FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

61 MP A7RIV announced

Page  <1 456
Author
Jonas A-R View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 29 December 2007
Country: Denmark
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Posts: 1408
Post Options Post Options   Quote Jonas A-R Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 September 2019 at 08:17
Originally posted by Cekari Cekari wrote:

Originally posted by Bob J Bob J wrote:

Originally posted by AudioDoc AudioDoc wrote:

61 Mp sensor. How many of us need 61 Mp?


I look back to the early days of Dyxum and see what amazing stuff people produced with 6MP... now we are a full order of magnitude beyond that..

Quite an impressive spec though.


I do, as:

1. Can't take a levelled shot even if pointed at with a gun at my head... *crop needed to avoid looking as I was drunk shooting*

2. Stopped zooming in all the way as to many cut-off subject parts like heads etc... *crop needed as zoom in*

3. Both #1 and #2 combined leaves me with a 3px image... or a tad more perhaps...


Nobody “needs” a camera regardless of how many pixels it might have. More pixels are nice to have if storage and processing power follows.
Just like sharp lenses. It is rare to see people complain about sharp lenses but more pixels seem to put a lot of people off for some strange reason. Even though smaller pixels will make all our lenses better and the system less prone for horrible aliasing artifacts.
a9 a6300 21/2.8 Loxia 35/2.8Z 35/1.4Z 50/1.4Z 55/1.8Z 85/1.4GM 90/2.8G 12-24/4G 24-105/4G 70-200/4G 100-400/4-5.6GM 2x TC
 



Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Posts: 2640
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 September 2019 at 02:56
Jim Kasson (blog.kasson.com) has a bunch of tests published about the RIV. It looks a bit worse than the RIII in some sensor metrics.
Sony A7II A6000 A77II LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MC-11 MD-NEX KR-NEX DA-NEX
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8 8.5/1.9
Back to Top
owenn01 View Drop Down
Alpha Eyes group
Alpha Eyes group

Joined: 20 May 2008
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Kent
Status: Offline
Posts: 10355
Post Options Post Options   Quote owenn01 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 September 2019 at 10:54
"The first camera is all you ever 'need'; anything after that is purely 'want'"

My experience is you can exchange Camera for almost anything - Bow; racquet; pen etc.

Best regards, Neil.
My Mantra: "Comment on other's work as you would wish to have yours commented upon". Go on - it's fun!
Back to Top
Cekari View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 15 August 2005
Country: Sweden
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Posts: 7500
Post Options Post Options   Quote Cekari Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 September 2019 at 11:02
Originally posted by Jonas A-R Jonas A-R wrote:

Originally posted by Cekari Cekari wrote:

Originally posted by Bob J Bob J wrote:

Originally posted by AudioDoc AudioDoc wrote:

61 Mp sensor. How many of us need 61 Mp?


I look back to the early days of Dyxum and see what amazing stuff people produced with 6MP... now we are a full order of magnitude beyond that..

Quite an impressive spec though.


I do, as:

1. Can't take a levelled shot even if pointed at with a gun at my head... *crop needed to avoid looking as I was drunk shooting*

2. Stopped zooming in all the way as to many cut-off subject parts like heads etc... *crop needed as zoom in*

3. Both #1 and #2 combined leaves me with a 3px image... or a tad more perhaps...


Nobody “needs” a camera regardless of how many pixels it might have. More pixels are nice to have if storage and processing power follows.
Just like sharp lenses. It is rare to see people complain about sharp lenses but more pixels seem to put a lot of people off for some strange reason. Even though smaller pixels will make all our lenses better and the system less prone for horrible aliasing artifacts.


Couldn't agree more, as long more pixels means better IQ as well as possibility to crop in more. (Poor mans Tele )
Images https://www.flickr.com/photos/cekari/sets/ ,

English is a funny language, seldom it spells the words like I do
Back to Top
Cekari View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 15 August 2005
Country: Sweden
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Posts: 7500
Post Options Post Options   Quote Cekari Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 September 2019 at 11:20
Originally posted by QuietOC QuietOC wrote:

Jim Kasson (blog.kasson.com) has a bunch of tests published about the RIV. It looks a bit worse than the RIII in some sensor metrics.


The dpreview chart-test here reveals that the a7R IV are in pair concerning noice with the a7R III up to ISO400, higher up the a7R III gets the upper hand, but not by much.
What you gain with a7R IV is sharper images with better (cleaner) withes and blacks.

Also interesting is "Sony a7R IV has Dual Native ISOs of 100 & 320 and none of the PDAF Pixel Banding that plagues Fuji GFX 100 and Nikon Z7 cameras" Article can be read here and a link to the test in the article.

Edited by Cekari - 17 September 2019 at 11:24
Images https://www.flickr.com/photos/cekari/sets/ ,

English is a funny language, seldom it spells the words like I do
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Camera Talk > E-mount full frame Page  <1 456

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.047 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Feel free to contact us if needed.