Noise a850 vs. A77

[argieramos]

I rarely shoot high ISO. Mostly my daughters ballet and school plays which isn't often. Those pictures never gets printed. They are just viewed on the computer. So high ISO is important but not overly important. My Olympus gear was really bad over 800iso. If I worked for Rolling Stone and shot concerts then a 5D would be my choice. But for what I do I can't justify getting one. I think that a camera like the NEX 7 with it cropped sensor, small size and low cost plus IQ approaching the IQ of a full frame camera is awesome. I think in the near future owning a full frame camera will be of little benefit. I am very pleased with my Sony gear. It does what I want it to do. Like I said. Sony and Olympus both think outside the box. Call it gimmiky if you like but they have the balls to try new things.

I agree with most of what you said, but...

Most of what you said makes sense if you put photos on FB and keep them on your computer like you said. But how many people only enjoy keeping their photos on the computer? Heh.

And I get soooo tired of these moms at basketball games with their entry-level DSLRs (including Sony) with their entry-level lenses asking "why are all of my pictures blurry?" "It's out of focus." "It shouldn't do that! I paid $600 for this camera!!!!"

Those moms just doesn't know how to operate a DSLR camera. You're just like them bro. You bashed the a100 because you didn't know how to use the "eye-start" properly, and didn't know how to lock focus. lol

You get what you pay for. "New things" refers to features that people are wanting, and make work easier. "Gimmicks" refer to those features that sound cool on the box of the product. Sony and Olympus have tried new things, but I'm not sure that their innovation really outweighs their gimmicks....I mean....in-camera HDR? Is that really innovation, or is it just being lazy.....

Having those so-called "gimmicks" is better than not having anything at all. And don't talk like you can't manually create an HDR on your computer with a software. What's your problem bro?

 

[o hey tyler]

A lot of people shoot with available light? Ofcourse! Everyone does. There are times that you just can't use a flash and the ambient light is not good enough. I was asking how often do you use the 6400? For what I see a850 shots from 100-3200 are good. 6400 not that good, but still usable. A lot of people are using flash right? In Portrait, Studio, Wildlife, Sports, Landscape, and General outdoor Photography, what ISO do you use? 6400?

I see that you are still using that "cold' issue to attack me. You really don't want a decent and healthy discussion huh? lol...

I used 6400ISO on my 5Dmk2 the other night to take photos of the stars, and they turned out great. Other people use ISO that high to freeze action in available light.

That's why I chose the 5Dmk2 because it does so well up to ISO6400. Even images at a higher ISO are salvageable but may require a touch of NR.

Before I make a comment on that one, can I see the sample of that bro if you don't mind? High ISO noise is not that noticeable on that kind of photography anyway.

Really? Noise isn't more prevalent in dark areas of a photo? Why is there more noise noticeable in dark/underexposed areas of a photo then? Have you done this kind of photography? Do you have real world experience shooting stars?

 

[argieramos]

I used 6400ISO on my 5Dmk2 the other night to take photos of the stars, and they turned out great. Other people use ISO that high to freeze action in available light.

That's why I chose the 5Dmk2 because it does so well up to ISO6400. Even images at a higher ISO are salvageable but may require a touch of NR.

Before I make a comment on that one, can I see the sample of that bro if you don't mind? High ISO noise is not that noticeable on that kind of photography anyway.

Really? Noise isn't more prevalent in dark areas of a photo? Why is there more noise noticeable in dark/underexposed areas of a photo then? Have you done this kind of photography? Do you have real world experience shooting stars?

Dude, the sky at night, where everything looks completely black, is not the same as dark/underexpose areas.

 

[Derrel]

Dude, the sky at night, where everything looks completely black, is not the same as dark/underexpose areas.

W_h_a_t are you t_a_l_k_i_n_g about man???? The night sky, that looks "completely black" is not the same as "dark/underexpose areas". Wow...I wonder why the night sky looks so "completely black"...

Is that "completely black" night sky NOT a "dark area"? I mean, by definition, it would seem that a "completely black" night sky *is*,indeed, a dark area.

 

[argieramos]

Dude, the sky at night, where everything looks completely black, is not the same as dark/underexpose areas.

W_h_a_t are you t_a_l_k_i_n_g about man???? The night sky, that looks "completely black" is not the same as "dark/underexpose areas". Wow...I wonder why the night sky looks so "completely black"...

Is that "completely black" night sky NOT a "dark area"? I mean, by definition, it would seem that a "completely black" night sky *is*,indeed, a dark area.

[Facepalm] Common sense.. I guess you don't have that. How can you consider yourself as Pro? Man, I wouldn't hire you if i really need a Pro. lol

Look up in the sky at night where the light is completely absent
Look at the dim lit areas.
Are they the same?

 

[Derrel]

Dude, the sky at night, where everything looks completely black, is not the same as dark/underexpose areas.

W_h_a_t are you t_a_l_k_i_n_g about man???? The night sky, that looks "completely black" is not the same as "dark/underexpose areas". Wow...I wonder why the night sky looks so "completely black"...

Is that "completely black" night sky NOT a "dark area"? I mean, by definition, it would seem that a "completely black" night sky *is*,indeed, a dark area.

[Facepalm] Common sense.. I guess you don't have that. How can you consider yourself as Pro? Man, I wouldn't hire you if i really need a Pro. lol

Is English your native language? It does not appear so.

