Site Sponsors
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 92

Thread: Sony A7r sensor not the same

  1. #1
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Went to Samys here in La to pick up the Sony 43 flash works a charm. Anyway I actually talked to someone that knew something. From the reps mouth the A7r is NOT the same sensor as the D800e it's 3 years newer and specifically designed for this cam and the new processors and image chain. Honestly just looking at the files I never thought it was myself. To me it's actually better.

    Thought I would share that
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #2
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,298
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Went to Samys here in La to pick up the Sony 43 flash works a charm. Anyway I actually talked to someone that knew something. From the reps mouth the A7r is NOT the same sensor as the D800e it's 3 years newer and specifically designed for this cam and the new processors and image chain. Honestly just looking at the files I never thought it was myself. To me it's actually better.

    Thought I would share that
    Comparing images between my D800E and A7R files I get the impression the D800E files have more bits per pixel.
    With best regards, K-H.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    123
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    DXO measures the color depth of the a7r at 25.6, identical to the d800e, and .9 bits behind the 16 bit Phase One IQ 180 back.

    "The Sony is in joint fourth place for color depth alongside the Nikon D800E. These are very high scores indeed and are only fractionally behind the Phase One P65 Plus models with their higher 16-bit A/D conversion. However, bear in mind that the P65 Plus models aren’t the latest from the firm."

    Note: as the Sony and Nikon have identical color depths, they share 3rd place, only bettered by medium format backs.

    Sony A7R sensor performance - DxOMark

    Graham
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  4. #4
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,298
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by GrahamB View Post
    DXO measures the color depth of the a7r at 25.6, identical to the d800e, and .9 bits behind the 16 bit Phase One IQ 180 back.

    "The Sony is in joint fourth place for color depth alongside the Nikon D800E. These are very high scores indeed and are only fractionally behind the Phase One P65 Plus models with their higher 16-bit A/D conversion. However, bear in mind that the P65 Plus models aren’t the latest from the firm."

    Note: as the Sony and Nikon have identical color depths, they share 3rd place, only bettered by medium format backs.

    Sony A7R sensor performance - DxOMark

    Graham

    Thanks Graham. The reason I had the impression was that when processing a file with CS6 it showed intermittently a pixelated view. I had never seen this kind of behavior with an D800E file.

    Thanks for the correction.
    With best regards, K-H.

  5. #5
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Went to Samys here in La to pick up the Sony 43 flash works a charm. Anyway I actually talked to someone that knew something. From the reps mouth the A7r is NOT the same sensor as the D800e it's 3 years newer and specifically designed for this cam and the new processors and image chain. Honestly just looking at the files I never thought it was myself. To me it's actually better.

    Thought I would share that
    It seems the A7R sensor assembly with angled micro-lenses and gapless pixels has to be different given the distance to sensor compared to a 35mm DSLR ... no?

    No matter ... that you can get D800 sort of performance in a camera this small seems quite a feat.

    Have to go back and find Jack's thread where he recommended the D800 over the D800e because you could match the e version in post. Don't remember what adjustments he recommended, but it'd be interesting to see whether they would apply here.

    - Marc

  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by k-hawinkler View Post
    Thanks Graham. The reason I had the impression was that when processing a file with CS6 it showed intermittently a pixelated view. I had never seen this kind of behavior with an D800E file.

    Thanks for the correction.
    If you are processing, then the preview could very well be 8-bit until you apply the change and the software recalculates the values. This is how Photoshop works.
    Will

    http://www.hakusancreation.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  7. #7
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    To be clear, I never recommended the D800 *over* the D800E as I believe they each have their place. I only indicated that with a little extra work in post, you could get the D800 to the same practical level of resolution performance as the E, or get the E to the same level of smooth tonality as the non-E. (At that time, I probably indicated they were close enough I personally did not see a strong need for owning both, but did anyway for convenience.) What the non-E it requires to meet the E in high-frequency detail rendering is roughly 30% more amount on your high-freq capture sharpening routine (0.4 to 0.6 pixel radius at low threshold ~ 1); AND increasing clarity about 6 to 8 points to subdue the slight AA filter veiling. (Reverse that with the E to be smoother toward the non-E rendering.)

