dumont - http://www.pbase.com/dumont - For equipment see profile.
WS Schappell
Forum Enthusiast
http://www.photo-forums.com/[email protected]@.eea646c/42
--
No pixels were harmed in the writing of this post.
Equipment in profile.
--
No pixels were harmed in the writing of this post.
Equipment in profile.
B
Barry Fitzgerald
Guest
Lol, Ken wont make a RAW file avalable as we would see the huge difference.
Sure you can get not bad results with jpeg, but who wants not bad with a swanky 12mp camera?
--
Clint is on holiday! Soon to return! ;-)
Ken_5D
Forum Pro
So have I and there are places if you pixel peep your prints that details suffers. That is one reason I wanted more MP as I have a few shots that the 6MP failed to scale to a sharp 13x19 print.
Barry.. how big would the Tiff files be if they offered that?
X.Fine is an uncompressed jpg.. its as close to a Tiff except 8 bit colors as you can get.
Fine is a very well compressed 4-5 MB file that set to the user's taste will deliver 13x19 prints easily by my experience.
I was surprised given the assumed distaine some have as how good the 2-3MB Standards are for most uses.
Sony did not assume over sharpened 0 jpegs..
Everybody screams "give me what the camera sees so I can fix it myself" then when they do its "Please shapen all my JPGS perfectily in advance even if you don't know what I think is perfect. Stupid Sony don't know how to sharpen my jpgs for me.."
--Huge difference.
--
Clint is on holiday! Soon to return! ;-)
------------
Ken - KM 5D (A700 Joy)
http://www.cascadephotoworks.com
RomeoD
Senior Member
I had a similar effect except that the subject had a light shirt and stood behind a dark background with mid afternoon sun. The aura bled into the background. Did not see the effect until I got home and downloaded the pix. I need to play with the DRO, I think this is what is creating these glows. I had mine set to Lv 4.
--
RomeoD
'An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.' -Mahatma Gandhi
--
RomeoD
'An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.' -Mahatma Gandhi
Ken_5D
Forum Pro
WRONG BUCKO!!!
I am all about the truth, I shot both a RAW version of that scence and a Fine JPEG with only + 2 sharpening...Later tonight when I am back at home I will provide both source files.
Never, EVER, Assume you know what I WON'T DO.
Mean while I am still waiting for the amazing P&S shots we all are told put this to shame. or even a 6mp shot scaled for 5x4 feet that matches that...
Its 2 hours before I will be on my home machine unless I get really lucky with the traffic.
See ya all then for the 1st annual A700 Kitty RAW vs JPG PP contest.
------------
Ken - KM 5D (A700 Joy)
http://www.cascadephotoworks.com
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum