Sony A7 IV official topic

[lebigmac]

Here is another comparison a7->A7iv with three different 50mm lenses: The vintage Olmypus OM 50 1.8 and Minolta MD 50mm 1.7 plus the modern Sony FE 50mm AF lens. Shocking.

The whole set with jpg and raws is here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/qa013alqdxzgxgw/AAC_xXoEPTZ_p-U1lOU0qTYda?dl=0

The above is the A7, the below the A7iv

 

[lebigmac]

.. Aperture was 5.6 with 1/60

[bjohn]

1 hour ago, lebigmac said:

Here is another comparison a7->A7iv with three different 50mm lenses

In every case, the A7iv photo appears to be more zoomed in; are you using it in APS-C mode?

[BTM_Pix]

1 hour ago, lebigmac said:

Here is another comparison a7->A7iv with three different 50mm lenses: The vintage Olmypus OM 50 1.8 and Minolta MD 50mm 1.7 plus the modern Sony FE 50mm AF lens. Shocking.

I've pulled out the switch section in each comparison to show that the focus point is slightly different within each test.

In some it favours the A7 and in others the A7iv in terms of appearing sharper but at the actual focus point for each camera within each comparison image they are both much of a muchness.

If you take the MD one for example, the switch is sharper on the A7 because the focus point is on that whereas with the A7iv it looks softer but if you then compare the rim of the jug in each you'll see that it is reversed as that is the focus point for the A7iv.

[bjohn]

Based on BTM_Pix's post above, try repeating the tests focusing on the switch every time, using a tripod so the lenses are in the exact same position for every photo and you aren't changing the distance from the camera to the subject (as you get closer to MFD, the image will be affected). If possible, don't use focus peaking on either camera but use the punch-in feature and focus by eye to make sure the letters on the switch are sharp.

[BTM_Pix]

14 minutes ago, bjohn said:

make sure the letters on the switch are sharp

I would actually recommend focusing on the texture on the switch as it is this that is the giveaway on the examples above.

[lebigmac]

59 minutes ago, bjohn said:

In every case, the A7iv photo appears to be more zoomed in; are you using it in APS-C mode?

No, I zoomed booth it in for convenience in preview, by the same factor, and the image of the A7iv is larger.

 

53 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

n some it favours the A7 and in others the A7iv in terms of appearing sharper but at the actual focus point for each camera within each comparison image they are both much of a muchness.

Yes, I've seen that, but for me, it's hard to explain. I shot all from a tripod, the distance to my aroma boy is about 1m. With f 5.6 both objects should be in focus. I checked the focus bfore pulling the trigger with the peaking function, and based on that, both items laid with in the focus area. I'll look for a brighter area and make some photos with around f 11.   

[lebigmac]

Here a quick shots handheld with f 11 and the MD. Only relied on focus magnification, no focus peaking (Sorry Andrew for the file size). 

 

[BTM_Pix]

18 minutes ago, lebigmac said:

I'll look for a brighter area and make some photos with around f 11.   

Be careful stopping down as you may run into diffraction issues which will cause more issues.

If you want to test this in a more structured and controlled way then you will need to use a focus calibration tool such as the Spyder.

That way you can see precisely how much is in focus ahead of and behind the focus point.

They aren't particularly cheap (about €60) but that might be a bargain in terms of your own time in trying to get to the bottom of things.

However, it is pretty simple to make one yourself using a guide such as this one.

http://www.parallax-effect.ca/2013/03/12/the-ghettocal-my-diy-lens-calibration-tool-for-micro-adjustment-enabled-dslr-cameras/

[bjohn]

It is indeed puzzling. All I can say is that I'm glad I didn't decide to get an A7iv as my second camera for stills; I'll either get an original A7s or another A7iii. Almost all my lenses are from the 1940s-1980s; I only own three modern ones. All my lenses perform beautifully on the A7iii.

[BTM_Pix]

14 minutes ago, lebigmac said:

Here a quick shots handheld with f 11 and the MD. Only relied on focus magnification, no focus peaking (Sorry Andrew for the file size). 

I have to say that the two images are so completely different in terms of composition and light thats its difficult to make any comparison between them.

In lieu of not having a focus calibration tool, the keyboard on the desk if placed next to the coffee machine could act as an OK substitute if you place it like this crude representation. 

This way there will be evenly spaced and legible markers in front of and behind the focus point to compare between images.

By the way, I do note from the EXIF of the A7iv file though that it appears to think the stabilisation is on ?

[lebigmac]

48 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

However, it is pretty simple to make one yourself using a guide such as this one.

I really feel honored, but I think, you are overestimating my skills by a long margin. BUT the setup that you've send now is outright genius!! You are just awesome. I'll arrange things as advised first thing tomorrow, and I'll give my best in the kitchen sink to make the aromaboy look like the one in your pic. And I'll look for a constant lighting environment.