    I am meeting with Guy in a few weeks and will play with some Sony raw files and share whatever capture sharpening settings I think make sense here. Or in the meantime, if somebody wants to send me a well-captured raw file with significant areas of high detail, I can look at it over the weekend. It might actually be a good exercise for this group of owners -- we could have a processing contest of sorts to help each other understand what works and what won't for their needs.

    PS: Just to clarify my stance re the D800, I actually still own one of each body and use dedicated capture adjustment sets for each camera to render to their respective strengths. My personal take is that for 90% of all work, they are essentially identical in practical application. There are perhaps 5% of the time the D800E is going to be superior and 5% of the time the D800 is going to be superior, but in either case the amount of superiority while seen subtly at the pixel level is almost insignificant in even the largest print save for subtleties in image undertone. Generally speaking, I use the D800E for landscape, architecture and art-repro work and I prefer the D800 for people anything, B&W conversions and long tele nature work. But as a practical matter I could easily shoot everything with one, I'd just have a difficult time deciding which it would be
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    To be clear, I never recommended the D800 *over* the D800E as I believe they each have their place. I only indicated that with a little extra work in post, you could get the D800 to the same practical level of performance as the E. What it requires is roughly 30% more amount on a high-frequency capture sharpening routine (0.4 to 0.6 pixel radius at low threshold ~ 1); AND increasing clarity about 6 to 8 points to subdue the slight AA filter veiling.

    I am meeting with Guy in a few weeks and will play with some Sony raw files and see what capture sharpening settings I think make sense, and then share them here. Or in the meantime, if somebody wants to send me a well-captured raw file with significant areas of high detail, I can look at it over the weekend. It might actually be a good exercise for this group of owners -- we could have a processing contest of sorts to help each other understand what works and what won't for their needs.

    PS: Just to clarify my stance re the D800, I actually still own one of each body and use dedicated capture adjustment sets for each camera. My personal take is that for 90% of all work, they are essentially identical in practical application. There are perhaps 5% of the time the D800E is going to be superior and 5% of the time the D800 is going to be superior, but in either case the amount of superiority while seen subtly at the pixel level is virtually insignificant in even the largest print save for subtleties in the final image undertone. Generally speaking, I use the D800E for landscape, architecture and art-repro work and I prefer the D800 for people anything, B&W conversions and long tele work. But as a practical matter I could easily shoot everything with one, I'd just have a difficult time deciding which choice it would be
    My bad Jack ... right, you didn't recommend one over the other ... just that for many, the D800 could work as well ... etc. as you explained above.

    I think the whole exercise in what levels of sharpening etc. would be very helpful ... I recall the same efforts were needed with the S2 files which tended to be over-sharpened, or sharpened the wrong way for those specific files.

    - Marc

  9. #9
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    We will actually have the Leica S in our hands for a update review in about 10 days. My one complaint on the Sony is the lossless compression. I'm hoping they give us a option. Now they may be different sensors and I maybe able to see a slight difference I would not make this a one is better than the other hyper thread. What I think Sony did was just change the whole engine in camera processing and such. What they did to the actually sensor I don't know but let's remember also the marketing spin on release products. Take everything with a grain of salt if you know what I mean . I love this little thing but am I totally convinced its better. Than no I am not . I went after features now let's see how the files are is still something I need to get through. That answer won't come till I get a lot if shooting done which I have not done yet. 3 weeks and I will have a much better idea as I will have shot a lot by than.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  10. #10
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    We will actually have the Leica S in our hands for a update review in about 10 days. My one complaint on the Sony is the lossless compression. I'm hoping they give us a option. Now they may be different sensors and I maybe able to see a slight difference I would not make this a one is better than the other hyper thread. What I think Sony did was just change the whole engine in camera processing and such. What they did to the actually sensor I don't know but let's remember also the marketing spin on release products. Take everything with a grain of salt if you know what I mean . I love this little thing but am I totally convinced its better. Than no I am not . I went after features now let's see how the files are is still something I need to get through. That answer won't come till I get a lot if shooting done which I have not done yet. 3 weeks and I will have a much better idea as I will have shot a lot by than.
    What is the trouble with their lossless compression?
    -bob

