Sony marketing...DSLR GEAR NO IDEA

[Greg Beetham]

Pete 125/sec f8 here in summer with full sun it would burn highlights I’d say at a guess, I reckon you could go f11 easy here but then with contrasty slide film you would end up with black shadows in the darkest ones, of course also here in the summer there is often cloud so that would help a lot. Yes E6 is the best and scanned negatives are surprisingly good too if you can stand the whole process with the scanner acting like a dust magnet.
The problem with scanning film is then you are back in digital land again with its tonal harshness and strange banding and posterization problems. There is still nothing in digital land to reproduce the look of a wet print when it comes out of the drum, then after squeegeeing it off and you can watch the colours normalize as it dries on some Kleenex. It’s more costly than digital when compared to printing digital, and time consuming as well but you tend to appreciate the finished product a lot more I think.
Realistically here I think film is hard now unless I can find someone still processing commercially locally, even then I think I would be more interested in MF than 35mm, but it was hard to find anyone doing film processing for that here even back in the film days, I had to do that myself with those Agfa kits and I still have a couple of C41 and maybe a couple of E6 left in the fridge downstairs but they wouldn’t be any good now, I just haven’t got around to tossing them out, you can’t get those anymore either, not here anyway.
Greg
Ps I’ve never seen that add before Barry, good to see ol Arthur again.

[classiccameras]

Greg, I guess with the bright Aussie lighting F/11 would be better or shoot at 250 Sec. Kodachrome 25 and 64 had a reasonable latitude but a stop either way would be as far as I would like to take it. I often had a tiny ammount of minus [1/2] stop compensation turned on for better saturation, but only when the subject would benefit from that, plus you were at the mercy of the Kodak lab. Ektachrome was a little more sensative but you could 'pull' it during processing which was why it was a favourite with the pros.
I understand your problems with D+P, because of the great distances you might have to post them to and that must carry some cost too.
I'm still waiting for a Digicam that can exhibit pictures like or at least very similar in IQ to colour reversal film.

[peterottaway]

This is what was a problem in film days with Agfa colour films and some Japanese films as well until into the 1980's. The colour palette was designed to render well the home town palette not what they encountered in Australian conditions. Agfa slide films except in winter seemed to add a layer of dust to most colours but especially to anything green. K25 and K200 produced far better results than did K64, it may seem odd but K25 was the way to go to get good blacks and shadow details even though it was considered the more contrasty film.

Even though it is technically Autumn here from today = Australia changes its seasons on the first of the month rather than the 15th as some other countries do, it was 14c to 37c today with no cloud and will be 17c to 39c tomorrow. Shooting at EI 100 I was getting 1/1600 to 1/2500 at f 8.0 after 6pm today.

When I was shooting outdoor winter sports with ISO 400 film between noon and 3pm most days I could get 1/640 to 1/1250 at f8.0. The digital palette is different from film but with decent PP programs the general quality I can extract from digital is better than those days I got lucky with film. And that is saying nothing much about my PP skills or lack of them. In many cases though just like in film days it is a case of toning things down rather than boosting your results.

Greg lives in tropical / subtropical east coast Townsville, although the inland areas excluding the Atherton Tableland rapidly turns arid. Perth just to the west of me is west coast southern hemisphere what San Diego is to west coast northern hemisphere.

[Birma]

The Sony ads are a re-run of the David Bailey Olympus adverts (IMO that is)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWlj9ZJkliA

Now that's a cracking advert Barry

[Greg Beetham]

I don’t think I used Agfa film, not that I recall anyway (I might have used the odd 35mm print film maybe), I did use Kodachrome a few times way back when, but mostly Ektachrome and Velvia, also 200ASA Gold for 35mm prints, and some Kodak and Fuji 120 print film, also some Ilford B&W film and paper, still have boxes of B&W photographic paper of various sizes.

