The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

High ISO Test: A7s vs Df vs A7r vs A7

horshack

New member
All using Voigtlander 40mm Ultron II Nikon mount @ f/8, same physical exposure, tungsten lighting, shot raw and processed in LR5 with all defaults, downsampled to 8MP. For A7/A7r ISO 51,200 and 102,400, shot at max ISO of 25,600 and pushed 1EV and 2EV in LR. For Df ISO 409,600, shot at max ISO of 204,800 and pushed 1EV in LR. For A7/A7s, EFCS used for all images.The Df's output brightness in LR was a little below the A7 models and so was adjusted +.15EV in LR.

100% Crop Composite #1
100% Crop Composite #2

Full Scene
 

Rawfa

Active member
At 12800 the difference REALLY starts to kick in. I'm also surprised at the noticeable difference between the A7 and the A7R at 12800.
 

Tim

Active member
Very interesting comparison.
Some mixed results IMO.

There are two questions of usable and best.
While the A7s is best at the top end, I would find anything past 12,800 not much use in any of them for me. Others may have differing opinions and uses.
The video is probably the exception with the A7s, it could stand the noise more and still yield a video.
Makes me think the A7 is a bargain now.
 
A7 has always been a bargain IMHO.

As a concert photographer, I'm pretty darn happy with the A7s, A7 combination in my little Domke bag.
 

Rawfa

Active member
Very interesting comparison.
Some mixed results IMO.

There are two questions of usable and best.
While the A7s is best at the top end, I would find anything past 12,800 not much use in any of them for me. Others may have differing opinions and uses.
The video is probably the exception with the A7s, it could stand the noise more and still yield a video.
Makes me think the A7 is a bargain now.
Still, having usable 12,800 it's pretty darn freaking awesome. In VERY poor low light I have yet to go beyond iso 2500 for professional stuff with the A7. In moderate light I have some usable iso 6400. But lets now forget that there's a vast interval between 6400 and 12800.
 

Tim

Active member
Still, having usable 12,800 it's pretty darn freaking awesome. In VERY poor low light I have yet to go beyond iso 2500 for professional stuff with the A7. In moderate light I have some usable iso 6400. But lets now forget that there's a vast interval between 6400 and 12800.

Very true. I lived quite well with 3200 in film days. The above sample doesn't really show what could be done to improve the image in software also.

While I applaud the A7s for the price difference I am thinking I will move to an A7 for me.
 

Annna T

Active member
Still, having usable 12,800 it's pretty darn freaking awesome. In VERY poor low light I have yet to go beyond iso 2500 for professional stuff with the A7. In moderate light I have some usable iso 6400. But lets now forget that there's a vast interval between 6400 and 12800.
Wellington, it is only one stop difference : is that a lot for you ? Enough to justify the price difference between A7 and A7s ? (Unless you do video too if course, but fir stills ?)
 

turtle

New member
In terms of the subjective quality of the high ISO, the A7S just looks much nicer to my eyes to the tune of a lot more than one stop once you get past ISO 6400. If taking photos in the middle of the night is your thing, the A7S appears peerless. The noise looks much nice and the lack of colour noise astonishing. I'd love to have one, but cannot justify it despite trying very hard to do so ;)
 
V

Vivek

Guest
What I noticed very recently is this- the noise pattern of high ISO files (A7r) are vastly improved in the current LR. Lot easier on the eyes. :)
 

Annna T

Active member
What I noticed very recently is this- the noise pattern of high ISO files (A7r) are vastly improved in the current LR. Lot easier on the eyes. :)
I'm curious to know which settings give you so good results. Usually, I shoot rather at low ISO, but recently I have taken pictures in available light at a wedding, using very high ISO (3200 to 6400) and I have a hard time getting good results either there us too much noise left, or pictures lack sharpness.

At low ISO, I use 0-10 for light noise (details to 50) and color noise @ 12 (details 50 too). At 3200, I set color noise @ 16-20 (details I try to keep @ 50 but often lower) and light noise I don't like to go over 16 .. Sometimes 20.
For sharpness when I have people, I use 35, 1 or 1.4 with details between 35-40

All input welcome, since people photography at high ISO ISN't my usual subject.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I need to figure out settings for in camera jpegs at about iso1600. My big gig of 15k in images I have to do jpegs as I don't have any time for raws or any corrections. I need to nail it with in camera jpegs.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I'm curious to know which settings give you so good results. Usually, I shoot rather at low ISO, but recently I have taken pictures in available light at a wedding, using very high ISO (3200 to 6400) and I have a hard time getting good results either there us too much noise left, or pictures lack sharpness.

