New A900

Doug,
Let me see if I understand the LR processing. Once I set the camera to your settings, the jpeg thumbnail for the lcd will be very close to the RAW. Then if I back out the settings in LR then I will be in synch. In other words:

raw capture = what I see on the LCD = what I see when I import into LR.

Without doing that, the camera underexposes a bit in RAW, the jpeg setting on the camera shows a well exposed jpeg and LR makes those same changes on import, so it looks like everything is honky dory but you aren't getting all you can out of the file?

So: this shot was done without making your in camera settings but I did the LR changes below:

View attachment 16590

View attachment 16589

So, if I had made the suggested adjustments in the camera and got the proper histogram exposure, I would have a much better exposure than what I show above?

If all of that is true, I should take these settings and make a preset that I use on import? Do you make any changes to the default sharpening in LR?

Finally, I understand your spot metering setting but do you ever use the center weighted or matrix metering?

Sorry that was a mouthful!

TEBnewyork said:

raw capture = what I see on the LCD = what I see when I import into LR.

Without doing that, the camera underexposes a bit in RAW, the jpeg setting on the camera shows a well exposed jpeg and LR makes those same changes on import, so it looks like everything is honky dory but you aren't getting all you can out of the file?

So: this shot was done without making your in camera settings but I did the LR changes below:

So, if I had made the suggested adjustments in the camera and got the proper histogram exposure, I would have a much better exposure than what I show above?

If all of that is true, I should take these settings and make a preset that I use on import? Do you make any changes to the default sharpening in LR?

Finally, I understand your spot metering setting but do you ever use the center weighted or matrix metering?

Sorry that was a mouthful!

Click to expand...

It sounds like you've pretty much got the gist of it all. Of course, this still isn't gonna get you an exact interpretation of RAW, but it'll be a lot closer. Do you have a handle on the whole uniWB thing?

As far as sharpening, when I was using lightroom, I actually just turned it all off and did it in PS. Adobe's conversion methods don't jive too well with cameras that have good color separation, like the A900, and I found that using the LR sharpening just exacerbated the problem.

I use matrix metering for non-critical snap shots, or if I need to shoot quickly, but when you're trying to really eek out the most exposure to the sensor that you can on critical stuff, matrix metering in all cams is a bit too inconsistent to me. If you set the AEL button to "spot meter toggle" it's pretty easy to get a quick spot meter when in matrix mode. You may want to try playing around with Intelligent Preview, also. It's pretty cool.

I also forgot to mention that ISO 320 is actually the ISO sweetspot of the A900. ISO 200 has linearity problems with the shadows, which Andrey outlined the other day in Shelby's wedding pic thread. Below ISO 200 is just an overexposure of ISO 200, so it isn't that useful, either, unless you're shooting jpegs. take care, d

Thanks Douglas!
Great having people around that have thoroughly dissected the camera and all of the settings.

I will work with the metering tomorrow.

I don't have a handle on the UniWB. I will go back and look for the information posted about it but a few words from you would be very helpful.

Again many thanks,
Terry

Edit:
Found the thread and will work on that tomorrow. Will I be totally screwed up if I use all the settings from above and don't use uniWB?

Hey, no problem. When I was shooting a Leaf digital back, I decided to buy an A100 in order to have a small camera around. Now I've been shooting Sony cameras almost three years, so I've had a chance to familiarize myself with the ins and outs of them...not to mention I've been taking a lot of advice from Andrey and Iliah Borg. :lecture:

UniWB is a practice that I've experimenting with only in the past six months, and I don't always use it, but I try to. The obvious disadvantage of it is that you get a nice, Incredible Hulk green on all of your images, which has to be fixed in your raw converter. The advantage of it being that you get an even more accurate histogram, because it gives you an approximation of your RAW file before WB is applied. All white balance really is is the gaining up of the red and blue channel to equal the green channel. You'll find that in using uniWB in daylight, your green channel is nearly always the first channel to blow in the histogram. Not only does uniWB make your histogram more accurate, but it also shows that one can use magenta filters to equalize the color channels and get a stop or two more DR in daylight....but that's another topic that should be dealt with in its own thread.

