The Arms Race Continues......
- Thread starter Mr Perceptive
- Start date
Mr Perceptive
Perceptive Member
If you are chasing MP then it definitely looks good, but the file sizes will be enormous especially if you want an original RAW (since Sony's Compressed RAW files appear to be actually lossy), this means that computer requirements will also increase.
It will be interesting to see how many lenses both Sony and third party actually resolve to that resolution, I'm sure the Sony GM, and the Sigma ART ones will, but what of the lower Sony's and other third party Tamron/Samyang/etc
Its certainly set a fairly high bar, apparently 3 more Sony camera bodies are due to be announced in next 3 weeks...interesting times....
I can think of 2 Sony lenses straight away which would benefit from the extra resolution (55/1.8 and 90/2.8 macro - both of which are superb). The 24/1.8GM and 135/1.8GM would probably be up to the bar as well.
What will be interesting to see is how the noise at higher ISO holds up as the pixel density is starting to get pretty high now. (Similar pixel density to Fuji X-T3).
Let's see what else Sony have up their sleeves...
Lefty
eternumviti
Insufficient privileges to reply.
Amar, you've only just bought your Z7 and you are going to have to change it now!
I don't want more resolution. I've got 24mp with my current Nikon, but I actually prefer the files from my 10.5mp D80. As for sharpness, I bought one of those filters that slightly unsharpens the lens, but as it turns out I don't need it because I keep knocking my 17-55 f2.8, and it costs me 500 quid every time, so best just to leave it and get blurred pictures
Mr Perceptive
Perceptive Member
Amar, you've only just bought your Z7 and you are going to have to change it now!
I don't want more resolution. I've got 24mp with my current Nikon, but I actually prefer the files from my 10.5mp D80. As for sharpness, I bought one of those filters that slightly unsharpens the lens, but as it turns out I don't need it because I keep knocking my 17-55 f2.8, and it costs me 500 quid every time, so best just to leave it and get blurred pictures
Love this post!!!
I totally get where you are coming from, and one of the reasons that I didn't 'upgrade' to a Sony A7Rii/iii or a GFX (besides ££££) is that I really like my current output, IMHO I think some of my best photos have been taken with the 24MP X100F, certainly not known for having the sharpest lens on the planet, and there is also something special about the images from the original 12MP X100. I'm certainly more into the rendering of the image these days, and definitely not going to chase megapixels. Printing at home was the best thing I've done so far in my photographic journey, its definitely changed my perspective.
SteveG
pfm Member
I've gone full-frame a while back, with a Pentax K1. Most of my lenses pre-date digital (and some by a very long way) but have coped well going up to 36MP full-frame from the 10MP APS-C. I did quickly upgrade from an i5 with conventional disk to an i7 with 16GB and two SSD's though, as file processing was painful with the old computer. While I'm not convinced I'd want a larger pixel count anytime soon (especially as my ancient DSLR with 10MP produced much better results than I was getting from point and shoots and compact system cameras with substantially more pixels) it is good to see someone pushing things forward. The main reason I went from my old K10D to the K1 was because it was full-frame rather than anything to do with the number of pixels.
Having said all that I am interested to see how the 20MP RX100 that has just this minute arrived compares with my other cameras as I've read good things about it.
Having said all that I am interested to see how the 20MP RX100 that has just this minute arrived compares with my other cameras as I've read good things about it.
I'm happy with the Z7 as it suits my needs as a landscape photographer. That's not taking anything away from the A7rIV. The Z7 wouldn't exist were it not for Sony's pioneering efforts.
I don't want more resolution. I've got 24mp with my current Nikon, but I actually prefer the files from my 10.5mp D80. As for sharpness, I bought one of those filters that slightly unsharpens the lens, but as it turns out I don't need it because I keep knocking my 17-55 f2.8, and it costs me 500 quid every time, so best just to leave it and get blurred pictures
I think we'll have to agree to disagree here. I've never got it when folk have said a lens / camera is 'too sharp'.
In my experience, a lot of the overly processed 'digital' looking images we see these days owe more to poor processing than overly sharp optics / ultra high-res sensors. You can make a digital image look like a film image but you can't do the reverse with a film image.
The Sony is progress. It's an unwritten book: an ultra high quality tool, which is as good (or bad) as the photographer wielding it.
Having said all that, there is definitely more to a camera than its sensor. I'd say ergonomics / usability are at least as important and are a large part of the reason for the success if cameras such as the Fuji X100 series (a camera which I love - the leaf shutter is an absolute joy).
This is also a large part of my reason for going back to Nikon over Sony. The Nikon felt better in the hand and the controls were a lot more intuitive (to me). Consequently it did a better job of 'getting out of the way'. Something that's very important when you're out at 5am and you can't feel your hands because it's -4 degrees!
Lefty
Last edited:
Yes, the ergonomics are a big differentiator, and finding a system that works for you is the top priority, the rest of it is just a case of waiting till your chosen manufacturer does a refresh to get the latest sensor tech. I'd guess the same sensors will appear in the next Nikon mirrorless, just about the time for Lefty to get the upgrade bug from his Z7
eternumviti
Insufficient privileges to reply.
Amar, I give you 6 months, 9 tops
I'd guess the same sensors will appear in the next Nikon mirrorless, just about the time for Lefty to get the upgrade bug from his Z7
Yep - sounds about right
Im hoping that it will be 2-3 years until the Z7 is replaced. From the looks of it so far, Nikon are doing a Fuji and issuing firmware to continually upgrade the Z7's performance. The Z system is still very immature and I am looking forward to seeing how it develops over the next year.
Another reason for switching to Nikon was the price of Sony glass. I just picked up Nikon's latest 70-300 for £474 new. Sony's equivalent is over £1000!
Gromit
Plasticine Dog
There's always the upcoming Nikon Z8.
Whilst I'd never need this kind of resolution, I firmly believe it's great to have such products available - the tech within such cameras does tend to trickle down to less elevated models (think Sony with the incredible AF system from the A9). That's always going to be a Good Thing.
True that quality Sony glass is - or can be - very expensive, but companies such as Samyang are on a roll. Sigma are in the mix but they really need to pull their finger out and produce a range of lenses which are proper, native FE mount, not conversions of current FF glass.
Whilst I'd never need this kind of resolution, I firmly believe it's great to have such products available - the tech within such cameras does tend to trickle down to less elevated models (think Sony with the incredible AF system from the A9). That's always going to be a Good Thing.
True that quality Sony glass is - or can be - very expensive, but companies such as Samyang are on a roll. Sigma are in the mix but they really need to pull their finger out and produce a range of lenses which are proper, native FE mount, not conversions of current FF glass.
There's always the upcoming Nikon Z8.
Agree with this 100%
The A7rIII is almost like a concept car. It may not be for everyone but the tech contained within it will be refined and incorporated into more attainable everyday cameras which a wider range of folk may be interested in.
True that quality Sony glass is - or can be - very expensive, but companies such as Samyang are on a roll. Sigma are in the mix but they really need to pull their finger out and produce a range of lenses which are proper, native FE mount, not conversions of current FF glass.[/QUOTE]
Yes, one of the huge positives of the Canikon systems is the widespread availability of good third party glass, although with each passing year, the situation improves for Sony users. The other thing is that although Sony glass is expensive, it is almost always superb. Take the recent 200-600 as an example. Expensive but probably also a notch above similar lenses available for the Canikon systems.
Lefty