At low ISO, I use 0-10 for light noise (details to 50) and color noise @ 12 (details 50 too). At 3200, I set color noise @ 16-20 (details I try to keep @ 50 but often lower) and light noise I don't like to go over 16 .. Sometimes 20.
For sharpness when I have people, I use 35, 1 or 1.4 with details between 35-40

All input welcome, since people photography at high ISO ISN't my usual subject.
The settings/processes are simple (I am not good at post processing and spend the minimal times).

I use (almost always) center weighted metering. Absolutely no contrast noise reduction ever. Only color noise reduction to the maximum (Nik plugin).

When in mixed light/poor light situations, expose generously or at least adequately.
 
Last edited:

rayyan

Well-known member
Since I have the Df with me, I thought I might participate. Not to say which one
Of the cams mentioned is the best at zillions of ISO .

What is the normal ISO you shoot at?
Post an image shot at a high xxxx ISO that would for you be suitable to either hang in your house, sell or whatever you do with it.

Just because a figure for a high ISO is available, does not mean one uses it that often. So what are the times when say ISO 3200 or 6400 was no good to you?

Let's see some real world samples, rather then test charts.
Let the rubber meet the road.

It is 2313 hrs here on Sunday 14/dec/2014. I stepped out onto my balcony and using my Df and the 50/1.8 G took a few shots across.

Guess what my auto ISO chose as the ISO?

You go first, and I shall post my pictures of a few minutes ago.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Since I have the Df with me, I thought I might participate. Not to say which one
Of the cams mentioned is the best at zillions of ISO .

What is the normal ISO you shoot at?
Post an image shot at a high xxxx ISO that would for you be suitable to either hang in your house, sell or whatever you do with it.

Just because a figure for a high ISO is available, does not mean one uses it that often. So what are the times when say ISO 3200 or 6400 was no good to you?

Let's see some real world samples, rather then test charts.
Let the rubber meet the road.

It is 2313 hrs here on Sunday 14/dec/2014. I stepped out onto my balcony and using my Df and the 50/1.8 G took a few shots across.

Guess what my auto ISO chose as the ISO?

You go first, and I shall post my pictures of a few minutes ago.
I somewhat agree with you. I find need for ISO 1600 often, 3200 sometimes, 6400 few times...higher? not really often.
I can see how the A7s seems to allow to go pretty high with usable results, but I dont see worlds difference in the range 3200 and lower. Specially as soonas one has to do a little exp compensation in post.
I am sure any comparison about noise of a df or d4s vs A7s ist mostly academic.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I am sure any comparison about noise of a df or d4s vs A7s ist mostly academic.
May be if it is not for the banding that starts to show from the Nikon cams at high ISOs which is absent with the A7s files. Check the web. The results are out there.
 

Annna T

Active member
The settings/processes are simple (I am not good at post processing and spend the minimal times).

I use (almost always) center weighted metering. Absolutely no contrast noise reduction ever. Only color noise reduction to the maximum (Nik plugin).

When in mixed light/poor light situations, expose generously or at least adequately.
Thank you for taking the time to answer. I asked because you sait it was easy to get rid of noise in LR..

My cure is downsampling :) I have Nik software too, but use mainly SilverEffex.. May be I should give it a try with NikDefine..
 

Paratom

Well-known member
May be if it is not for the banding that starts to show from the Nikon cams at high ISOs which is absent with the A7s files. Check the web. The results are out there.
Never saw it in real world images, but than I also felt the M doesnt have a banding issue - but I am sure there are images in the web which can prove the banding issues.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I asked because you sait it was easy to get rid of noise in LR..
I said the pattern has improved.

What I noticed very recently is this- the noise pattern of high ISO files (A7r) are vastly improved in the current LR. Lot easier on the eyes. :)
Yes, give the Nik a try. I picked up that tip (reducing color noise) somewhere and it has been working quite well. :)
 
Top