As far uniWB necessity, that's really up to you. Sometimes what I do is meter with uniWB, and then switch back to my normal WB settings once I've got my correct exposure, and that way my pics aren't green on the lcd preview. If you decide not to use it, ultimately, you can approximate it by just looking at your green channel when you're shooting in daylight. ie, if you're in daylight, and your histogram shows the reds or blues clipping, ignore it, and expose up until the green channel nearly clips. Obviously, this is a little risky, but it's rare that the green channel doesn't actually clip first in daylight, regardless of what your histogram says. In tungsten lighting, things get a bit more complicated, because reds are stronger. Does this make sense? :bugeyes:

Douglas,

Unbelievably it makes sense. What I really think I will like is setting exposure with uniWB and then going back to a regular WB setting. I think it would be really disconcerting for me to always see the green preview image on the LCD and feel comfortable that all was OK with the shot. I think when I am shooting at a slower pace the intelligent preview will also be helpful in making sure the greens don't blow.

HI There
Just to be contrary. Although I completely subscribe to most of Douglas theories, I've found that setting a white balance (daylight in my case) and then sticking to it rigidly means that you really get to understand the colour balance of the camera, added to which you aren't trying to standardise the colour in natural environments when you're really trying to capture the nature of the light rather than a mid grey.
Of course, if you're taking shots indoors of paintings it's a different matter, but outdoors I think it's a good principle.
It also means that if you do want to change it in post processing you can easily make a batch change to all your images . . . but I find it does a grand job anyway.

It's a bit like deciding to settle for a particular film stock and then sticking to it, it becomes part of you, rather then dithering about from one setting to another.

Exactly the same here. I shoot 99% daylight, and mostly at ISO 100. I'm sure Douglas has a point, but I like to keep my life simple, and trust the camera manufacturer with the settings. I am getting excellent results with my A900 and IDC so I don't feel any need to change what I'm doing. Like Jono, I consider WB and the different creative styles as different kinds of film. I think the A900 produces excellent color without any external help.

jonoslack said:

HI There
Just to be contrary. Although I completely subscribe to most of Douglas theories, I've found that setting a white balance (daylight in my case) and then sticking to it rigidly means that you really get to understand the colour balance of the camera, added to which you aren't trying to standardise the colour in natural environments when you're really trying to capture the nature of the light rather than a mid grey.
Of course, if you're taking shots indoors of paintings it's a different matter, but outdoors I think it's a good principle.
It also means that if you do want to change it in post processing you can easily make a batch change to all your images . . . but I find it does a grand job anyway.

It's a bit like deciding to settle for a particular film stock and then sticking to it, it becomes part of you, rather then dithering about from one setting to another.

Click to expand...

I'm in the I would not worry about WB being so close like 200 or 300 kelvin off the mark would be okay but any more than that like shooting daylight setting in tungsten light for example will just screw up the file otherwise you can do well in any of the RC to make the small corrections. Making big sweeping changes is the one you want to avoid. I think right now get used to using the camera and getting a feel for everything and as you become more familiar with it than start making these changes.

Many times we let the tech jump in there before we understand what it is doing and that learning curve gets bigger for now keep it simple, your not after the gold winning image at the moment but more testing it's capabilities and get the hang of it. It's like going on a date you just want to know what the other person is made of not all of there issues off the bat. Like that analogy . Hell I have not been on a date for 24 years.:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:

BTW I want some Raws of your images Terry . Like to process them in C1

Guy Mancuso said:

I'm in the I would not worry about WB being so close like 200 or 300 kelvin off the mark would be okay but any more than that like shooting daylight setting in tungsten light for example will just screw up the file otherwise you can do well in any of the RC to make the small corrections. Making big sweeping changes is the one you want to avoid. I think right now get used to using the camera and getting a feel for everything and as you become more familiar with it than start making these changes.

Click to expand...

