Reading mode: Light Dark

So...Is it or is it not crippled? 828 infrared mode

Go to last post
by crippled I mean a night mode that cannot be used in manual mode.

So not is it crippled or not? if so then 1/30s or 1/60s? F number?
Richard N. Allen said:
I doubt it's crippled. The manuals for the F717 and V1 warn "do
not use the NightShot function in bright places (e.g. outdoors in
the daylight)."

Richard
http://www.pbase.com/richarda/galleries
V1, F717, P9, S70 & FD71
Click to expand...
--
I am not an English native speaker!
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918
 
The NightShot function cannot be used in the Manual mode on the F828. As on the F717 and V1, it can only be used in Auto, Program and Video modes.

Richard.
 
It's probably limited to 1/30. That's the way it is on the V1, and 1/30 seems to be the other "limit" for other functions of the 828. But no one seems to know, and the manual doesn't specify. K.
Daniella said:
So not is it crippled or not? if so then 1/30s or 1/60s? F number?
Richard N. Allen said:
I doubt it's crippled. The manuals for the F717 and V1 warn "do
not use the NightShot function in bright places (e.g. outdoors in
the daylight)."

Richard
http://www.pbase.com/richarda/galleries
V1, F717, P9, S70 & FD71
Click to expand...
--
I am not an English native speaker!
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918
Click to expand...
--
Galleries: http://www.koo22photos.com/-/koo22photos/default.asp
 
Daniella -

There were some reviewers who had a pre-pro F828 that appeared to allow changing of some shutter speeds and apertures. Note that these changes did not work all the way through the range of shutter speeds and apertures and was still limited because the camera was not yet completed and was still in a state of flux.

Also important to note is that not every reviewer had a camera that was able to effect these changes in modes beyond Auto and Program AE.

The conclusion even at preview time was that Sony would in the end produce a Nightshot mode that would most likely operate just like in the F717.

The reason for the confusion here in the forum is because users took the idea that it might be unlimited and just RAN with it. The hope and expectation took on a life of its own, and now you have a few disappointed individuals who had expectations that were not in line with the known facts.

I feel bad for the guys that hoped on this feature, but there are no surprises here if you were careful about your reading.
Daniella said:
I am confused...I read before that the 828 will be fully
founctional in night mode but in the manual it is written not to
use it in day light????

So am I right to guess that it is still crippled?

--
I am not an English native speaker!
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918
Click to expand...
--

Ulysses
 
some reviewer had the silly idea of saying that it will be fully enable..they did not mention this was only on the preproduction model.

So many people were hoping it was going to be that way.
Ulysses said:
There were some reviewers who had a pre-pro F828 that appeared to
allow changing of some shutter speeds and apertures. Note that
these changes did not work all the way through the range of shutter
speeds and apertures and was still limited because the camera was
not yet completed and was still in a state of flux.

Also important to note is that not every reviewer had a camera that
was able to effect these changes in modes beyond Auto and Program
AE.

The conclusion even at preview time was that Sony would in the end
produce a Nightshot mode that would most likely operate just like
in the F717.

The reason for the confusion here in the forum is because users
took the idea that it might be unlimited and just RAN with it.
The hope and expectation took on a life of its own, and now you
have a few disappointed individuals who had expectations that were
not in line with the known facts.

I feel bad for the guys that hoped on this feature, but there are
no surprises here if you were careful about your reading.
Daniella said:
I am confused...I read before that the 828 will be fully
founctional in night mode but in the manual it is written not to
use it in day light????

So am I right to guess that it is still crippled?

--
I am not an English native speaker!
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918
Click to expand...
--

Ulysses
Click to expand...
--
I am not an English native speaker!
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918
 
As far as I know, EACH of the reviewers mentioned that they were using pre-pro models. And even if they somehow neglected to mention this point, how could it be any other way? The camera was so far from release time that there were no production cameras available. Hence the lack of sample images.

People got all fired up over speculation that had no firm basis to begin with.
Daniella said:
some reviewer had the silly idea of saying that it will be fully
enable..they did not mention this was only on the preproduction
model.

