The pith of conversation does not consist in exhibiting your own superior knowledge on matters of small consequence, but in enlarging, improving, and correcting the
I’ve long been an avid photographer and have, on a number of occasions, been paid for my work. My actual profession is (was) Civil Engineer and Project Management in the construction industry.
I have 2 cameras for different functions, a smaller, lighter and cheaper “carry around” camera to have with me for targets of opportunity and a larger, heavier and more expensive camera that I use for shoots and studio work. The specific cameras that I use have changed over the years but have followed that format. Currently, the small/light/less expensive roll is covered with a Sony A6600 which retails for in the $1600 range without lens though you could get a good used one for a little more than half that. The larger camera is currently a Sony A7RV, which are retailing in the $3300 range without lenses. Notice both are Sony. Because of the cost of the lenses which will only fit that brand camera, once you start with a brand (Sony, Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Fuji, etc.), you tend to stay with it. No way on earth am I gonna start over on a lens collection, which cumulatively over time can represent far more money than the bodies, if you’re a fanatic. Most normal people can buy one good multipurpose lens and live happily ever after.
I’ve notice that I shoot as many of my favorite shots with the A6600 as with the A7R5 and really haven’t noticed much in the way of quality differences between the two, so I decided to do a test. Shoot the same object with both cameras while eliminating or adjusting for as many of the variables as possible. Then taking the images to do a side by side to see the actual differences between the camera images.
Below is a picture of the two cameras side by side wearing typical lenses.
Here’s how I set it up:
All shots were taken from a tripod
I put the subject, an old Rollei camera on a wood tripod in my yard, in the shade.
The same lens was used on both, a 90mm f2.8 Sony branded macro.
ISO was set to 400. I should have set it to 100 but———
The shots were manual mode 5 sec timer to eliminate camera shake, f5.6, 1/100th sec
Focus was center
For technical reasons, the effective magnification of any given lens is different depending on the sensor size of the camera. To keep the included image the same, I had to move the tripod to equalize a 1:1.5 magnification difference. The shooting distance was 9’ for the A6600 and 6’ for the A7RV.
There were no post production modifications, the images were straight out of the camera as RAW files.
The original images are far too large (24 meg and 70 meg respectively) to put on the net so these images have been changed to jpegs at a more usable file size. But still with no modifications.
Results
The images are below, with the top being from the A6600 and the bottom the A7R5.
Looking at image quality, there is very little detectable difference. There is a slight difference in white balance and color saturation but I easily and commonly alter any of those attributes in a few seconds with Photoshop. The bokeh is slightly different mostly because ASP-C cameras all have a slightly greater depth of field than full frame. That’s due to optical physics, not camera quality. Usually, you have to shoot an ASP-C camera 1 stop lower to match full frame bokeh.
Looking at image resolution (sharpness), below is a side-by-side isolation of the camera face. Just above the top lens is printed “Made in Germany” in small (less than 1/16’’) print. In addition, there is the company logo on the bottom lens with the line thickness in the 1/100” range. If I was required to choose a clear winner, I would have to bore in to the point that the test would have no relevance to what most of us do. Astronomers, perhaps.
The image from the A6600 is on the left and A7Rv on the right
Conclusion:
I really don’t see any substantial differences in image quality I have no doubt that the differences are there but only at levels that would make it moot for the great majority of people. My self too, probably though some of my studio work pushes it hard enough that I’ll keep the full frame.
If you and a friend go on a shoot armed with one of these cameras, given close to equal skill levels, who ever has the best lens is going to get the best images.
Here’s a parallel: For a number of years in my native Atlanta, my profession commonly had me evaluating old abandoned buildings in the downtown area. I was usually by myself and there was almost always lots of evidence of “tenants”. I’m ex-Marine and life time competitive shooter in several different disciplines, so I commonly carried a weapon. When anyone asked my for my recommendation on the best carry pistol, I would reply, “The one you’re most likely to have with you.” That works in cameras too.
Given the marginal differences in image quality between the two formats coupled with the anything but marginal differences in camera weight, size, camera costs, lens cost, & camera portability, it’s hard not to conclude the ASP-C format is superior for 90% of the population. There are advantages to full frame, making large prints for example. A full frame camera will usually be better at low light, high ISO situations such as indoor sports, concerts, night time street photography, some wedding shots, etc. I’ve gotten some indoor shots at an ISO of 12,000 that look fine right out of the camera. An APS-C would be close (at least) to useless at that ISO.
This is based on Sony because that’s what I have but you can get equivalent models with equivalent performance at equivalent price from any of the major camera makers. I also recommend exploring the used markets. Skip Ebay though and look at major camera dealers like B&H or Adorama. Cameras these days are engineered to make it well past 100,000 snaps. An average photographer shoots, what, 1000/year?
Cell phones? Cell phones make decent snapshots but if you want a photograph— Also, cell phones do fairly well as long as the conditions are ideal but the images degrade rapidly otherwise. Then, there is no adjustability. Say, you’re shooting photos of mostly still subjects and everything is fine but later you want to shoot something moving, maybe rapidly. You’re SOL. Cell low light capability truly sucks.
Better a cell than nothing but if you aspire to more.
Below is a sample of one of my high rez product photos taken with a full frame. This is one of a series on Mexican coins taken for a online dealer.
I would think that the principle and purpose behind the concept of government was an outgrowth of earlier tribal organization. A chief by whatever name, usually the strongest, surrounded by his warriors and “wise” elders or something very similar was the precursor to organized government. The purpose wasn’t necessarily the aggrandizement of individuals but to protect the tribe members from predation from within and without of the tribal structure.
In dense blue run cities it seems that the basic purpose has been inverted to center on the increase of the wealth and power of a central elite and the public can be damned.
The only valid purpose of government should to provide a framework of protection from predators physical and economic, codify limits of behaviour and enforce same so the population can thrive without fear to whatever extent possible.
Seems to me that Brandon has flatly failed at his warrant and is flailing around blaming the ramifications of his failure on whoever seems to be semi-plausable while the predators swarm and prosper. Essentially chaos.
Multiply that by a large enough factor and it is civilizational failure.
That equates to more than a million dollars in losses per year.
They spent $400,000 in security for this one store
Their employees were still subject to frequent physical attacks by the thieves.
And then Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson characterized Walgreen’s decision to shut the store as criminal abandonment. Wow, that’s amazing. If I were the mayor of the third largest city in the United States and I discovered that a vital retail provider of drugs for my citizens was pulling out because my police force had failed to keep thieves and thugs in check at this location, I would move heaven and earth to make an example of that store and surround it with cops 24/7 until the crooks gave up. But Brandon Johnson blames the people being robbed and assaulted by the mob that represents his true constituency.
From one end of this country to the other all blue cities and states are devolving into something that more resembles third world, banana republic street chaos than the United States of America. But I now doubt that the voters in these jurisdictions will ever kick the Democrats out. Los Angeles is the current test case. Spencer Pratt is lambasting Mayor Karen Bass on the abysmal record she has accumulated over her term. Between the horror show that was the Palisades fires and the complete lack of assistance to the victims, to the enormous disgrace of the out-of-control homeless epidemic on the streets of Los Angeles, Pratt has been speaking out and posting advertisements mocking his opponent’s ineptitude.
But will it make any difference? California is a one-party state. It’s owned by the state-workers’ unions. Their pensions are the only important policies they care about and the Democrats have bought their votes with these funds. So, I expect nothing to change in California, New York and the rest of the blue states for as long as their states can fund those pensions. When the day comes that they run out of other people’s money, there will be hell to pay. But the devil works for them so I’m sure he’ll pony up.
Kevin James is best known as the star of the long-running tv comedy series “King of Queens” where he is a modern-day Ralph Kramden working as a delivery driver for a UPS type company. In that role he was a very funny everyman with a sassy wife and with Jerry Stiller as his deranged basement dwelling father-in-law. Suffice it to say I’ve always found Kevin James a talented comedian.
So, Camera Girl came to me awhile ago telling me that Kevin James was in a movie called Solo Mio where he was a groom left at the altar by his runaway bride. I must confess that this didn’t sound particularly hilarious but as a date movie for the two of us as fans of the star it seemed plausible. But we somehow never got to the theater and I soon forgot all about it.