Regarding your 'out of focus' observation, there is a comparison set with balcony pictures linked above in one of the first posts, there seems to be the center of the scene out of focus as well on several pictures. And that was my impression after starting to shoot with the new camera. I've been shooting for years with these lenses, on a gx85, NX1, Nex5n/t, Nex3, Z6, a ton on the A7, and while they performed differently, they did always as expected and I never had the impression that something is not right with the results – until the A7iv. That's how it started. I can't rule out that in the end the photographer is to blame, since my eyesight seems in steep decline - esp. after sunset – due to my fast progressing age and decades of screen work – but still, it feels strange.

Is the EXIF from the last shot? 'Steady Shot' was on and set on 50mm focal length for this, it was handheld.   
 
     

[lebigmac]

2 hours ago, bjohn said:

All I can say is that I'm glad I didn't decide to get an A7iv as my second camera for stills; I'll either get an original A7s or another A7iii. 

Maybe, you should wait what comes out of this.
Apart from the issue discussed here at the moment, I find it a bit difficult to adapt my workflow to the raw files of the A7iv. Normally, I look for room in the shadows and lift it, for instance, and alter an image starting from there. With the A7iv, all the dynamic range seems already baked in when taking the picture and it is sometimes surprising that I can't seem to lift the shadows as far as I am used to.    

[bjohn]

1 hour ago, lebigmac said:

With the A7iv, all the dynamic range seems already baked in when taking the picture and it is sometimes surprising that I can't seem to lift the shadows as far as I am used to

What software do you use to process your photos?

[lebigmac]

7 minutes ago, bjohn said:

What software do you use to process your photos

Lightroom and  Luminar

[lebigmac]

Here is a hopefully more consistent set. All with f8 and 1/30 on tripod. In contrast to the previous sets, I didn't rely on focus peaking at all but on magnification. 
All .jpgs and raws here, and there's also a set with IBIS on (which doesn't seem to make a difference): 

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/466oznln2oz53txn3nyn6/h?dl=0&rlkey=4a0m3kmpo1puuatt1f5xfojq3

A7 above, A7iv is below
Minolta MD 50:

 

Olympus 50mm:

 

Sony FE 50mm

 

The manual lenses look here far better than on the previous pictures. 

[cojocaru27]

hi guys. Looking for a bit of advice . I upgraded from nx1 to a7IV and so far really happy with the quality of the footage in slog3. I did a trip in Kyrgyzstan and the country with its horse riding men inspired me to shoot this westernish travel video with my sony a7IV:

It's just the quality of YT is just a mess. The original prores export looks way more clean and a bit brighter too ( which is strange ). So, do you have any recommendations for settings i should use when exporting for yt? I am using final cut pro.

Also the rolling shutter i knew it was bad. But i have this problem with the motion cadence. When i have a slow pan the image is just has a freeze like it can't deal with the movement or so. It's just not smooth as it supposed to be. This is also from the rolling shutter too?

thanks for your advice. Much obliged!

[Francisco Rios]

Hi, I usually export prores and then compress with compressor. Youtube settings template... and then upload to YouTube...

Don't have camera so don't know about rolling... I'm planning to buy a7iv but also considering A7SIII because of heating... How was your experience about heat? Also got questions about iso performance and settings between both models working with s-log3

Best

[bjohn]

On 9/13/2022 at 4:35 PM, cojocaru27 said:

When i have a slow pan the image is just has a freeze like it can't deal with the movement or so. It's just not smooth as it supposed to be. This is also from the rolling shutter too?

Do you have image stabilization turned on? Turn it off when panning or tilting, otherwise you can get herky-jerky lags.

[newfoundmass]

On 9/13/2022 at 4:35 PM, cojocaru27 said:

hi guys. Looking for a bit of advice . I upgraded from nx1 to a7IV and so far really happy with the quality of the footage in slog3. I did a trip in Kyrgyzstan and the country with its horse riding men inspired me to shoot this westernish travel video with my sony a7IV:

It's just the quality of YT is just a mess. The original prores export looks way more clean and a bit brighter too ( which is strange ). So, do you have any recommendations for settings i should use when exporting for yt? I am using final cut pro.

Also the rolling shutter i knew it was bad. But i have this problem with the motion cadence. When i have a slow pan the image is just has a freeze like it can't deal with the movement or so. It's just not smooth as it supposed to be. This is also from the rolling shutter too?

thanks for your advice. Much obliged!

First, cool video! Second, there could be a couple things at play. I believe that YouTube prioritizes larger channels over smaller ones when it comes to transcoding, so larger channels have better quality than smaller ones. The other thing is that YouTube simply might not handle ProRes footage very well, even though in theory you'd think the higher the quality of your input, the higher the quality your output would be. 

Try exporting using your editor's YouTube setting and see if you get better results!