jeez, why are the ISO's soooo HIGH

[Cliff]

so......been with the Sony A7iii and 200-600 for a few months now and I've had a few IQ issues to resolve and thankfully some of those were settings related and I think things have improved quite a lot , however, my biggest puzzle is the way in which Sony have configured their sensors on exposure. to get the ISO down I'm having to dial in 1 full stop ( negative) of exposure compensation to get the same exposure as I do on my Nikon D500 and thereby the ISO down to the same levels, the resultant images are then slightly under exposed but at least the noise is reduced .My Nikon produces lower ISO and noise and that's a D500 - anyone else have this issue of high ISO and noise at default without dealing in negative EV?

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Occasionally it goes nuts with the ISO on Auto and puts it way higher than necessary, leading to overexposed images, but at least over is better than under, it's easier to correct without adding noise. That said, I find the RIV Raw files really malleable.
What metering mode are you using? I have mainly used Pattern, though it tends to blow highlights out a bit, and so I also use centre weighted. I generally find the meter to be very good, way better than my Nikon was.

 

[Cliff]

For BIF I used spot, but had to change back to matrix as I found spot didn’t work with zone focussing , the trouble with matrix it’s too general so tends to over compensate for the whole scene, and for BIF that’s not what I want. I could try centre weighted and see how that works out

 

[Cliff]

Occasionally it goes nuts with the ISO on Auto and puts it way higher than necessary, leading to overexposed images, but at least over is better than under, it's easier to correct without adding noise. That said, I find the RIV Raw files really malleable.
What metering mode are you using? I have mainly used Pattern, though it tends to blow highlights out a bit, and so I also use centre weighted. I generally find the meter to be very good, way better than my Nikon was.

Kev, quick question, do you turn off steady shot and lens stabilisation for BIF ?

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Kev, quick question, do you turn off steady shot and lens stabilisation for BIF ?

Yes. always over 1/1600th. It can wreck a shot, I learned that the hard way.

 

[Cliff]

thanks for the reply, I went out to test the system today on swans and gulls, BIF, anyway I fired off a few bursts, and within the bursts I had a mixed bag , some soft generally the second image and maybe a few others, but overall I was not impressed with the sharpness, most images are just off focus, not soft but ..... you know probably what I mean, I then realised when I got home that I had on steady shot, VR and electronic first curtain and though maybe this is causing the slight softness, here is one of the better images, you can see what I mean about the just off focus, so....if I turn all this stuff off will I see an improvement

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

thanks for the reply, I went out to test the system today on swans and gulls, BIF, anyway I fired off a few bursts, and within the bursts I had a mixed bag , some soft generally the second image and maybe a few others, but overall I was not impressed with the sharpness, most images are just off focus, not soft but ..... you know probably what I mean, I then realised when I got home that I had on steady shot, VR and electronic first curtain and though maybe this is causing the slight softness, here is one of the better images, you can see what I mean about the just off focus, so....if I turn all this stuff off will I see an improvement View attachment 1749

That is exactly what it does, almost like a slight motion blur. It's because the stabilisation is fighting against a really fast shutter when it's not needed. It varies from company to company, but all the big names say switch it off at some point. Tamron say 1/500th on the G2 lenses, something I can attest to be right.

 

[Cliff]

Thanks for the confirmation , I’ll give It a go layer in the week

 

[seuadr]

That is exactly what it does, almost like a slight motion blur. It's because the stabilisation is fighting against a really fast shutter when it's not needed. It varies from company to company, but all the big names say switch it off at some point. Tamron say 1/500th on the G2 lenses, something I can attest to be right.

i knew this was a thing, i didn't realize it could be that low!

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

i knew this was a thing, i didn't realize it could be that low!

Indeed. Only on Tamron though, all others say 1/1600th or more. The Tamron system is slightly different, and very effective.

 

[Ziggy]

I don't mind the high ISOs. With BIF the A9 is good for 6400 with decent NR in post. My D500 is marginal at 2200.
Shooting backlit I dial in +1.5 EV with the Sony using multi metering.

