Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Sony A1 Resources: Memory Card Tests | Accessories | Firmware | User Guide | Price Check: B&H Photo
The A7RV (not A7V) does not stack “in body” but it does capture the images for the stack in a focus bracket (which is then processed on a computer with more RAM, more CPU, and more disk space, then the camera). I won’t be at all surprised to see that appear in a firmware update for the A1, probably with the bulb timer.When comes the update for the a1 to stack in the body like the a7 V already can?
Can be very useful for landscapes, like a leading line shot of a fence run if you want the entire thing in sharp focus. Of course you don't need the number of shots that you would for macro, but 3 or 4 can make a huge difference.I don't see the need to be honest. It's really only good for macro shooting, and that's pretty niche really. As Tony said, more processing is required too, and more storage.
it is good for more than just macro ,excellent for landscapes also ,church interiors lots of times it could be utilized , on my m43 you could nearly shoot stacked images handheld the ibis was that good in fact it has probably improved even more since i became a sony shooter ,if macro was my niche i would be back with smaller sensors and maybe the new olympus 90mm f3.5and the om1 ,not much competes in real world applications to m43.I don't see the need to be honest. It's really only good for macro shooting, and that's pretty niche really. As Tony said, more processing is required too, and more storage.
I would never use it for landscapes, there's enough DOF in normal shooting IMO. We never had it in film days and I have plenty of landscapes that don't require it.it is good for more than just macro ,excellent for landscapes also ,church interiors lots of times it could be utilized , on my m43 you could nearly shoot stacked images handheld the ibis was that good in fact it has probably improved even more since i became a sony shooter ,if macro was my niche i would be back with smaller sensors and maybe the new olympus 90mm f3.5and the om1 ,not much competes in real world applications to m43.
I shoot a lot of macro and closeups, and have done so for years. One thing I rather like about this type of image is that I can be creative with effective use of blur and bokeh in some areas of the image while other sections are sharp, which presents an interesting visual contrast and a pleasing overall view of the subject. I do understand, though, why some photographers are all over the whole focus stacking thing and certainly for some projects, such as product shots, it really is very useful.
Anyway, so my A7R V has the ability now to do focus stacking, but I still have not gotten around to trying it out as it just isn't all that important to me. It is nice to know that this particular process and technique is now available when and if I do want to try it. I also have the A1 and I use that camera mostly for different kinds of shooting (wildlife in particular) than I do the A7R V and really couldn't care less if there is a firmware update at some point adding focus stacking to that camera. I wouldn't use it, I know that. Of course others do want it and are eager to have it, and presumably have specific intentions for how and where they will use it, and that's fine.
What I really wish is that Sony would make their firmware updating process much smoother and more intuitive than they do. Maybe people with Windows machines don't have a lot of issues, but I definitely have had with my Macs. I'd much prefer a system such as other camera manufacturers offer with their firmware updates, where one downloads and copies the appropriate files to a memory card and then puts that into the computer and goes from there with the updating process....
depends on your foregound interest, granted most of the time it is distant and just shoot f11 and be there .I would never use it for landscapes, there's enough DOF in normal shooting IMO. We never had it in film days and I have plenty of landscapes that don't require it.
f22...depends on your foregound interest, granted most of the time it is distant and just shoot f11 and be there .
f22 and be mushy ,i will stay with f11f22...
Mushy? How so?f22 and be mushy ,i will stay with f11
diffraction on most lenses after f11 ,Mushy? How so?
Diffraction occurs on most lenses when stopped way down. Some are worse than others. Although, I'd disagree that it's occurs to the extent noticeable at f/11 on a full frame camera. It would be moreso on APS-C or M-4/3 . In the case of the Tamron 28, it doesn't come into play until f/22. From ephotozine:Hmm. I honestly can't say I've noticed it on the Tamron 24, 2.8
Tamron 24mm f/2.8 Di III OSD M1:2 Performance
Centrally, sharpness is excellent from f/2.8 all the way through to f/16. It is still very good even at f/22, where diffraction just starts to take effect. The edges are excellent at f/2.8 and f/4, very good from f/5.6 to f/16, only softening due to diffraction at f/22.
Yep, so all of my Seascapes are at f20 or f22 on that lens, and I based my settings on what we used to use on film, which seems to work perfectly well on the FF sensor. It's all a personal thing. I probably wouldn't be worried about diffraction unless it was glaringly obvious, which it hasn't been so far.Diffraction occurs on most lenses when stopped way down. Some are worse than others. Although, I'd disagree that it's occurs to the extent noticeable at f/11 on a full frame camera. It would be moreso on APS-C or M-4/3 . In the case of the Tamron 28, it doesn't come into play until f/22. From ephotozine:
So it's not surprising you never noticed it on that lens. Some can get very bad. The advice from most people is to find the sweet spot of your lenses and try to stick with them. Charts like this can be very helpful for anyone looking for that information.
I still have to convince myself that f/11 and up is safe with the FF. Using M/43 you knew that by the time you got to F/11 on most lenses you were getting into diffraction. The reason it's more prevalent with smaller sensors is due to the smaller opening for an equal aperture. Because F stops are derived from a mathematical formula based on focal length of the lens, and crop sensors use physically smaller lenses, the light starts to bend into diffraction earlier in the aperture range.
What's interesting about that lens is even at f/22 it still ranks very good in the center. Like you, I'd use it and not worry one whit!Yep, so all of my Seascapes are at f20 or f22 on that lens, and I based my settings on what we used to use on film, which seems to work perfectly well on the FF sensor. It's all a personal thing. I probably wouldn't be worried about diffraction unless it was glaringly obvious, which it hasn't been so far.
Also, it's a bloody bargain!What's interesting about that lens is even at f/22 it still ranks very good in the center. Like you, I'd use it and not worry one whit!
Holy crap! $200? WOW! I never looked at it before, the 24-105/4 is ok for me, but that's a helluva deal!Also, it's a bloody bargain!
It really is, I think I paid £180 here, but interestingly it came from your side of the pond even though I bought it on Amazon.Holy crap! $200? WOW! I never looked at it before, the 24-105/4 is ok for me, but that's a helluva deal!
I would not be obvious unless you shot the same image at say F11 and compared themYep, so all of my Seascapes are at f20 or f22 on that lens, and I based my settings on what we used to use on film, which seems to work perfectly well on the FF sensor. It's all a personal thing. I probably wouldn't be worried about diffraction unless it was glaringly obvious, which it hasn't been so far.
Exactly. If not impossible, or at the very least negligible.Diffraction blurring is a gradual thing, and may be difficult to see at f/11.
Sony A1 Resources: Memory Card Tests | Accessories | Firmware | User Guide | Price Check: B&H Photo