HI Guy
I wasn't advocating using Daylight white balance in Tungsten :ROTFL:
to be honest, when lighting get's mixed and artificial, THAT'S when I use AWB - or a custom WB.

But to use daylight in natural light (whatever kind of natural light it may be), gives you a really good feel for the colour of the camera. It also gives you an excellent version of the light you actually saw.

I agree with what Edward said (and I think what you meant). Keep it simple and you'll learn about the camera. Which produces great colour in raws if it's just left on Daylight.

The spot metering on the button is an absolute wonder though - I leave mine on matrix almost all the time, and if I think it's wrong it's so easy to take a spot reading with one press of the button.

Guy Mancuso said:

BTW I want some Raws of your images Terry . Like to process them in C1

Click to expand...

I have some old ones here that you can plunder if you want Guy:

Sony RAW files (DNG format)

I've converted them to DNG (embedded) to make them smaller, but I can detect no difference processing them in C1 or Aperture from the original Sony RAW files.

All the files beginning with _DSC and ending with .DNG are from the A900. Some are a little underexposed - but that's me determined not to blow the highlights.

Thanks all, I plan on doing two things. One is to keep it simple and use the basic camera settings as you say and the other is to use the neutral settings (as custom) and a LR preset. I do like understanding what Douglas has said/done.

I don't think I can come to grips with the green LCD image from uniWB but will take care with the histogram. For slower paced tripod work, I can see how I would use the intelligent preview to fine tune things.

Guess I'm excited to be up and out this AM....I can't sleep!

jonoslack said:

HI Guy
I wasn't advocating using Daylight white balance in Tungsten :ROTFL:
to be honest, when lighting get's mixed and artificial, THAT'S when I use AWB - or a custom WB.

But to use daylight in natural light (whatever kind of natural light it may be), gives you a really good feel for the colour of the camera. It also gives you an excellent version of the light you actually saw.

I agree with what Edward said (and I think what you meant). Keep it simple and you'll learn about the camera. Which produces great colour in raws if it's just left on Daylight.

The spot metering on the button is an absolute wonder though - I leave mine on matrix almost all the time, and if I think it's wrong it's so easy to take a spot reading with one press of the button.

Click to expand...

Yea I was just saying when go into tungsten light than switch to AWB or Tungsten on those big sweeping changes otherwise just use daylight and 200 or 300 kelvin change is great in any RC. Moving thousands is when trouble starts. Yes keep it simple until she understands it better. I see too many folks when teaching trying to do to much with a new cam. Just settle in and get the feel first

TEBnewyork said:

Thanks all, I plan on doing two things. One is to keep it simple and use the basic camera settings as you say and the other is to use the neutral settings (as custom) and a LR preset. I do like understanding what Douglas has said/done.

I don't think I can come to grips with the green LCD image from uniWB but will take care with the histogram. For slower paced tripod work, I can see how I would use the intelligent preview to fine tune things.

Guess I'm excited to be up and out this AM....I can't sleep!

Click to expand...

Exactly and I do NOT want to undermine what Douglas has said at all and stuff to understand and apply later. That all sounded real good to me but learning how to use a spot meter is one thing you need to learn also. Just hitting different colors can throw a meter south in a hurry so you need to know those basics as well. I learned the Zone system and you learn how to use a spot meter in a hurry or your in big trouble. Green grass is neutral grey but depending on color it is a different percentage. See what I mean

Guy Mancuso said:

Exactly and I do NOT want to undermine what Douglas has said at all and stuff to understand and apply later. That all sounded real good to me but learning how to use a spot meter is one thing you need to learn also. Just hitting different colors can throw a meter south in a hurry so you need to know those basics as well. I learned the Zone system and you learn how to use a spot meter in a hurry or your in big trouble. Green grass is neutral grey but depending on color it is a different percentage. See what I mean

Click to expand...

Actually, I am OK with spot metering. The funny thing about getting the hang of spot metering is where I learned to control it. A P&S camera that had no manual controls and was prone to blowing highlights. It did have spot metering and easy access to exposure compensation. So, I spent a whole summer shooting this little camera that blows highlights with +2 to +3 EV.

