Sonys' new Camera announcement (Page 4): Are you seriously considering purchasing this thing? Do you really have a need to make billboard sized prints? What other attributes does this...

rcarol

ORpilot wrote:

That is what I have and I expect that at full 61MP that I will be able to take a sip of tea inbetween actions, for the computer to catch up. Ath the 256MP it might crash the computer. Only guessing here. That is why I would like to rent one first. Or, take my SD card with me and shoot a few shots in the store and then PP the card at home.Maybe one of the evaluation sites will tell us about the computer actions.

Are you seriously considering purchasing this thing? Do you really have a need to make billboard sized prints? What other attributes does this camera have that makes it compelling to own?

lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.

spaceytracey wrote:

So sorry to ruin your day. I'll try to do better in the future.

Oh, come on, now, spaceytracey, you didn’t ruin squat. You do realize now, I trust, that that the penultimate post to yours had nothing to do with what you were referring to.

lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.

spaceytracey wrote:

My response was to the initial thought that CA referred to California. Please forgive me.

Thank you for clarifying, spaceytracey. You need not apologize. It’s just that I’ve observed others in recent topics who have recently commented on such vague posts, whether it was inadvertent or not by the member, to use the "wrong" reply soft key. While some may think that people who point out this error (of sorts,) are on some sort of "power trip" as a policeman (of sorts,) it really is just intended to help another person better convey his/her thoughts.

lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.

ORpilot wrote:

Yes and no. Yes it works but I doubt if anyone can hand hold it steady enough to keep the image from being blurred. So No you can't hand hold it. A tripod is needed.

Thank you for confirming what I thought. It appears that a lot of the hullabaloo regarding this new model camera is really only applicable when a tripod is employed.

Yes, this is an invitation to those who perceive the preceding as simplistic or outright just plain wrong to opine otherwise.

lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.

lev29 wrote:

Just out of curiosity, how does this model compare to the Sony a9?

FYI - Both camera bodies currently have the same list price in the U.S. at $3500. I guess I'll start to answer my own question here by posting the only two URLs I could find at this time.

https://www.imaging-resource.com/cameras/sony/a9/vs/sony/a7r-iv/, and a
2m43s long pseudovideo consisting of music and a series of side-by-side comparisons of various features https://youtu.be/SrER5pbqdCY

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

lev29 wrote:

Thank you for confirming what I thought. It appears that a lot of the hullabaloo regarding this new model camera is really only applicable when a tripod is employed.

Yes, this is an invitation to those who perceive the preceding as simplistic or outright just plain wrong to opine otherwise.

I disagree.

I have a Pentax Q-7, a 12mp MILC camera with a so-called 1/1.7" sensor. My calculations show that an "APS-C" sensor with the same pixel density would be a 108mp sensor - a "FF" sensor with the same pixel density would be a 243mp sensor, much more than what this camera has. Most of the time I take photos hand-held, and detail is entirely appropriate for a 12mp image as long as I keep the shutter speed at 1/125 or so.

(Download)

lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.

rehess wrote:

I disagree.

I have a Pentax Q-7, a 12mp MILC camera with a so-called 1/1.7" sensor. My calculations show that an "APS-C" sensor with the same pixel density would be a 108mp sensor - a "FF" sensor with the same pixel density would be a 243mp sensor, much more than what this camera has. Most of the time I take photos hand-held, and detail is entirely appropriate for a 12mp image as long as I keep the shutter speed at 1/125 or so.

I'm sorry, what is it that you disagree with and how does your example support it?

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

lev29 wrote:

I'm sorry, what is it that you disagree with and how does your example support it?

I don't agree that a tripod is needed at that pixel density.
This photo was taken hand-held at a higher pixel density, and I don't see any motion blur, any loss of detail from what 12mp is capable of.

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

lamiaceae wrote:

In case you have not seen it already here is what ... (show quote)

Don't get too excited about that claim of 15 stops DR. The Sony is a 14bit system so right there 1 stop of dr is clipped.

lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.

rehess wrote:

I don't agree that a tripod is needed at that pixel density.
This photo was taken hand-held at a higher pixel density, and I don't see any motion blur, any loss of detail from what 12mp is capable of.

Interesting. Thank you!

CO

Chris T wrote:

Wow!!! … That IS amazing, CO …

Whatever will they think of, next?!!!!

There are some videos online that show the 470EX-AI flash in operation. Check out those. Those people at Canon are geniuses.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

CO wrote:

There are some videos online that show the 470EX-AI flash in operation. Check out those. Those people at Canon are geniuses.

I will, CO … thanks for the heads-up!!!

Yes, I think you're right! ... Canon is THE most - innovative camera company - of the lot!!!

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

rehess wrote:

I don't agree that a tripod is needed at that pixel density.
This photo was taken hand-held at a higher pixel density, and I don't see any motion blur, any loss of detail from what 12mp is capable of.

If your math is correct....The a7Riv is 61mp density. To get that 256MP it utilizes pixel shift (moving the sensor 1 pixel) and takes 16 images and then combines them into one. Pixel shift is not the same as your camera. Your camera does not shift the sensor to take a photo. If the camera or the subject moves just one pixel during the 16 shots than it will have blur. That's how I understand the mechanics. Similar as to doing a dye transfer print and not having perfect registry between the color dyes. Or doing addative color printing and bumping the enlarger when changing the 3 color filters.

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

rcarol wrote:

Are you seriously considering purchasing this thing? Do you really have a need to make billboard sized prints? What other attributes does this camera have that makes it compelling to own?

Yes, if I won the lottery or my a99ii brakes. My FF cameras have a long way to go to even come close to a print off of a 4x5. So yes, if on pixel shift it could get close to my 4x5 then yes. It's much less money than a Hasselblad.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

ORpilot wrote:

If your math is correct....The a7Riv is 61mp densi... (show quote)

I wasn’t talking about pixel-shift - only about the 61mp.

Pentax has had pixel-shift for several camera generations. The first generation(s) required a tripod; the most recent generation works hand-held, using the IBIS to provide needed stability, or so they say {no, I have never used the pixel-shift on my KP}

added: The biggest problems with pixel-shift are (1) movement within the scene {most scenes I photograph have life}, and (2) processing ‘raw’ files since most software doesn’t know about pixel-shift.