Sony A7III - real life star eater images

PWPhotography said:

JimKasson said:

PWPhotography said:

Striping issue is also not a big deal that can be largely avoided by <snip> not using the most vulnerable lenses such as FE 85/1.8 for the issue.

Click to expand...

Not remotely true, although Some lenses are more prone to this issue than others. In fact, I haven’t yet found a lens that can never cause the artifacts. I thought that I had one in the Sony 12-24/4 zoom, but right after I posted that information, someone showed me a striped image made with that lens.

Click to expand...

What I said practically you can avoid to the level that you will not see this issue easily even at 1:1 view. Your studio test is under extreme lighting condition and you said you pushed on the purpose to show this issue even difficult deliberately, that certainly is not the real-world photos were taken that photographers will have the mind in showing this issue deliberately.

Here is DPR A7 III review,

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a7-iii-review/5

The occurrence of this 'striping' is very hard to predict, rarely occurring with some lenses but readily occurring with others, under the right conditions to induce them. For example, we weren't able to reproduce visibly distracting striping with the Sony FE 35/1.4 (left), but did so quite easily with an adapted Canon 35L (right).

We set up a stress test in our studio (see setup here) and checked many lenses. We haven't found a pattern that allows one to predict which lens will be problematic, but we were able to differentiate lenses that produced a strong pattern (85/1.8, Canon 35L II, Canon 85L II), a mild one (50/1.4 GM, 85/1.4, 70-200/2.8 GM), or none at all (35/1.4, Rokinon 35/2.8, 55/1.8, 24-105/4, 70-200/4)

So in DPR reviews they tested under normal backlit scenarios (actually pretty strong from what I see from Rishi's test), but they were unable to see from certain lenses. While under your extreme torture tests and you also pushed hard, virtually none lenses can immune from this issue and I had to view in 2:1 on my iMac to see this issue obviously from the lenses you said very difficult to produce this issue.

The difference is that DPR review more reflected in real-world photography while your studio test is more extreme torture test that doesn't reflected in real-world photography. I think photographers should care more former real-world experience rather latter. But for reach purpose your tests are very valid and useful, but just not in the way real-world photos are taken.

You're arguing on purest studio result while I only dispute in practical usage.

Click to expand...

1. Just because a lens didn't show obvious striping in that particular studio setup we used, does not mean it will never ever show up with that lens. There may very well be a more extreme scenario, or simply different scenario, where the problem does manifest itself. We can't account for all scenarios, which is why we said that it's been hard for us to predict which lens is or isn't problematic. That said, in our limited testing, we found that studio set up to be relatively telling regarding which lenses would be problematic.
2. Recall that even the 35/1.4 FE, which barely showed any striping in our studio setup (if at all), did still show a small bit of striping in my toddler shot. My point is that no test is perfect, but we look for trends.
3. I'm pretty sure that you can probably get striping with any lens, given the correct setup. For example, flashing a bright light directly on-axis at the camera produces visible striping even with that 35/1.4 that we felt wasn't very problematic in most of our real-world shooting.
4. Point #3 shouldn't be surprising, as shining a bright light at the sensor with no lens at all produces striping.

AstroDan said:

I can deliver on this one easily enough, even with the bright skies at this latitude. I likely won't be able to calibrate with flats if I am switching cameras, so I will just shoot lights, and post those along with lights calibrated from a superbias/dark routine. I'm also finding myself short of time lately, so I will just shoot them through our 16" instead of setting up my 90mm refractor.

Do you have a preferred target? I shot M13 last time figuring that if anything would show the issue, it would.

Cheers,

Dan

Click to expand...

PWPhotography said:

Thanks Rishi, and as I said I always thanks Jim for his great work.

No need to dispute on someone's personal subjective opinion. Nobody here denied such issues such as striping or star-eater that are objectively confirmed but just severity level on personal subjective level. They both happened not a big deal or even no issues to me.

Click to expand...

PWPhotography said:

No cameras are perfect, immune from any issues and DSLRs also have their own issues, on my opinion more severe that related to my shooting areas directly.

As I said agree on disagree and we should move on.

Click to expand...

