LensBrew

I usually carry all my gear in my backpack. Since I have it on my back and it looks small, they never bother me. Yet, I'm getting older and prefer to reach my destination healthy and pain-free. I'm planning to get a roller bag that fit most airline (especially domestic) before the summer, and a collapsable shoulder bag in case I need to reorganize.

Unfortunately, that is not possible without an additional remote trigger. Directly from the camera, you can see the focus and composition before it starts the count. I suggest you download imaging edge app for selfie shots. Many people use their phones to achieve that, others prefer a tablet to see everything in a larger window.

Eye-AF is the reason I came to Sony. It is amazing and works better than I expected. But another element that I love about Sony Alphas are the weight and size. I love to travel , and those specs help me carry what I need without breaking my back.

If you're thinking about something in between your 2 options, why not look at the A7C? It is smaller than the A7iv and has a full-frame sensor. The ZV-E10 is not a pocket size camera. The lenses are interchangeable, and even with a pancake lens you'll have a very tight fit.

I'm not sure there is any trick to it. I love using the 100-400 to isolate the mountain from the foreground, and the light and clouds working in union with the mountain. It gives the mountain a majestic look, and the print is out of this world (figuratively).

You just gave me an idea. There are some light-streak (blue or gold) filters, I think from polar pro and Nisi. I'm not sure what their correct name is. With all the night lights you could use them some cinematic effects. A mist filter is also nice to try.

I never had problems with small spaces, I don't think about shooting full bodies. It's great for low light too, so indoor events are a breeze with this lens.

True. Then they were "phones", to call people to connect. Nonetheless, I love the new technology and how we get to conduct businesses on a small devices.

I would shoot before asking. If interrupted, they get out of their focus zone and the feeling is lost. But I would do it without getting into their face or disrupt what they're doing. If they are too busy, I take the shot and move on. If not, I take the shot then show it to them. Many would be delighted to see themselves. I think Monica Sigmon had a discussion on her podcast, that images are more to acknowledge the existence of the person since they don't actually "see" themselves. And that's what I believe will get the reaction that I want to see after the view what you got.

I've been listening to yours for a while now @monicasigmon . Everyone is very delightful and I'm learning different aspects of the job, whether it is soft skills with costumers or planning and designing. I also follow Pierre T. Lambert, he interviews photographers and film makers on the life paths they've chosen that lead them to where they are. His podcasts are inspiring. Non-photo: Huberman Lab by Dr. Andrew Huberman. He's a professor in Neuroscience at Stanford. He discusses everything related to human health, physical and mental, including substances; supplements; exercise; meditation; myths and more. I love that all his points and non-biased and based on scientific research.

135mm f/1.8 GM for me. I love the low light when shooting indoor venues, especially when I'm not allowed to get closer. Also it makes the portraits so sweet (for a lack of better word).

Wild life! people are life and they go wild in Vegas. Ok jokes aside (only a little). I would say night lights, light trails and signs. I haven't been there ever honestly, but this is my list of shots if I went there. I would also call a model for some portraits.

Does Sony Ericsson K750 counts? I bought that phone for the camera in 2005, a 2 MP fun tool at that time. And I still have it to this day. If it doesn't count, then it's the A9ii for me. It is the AF that I needed to capture my kids and sports.

That's is what I was thinking. But with the RX1R I would lose the pocket-ability function. But then again, our pockets are already too full with things, so a small sling with be more efficient. With this realization, I'm going for the RX1R. I saw some leaked images and a possibility of it getting updated, fingers crossed.

I would recommend to identify what specs your current bodies don't have, and how much it will better your work. Remember the law of diminishing return. The other reason for upgrading is if the bodies are showing their age in your workflow and images.

Thank you for the complement. I also want to recommend to use a star and moon tracking app. They are necessary for planning your shots.

Sony make amazing imaging tools, but so much for post-processing softwares. They ,right be good for basic works, but the bar for "basic" very high now.