So many people were hoping it was going to be that way.
Click to expand...
--

Ulysses
 
Ulysses said:
As far as I know, EACH of the reviewers mentioned that they were
using pre-pro models. And even if they somehow neglected to mention
this point, how could it be any other way? The camera was so far
from release time that there were no production cameras available.
Hence the lack of sample images.

People got all fired up over speculation that had no firm basis to
begin with.
Click to expand...
That's true Uly, but where do you draw the line? I mean were we supposed to believe their comments about color and low lag? Or about how the camera felt and responded?

Here's Dave's quote from his 828 preview on IR:

"NightShot and NightFraming take advantage of the CCD's sensitivity to infrared light, which is normally filtered out, because it tends to skew the camera's color rendering in bright sunlit scenes. Sony's NightShot technology uses a movable IR filter that lets the camera take advantage of this IR sensitivity in low-light situations and block it at other times. A much welcomed update on the F828 model is the availability of both modes in all record modes, as the previous F717 and F707 models only provided NightShot and NightFraming in Auto mode. Big kudos for this enhancement, thanks to Sony for listing to their users (and reviewers)!"

Dave does a good job. IMO, his reviews are second only to Phil's. You are right. We were foolish to take this one to the bank, on faith. But we so wanted to believe....lol

Steve

--
http://www.pbase.com/slo2k
'The question is not what you look at, but what you see' - Thoreau
 
Steve Cavigliano said:
That's true Uly, but where do you draw the line? I mean were we
supposed to believe their comments about color and low lag? Or
about how the camera felt and responded?
Click to expand...
All I can talk about is my own personal line. I said from the beginning that this was pre-pro, and not to trust it. I was happy to hear the early reports, but I wasn't really convinced, primarily because several reviewers were reporting slightly different camera behaviors. Typical of very, very early pre-pro.
Steve Cavigliano said:
Here's Dave's quote from his 828 preview on IR:
Click to expand...
Yeah. Poor Dave on this one. :-)

--

Ulysses
 
that reviewer already knew about the 717 being crippled but yet he claimed that the new 828 would not be crippled..

I guess we all thought that he got information from Sony that this would be fully enabled..at last.
Steve Cavigliano said:
Ulysses said:
As far as I know, EACH of the reviewers mentioned that they were
using pre-pro models. And even if they somehow neglected to mention
this point, how could it be any other way? The camera was so far
from release time that there were no production cameras available.
Hence the lack of sample images.

People got all fired up over speculation that had no firm basis to
begin with.
Click to expand...
That's true Uly, but where do you draw the line? I mean were we
supposed to believe their comments about color and low lag? Or
about how the camera felt and responded?

Here's Dave's quote from his 828 preview on IR:

"NightShot and NightFraming take advantage of the CCD's sensitivity
to infrared light, which is normally filtered out, because it tends
to skew the camera's color rendering in bright sunlit scenes.
Sony's NightShot technology uses a movable IR filter that lets the
camera take advantage of this IR sensitivity in low-light
situations and block it at other times. A much welcomed update on
the F828 model is the availability of both modes in all record
modes, as the previous F717 and F707 models only provided NightShot
and NightFraming in Auto mode. Big kudos for this enhancement,
thanks to Sony for listing to their users (and reviewers)!"

Dave does a good job. IMO, his reviews are second only to Phil's.
You are right. We were foolish to take this one to the bank, on
faith. But we so wanted to believe....lol

Steve

--
http://www.pbase.com/slo2k
'The question is not what you look at, but what you see' - Thoreau
Click to expand...
--
I am not an English native speaker!
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918
 
My F717 nigthshot exposure limit is between 1/60 sec (fastest) to 1/8 sec (slowest) you may control the exposure by using various degree of ND filters. Or just use normal mode with long exposure, you will get a red cast image stead of green (nightshot), which need extensive post editing.
koo22 said:
Daniella said:
So not is it crippled or not? if so then 1/30s or 1/60s? F number?
Richard N. Allen said:
I doubt it's crippled. The manuals for the F717 and V1 warn "do
not use the NightShot function in bright places (e.g. outdoors in
the daylight)."