The big one for me was the availability of those Agfa film developing kits with all the chemicals in the kit, you have to have a temperature controlled drum processor to do colour film, (also very accurate timing of the process itself, changing from one chemical to the next and so on), paper too but that’s different chemistry and not as critical as film is with temperature and timings.
I still have an unopened box of Cibachrome (Ilfochrome) developer and fixer powder, and also a couple of boxes of Cibachrome 10x8 photo paper in the fridge that really should be used up.

There was at the time a lady here who used to run a small lab doing 120-220 and quite a few wedding photographers used her service, I did get her to do some films of mine as well but she closed down years ago now.
Last time I had a browse at B&H they had quite a lot of film related gear, paper, film and chemicals too but I’m not sure about the minimum quantities they have available when it comes to film developing or if there are any restrictions in transporting and so on.
Greg

[peterottaway]

I used a lot of Fujichrome 50 which Fuji abandoned to introduce Velvia which I detested. The Fuji 50 just seemed to suit local conditions which Velvia did not. I then switched to Fuji Sensia 100 and Reala 100.

At the end of my film days I was using Sensia 100 and Agfa RSX 100 slide films, Reala and Fujicolor Pro colour negative plus Agfa APX25,100 and 400 with Neopan 400 as a general purpose band w film.

This is probably completely different to what others who are here were using. But it does prove the point that everyone is different in their requirements.

[Wes Gibbon]

I used a lot of Fujichrome 50 which Fuji abandoned to introduce Velvia which I detested. The Fuji 50 just seemed to suit local conditions which Velvia did not. I then switched to Fuji Sensia 100 and Reala 100.

At the end of my film days I was using Sensia 100 and Agfa RSX 100 slide films, Reala and Fujicolor Pro colour negative plus Agfa APX25,100 and 400 with Neopan 400 as a general purpose band w film.

This is probably completely different to what others who are here were using. But it does prove the point that everyone is different in their requirements.

I believe Fuji tweaked Velvia a number of times, including a major change about halfway through it's lifespan (original Velvia that is). I tried a roll when it first came out and also disliked it, but tried it again a few years later and liked it very much, but it had been much improved.

[classiccameras]

Yes, I liked the early Fujichrome 50 but like you the much later batch of Velvia 50 and 100 was also quite nice. My all time favourite was Kodachrome 25 but never liked the 64 as much. I used a lot of E6 home processing and my favourite there was Ektachrome 100. These days, the few rolls I take get sent to Peak Imaging in Sheffield.
Reala and Portra were excellent col Negs and I have managed to tweak my A37 to very nearly that colour balance which is very pleasing.
I found Agfachrome 50 an interesting film as on the one hand it produced some very realistic colours but tended to 'block' even at half a stop under.

I did a lot of work in B+W using a variety of red, orange and yellow filters with Ilford FP and HP 4 and I always felt you get the best drama from B+W, Ansel Adams is a good example. I loved his work and have all his annual calenders.
Its interesting to see the old Fujichrome colours replicated on fuji digital cameras, such as Astia, Provia and Velvia and they are pretty close to the origininals, all credit to Fuji, the best Jpegs in the business IMHO.
Pete

[peterottaway]

I guess like with many, I went along with what was working for me. Velvia produced a strong reaction in me and that was that.

On a totally different note more in keeping with the original topic, Sony has never really annoyed me the same way as it has upset some others here. They have done things which I disagree with or couldn't see the point of. And then you get those on some sites who praise Fuji to high heaven for issuing a series of updates fixing or tweaking things that should have been done better in the first place.

Even companies who are running on 12 month replacement cycles shouldn't duck their obligations to fix things that don't work as well as advertised for last years model. And given that Sony seems to be on a 3 year replacement cycle for cameras such as the A77 and A99 I do think that they should be prepared for a 12 month software refresh. To improve the menu or correct lens compatibility problems but not to totally update the whole damn thing as some believe is their right from Sony.

[bfitzgerald]

Never liked Velvia just too OTT colours and saturation. Provia was much better IMO, but I mostly used print film for the latitude it had.

