Sony a7Sii Joshua Tree Review

Continuing my extended review of the Sony a7Sii (you can read the general overview and the wedding reviews on my blog), I took it to Sequoia National Park and Joshua Tree to see how it would perform (and to deepen my knowledge of the camera).  Being mirrorless-- and a Sony-- its operation is significantly different than my other two cameras.  And in all fairness it has an incredibly high bar to pass in order to make it into my camera bag.  The Nikon D600 (my workhorse) was rated with the 3rd best DSLR sensor when it was released; my Pentax 645D was similarly at the top of its class, only within the even more demanding medium-sensor competition.  So how did the a7Sii fare?

To start let me say that I never intended the Sony to be a primary camera, only a solid backup.  I don't like having identical systems for 1st and 2nd cameras. Since cameras so rarely fail, I like my 2nd to offer something different in terms of tonal quality or features.  I want it to be something I'll use during a session even when my primary kit is functioning just fine.  To that end, the Sony doesn't disappoint.  But let me start with the specifics.

The Good
I wanted to play with the a7Sii with some landscape opportunities; I'd already found that the ever-so-slight shutter lag made it less than ideal for events and sports; I wanted to see how it performed with a still subject.  Normally, I'd chose the Pentax 645D for this job.  And let's be honest-- it's unfair to pit a 12MB full-sized sensor against at 40MB medium format sensor.  The Pentax surpasses in detail and texture.  Still, the Sony does quite well on its own terms.  While the image quality is not quite on par with even my Nikon, it's clearly ahead of smaller sensor cameras, and many full-framed ones too.  Also, the Pentax is freakin' huge; it's not suited for hardcore traveling.  The Sony is the smallest of the trio, and in some respects (silent shutter, low-profile, and tilting LCD) the most versatile.  So even though it doesn't have the same detail and textural depth, I'd still list image quality in the "good" section.

With landscape (and portraiture and architecture), you don't notice the ever-so-slight shutter lag.  The issue doesn't distract in the slightest.

The dynamic range is pretty impressive; it may even surpass my Nikon-- I'll have to test that further.  What makes it so good is that the camera resists blowing out.  You can see it in the blue skies-- I did very little to pull them out in these images.  The darker zones are sometimes a bit mushy, but the camera works hard to keep everything within range.

I'll repeat myself now: the Sony a7Sii is incredibly fun to shoot.  It just feels good.  And the versatility I mentioned before gives it a flexibility that's hard to match.  So even if my other cameras produce better images, there will still be times when I'll chose it above the rest.

A simple $20 adapter allows me to use some incredible Nikon glass. This is the 50mm f/1.2.

Because you can quickly zoom in (I've assigned the Zoom to the button nearest the shutter), focusing with a manual lens is quite quick and beautifully accurate.

The Not-So-Good
When it comes to landscape photography, the Sony really doesn't have any major flaws.  If you're a professional landscape photographer the low resolution (12MB) sensor is an obvious and insurmountable problem. But for the rest of us it does quite well.  And if you use a better lens, you'll get some of that detail and sharpness back.  12MP with excellent glass is sharper than 16MP with mediocre glass.

In scenes with a wide dynamic range, the viewfinder and LCD often make the brightest portions appear blown out.  But just on the screen-- not the image itself.  To compensate,  I took to always having the histogram up in shooting mode so I could tell what was really happening.  It's not blown out, the viewfinder/LCD just doesn't have the same dynamic range as the image.

Color.  Color? Color....  I'm pretty mixed on this one.  Shooting in RAW and converting with Adobe DNG converter, the colors are oddly muted.  Not just muted, oddly so.  You can pull a lot of richness back (in fact the raw files are quite flexible), but it takes more tweaking than with either of my other cameras.  I also, I find it needs a little more sharpening.  I think those qualities qualify as a negative.

But really, there's not much else in the negative.

The wife... tree hugging.