You also seem to suffer from a SEVERE case of reading comprehension failure. What's all this blathering coming from your end about "Pro?" and me considering myself as a "Pro?" Can you not read my signature file, which has been on over 10,000 posts? Sorry argieramos, but learn to read. It says, "It's about time people started taking photography seriously, and treating it as a hobby." And argieramos, you are probably never going to need the services of a professional photographer, except perhaps for your high school senior picture set.

Sorry argieramos, but your inability to recognize the NIGHT SKY as a "dark area" makes me question your language skills. Do you speak another language besides English as your first, or primary language? It seems like you have difficulty engaging in anything more than snarky little high-school type slap fighting.

 

[o hey tyler]

Before I make a comment on that one, can I see the sample of that bro if you don't mind? High ISO noise is not that noticeable on that kind of photography anyway.

Really? Noise isn't more prevalent in dark areas of a photo? Why is there more noise noticeable in dark/underexposed areas of a photo then? Have you done this kind of photography? Do you have real world experience shooting stars?

Dude, the sky at night, where everything looks completely black, is not the same as dark/underexpose areas.

Maybe now you can come to terms that you don't know anything about photography other than what DxO mark tells you about sensors.

If everything in the night sky looks black, with the exception of the stars... You STILL don't think that it's an underexposed area of the image?

 

[o hey tyler]

PS. It was 27 degrees out in Maine when I took that image. I was also fairly drunk and stoned at the time. I still managed to make it down the street without falling, or freezing to death to take photos.

It's going to be 46 degrees in Chi-Town today... Are you going to get outside and take some photos? Surely that temperature is within the working range of your Sony.

 

[argieramos]

Is English your native language? It does not appear so.

You also seem to suffer from a SEVERE case of reading comprehension failure. What's all this blathering coming from your end about "Pro?" and me considering myself as a "Pro?" Can you not read my signature file, which has been on over 10,000 posts? Sorry argieramos, but learn to read. It says, "It's about time people started taking photography seriously, and treating it as a hobby." And argieramos, you are probably never going to need the services of a professional photographer, except perhaps for your high school senior picture set.

Sorry argieramos, but your inability to recognize the NIGHT SKY as a "dark area" makes me question your language skills. Do you speak another language besides English as your first, or primary language? It seems like you have difficulty engaging in anything more than snarky little high-school type slap fighting.

Now you have to criticize my english skills because as usual, you can't make a decent argument about the topic. I never that night sky is not a "dark area". Where did you get that from? lol.. Does all the "dark" look equal? As I said, common sense.

You're dumb as a box of rocks. Straight up and get a clue.... lol

 

[argieramos]

Maybe now you can come to terms that you don't know anything about photography other than what DxO mark tells you about sensors.

If everything in the night sky looks black, with the exception of the stars... You STILL don't think that it's an underexposed area of the image?

Did I even say otherwise? You didn't get the point my friend. I was talking about the sky at night when it's extremely dark. If you photograph a pitch black, the noise is less visible compare to the regular shot with the same high ISO.. I am surprise you didn't know that. lol

 

[argieramos]

PS. It was 27 degrees out in Maine when I took that image. I was also fairly drunk and stoned at the time. I still managed to make it down the street without falling, or freezing to death to take photos.

It's going to be 46 degrees in Chi-Town today... Are you going to get outside and take some photos? Surely that temperature is within the working range of your Sony.

I don't give a damn even if it was 0 degree out when you took that picture. We have a different lifestyle, you know. I prefer to shoot when it's warm outside, why does it bother you?. Your personal attack is not going to work on me. Try something else. You're becoming the 2nd Nikon_Josh. lol

 

[o hey tyler]

Maybe now you can come to terms that you don't know anything about photography other than what DxO mark tells you about sensors.

If everything in the night sky looks black, with the exception of the stars... You STILL don't think that it's an underexposed area of the image?

Did I even say otherwise? You didn't get the point my friend. I was talking about the sky at night when it's extremely dark. If you photograph a pitch black, the noise is less visible compare to the regular shot with the same high ISO.. I am surprise you didn't know that. lol

You really are that clueless. Amazing.

 

[argieramos]

You really are that clueless. Amazing.

Are you saying that I'm wrong?

 

[Nikon_Josh]

W_h_a_t are you t_a_l_k_i_n_g about man???? The night sky, that looks "completely black" is not the same as "dark/underexpose areas". Wow...I wonder why the night sky looks so "completely black"...

Is that "completely black" night sky NOT a "dark area"? I mean, by definition, it would seem that a "completely black" night sky *is*,indeed, a dark area.

[Facepalm] Common sense.. I guess you don't have that. How can you consider yourself as Pro? Man, I wouldn't hire you if i really need a Pro. lol

Is English your native language? It does not appear so.

You also seem to suffer from a SEVERE case of reading comprehension failure. What's all this blathering coming from your end about "Pro?" and me considering myself as a "Pro?" Can you not read my signature file, which has been on over 10,000 posts? Sorry argieramos, but learn to read. It says, "It's about time people started taking photography seriously, and treating it as a hobby." And argieramos, you are probably never going to need the services of a professional photographer, except perhaps for your high school senior picture set.

Sorry argieramos, but your inability to recognize the NIGHT SKY as a "dark area" makes me question your language skills. Do you speak another language besides English as your first, or primary language? It seems like you have difficulty engaging in anything more than snarky little high-school type slap fighting.

As I have said all along, his reading and writing skills are simply abysmal. :lmao:

 

[o hey tyler]

You really are that clueless. Amazing.

Are you saying that I'm wrong?

Clearly.