Sony A7R V Who deserves the credit? The A7RV autofocus is very good.

[AlphaWorld]

I am starting to wonder how much credit I can take for the quality of images shot with the A7RV.

I took the A7RV + 200-600 G to a zoo, and happened to see a wild bird in a tree (not a zoo exhibit!). Turned toward it, and asked the camera to focus on the bird. I had the Focus Area set to Zone, the Subject Recognition set to Animal / Bird, auto ISO minimum shutter 1/2000, and the lens at 600mm, wide open. The bird was surrounded by branches, but I got a clear(ish!) view of it. Half-pressed the shutter, the camera got eye-AF, and I took the shot. Auto-ISO chose ISO 1250.

This image has been lifted half a stop (blame the overcast sky for under-exposure of the bird), and I lifted the shadows a further half-stop to bring out some feather detail. No other processing - no noise reduction.

I think the A7RV did a good job on the focus, but I'm starting to wonder how much credit I can take for the images it takes? Heck, I don't even what kind of bird I photographed!

I guess I pointed the camera in the right direction

I suppose I could dig out the A7RIV, or even the A7RIII, to make things harder, if I wanted more credit for the image quality. I could start using manual focus lenses, too. I really don't see myself doing that.

Maybe I should start saying "My camera took a good photograph of ..."?

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

When they start adding computational photography software on the cameras, or add "AI" then you can say the camera did all the work. For now, it worked as a good tool to find focus, but you found the subject, snapped the photo, and did the editing; so kudos to YOU.

 

[iain clyne]

Thats the problem. It's so tempting to just point the camera press the shutter button and you have a picture. They are so capable of doing so much with very little input from us.

The bird has come out well.

 

[Landshark99]

Having spent many a year in the everything manual unforgiving film world, I am happy to say the image is what counts not the process

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

They already are.

I stand corrected

 

[Rick Dahms]

There’s a story about Chet Atkins - after a show, a guy from the audience walked up on stage and said, “Man, your guitar sounds really good!” Chet put the guitar down on a stand and took a few steps away and said, “How does it sound now?”

It’s nice to have a good camera but the camera doesn’t take the picture.
Congrats on the shot!

 

[Slug]

Nice Black bird.

 

[Rick Dahms]

Right up until you depend on autofocus for the shot.

Actually, the camera does take the picture. The photographer makes the photograph. At least as far an Ansel is concerned.

I play guitar. Nowadays everyone depends on a tuner. Chet Atkins did too once they came along. Doesn't matter how well Chet played, if he wasn't in tune, he sounded like crap. So, should the credit go to the guitar, the player, or the tuner? Maybe the correct answer is that it takes all three!

I understand what you’re saying and agree that it does take a lot of things coming together. The Sun provides the light, the tree the setting, the egg the bird… but could Tony have taken the picture with a different camera? Is it really his picture if he didn’t struggle enough? How hard does it have to be to merit credit? And I’ve listened to enough old Chet to be fairly confident that he could tune his guitar before there were tuners.

 

[AlphaWorld]

I should confess that not everything I post here is meant seriously. Yes, I know that’s hard to believe, but it’s true!

Sometimes I say things intended to provoke thought, but often I indulge my fondness for taking a lighthearted look at life. Or I enjoy and wonder at new technology - my first full-frame DSLR had 9 focus points (and 6 mysterious “assist“ points).

I like your analogy, Tim! It is indeed reminiscent of the “your camera takes good photographs“ comment. (Or “your guitar plays good tunes”, if I may misquote you).

 

[Rick Dahms]

The entire point of his post though is about his then-new A7RV's AF being very good, and better than his previous cameras. The context is important.

You're also missing the point of my post, where I specifically stated that Chet used tuners too, once they came along. That point being:

We all used what we had when we had it, but when something new and better comes along, we can appreciate it.

Which again goes back to Alpha's post.

No,Tim, I understood Tony’s post. And I didn’t miss the point of your posts. Both of them are very easy to follow. I just disagree with you.