The Verdict
The Sony does a very good job of challenging my Nikon for travel photography.  The smaller size and versatility make it a difficult camera to leave at home.  Let's see what I do the next time I take a major trip (okay, let's be honest, I'll probably take both since the Sony can use the Nikon lenses).  The a7Sii is quite capable for landscape photography, just so long as you don't need a huge amount of detail.  Again, it wouldn't be the choice of a professional in that field, but rather a professional photographer looking for either a solid second camera or dabbling in a field that's not his/her/they specialty.

At times I felt there was some very safely "middle-ground" about the camera.  With the kit lens, it's easy for the images to be good yet unexceptional.  However, I think that with better lenses and a deeper understanding of the camera's qualities it will be possible to create some truly exceptional images.  These images, by the way, were tweaked for color and sharpness, but I didn't take the time to try and find their full potential.

The a7Sii is, of course, really designed for video.  Still images are secondary.  If you judge it as a video camera first and a still camera second, the Sony a7Sii is better than its aspirations:  I'll never grab my Nikon above the Sony for video, but there are times I'd grab the Sony first when shooting still images, which speaks volumes.  And if I had to give up one of my three cameras today, I'd let go of the Pentax.  The image quality is superb, but it can't compete on versatility.  In comparison, it's a boutique camera, a tool for a specific purpose.

Nuts!  I left my tripod at home.  This image was shot with the camera propped on my bag to reduce shake....  Also, in  the dark I couldn't find the shutter delay option, so two strikes against. me.  That functionality is a bit buried in the menu.

Musings on the Death of Photography

I can’t think of one art form that has died; perhaps this is because art, by definition, depicts an enduring aspect of the human experience. I have no worries that photography will be the first to perish.  But there is something gnawing at its soul that I find intriguing.  A few things, actually.

Photography is probably the most accessible “art” form we have.  Everyone takes pictures.  Many, many people play an instrument, but it’s unlikely that you’ll record your friend or family member’s playing and listen to it daily.  We do that we photographic images, though.  Our walls and refrigerators are plastered with photographs, most of which were shot by amateurs.  It’s an art form whose price of entry is almost nothing, which makes the price of being “exceptional” very high.  The talent, equipment, and dedication required to rise above the ocean of camera-wielders is astounding.  

And it’s a spectrum: Aunt Sally’s images blend into the enthusiast’s, which blends into the talented professional, which blends into top 2% of photographers.  This blending makes it difficult to evaluate and critique, two necessary conditions of any art form.  That’s a nibble, I think; a gnawing.

So many photographers, working on so many levels, makes it difficult to find paid work: full-time photographers are undercut by part-timers who will do the job at half the price; part-timers are undercut by Freebies.  All of this is being discussed endlessly and hopelessly.  The unspoken challenge is that less work also means slower improvement; even the best photographers improve by virtue of working. 

Unlike ever before, artists are working in an environment where “free” is a common price point.  There’s free music on the internet; free books in the library; free news; free concerts; free performances; and apparently “free” (but often stolen) images on the web.  And when things aren’t free they can be “bulk rate.”  Netflix gives you unlimited movies for a monthly, bulk fee.  “Free” art is less common among artists who produce a physical object that can be hefted around your apartment—like a painting or sculpture; but if it can be turned into something intangible—a song, an image, or a movie—then there is a growing expectation it can be had for free.  Munch-much goes Death on the ankle of Photography.

The accessibility of photography also leaves us drowning in images in a way that has never happened in the history of our or any other art form.  Our hard drives are clogged with unprinted and forgotten images.  I worry that this surplus devalues truly exceptional images.  My mother passed away last year, and each of the limited number of photos of her are a treasure.  I don’t think I would feel so attached to them if I had inherited a hard drive with a thousand images.  Worse, I don’t think those few would have stood out in a sea of mediocre images. Historically, painters have had the same complaint of museums: hang a work of art next to twenty other paintings and what do you get? A mind-numbing experience.  I can think of few things more chilling than my work contributing to the numbing of the public’s response to photography.  Munch-munch.

On the bright side, there has never been more of a demand for images.  With the internet, we live in an increasingly visual world. This means opportunity for more money, creativity, and excellence.  Two forces are clearly at play here.  How will we navigate them?