Richard
http://www.pbase.com/richarda/galleries
V1, F717, P9, S70 & FD71
Click to expand...
--
I am not an English native speaker!
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918
Click to expand...
--
Galleries: http://www.koo22photos.com/-/koo22photos/default.asp
Click to expand...
 
I was reading through the thread with great interest last night (the Sony you know what thread, concerning IR capability in the new 828. Was it deleted?

Arguments on both sides were interesting (public outcry if "perverts" had the better IR capability ----- arguments for it, since "perverts" would find a way around it's limitations, and crippling it would only hurt legitimate photographers, etc.).

I even almost responded to one post (from Ulysses if memory serves) with an analogy that you wouldn't base buying a car on the width of the ashtray, so you shouldn't judge the camera on only one feature.

Well -- actually, I would base a purchase decision for a car on the ashtray. I look carefully at the ashtray (especially it's location) in an automobile.

I've even returned rental cars when travelling because the ashtray placement was not adequate; refused to eat at restaurants without smoking sections (or substandard smoking sections), stayed at different hotels because of smoking policies, etc.

Yes, it's a bad habit, but I'm not the one that brought up the analogy.

So, I can understand the feelings of Photographers wanted a camera with better IR capability, and refusing to buy a camera without it.

--
JimC
------
http://www.pbase.com/jcockfield/konica_kd510z
 
Yes, Dave too assumed that the nightshot would have no restrictions. It was only reasonable to assume so. Too bad it turned to be otherwise. But I think that it wasn't to be expected.
Daniella68313 said:
Daniella wrote:
that reviewer already knew about the 717 being crippled but yet he
claimed that the new 828 would not be crippled..

I guess we all thought that he got information from Sony that this
would be fully enabled..at last.
Steve Cavigliano said:
Ulysses said:
As far as I know, EACH of the reviewers mentioned that they were
using pre-pro models. And even if they somehow neglected to mention
this point, how could it be any other way? The camera was so far
from release time that there were no production cameras available.
Hence the lack of sample images.

People got all fired up over speculation that had no firm basis to
begin with.
Click to expand...
That's true Uly, but where do you draw the line? I mean were we
supposed to believe their comments about color and low lag? Or
about how the camera felt and responded?

Here's Dave's quote from his 828 preview on IR:

"NightShot and NightFraming take advantage of the CCD's sensitivity
to infrared light, which is normally filtered out, because it tends
to skew the camera's color rendering in bright sunlit scenes.
Sony's NightShot technology uses a movable IR filter that lets the
camera take advantage of this IR sensitivity in low-light
situations and block it at other times. A much welcomed update on
the F828 model is the availability of both modes in all record
modes, as the previous F717 and F707 models only provided NightShot
and NightFraming in Auto mode. Big kudos for this enhancement,
thanks to Sony for listing to their users (and reviewers)!"

Dave does a good job. IMO, his reviews are second only to Phil's.
You are right. We were foolish to take this one to the bank, on
faith. But we so wanted to believe....lol
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
yes, the thread appears to have disappeared.
Member said:
Jim Cockfield wrote:
I was reading through the thread with great interest last night
(the Sony you know what thread, concerning IR capability in the new
828. Was it deleted?

Arguments on both sides were interesting (public outcry if
"perverts" had the better IR capability ----- arguments for it,
since "perverts" would find a way around it's limitations, and
crippling it would only hurt legitimate photographers, etc.).

I even almost responded to one post (from Ulysses if memory serves)
with an analogy that you wouldn't base buying a car on the width of
the ashtray, so you shouldn't judge the camera on only one feature.

Well -- actually, I would base a purchase decision for a car on the
ashtray. I look carefully at the ashtray (especially it's
location) in an automobile.

I've even returned rental cars when travelling because the ashtray
placement was not adequate; refused to eat at restaurants without
smoking sections (or substandard smoking sections), stayed at
different hotels because of smoking policies, etc.

Yes, it's a bad habit, but I'm not the one that brought up the
analogy.