PWPhotography said:

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums

Click to expand...

Trollmannx said:

PWPhotography said:

Thanks Rishi, and as I said I always thanks Jim for his great work.

No need to dispute on someone's personal subjective opinion. Nobody here denied such issues such as striping or star-eater that are objectively confirmed but just severity level on personal subjective level. They both happened not a big deal or even no issues to me.

Click to expand...

Excactly - what is an issue to some might go unnoticed by others.

To those affected star eater and stripes are real issues!

And those affected are most likely as interested in information gathered from threads like this one, as they ignorant about personal opinion about issues beeing non issues.

Tristimulus said:

No cameras are perfect, immune from any issues and DSLRs also have their own issues, on my opinion more severe that related to my shooting areas directly.

As I said agree on disagree and we should move on.

Click to expand...

Am moving on - still interested to learn facts about stars and stripes...

Click to expand...

The Davinator said:

AstroDan said:

I can deliver on this one easily enough...

Click to expand...

M13 is a good target. Anything with a decent starfield maybe...like the Veil, Trifid or the Lagoon

Click to expand...

AstroDan said:

If I can get organised for Friday I will try to follow the following process:

Three sets of exposures using the A7III, A7R, and 6D. Each set will total approximately 5 minutes using sub-exposure timings of 1 minute, 30 seconds, and 3.2 seconds to provide adequate comparisons between the 6D, A7R bulb (star-eater)/regular, and A7III star-eater/regular.

Click to expand...

Magnar W said:

AstroDan said:

If I can get organised for Friday I will try to follow the following process:

Three sets of exposures using the A7III, A7R, and 6D. Each set will total approximately 5 minutes using sub-exposure timings of 1 minute, 30 seconds, and 3.2 seconds to provide adequate comparisons between the 6D, A7R bulb (star-eater)/regular, and A7III star-eater/regular.

Click to expand...

This would be great!

And, please, post as a new tread! ;-)

Click to expand...

Navman said:

Magnar W said:

AstroDan said:

If I can get organised for Friday I will try to follow the following process:

Three sets of exposures using the A7III, A7R, and 6D. Each set will total approximately 5 minutes using sub-exposure timings of 1 minute, 30 seconds, and 3.2 seconds to provide adequate comparisons between the 6D, A7R bulb (star-eater)/regular, and A7III star-eater/regular.

Click to expand...

This would be great!

And, please, post as a new tread! ;-)

Click to expand...

Is that so that more opinions can get trodden under foot! ;-)

Click to expand...

AstroDan said:

The Davinator said:

AstroDan said:

I can deliver on this one easily enough...

Click to expand...

M13 is a good target. Anything with a decent starfield maybe...like the Veil, Trifid or the Lagoon

Click to expand...

If I can get organised for Friday I will try to follow the following process:

Three sets of exposures using the A7III, A7R, and 6D. Each set will total approximately 5 minutes using sub-exposure timings of 1 minute, 30 seconds, and 3.2 seconds to provide adequate comparisons between the 6D, A7R bulb (star-eater)/regular, and A7III star-eater/regular.

In each case I will use the same iso (likely 1600) between the cameras, and calibrate with a stack of 50 bias frames, and a stack of 15 dark frames for each exposure length (I may just use a scaled dark). I will also post single frames, and uncalibrated stacks.

A more realistic test would be to scale the ISO to correctly pair it to the sub-exposure length, but I am not inclined to shoot three sets of bias/darks for each camera. If people would prefer that I'm happy to do it, I will just leave out the calibration. I don't want to go much over 5 minutes of integration, as the stacks will become very large very quickly.

Dan

Click to expand...

AstroDan said:

The Davinator said:

AstroDan said:

I can deliver on this one easily enough...

Click to expand...

M13 is a good target. Anything with a decent starfield maybe...like the Veil, Trifid or the Lagoon

Click to expand...

If I can get organised for Friday I will try to follow the following process:

Three sets of exposures using the A7III, A7R, and 6D. Each set will total approximately 5 minutes using sub-exposure timings of 1 minute, 30 seconds, and 3.2 seconds to provide adequate comparisons between the 6D, A7R bulb (star-eater)/regular, and A7III star-eater/regular.