Fast forward to today and Camera Girl was at the local library and by a coincidence they had just gotten a DVD of Solo Mio, so home it came and we made some good coffee and cut into a pie and watched it. Well, what do you know? We enjoyed it.
(Spoiler Alert – Skip down to last paragraph to avoid spoilers and read recommendation)
The plot is goofy. James is an American 4th grade art teacher named Matt Taylor. In the opening scene we see him propose to a fellow teacher named Heather in the classroom and next we find Matt at the altar of a church in Rome where he will marry Heather and celebrate a deluxe honeymoon in Italy. But she leaves him at the altar leaving only her engagement ring and a Dear John letter.
The rest of the film is Matt trying to contact Heather by phone to beg her to reconsider. But because he couldn’t cancel the honeymoon he is travelling around Rome and Tuscany with a group of honeymoon couples visiting romantic Italian locales as a tourist. And it is with this group that he meets Julian and Neil, two new husbands whose brides are very much present but who are neglected while their husbands rally round Matt trying to force him to accept the loss of Heather and move forward with his life.
Their distinctly dysfunctional advice and help manage to make Matt even more miserable but with the help of some locals (including a sympathetic Italian woman named Gia who owns a small restaurant) Matt begins to make sense of his capsized life. Eventually Matt finds a new love (of course) and all is well.
Other than James none of the main actors are well-known (at least to me) but the opera singer Andrea Bocelli has a small part as a fictional version of himself. But this is not a star-driven film. It is a small romantic comedy that manages to bring a smile to your face and even a few small laughs. It isn’t too sappy so as to embarrass a man in the audience but it doesn’t hurt to have your wife or girlfriend there to justify your presence as a man at such a non-conventional film. But I will openly admit that I definitely enjoyed the movie. Recommended for couples and fans of Kevin James.
I was listening to an interview that Philip K Dick (PKD) made back in May 1979. Now I’ve never read any of his stories. Of course, I’ve seen Blade Runner and I have heard him described as one of the best science fiction writers of all time so I’ve always meant to get ahold of a few of his books and read them but between work and wife and kids and life I’ve just never had a chance.
So, when I saw this YouTube audio-file I listened to it. It’s two hours long and some of it is kind of hard to believe. But it is extremely interesting. I would say PKD was a very intelligent man but I’m pretty sure his grasp on reality was extremely tenuous on certain subjects. He believed that at one point he was possessed by some kind of spirit or intelligence that controlled him and fixed a lot of his financial and even health problems. And listening to him describe this chapter in his life it’s hard not to assume that either he was dealing with some kind of split personality or he was suffering from schizophrenia.
Now based on what I’ve read about PKD’s fiction he was intrigued with the idea that reality wasn’t what we think it is. That different people experienced radically different perceptions of reality and maybe none of these perceptions were particularly accurate. And so, with this type of belief I could see how he might accept versions of reality that most people would find absurd.
Now, in the audio-recording he is asked by the interviewer about his use of drugs and their impact on his mind and writing. PKD goes to great lengths to deny that he used LSD more than once. He claimed that the drug he abused was an amphetamine that he used to be able to produce prodigious amounts of fiction writing. The implication was that his drug use did not affect his writing by altering his mind. And maybe this was true. But listening to this man I got the distinct impression that even if LSD wasn’t the source of his delusions, that he was indeed substantially untethered from reality in a lot of his beliefs about the world around him. In short, I think he was in some sense insane.
So, how does this jibe with his undeniable creative talent? I think that both these things can be true at the same time. Look at Vincent van Gogh. He was undeniably a creative genius in his field of art but he was also a tortured madman who finally killed himself to escape his mental anguish. So, whether PKD was driven insane by his drug use (of whatever substances) or whether his mind was damaged for whatever other reasons there might have been, his grasp on reality (or lack thereof) did not stop him from producing very entertaining science fiction. And perhaps it was his delusions that actually made his stories so interesting. Strange man. Well, I’ll start with “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?” and see how I like it. Maybe I’ll read some more.