  11. #11
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,298
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Is it lossless or lossy?
    With best regards, K-H.

  12. #12
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    I just read that its not the same as the Nikon process. I have to look into this thigh. Im just always leery of compressing files. Guess we should look into this and make sure I have the correct in info. I just read some whining about it
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  13. #13
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    I just read that its not the same as the Nikon process. I have to look into this thigh. Im just always leery of compressing files. Guess we should look into this and make sure I have the correct in info. I just read some whining about it
    Well, if it is lossless it is a good thing since it may very well reduce the write-time to card.
    I use it exclusively after convincing myself that it made not a bit (literally) of difference.

    There are many lossless compression algorithms, several which are used in tiffs.
    I can't think of a software title that is not shipped in a compressed version.
    The fear and loathing of lossless compressed files is baseless and probably based on the crappy jpg compression algorithms (no, no I don't want any compression please if it is like that). That is one reason that jpeg 2000 now supports a lossless compression option.
    -bob
    Last edited by Bob; 3rd January 2014 at 09:30.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  14. #14
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Your right Bob jpegs have received such a bad rap on this subject it trickles down to other areas in the digital arena.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  15. #15
    Senior Member Joe Colson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,910
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    36

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    Or in the meantime, if somebody wants to send me a well-captured raw file with significant areas of high detail, I can look at it over the weekend. It might actually be a good exercise for this group of owners -- we could have a processing contest of sorts to help each other understand what works and what won't for their needs.
    Jack, I'll send a PM with a Dropbox link to a raw file from the A7R.

    Joe
    _________________________________
    Joe Colson Photography

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    123
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    My one complaint on the Sony is the lossless compression.
    Guy, I'm not satisfied that the compression is lossy. Although I haven't read the current "pundit" opinions, the same discussion was raised with the introduction of the Sony a77 and Sony a99.

    At that time, Sony's UK rep, Paul Genge, when directly asked about the properties of the new ARW files, replied they were "lossless".

    I'm not interested in revisiting the minutia of raw discussion. I would be interested to see a side by side comparison of the output, preferably printed, from a Nikon d800e, and Sony a7r. Use the same lens on both, and in all things, make the shooting parameters equal. Prove how the a7r image is at a disadvantage from the raw compression.

    I'm not holding my breath.

    Graham
    Last edited by GrahamB; 3rd January 2014 at 18:03. Reason: change "lossless to "lossy" regarding compression

  17. #17
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Almost all (all AFAIK) raw files are just wrapped tiffs. The compression scheme can be inspected by looking at the tiff metadata.
    -bob

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Near Brussels, Belgium, Europe
    Posts
    541
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    It would be really interesting to share A7r development settings.
    I'm comparing it with my S2 and face several issues (some colors are off with the S2 files in C1 (using the Leica S2 profile for C1) Some difficult WB adjustment with the A7r in C1 f.i. portrait with flash: if WB set for a good skin tone, the rest of the picture looks too cold/magenta / etc).
    Start to think that LR best C1 for those 2 camera files (quite obvious in color accuracy, but also maybe color/tone transitions). C1 however best LR for details extraction.
    ___________________________________
    http://www.vincent-angillis.be

  19. #19
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Re sharpening. Joe was kind enough to send me a file with lots of high-freq detail taken with the 35 at ISO 400 in moderate light. I've only looked at this single file and for a short period of time, so it's dangerous to draw broad conclusions -- but I will do so lightly for the purposes of starting this discussion. With your input and more images it is subject change over time.