 

[Cliff]

Well went out today, high hopes.........came back with 600 images, first scan 500 considered unfit to process, focus way off on a lot of them, ......I’m getting close to giving Up tbh, with the Nikon d500 you basically switch it on, select group focus for BIF with CAF and for stationary select single point and BOOM 90% images in focus, with Sony , you have ponce about with umpteen settings on the camera and lens and about 20 % are in focus...... I don’t think it’s the 200-600 either it’s the A7iii........ my mate has an A9 and 200-600 and we swapped lenses today, his images sharp off both lenses, mine soft ......

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Well went out today, high hopes.........came back with 600 images, first scan 500 considered unfit to process, focus way off on a lot of them, ......I’m getting close to giving Up tbh, with the Nikon d500 you basically switch it on, select group focus for BIF with CAF and for stationary select single point and BOOM 90% images in focus, with Sony , you have ponce about with umpteen settings on the camera and lens and about 20 % are in focus...... I don’t think it’s the 200-600 either it’s the A7iii........ my mate has an A9 and 200-600 and we swapped lenses today, his images sharp off both lenses, mine soft ......

Interesting. Do you have a filter on your 200 600?

 

[Cliff]

No filter, I never use filters, the quickest way to ruin images, oh forgot to say, I did shoot his A9 with my lens and Tc and images tack sharp , used expanded spot small and zone......AND.... I could reduce the shutter speed to 1/500 for stationary and 1/1600 for BIF, with the A7iii I dare not try stills at less than 1/800

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

No filter, I never use filters, the quickest way to ruin images, oh forgot to say, I did shoot his A9 with my lens and Tc and images tack sharp , used expanded spot small and zone......AND.... I could reduce the shutter speed to 1/500 for stationary and 1/1600 for BIF, with the A7iii I dare not try stills at less than 1/800

Cool, yes filters are a terrible addition (it's actually caused focussing issues on the RIV). It does seem the 7III is your issue then. What a pain.

 

[Cliff]

It seems to me the lens does not play nicely with the body, however in the studio with 24-105 images are sharp

 

[Ziggy]

On your A7R3 set focus /release priority to focus.
When I do on mine the BIF burst rate can drop sharply.
I reckon the default of balanced may just settle for a good enough lock.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

It seems to me the lens does not play nicely with the body, however in the studio with 24-105 images are sharp

It's interesting, because that's been the general consensus with that lens and the RIV, though not for me.

 

[Cliff]

On your A7R3 set focus /release priority to focus.
When I do on mine the BIF burst rate can drop sharply.
I reckon the default of balanced may just settle for a good enough lock.

Mine is set release priority focus .....

 

[Ziggy]

Well, if you don't want soft shots change to Focus priority.

 

[Cliff]

sorry I mis reported -
what I have set is
priority set in AFS - AF
priority set in AFC - AF

 

[Cliff]

what a difference 24 hours makes - I haven't changed any settings but the images are sharp today........odd and puzzling, still I'm relieved

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Lovely shots too

 

[jhousteniii]

For BIF I used spot, but had to change back to matrix as I found spot didn’t work with zone focussing , the trouble with matrix it’s too general so tends to over compensate for the whole scene, and for BIF that’s not what I want. I could try centre weighted and see how that works out

CEnter weighted works best for me with birds in flight. I dial exposure comp up or down depending on the scene and what I am shooting.

 

[LTS]

You are using the A7iii and 200-600? Are you using the lens stabilization and if so, what setting are you on?

 

[Cliff]

mode 2 I found to be the best mode so far for BIF and static, things have improved last couple of days for some reason

 

[Paul stuart]

Interesting you found mode 2 better is that not the setting for panning hard to see how this improves static shots ,i am with kev and generally turn of ois for fast action stuff ,but must say your images look nice cliff ,my thoughts are heading me towards a a9 though seems to be the only sony camera that gives 100% reliable bif shots ,although a bad craftsperson blames there tools .

 

[Cliff]

whilst the A9 is undoubtedly the best body for BIF, for tracking and viewfinder etc, I am of the view that the A7 iii is a very capable body too, once the nuances are mastered, the 200-600 does play nicely with the A9, i am also now finding it plays rather well with the A7iii, both for BIF and stationary subjects and yes I agree a poor tradesman does often blame his tools

 

[Paul stuart]

well the a73 has the best iso performance so here in the uk especially from now until spring makes up for the af performance .