In each case I will use the same iso (likely 1600) between the cameras, and calibrate with a stack of 50 bias frames, and a stack of 15 dark frames for each exposure length (I may just use a scaled dark). I will also post single frames, and uncalibrated stacks.

A more realistic test would be to scale the ISO to correctly pair it to the sub-exposure length, but I am not inclined to shoot three sets of bias/darks for each camera. If people would prefer that I'm happy to do it, I will just leave out the calibration. I don't want to go much over 5 minutes of integration, as the stacks will become very large very quickly.

Dan

Click to expand...

sharkmelley said:

AstroDan said:

The Davinator said:

AstroDan said:

I can deliver on this one easily enough...

Click to expand...

M13 is a good target. Anything with a decent starfield maybe...like the Veil, Trifid or the Lagoon

Click to expand...

If I can get organised for Friday I will try to follow the following process:

Three sets of exposures using the A7III, A7R, and 6D. Each set will total approximately 5 minutes using sub-exposure timings of 1 minute, 30 seconds, and 3.2 seconds to provide adequate comparisons between the 6D, A7R bulb (star-eater)/regular, and A7III star-eater/regular.

...

Dan

Click to expand...

What optics do you plan to use? Lens or scope? What focal length?

Mark

Click to expand...

AstroDan said:

sharkmelley said:

AstroDan said:

The Davinator said:

AstroDan said:

I can deliver on this one easily enough...

Click to expand...

M13 is a good target. Anything with a decent starfield maybe...like the Veil, Trifid or the Lagoon

Click to expand...

If I can get organised for Friday I will try to follow the following process:

Three sets of exposures using the A7III, A7R, and 6D. Each set will total approximately 5 minutes using sub-exposure timings of 1 minute, 30 seconds, and 3.2 seconds to provide adequate comparisons between the 6D, A7R bulb (star-eater)/regular, and A7III star-eater/regular.

...

Dan

Click to expand...

What optics do you plan to use? Lens or scope? What focal length?

Mark

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

sharkmelley said:

AstroDan said:

sharkmelley said:

AstroDan said:

The Davinator said:

AstroDan said:

I can deliver on this one easily enough...

Click to expand...

M13 is a good target. Anything with a decent starfield maybe...like the Veil, Trifid or the Lagoon

Click to expand...

If I can get organised for Friday I will try to follow the following process:

Three sets of exposures using the A7III, A7R, and 6D. Each set will total approximately 5 minutes using sub-exposure timings of 1 minute, 30 seconds, and 3.2 seconds to provide adequate comparisons between the 6D, A7R bulb (star-eater)/regular, and A7III star-eater/regular.

...

Dan

Click to expand...

What optics do you plan to use? Lens or scope? What focal length?

Mark

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

sharkmelley said:

AstroDan said:

sharkmelley said:

AstroDan said:

The Davinator said:

AstroDan said:

I can deliver on this one easily enough...

Click to expand...

M13 is a good target. Anything with a decent starfield maybe...like the Veil, Trifid or the Lagoon

Click to expand...

If I can get organised for Friday I will try to follow the following process:

Three sets of exposures using the A7III, A7R, and 6D. Each set will total approximately 5 minutes using sub-exposure timings of 1 minute, 30 seconds, and 3.2 seconds to provide adequate comparisons between the 6D, A7R bulb (star-eater)/regular, and A7III star-eater/regular.

...

Dan

Click to expand...

What optics do you plan to use? Lens or scope? What focal length?

Mark

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Magnar W said:

RichardLarssen said:

What about A7RIII? The same or better?

Click to expand...

Better, due to smaller pixels, and nothing to worry about for our nice night sky photographs! I even ordered a new, more precise sky tracker for use with my A7rIII. ;-)

When we get dark skies again, I will challenge Trollmanx to run some tests with his A7III, while I am doing excactly the same with my A7rIII.

A7rIII test, 85 mm Zeiss Loxia f:2.4 lens, 100% crop.

Real world A7rIII night sky panorama, Zeiss Loxia 21 mm f:2.8 lens, many frames stitched.

Click to expand...