    What I see initially is a file that appears to have a stronger AA filter than the D800. It requires fairly heavy-handed sharpening and a good bump in clarity to clear it up. Also, base saturation needed a slight bump -- this is likely the debayering engine design. Also, noise seems to be a little lower than the D800's, possibly due to same AA, or possibly due to a better debayering engine.

    That said, here is the initial set of adjustments I worked up for the A7r in C1 to generate a highly detailed but not brittle image:

    1) Saturation to +8
    2) Clarity to Neutral +20 (This is higher than the D800 by almost twice, and one factor that leads me to believe a stronger AA. The other danger of going higher in Clarity is you net reduce DR.)
    3) Sharpening 250/0.6/1.0 (This is very similar to the D800, and helps confirm an AA filter of some sort.)
    4) NR at L20/C15/Single Pixel 1 (This is a modest 5 point higher L than the D800/E, but helped add slight smoothness back to the overall look -- could be image or ISO dependant.)

    Again, much of this starting point could be due to the nature of the image itself, so let's keep it mainly as a starting point for discussion. Hope it helps and I look forward to hearing your findings!
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Varese Italy
    Posts
    226
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Jack, in theory the A7r shouldn't have an AA filter. This notwhistanding, while performing comparison with the d800 shooting test targets, I noticed that the quantity of aliasing was lower in the A7r than in the d800, using the same lens. At the same time, in my experience, files from the A7r require less sharpening than those from the D800, so I suspected that Sony has found a way to counteract moire without an AA filter.(Raw converter ACR)
    Sergio

  21. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    760
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Jack
    I thought the A7r had no AA filter but i found myself using more clarity and sharpening than my D800 shots --- processed via CS6.

  22. #22
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,298
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    With both D800E and A7R files I use CS6 and the latest ACR, but do all sharpening and noise reduction in Nik. Seems to work very well. I also use the clarity slider to bring out detail. Nik also handles well the noise generated by that.
    With best regards, K-H.

  23. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    My one complaint on the Sony is the lossless compression. I'm hoping they give us a option.
    That is one of my major complaints. I too would prefer to have an option the way my D700 gives me.

  24. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    What is the trouble with their lossless compression?
    -bob
    People believe it is actually lossy.
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  25. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Near Brussels, Belgium, Europe
    Posts
    541
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    1) Saturation to +8
    2) Clarity to Neutral +20 (This is higher than the D800 by almost twice, and one factor that leads me to believe a stronger AA. The other danger of going higher in Clarity is you net reduce DR.)
    3) Sharpening 250/0.6/1.0 (This is very similar to the D800, and helps confirm an AA filter of some sort.)
    4) NR at L20/C15/Single Pixel 1
    My settings for iso 100 & high frequencies shot (in C1):
    Sat +4
    Clarity neutral +8 to +12 (max) to prevent too much tonal transitions alteration
    Structure +2
    Sharpness +300/0,4/0,6
    NR L15/C12

    Lower frequencies are then sharpened in CS5 after post prod & resizing
    ___________________________________
    http://www.vincent-angillis.be

  26. #26
    Senior Member mjm6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    526
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    15

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by ZoranC View Post
    People believe it is actually lossy.
    It may be, and that is a real concern...

    I believe it is only possibly an issue for B&W shooting, and I intend to do some shooting to test the camera out soon in this respect. Maybe this weekend.


    ---Michael
    a7r, a7rII, FE 16-35, FE 24-70GM, FE 70-200, Loxia 21mm, 35mm, 50mm

  27. #27
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by anGy View Post
    My settings for iso 100 & high frequencies shot (in C1):
    Sat +4
    Clarity neutral +8 to +12 (max) to prevent too much tonal transitions alteration
    Structure +2
    Sharpness +300/0,4/0,6
    NR L15/C12

    Lower frequencies are then sharpened in CS5 after post prod & resizing
    My setting on sharpening is pretty much the same as the D800e 200/.6/1
    clarity around 10
    NR I drop down to like 15L/color 20
    I also usually add about 3 points of black for punch

    Saturation i dont usually add any.

