Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 1, 2009, 11:44 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Posts: 2,295
Default Minolta 5D/7D users from the past.

I came from the Minolta 5D to my first Sony body the A700. Comparatively there's not much between the two except they take the same lenses. The A700 is a high performance camera where the 5D is more of a portrait, static subject type of camera.

What I'm getting to is the eye pleasing photo's I get with my 5D, still. Today I was taking portrait shots with a 28 f/2 and the results right out of the camera where much more pleasing then what I get from the A700. The colors of the A700 are not as nice as they appear from my old slow 5D. It just produces a better overall picture. The A700 does seem to have more dynamic range but thats about the only improvement I can see.

Anyone else?
Mike
lomitamike is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 2, 2009, 6:48 AM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

The KM 5D has more saturated and contrasty images by default.

If you want punchier images straight from the camera with the A700, try setting Contrast -1, Saturation +2, Sharpness +2 for the Creative Style you're using. If you want more contrast (and the 5D images are a bit contrasty), bump up contrast a bit more, too.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2009, 10:58 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Posts: 2,295
Default

Thanks Jim.
I normally set my contrast, saturation as low as they go and keep sharpness at 0 on both cameras.

I let my software add the contrast and saturation as needed. My observations are from after importing raw files without making any adjustments.

I still really enjoy using that camera and sometimes prefer the size with a small prime over my A700 with the VG when asked to shoot family stuff. The results are still impressive.
lomitamike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2009, 11:01 AM   #4
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

The RAW converter being used will also have a big impact on output. RAW converters tend to be "tuned" to a specific camera (different black point levels, tone curves, etc.). As a general rule, the camera manufacturer's raw converters will tend to try and emulate the camera's jpeg output using their defaults. I'd try a different converter if you don't like the default output with the one you're using.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2009, 11:51 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Posts: 2,295
Default

Got it. The raw converter I'm using does allow for raw presets to be adjusted at import for the hue, hue boost, sharpness, edges, moire/radius. It appears that when importing either MRW or ARW the sliders start out in the same position.

The converter appears to be using their "specific" camera default setting. There are two other options I can try a manage presets and save as camera default setting. I have not played around with those settings other then click on the save as camera default which opens a dialog box that has the cameras name in it. I been timid in seeing where that will takes me. So I just use their default setting.

I don't know if that would make any difference in the end result.
lomitamike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2009, 12:33 PM   #6
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

It's not just the slider positions. RAW converters will use different internal defaults for tone curves and more, depending on the camera model (even if the slider positions start out the same). Experiment. ;-)

Some raw converters even allow you to use tone curves (loaded from files) for a different camera model (so you can emulate their look during raw conversion). One example of a raw converter with that feature is UFRaw. See the "Base Curve" section on this page for how that works.

http://ufraw.sourceforge.net/Guide.html

Personally, I use Linux most of the time. So, I do tend to stick with cross platform raw converters (like Bibble Pro or Raw Therapee), or Linux specific solutions like digiKam. I even use the free Google Picasa from time to time if I'm in a big hurry (even though you don't have the features available with it that you find in dedicated converters), and I'll even use dcraw.c from command line from time to time (passing parameters to it for how I want it to behave).

There are many raw converters available now (and you will often see a huge difference between them).
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:24 PM.