Day 69, Learning 69: Approaching the Problem of Style

"To do a dangerous thing with style is what I call art" ~ Charles Bukowski

Easier said than done, I think.  Good, actionable advice on how to develop your photographic style is hard to find.  Clichés, on the other hand, sprout like lawn weeds everywhere:  Style develops over time; you can’t rush it!  Confidence creates style!  Imitate other people’s work and put a twist on it!  Here are 3 ways/8 ways/10 tips to creating style!

To make matters worse, some of the top photographers in the industry have been teaching that the endless repetition of an observable technique equals style.  To me, that qualifies as fashion.
 

"Kitsch is the inability to admit that shit exists" ~ Milan Kundera

To a certain extent the clichés  are true; style isn’t possible until you’ve mastered the basics.  We’re all still learning.  Even the most accomplished photographers push themselves to create images they haven’t done before.  The basics are easy.  The intermediate skills are just that-- more difficult than beginning ones.  When it comes to style,  people often try to link the strengthening of technique to the creation of style--  you read about ridiculous exercises to improve one’s “vision” by  “spending the day photographing things that are purple.”  Like that’s going to be a big help on a professional shoot.  But since there are elements and principles of photography and form, it can be useful to practice identifying them in the real world. 

• Line
• Shape
• Form
• Texture
• Color
• Pattern

These are broad concepts and as one student-of-photography to another I can assure you that they aren’t much use until you learn to break them down into smaller elements.  Spend the day looking for one sub-element at a time.  You don’t need to drag your camera with you; use your cell phone. Observe reflections.  Identify complimentary colors.  Spot intersecting lines and curves. Locate a spot where one texture becomes another.  I'll tell you a secret:  None of the exercises will build or improve your personal style.  But they will strengthen the muscles you need to create it.

If you’re a working photographer the number one dictate is that you give your client the product they want.  Always remember that.  But once that's on the memory card, you have latitude to explore. So how do we develop style?

Examine the basic ingredients.  Style appears in the use of photographic elements and principles mentioned above.  It's also in the shape and texture of light.  Style isn’t static; it evolves.  Here are the most useful tips I’ve found to speed the development of personal style:

Style doesn’t develop on its own.  Yes, that's right:  you can take boring pictures from now until the day you die if you don’t actively pursue its development.  Time may improve your basic skills, but you’ll have to apply yourself to create an artistic vision. 

Strengthen your muscles and be attentive to what excites you.  Whether it’s practice or performance (work) pay attention to your interests.  It’s not just about identifying images that work-- a workable image may have no attraction to you.  Find what excites you.

When you’re shooting for a client, take a few for yourself.  Once you’ve met their expectations, ask to do something unusual-- new lighting, new location, new pose.  Keep your request reasonable, but ask.

"The more you leave out, the more you highlight what you leave in" ~ Henry Green

Pick five words that describe your favorite images.  These should be pictures you’ve already taken.  I often ask my clients for three words that describe the image they want me to create; that way I know what I’m working towards.  This is the same principle.  Now go into your image library and pick 10 of your favorite images.  Do they fulfill your five words?  Do you need to pick new ones?  

Pick three words you don’t want people to use when describing your images.  That sounds too easy, doesn’t it?  Here’s the catch:  They should be positive words.  They can’t be “boring,” or “plastic.”  They have to be three words that someone might say they want in their picture.  Is “fun” a word you don’t want attributed to your work?  Bright?  You can’t use gloomy (that's a negative word), but what about dark or moody?  These three “not-words” should guide you as firmly as your five positive words.  And remember, you don’t have to never create images that have those attributes-- you’re pointing your feet in a direction, not cementing them to a spot.

Post Mortem to Death.  This goes back to my first point-- style doesn’t happen by itself.  Review your images; review your process for taking them.  Evaluation is constant; it should be as addictive as taking images.  At Hurricane Images Inc. I constantly dig back into old images, re-edit them, play, and re-invent.