    Im still playing with these settings
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  28. #28
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    I thought the Sony pipeline was lossy …..the raw files are all the same size ….isn t that how you can tell .

    So Sony says the A7R sensor is newer than the D800/E yet they have identical test scores at DxO ? I am sure they customized the micro lens and updated the in camera processor but the actual sensor board itself sure seems the same .

    The largest concern seems to be that the in camera processing is applying changes to the raw files . Great for out of the camera results but maybe not what you would want for all situations .

  29. #29
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by sergio lovisolo View Post
    Jack, in theory the A7r shouldn't have an AA filter. This notwhistanding, while performing comparison with the d800 shooting test targets, I noticed that the quantity of aliasing was lower in the A7r than in the d800, using the same lens. At the same time, in my experience, files from the A7r require less sharpening than those from the D800, so I suspected that Sony has found a way to counteract moire without an AA filter.(Raw converter ACR)
    Sergio
    This is possible Sergio -- I should have clarified the A7r BEHAVES as though it has an AA and requires MORE sharpening and clarity than the D800...
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  30. #30
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by mark1958 View Post
    Jack
    I thought the A7r had no AA filter but i found myself using more clarity and sharpening than my D800 shots --- processed via CS6.
    Mark,

    Different raw processor, but same requirement is what led me to assert it does indeed behave as though it has an AA...
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  31. #31
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by ZoranC View Post
    People believe it is actually lossy.
    And this could possibly explain why we need more sharpening -- ??? -- need to noodle on this one a bit more...
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  32. #32
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    And this could possibly explain why we need more sharpening -- ??? -- need to noodle on this one a bit more...

    Depends in what you mean by lossy. Anybody have a raw file of a simple target or step wedge I might look at?

  33. #33
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post
    I thought the Sony pipeline was lossy …..

    I am sure they customized the micro lens

    The largest concern seems to be that the in camera processing is applying changes to the raw files
    Roger, any of these are problematic and could explain why the files need more processing than D800 non-E files to look "their best."
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  34. #34
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    Depends in what you mean by lossy. Anybody have a raw file of a simple target or step wedge I might look at?
    Agreed Bob, need to look at a few more files --- fortunately we'll both be with Guy in Yosemite and will have access to ALL of his raws

    There remain some questions for sure...
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  35. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by mjm6 View Post
    It may be, and that is a real concern...

    I believe it is only possibly an issue for B&W shooting ...
    I don't have enough technical mojo to gauge whether it is a real issue or not but I am a firm believer that I, as owner of camera, should be given freedom to decide whether something matters to me and how I want it set so I will strongly vote that Sony should give us freedom how we want our RAWs compressed (lossy, losless, or none at all), just like Nikon does.

    Sony, are you listening?
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  36. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    Depends in what you mean by lossy.
    To me there is only one definition of lossy: Anything where not all information is retained.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  37. #37
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Re AA filter. Assuming the Sony is being truthful in there being no AA filter, and assuming the optics in use are modern and good, we should see regular examples of moire. Ergo, it would be helpful if folks shared moire examples in this thread...
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  38. #38
    Senior Member dchew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    970
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    Depends in what you mean by lossy. Anybody have a raw file of a simple target or step wedge I might look at?
    Here you go:

    https://www.hightail.com/download/el...OW41bmdUWThUQw

    a7r, Zeiss 35mm f/2 w/Metabones III adapter.
    1/8 sec @ f/2, ISO 50. This is as sharp as I could get the focus zoomed in 14x. Gitzo w/arca swiss D4.