So, I can understand the feelings of Photographers wanted a camera
with better IR capability, and refusing to buy a camera without it.

--
JimC
------
http://www.pbase.com/jcockfield/konica_kd510z
Click to expand...
 
I'm always wondering why Perverts need IR capability. If I was a pervert, I would get the Canon and attach a big zoom lens. Much better pervert capabilities with a 500mm lens than from an IR mode that let you see the outline of a bra.
Member said:
Arguments on both sides were interesting (public outcry if
"perverts" had the better IR capability ----- arguments for it,
since "perverts" would find a way around it's limitations, and
crippling it would only hurt legitimate photographers, etc.).
Click to expand...
--
John from Southern California
http://www.pbase.com/johnrweb/disneyconcerthall
http://www.pbase.com/domdom
F707 and 300D
 
It is pointless for some "pervs" to use the Sony IR function, but it still manages to raise some serious arguments. As you say, the real "pervert tools" are not even discussed...
johnrweb said:
johnrweb said:
Arguments on both sides were interesting (public outcry if
"perverts" had the better IR capability ----- arguments for it,
since "perverts" would find a way around it's limitations, and
crippling it would only hurt legitimate photographers, etc.).
Click to expand...
--
John from Southern California
http://www.pbase.com/johnrweb/disneyconcerthall
http://www.pbase.com/domdom
F707 and 300D
Click to expand...
 
because some people wanted to buy the camera for that very purpose...

I already have a Dimage 7, and a 300d..just wish there was a camera with a 100% workable IR mode...then I would get it. if not, I'll just skip it.

If I had no camera at all, that would not be stopping me from buying the 828.
Jim Cockfield said:
I was reading through the thread with great interest last night
(the Sony you know what thread, concerning IR capability in the new
828. Was it deleted?

Arguments on both sides were interesting (public outcry if
"perverts" had the better IR capability ----- arguments for it,
since "perverts" would find a way around it's limitations, and
crippling it would only hurt legitimate photographers, etc.).

I even almost responded to one post (from Ulysses if memory serves)
with an analogy that you wouldn't base buying a car on the width of
the ashtray, so you shouldn't judge the camera on only one feature.

Well -- actually, I would base a purchase decision for a car on the
ashtray. I look carefully at the ashtray (especially it's
location) in an automobile.

I've even returned rental cars when travelling because the ashtray
placement was not adequate; refused to eat at restaurants without
smoking sections (or substandard smoking sections), stayed at
different hotels because of smoking policies, etc.

Yes, it's a bad habit, but I'm not the one that brought up the
analogy.

So, I can understand the feelings of Photographers wanted a camera
with better IR capability, and refusing to buy a camera without it.

--
JimC
------
http://www.pbase.com/jcockfield/konica_kd510z
Click to expand...
--
I am not an English native speaker!
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918
 
the fact is that you will not see an naked person..you will only see a bit of underwear under certain part of a pant that closely toutch it..frankly...you can see much more skin if you simply go at the beach!

the thing that the pervert wants is the attraction of something illegal..something not authorized..it is the whole concept of the invasion of privacy that attract those sick jerks...
johnrweb said:
johnrweb said:
Arguments on both sides were interesting (public outcry if
"perverts" had the better IR capability ----- arguments for it,
since "perverts" would find a way around it's limitations, and
crippling it would only hurt legitimate photographers, etc.).
Click to expand...
--
John from Southern California
http://www.pbase.com/johnrweb/disneyconcerthall
http://www.pbase.com/domdom
F707 and 300D
Click to expand...
--
I am not an English native speaker!
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918
 
Ulysses said:
The conclusion even at preview time was that Sony would in the end
produce a Nightshot mode that would most likely operate just like
in the F717.
Click to expand...
A real pity, not to mention absolute foolishness on Sony's part. I was considering an 828 mainly for use as an IR landscape camera. But I don't need it for most "normal" use. So no proper IR mode == no purchase.

I know of a small company that'll take a Canon D30 or D60 SLR and convert it to an IR-only camera sensitive enough for easy handheld use. Maybe they're next on the IR paranoids' hit list.

-Dave-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top