Special thanks to Tiffany Stewart (clothing designer for the top image), Hazel Wheeler (make-up artist), and Lejon Vinge (model, top).

Day 54, Learning 54: Revisit Old Photos to Make New

Whoa Nelly, barely posting this one under the deadline.  No promises for tomorrow.  I'm shooting a lovely and talented jazz singer named Mariana Desoto Hughes in San Jose, which will take most of the day.

Today's learning came by accident.  I was responding to an inquiry about a landscape and architectural job, and discovered that I wasn't pleased with the samples I had to show her (actually, I was too lazy to pull out the old hard drive and hunt around for some of them).  I was looking through the images I had at my fingertips, and started fiddling with a couple of oldies.  Here's the odd thing: when you improve in photography there's the taking of the image-- which can never be altered-- and the development of the image-- with which you can experiment with your new found skills.  Here's the original of the image above:

Correctly exposed but kinda blah, right?  It's taken in southern China.  The day was overcast (as were nearly all the days I was there) making the colors and contrast dull.  In the midst of beautiful landscape, I was struggling to create a memorable image.  I won't kid you; my highly edited one above is nothing like it was that day or in my memory.  This is an entirely fictional depiction, but far more interesting.

So the first learning is "revisit your old photos."  There are diamonds in the rough.  For a more novel/helpful post I'll explain the sun beam:

1. Duplicate your layer!
2. Use the Lasso tool and create the shape of the sun beam.
3. With the area selected, create a Curves Layer. 
4. Increase the exposure by dragging the center point up and to the right
5. Return to Layers and add a Gaussian blur to the mask. Set it between 10 and 50
6. Click on your image layer again
7. Use the Lasso tool to create a smaller version of the sun beam inside the original sunbeam
8. Repeat the steps above-- this will create a brighter center to the beam.
9. I painted over the branches so they wouldn't be effected by the beam....

Other things I did were clone out the faint flags in the middle, increase the contrast by duplicating the layer and setting the Blend mode to Multiply, pumping up the yellow, adding a few new roots (using the clone tool), and dodging and burning.

Day 51, Learning 51: Nighttime Long Exposure Tips

There are tons of excellent "how to" articles and video on shooting at night.  I won't try to summarize or top them.  But there are a couple tips I don't hear very often, especially when shooting urban night images.  So here's a few more thoughts for your toolbox:

Set Your White Balance to Shade.  It will warm up the colors that are there.  Now before I get flamed for suggesting you shoot in JPG (which I am definitely not suggesting)... set  your image to shade in Lightroom.

F/11 and Above for Light Stars.  Lights tend to turn into stars at about f/11.  It can add a nice dynamic element to the image

Lighten/Recover in Post.  In Lightroom or Camera Raw, use your recovery slider to pull the details out of the shadows and then adjust your Black slider to make sure you've got the full dynamic range.  Get the details.

Darken and Tint with Gradation Tool.  In Lightroom.

Sharpen and then Mask for the Sky.  This one's a no-brainer, but woe to me if I forget to mention.

Day 50, Learning 50: The Long Road

 

Whew!  I'm at the half-way mark for my 100 Days of Learning project.  For the most part it's been easier than I expected, though I hope the last couple of days aren't foreshadowing for the next 50.  Finding new material was hard.  But I still can't recommend it highly enough.  There's a certain point in everyone's development when you can only learning by consciously pushing oneself; and everyone has learning to do.

What pulled me through the past couple of days was exploring the idea of combining niches.  For example, if portraiture is your thing, than the "environmental portrait" requires you to have a high degree of control over both landscape and interior photography.  So what combination is necessary for you to excel in your niche?

On my 50th day, I'm offering a few thoughts on landscape photography:

• Standing upright is rarely the right position for landscapes
• Look for either leading lines or a strong foreground element
• Play with long exposures for creating movement, even if it's just creamy clouds
• Bracket your exposures when shooting a high contrast scene
• Look for natural "frames:" trees, cliffs, rocks
• Wait for that side light: avoid shooting between 11am to 2pm