    Jack's comments are interesting to me; I get the same impression. At 100% I do not see the same level of sharpness I expect. [del]Raw files from the 5DII[/del] and from my Alpa/IQ180 are both better. BTW, it doesn't get all that much better as I stop down.

    Is this because:
    1. The shutter shake problems? I've been looking for the classic double image effect, which isn't there. But maybe this movement is completely random, causing a general,slight fuzzyness?

    2. I'm at the lens's limits w/ this sensor and pixel size?

    3. It is just too hard to focus precisely on this sensor with the relatively short throw vs. large format lenses I'm used to on the Alpa.

    ??

    I will post another at f/4, and one from my 90 TS @ f/2.8 in a few minutes. Please note I did not make any effort to even out the lighting; the map center is brighter because it is brighter, not just from vignetting.

    Dave
    Last edited by dchew; 4th January 2014 at 18:22.
    How glorious a greeting the sun gives the mountains! - John Muir

    davechewphotography.com

  39. #39
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by dchew View Post
    Here you go:

    https://www.hightail.com/download/el...OW41bmdUWThUQw

    a7r, Zeiss 35mm f/2 w/Metabones III adapter.
    1/8 sec @ f/2, ISO 50. This is as sharp as I could get the focus zoomed in 14x. Gitzo w/arca swiss D4.

    Jack's comments are interesting to me; I get the same impression. At 100% I do not see the same level of sharpness I expect. Raw files from the 5DII and from my Alpa/IQ180 are both better. BTW, it doesn't get all that much better as I stop down.

    Is this because:
    1. The shutter shake problems? I've been looking for the classic double image effect, which isn't there. But maybe this movement is completely random, causing a general,slight fuzzyness?

    2. I'm at the lens's limits w/ this sensor and pixel size?

    3. It is just too hard to focus precisely on this sensor with the relatively short throw vs. large format lenses I'm used to on the Alpa.

    ??

    I will post another at f/4, and one from my 90 TS @ f/2.8 in a few minutes. Please note I did not make any effort to even out the lighting; the map center is brighter because it is brighter, not just from vignetting.

    Dave
    Dave,

    Bob has some special tools to dig inside the raw file with -- it will be interesting to hear what he learns

    Re image crispness, I agree with you. So far, I have not seen any A7r image with any lens combo that appears as sharp/crisp as similar D800/D800E shots, so I rule out lenses. They do sharpen up, but like the D800 seem to take a heavier-handed approach than the D800E. If the camera does not have an AA filter or there is not anything added to the Bayer matrix to alleviate aliasing, then one has to assume a vibration issue.

    One thought, and this one is way out there, but lends to the vibration issue: One way to attenuate aliasing without an AA filter proper, would be to allow the sensor to 'wiggle' around 0.2 ~ 0.4 pixel in it's mounts during exposure. My gut says this isn't the case, rather the issue with vibration -- and perhaps the overall effect we are seeing -- is the camera has such a low mass it simply cannot overcome the shutter vibration at any speed.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  40. #40
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,298
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Get rid of shutter vibration.

    http://www.getdpi.com/forum/558875-post139.html post #139
    With best regards, K-H.

  41. #41
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    My take, using a 50 year old Pentax 50mm with a scratched rear element @ f8 (2 series gitzo, BH-40 2 second delay on shutter), is that the A7r is sharper and far more detailed than my 5D3 ever was with any of my L lenses. I can't comment on clarity and contrast due to the lens which is yellowed due to a radioactive element. We have a D800e in the studio and shooting repro would be a great way to test this but to be honest, life it rather too short to bother, we've got too much real work to do, maybe another day less busy than this coming week (have to take the DF to the dealer tomorrow for 2nd shutter replacement in 6 months, sigh). I stand by my impression reported at the beginning. The raw file is here, focus on the AC unit. It's a DNG using the same base (LR/ACR) settings I had for my 5D3 and custom sharpening (I had to back the sharpening down from my defaults it was so sharp). It was this file that made me decide not to bother with a 'lux or a Sonnar. I love what that lens does wide open and stopped down it's bleeding sharp. Only thing is the Adobe jaggies are very apparent in that shot. Was the first time I'd seen the problem.