Don't own a 900, at least not yet, but very interesting thread. For sake of rest of us, if Terry et al could keep this going as something of a getting to know the A900 & glass pseudo 'blog', I think many folks would find it very interesting.

I agree with Rob, this thread is great (and I don't own an A900, either.) I am fascinated by what Douglas said and what others have added.

Terry, enjoy your day with the new camera and please keep this post going.

Hi Terry,

congratulations on your A900 - I'll be keeping a keen eye here on your first impressions... please post some samples as you get going!

I've only picked one up once at the Focus on Imaging show... but the OVF was very impressive, and I really like the colour I've seen in Jono's posts.

Cheers

Brian

Hey, Jono and Guy, I do the same thing with WB when I'm not using uniWB. In other words, I also keep the camera set at Daylight for everything outside of mixed lighting and tungsten. If I do use uniWB, I batch edit all the pics in the converter at the equivalent of Sony's Daylight setting (assuming daylight environment) in order to get a color feel for the camera like you mentioned. UniWB has been a gradual transition for me, because it is nice to get a general idea of the colors in the scene (even though the camera LCD is far from color accurate,) but the more I use uniWB, the more I get used to visualizing things. Like I mentioned above, a primary use for uniWB deals with color filters and DR increases, but I've not had a chance to delve into that world much, yet. More technically based shooters would disagree with this, but, if you're not doing the color filter thing, I would say that you can at least get close to using uniWB by simply looking using your green channel in the histogram as a guide....but you didn't hear that from me!

Edward makes a great point about allowing the camera to make color decisions and such as being similar to using different films, and surely every photographer on here has his/her own way of dealing with their "style." My posts are geared towards getting the highest quality RAW data at capture, because I deal with looks and style after the fact, but I surely understand that we all go through our photography journeys in a different way. Heck, I still shoot at higher ISOs sometimes just to get more grain, or add grain in post. If Iliah Borg joined this forum, I'm sure he'd rip me a new one, because he is an order of magnitude more technical and exacting than I could ever be about this stuff. Jeez, I can't believe I just typed "order of magnitude." What am I turning into?!?! :ROTFL: I'm really not as clinical as I seem, and I think that, because I use my dang iphone to post so often, my shortness makes it appear that way. Typing some of these long posts on a 3" touchscreen keyboard deserves its own thread about technique!

Overall, my goal is to give people unfamiliar with the Sony system a little head start on nailing things down, but it mostly applies to those that are concerned with noise at capture and getting the highest quality initial RAW file as possible. I certainly have no problems with making some sacrifices to fit individual styles. The A900 is bringing a lot of high end Nikon and Canon shooters into the Sony mix, and there are different philosophies in place for optimal shooting. Heck, Sony doesn't even meter middle gray the same as Canon/Nikon! The A900 is much more conservative in metering than its counterparts, and that has given the camera a bit more of a bad rap than it deserves in regards to noise, IMO. This is especially critical if you're using ACR/LR, because, as has been said many times, the design of that converter seems particularly bad at dealing with the A900 files, partially because of the camera's great color separation. Sony didn't help things by designing a camera with an ideal ISO of 320. :wtf:

Personally, I'm looking forward to Andrey's (hardloaf) more in depth advice based on his testing experiences with the A900, as that is sure to make my little posts seem quaint. Party!!

Got up early for the wonderful Ferry Market in SF. Set the camera back to standard settings and wanted to get a feel for the color right from the camera into Lightroom (before making any changes to camera settings) Here are some grabs from the market. I learned from Jono on the daylight WB and almost never use AWB anymore. These were all daylight and it was very grey foggy out. I must say the colors look great to me. Here are a few samples of the veggies. I was playing around with the 135 and getting a feel for the DOF so sorry some of these were shot too wide open and the shallow DOF makes some of the shots less appealing.

These are straight from the camera to LR only resized for export

View attachment 16627


View attachment 16624


View attachment 16626


View attachment 16625


View attachment 16628