Astrophotography is an amazing venture, and is easily achieved but their are some physical limitations you need to keep in mind. You can photograph the moon at any location you want. Even though it is visible at night, it is still reflecting the sun's light. You will need to close down your aperture, increase your shutter speed and keep you ISO to about 100. Now the longer your focal length the better, you'll capture more details and need to crop less. And speaking of cropping, higher megapixels sensors can give you more leeway while cropping. Now the latter is not a must, but it is an advantage. The last moon shots I got I was at 400mm, ISO 100, f/5.6 and shutter speed at 1/500th. As for starts, and could be extended to other astral bodies, you need to be in an area that has the least amount of light pollution. There are websites to help you determine those areas. Otherwise you'd have to deal with the extra light coming into your sensor. There are 2 rules for choosing the shutter speed, I suggest you experiment and see which one gives you the best result. As for the aperture, you'd need a fast lens, preferably f/1.4. You can increase your ISO if needed while trying to be careful with how much noise you are willing to tolerate. The shot I took was auto 8s, ISO 400 and f/1.8. And you want the moon to be a new moon. I used the 14mm f/1.8 GM lens for the stars image, while the 100-400mm GM for the moon image. And you might consider sensor modification, it basically removes the filter from the sensor giving it the ability to capture IS and UV rays.

Neutral for me looks the best. It felt more natural and a simple boost in contrast in post puts it where I find it satisfactory. Could you elaborate on the fading part? I try to never touch the Creative Look settings.

Video Newbie here too. I tried PremierPro but I didn't like it. I also tried Apple's Final Cut Pro, which felt better. But the most recommended I've seen on youtube and they have a really great free version is Da Vinci Resolve. I haven't tried it yet, but once I immerse myself into video editing I will go for that one.

35mm f/1.4 GM. This is the king (in my opinion) and my favorite lens. Besides this prime, I would suggest waiting on an updated version of the 16-35mm GM.

Mine is unfortunately almost once a week. But I hope this will not last forever once the current life chapter is over. I'm enjoying sports right now, and would love to keep shooting sports in the future. Travel photography is probably the most common between photographers and it is second on my list. But back to the 23 days in Iceland. I need to add that workshop to my bucket list.

I'm one of the people who searched for those videos and learned a great deal from them, including yours. I can also blame you for putting Costa Rica back on my bucket list after I checked it off 😁

For almost a year I thought mine were ISO invariant, but I was shocked to find they were not. There was a discussion on DRO that didn't sit well with me, and that lead me to this result. I will make a thread on that subject and the brightness of the viewfinder soon.

A discussion about noise at indoor sporting venue lead to the question: "is your camera ISO invariant?". Definition: shooting initially at lower ISO and then boosting the exposure in post will result in the same noise as if the image was originally shot with high ISO. It sounds like a good thing: shoot with high ISO and get the exposure correct in camera. But there is one problem, not all cameras have that property. I did some testing with my bodies A7RIV and A9II, and the results were not the same. After some research and reading testing results on DPReview, I redid my tests with the assumption that my bodies are not ISO invariant. The result lead to the conclusion that my bodies are definitely not ISO invariant. The A9II was kind of a given sine it is a stacked sensor, and that property are not used with stacked sensors. But I was surprised the result was the same for the A7RIV, which is not a stacked sensor. The finishing is, sensors with dual gains and not ISO invariant. The A7RIV has a second gain around ISO 320-400. The A9II on the other hand has a second gain at ISO 800. Let me give you a simple setting for the venue shooting basketball. Shutter speed : 1/1250th , f/2.8. With these 2 choices, the ISO needed to be at 6400 for this venue. I made the first shots at that ISO, and then again at the second gain ISO and boosting 3 stops in post. The images, as concluded by DPReview, were less noisy at second gain ISO. What about you camera? Is it ISO invariant, or does it have a dual gain sensor?