    EDIT. Just tried it with C1. Doesn't sharpen up anywhere near as nicely as in ACR. Tried it with 210,0.6,0 but the clarity sucks at default unlike in Adobe and the lack of a 'detail' slider is a real problem when trying to sharpen up brick walls. Jaggies are still there but less obvious. Try this in Adobe people.
    Last edited by Ben Rubinstein; 4th January 2014 at 09:11.
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com

  42. #42
    Senior Member dchew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    970
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Jack,
    There are two other possibilities:
    1. It's been probably two years since I've tested stuff. I use LR 80% of the time, and like many people after a while I get to know the sharpening required, so I use presets that are applied during import. Frankly it's been a while since I've looked at unsharpened images. Maybe I'm just expecting too much.

    2. It is the compression. Your comment about aliasing is interesting, because in the one image below of my house (#465), I see aliasing around the center window frames. That tells me it's focused pretty good. So how could it be a bit fuzzy but still have aliasing?

    #430 is the 90ts at f/8. Sorry I guess I uploaded the wrong one!
    #455 is the 35 f/2 at f/4
    http://www.hightail.com/download/elNLL0dObThVbSt4djhUQw

    #465 is the 35f/2 at f/4; house outside maybe a bit more relevant to the "high frequency" discussion. Focus on the four bricks above the center windows
    http://www.hightail.com/download/elNLL0dEayt0QTFFQmNUQw


    Quote Originally Posted by k-hawinkler View Post
    Get rid of shutter vibration.

    http://www.getdpi.com/forum/558875-post139.html post #139
    KH, thank you. I've seen your great work and posts. But honestly I'm seeing the same thing in your images.

    I want to be clear: this is not something I'm disappointed with! It is completely eliminated with a bit of standard sharpening, CA removal, etc. I'm just curious why I am noticing the same thing as Jack. Although I don't have a D800e to compare it to.

    Dave
    Last edited by dchew; 4th January 2014 at 09:46.
    How glorious a greeting the sun gives the mountains! - John Muir

    davechewphotography.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  43. #43
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,298
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by dchew View Post
    Jack,
    There are two other possibilities:
    1. It's been probably two years since I've tested stuff. I use LR 80% of the time, and like many people after a while I get to know the sharpening required, so I use presets that are applied during import. Frankly it's been a while since I've looked at unsharpened images. Maybe I'm just expecting too much.

    2. It is the compression. Your comment about aliasing is interesting, because in the one image below of my house (#465), I see aliasing around the center window frames. That tells me it's focused pretty good. So how could it be a bit fuzzy but still have aliasing?

    #430 is the 90ts at f/8. Sorry I guess I uploaded the wrong one!
    #455 is the 35 f/2 at f/4
    http://www.hightail.com/download/elNLL0dObThVbSt4djhUQw

    #465 is the 35f/2 at f/4; house outside maybe a bit more relevant to the "high frequency" discussion. Focus on the four bricks above the center windows
    http://www.hightail.com/download/elNLL0dEayt0QTFFQmNUQw




    KH, thank you. I've seen your great work and posts. But honestly I'm seeing the same thing in your images.

    I want to be clear: this is not something I'm disappointed with! It is completely eliminated with a bit of standard sharpening, CA removal, etc. I'm just curious why I am noticing the same thing as Jack. Although I don't have a D800e to compare it to.

    Dave

    Could you please be more specific?
    I have lots of images also with shutter shake.
    How about this one?
    Leica User Forum - Einzelnen Beitrag anzeigen - A7[R] Images with Leica lenses (open thread)
    Taken with A7R. I think it's okay.

    Or this one.
    http://www.getdpi.com/forum/559634-post149.html
    Taken with NEX-7.