Sony's cycles are a bit iffy to say the least, it remains to be seen what they produce for 2014 for A mount. I've read enough light leak, sensor streaking issues on the A7 to be convinced Sony view their customers as beta testers who pay for products!
They'd better have more than an A77 mkII for this year though, one model isn't going to cut it in the market.

[Greg Beetham]

Velvia with me was more of a ‘what was in stock at the camera shop in 120 at the time or on special’ than anything and when I tried it it seemed ok even if it was OTT with colour as I was really chasing any image that would print well rather than slides and if you are using dichroic filters you can dial in your own colour balance anyway.
Thinking back now I remember using some Konica print film as well as some Fuji Reala mainly because I used to pick up rolls of film from the shop (the owner used to give them to me at half price) that were approaching their use by date so I ended up with an assortment of different brands types and speeds sometimes, which didn’t bother me as they all took decent photos. The cheap film didn’t happen all the time though, then it was back to Ektachrome if there was any, failing that Velvia, if there wasn't one there was usually the other.

What was that you heard Barry, last time I was reading some thread about light leaks on a 7 I thought there was some adaptor involved not that I was paying a whole lot of attention, have there been other developments?
And I saw someone had suggested in a thread at dpr that Sony should leave the A77 around as a cheaper alternative even after the new one comes out. Good idea, I think you'd agree, but Sony hasn't done that so far that I've noticed, not with 7's anyway so I doubt they will do it this time either.
Greg

[bfitzgerald]

I can't see the A58 and a whopping price gap with a new A77 MkII near £1000 odd as being a good strategy for any company.
You miss the biggest sales segment entirely.
I've no intentions of spending the bones of £1000 on a crop sensor body (those days are numbered IMO) However nice the improvements are it's not a sensible purchase.

I've an envelope with cash in it and I'll sit and wait for a bit..to see what to do for a second body. At the right price the A77 could be worth a punt. I'm keen to avoid those silly flash adaptors and new hot shoe, so I'll try to stick to i-iso bodies for as long as possible.
Sony could keep the A77 around for a while (a strategy that seems to work for Nikon..though they tend to have too many older models around) But knowing Sony as I do they'll probably kill it off shortly, and the same applies to the A65. Making massive mistakes and not understanding the camera market is something that Sony have time and time again done.

Maybe they'll prove us wrong with some good models this year, I doubt it though.
I've no idea what idiot is running the camera division, but you could probably drag a hobby shooter off the street and they'd have a better idea of what people want.
E mount is not interesting even remotely for my needs, they can make as many mirorrless models as they want I won't be buying them!

[classiccameras]

Barry, do you favour FF over APS-C.

[bfitzgerald]

At current prices no not really.
FF is far too expensive IMO

Most useful would be using my FF lenses at their intended focal lengths, somewhat better DOF control also a plus, and high ISO improvements welcomed.
But...

APS-C is good enough IQ wise and mostly sufficient for DOF control. High ISO is also good enough for my needs (you can shoot ISO 3200 without being scared, and at a push 6400) I don't really need more than that.

I don't think the price premium FF attracts is worth it. Whilst I'm no A77 super fan..honestly do you really feel the A99 is worth the price of almost 3x A77 bodies?
Even using the A57 the high ISO improvements on the A99 are hardly massive (there no doubt but do you need it?)
I might even pick up another A57 possibly. There are some annoyances and quirks, but the IQ is very good, it's no slouch in low light as well..EVF aside it's actually pretty good overall.

Full frame will not interest me until the price falls significantly. The asking price of the A99 is far too much for any camera, and for the times I want to use FF lenses the cost of the A99 buys a ton of film and processing! I'm sticking to APS-C for now.

[classiccameras]

Barry, the A57 has become a sort after camera and looking through used camera sites, they don't hang around for long. I know a couple of pals who sold there 57's thinking the 65 was the panacea, it wasn't much better and had worse noise, they regretted it immensly and went out and bought second hand 57's. My personal opinion is you get better IQ from 16mp and less noise.
As you say the 57 has its faults and quirks but it is a super camera to hold and use and definitely better than equivalent Canikons IMO.