Sony users will defend this.

>>3064122
That's not how Sony's star eater algorithm works.

If the star only fills one pixel, then it gets eaten, and it only happens on the a7s, because it's 12mp and a video camera.

>>3064124
see? like a clockwork.

>>3064126
Why spread ignorance?

Unless you have some sort of personal grudge?

>>3064128

I haven't got a grudge, they're just shit, refused to repair my smashed sensor even though it was in warranty.

>>3064122
How this is crazy
Any camera that does this is literally unusable

What is this?

Im a sony user and like astrophotography.

>>3064138
>>3064134

Check the thread*
>>3064124

>>3064133
>I haven't got a grudge
>they refused to repair my smashed sensor

>>3064178
It was under warranty but said smashed sensors weren't covered by warranty.

Wtf is the point in warranty if it doesn't cover the camera being broken?

>>3064124
Fucking kek, mate, people buy the A7s for it's lowlight capabilities and so in theory it should be great for astrophotography.

>>3064187
A7rii is better in low light for stills nooblet. it uses line skipping on video, so the a7s has much better video performance in low light.

If you buy the a7s range for still photography, you're a fucking moron, first and foremost they are specialist use video cameras.

File: img-thing.png (54KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 300x300px

Is this just a side effect of optional in-camera noise reduction, or are Sony cameras actually this bad all the time?

>>3064189
Stop giving sony the benefit of the doubt you shilling cunt

>>3064190
If a single pixel on its own is completely blown, the a7s treats it like a hot pixel and fills it in.

The example op posted is not an example of how the a7s performs in real life.

>>3064192
Where's the benefit of the doubt? I mentioned no doubt, just cold hard facts.

It's these sort of threads that make me feel bad for owning a Sony. I swear not all Sony shooters are this bad.

>>3064200
Are what?
Did you understand the thread?

>>3064197
Oh, well that's interesting. My Pentax has a similar feature but it's optional, and you normally run it just once with the shutter closed so it can detect any dead pickles, then it assigns some sort of fix algorithm to it. It doesn't do any active fixing while you're taking photos, because that would be a mess.

>>3064202
I'm talking about these posters -

>>3064124
>>3064128
>>3064189
>>3064197

Honestly, they make me cringe and I don't think they're a good example of Sony shooters.

>>3064204
Yep, every sony camera has the dark frame option for long ss nr. The a7s, is a video camera, with giant pixels, so it does this on the fly.

>>3064207
What's cringe worthy about how this function actually works? Have I devalued your shitting on sony thread and that made you sad?

>>3064211
You're a twit, I can just imagine you seething at the teeth whilst typing these shilly posts.

I'm not OP either.

>>3064213
And now the rebuttals start coming, great start here, anon successfully countered how and why this hot pixel feature was implemented by implying the sony fan is angry, and a twit.

>>3064126
>>3064134
>>3064187
>>3064190
>>3064192
>>3064200
>>3064207
>>3064213

Kid, take a break. No one cares that you can't afford a sony.

Same thing with the a9

>GUYS WE'VE DONE IT WE'VE MADE THE MOST SENSITIVE SENSOR OF ALL TIME THIS WILL BE AMAZING IN LOWLIGHT. WHAT SHOULD WE DO WITH IT?
>Make it delete stars!!

>>3064186

How the fuck do you smash a sensor?

Wow this thread is full of idiots.

This guy >>3064124 >>3064197
is correct.

>>3064229
LMBO

people actually defend this? Sony is worse than I though

you don't need to be a photographer to shoot Sony.

Does it do this even when shooting "raw"? (I realize Sony doesn't have real raw).

>>3064124
>it only happens on the a7s, because it's 12mp and a video camera.
>because it's 12mp
So you're telling me that all professional digital cameras that are 12 megapixel and under also do this? It was my understanding that they had this down years ago.
>and a video camera.
It's not exclusively a video camera, that's not it's primary function.

Nice try shill, may want to try moving the goalposts on the same field next time.

>>3064389
>a7s
>not primarily a video camera
m8, I'm not a sony user but even I know it's mainly a video camera.

>>3064394

It's actually just a toy.

>>3064389
>why does it do this
Because hot pixels are fairly common on long video sessions regardless of the body, stars precisely 1 pixel across are not.

>>3064530

But all stars are one pixel.

>>3064530
lel, using soft lenses I see.

>>3064573
>>3064722

Look at the example op posted, stars are quite clearly usually larger than 1px, and we're spinning at thousands of mph.

If you ever did astro I wouldn't have to spell everything out for you children.

>>3064724
let me guess, your "astro" is some wide angle milkyway memeing?

even with a bayer sensor with a lowpass filter, the fwhm is always less than 2 pixels.

>>3064726
You blind nigger?
>>3064122
And stars move, dumb dumb.

>>3064738
wideangle milkyway memelord confirmed, sad.

>>3064757
Wideangle would exacerbate this issue, smaller stars that move slower across the frame.

You simpleton.

at some point i must have clicked /p/ instead of /o/ and subsequently forgot i brought up said board, because i brought up this thread later and could not figure out for the life of me how this had anything to do with /k/

i am tired