    These are full resolution images, files.
    So, a computer is probably required to inspect them.
    With best regards, K-H.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  44. #44
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Curiouser and curiouser...
    I was poking around the innards of an A7r "raw" file and came across something interesting that may explain a few things including why it seems to need so much more sharpening than one might otherwise expect.

    For reference, almost all raw files are simply tiffs really, and can be examined by common tools.
    Within each file, there are tags that indicate to the raw processor, some information needed so it can do its job properly.
    Below are some tags from a D800 file for comparison:
    SubFileType (1 Long): ReducedImage
    ImageWidth (1 Long): 160
    ImageLength (1 Long): 120
    BitsPerSample (3 Short): 8, 8, 8
    Compression (1 Short): Uncompressed
    Photometric (1 Short): RGB
    Make (18 ASCII): NIKON CORPORATION
    Model (12 ASCII): NIKON D800E
    StripOffsets (1 Long): 129748
    Orientation (1 Short): TopLeft
    SamplesPerPixel (1 Short): 3
    RowsPerStrip (1 Long): 120
    StripByteCounts (1 Long): 57600
    XResolution (1 Rational): 300
    YResolution (1 Rational): 300
    PlanarConfig (1 Short): Contig
    ResolutionUnit (1 Short): Inch
    Software (10 ASCII): Ver.1.02
    DateTime (20 ASCII): 2013:09:25 22:20:17
    Artist (37 ASCII): Bob Freund
    SubIFD (3 Long): 187348, 187468, 187696
    ReferenceBlackWhite (6 Rational):
    700 (1024 Byte): 60, 63, 120, 112, 97, 99, 107, 101, 116, 32,...
    Copyright (55 ASCII): Copyright 2012 Bob Freund ...
    34665 (1 Long): 1640
    34853 (1 Long): 129728
    36867 (20 ASCII): 2013:09:25 22:20:17
    37398 (4 Byte): 1, 0, 0, 0

    note that image tile itself is uncompressed. Nikon achieves its lossless compression by profiling the image color space and mapping the set of colors discovered into a smaller number of encoded bits (if possible)

    Now for the tags from a sample A7r raw file:
    SubFileType (1 Long): ReducedImage
    Compression (1 Short): JPEG Original TIFF 6.0 spec
    ImageDescription (32 ASCII):
    Make (5 ASCII): SONY
    Model (8 ASCII): ILCE-7R
    Orientation (1 Short): TopLeft
    XResolution (1 Rational): 350
    YResolution (1 Rational): 350
    ResolutionUnit (1 Short): Inch
    Software (14 ASCII): ILCE-7R v1.01
    DateTime (20 ASCII): 2014:01:01 14:29:44
    SubIFD (1 Long): 143834
    JpegIFOffset (1 Long): 144546
    JpegIFByteCount (1 Long): 969783
    YCbCrPositioning (1 Short): 2
    34665 (1 Long): 432
    50341 (106 Undefined):
    50740 (4 Byte): 228, 194, 0, 0

    Note that the image tile is compressed using the jpeg compression algorithm according to the TIFF 6.0 spec (1992)

    That spec provides for both lossless and lossy compression possibilities (Section 22) and I have not peeled the onion an additional layer to see what transform they are using, but it does appear that one of the jpeg compression techniques is used in the Sony raw files. According to that spec, all but one algorithm is lossy, and the only non-lossy algorithm is one that uses Huffman encoding.
    I will dig a bit further to see what I can find out. The bits will tell the truth.
    -bob
    Last edited by Bob; 4th January 2014 at 11:39.
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  45. #45
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,298
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Many thanks Bob for leading the way.
    Much appreciated. Very interesting indeed!
    With best regards, K-H.

  46. #46
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Varese Italy
    Posts
    226
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Here is an example of aliasing with the A7r and a summicron m last type (non apo) at 5,6.
    The file has been sharpened in ACR8 at 60/0,6/25/0


    _DSC0597 by sergio lovisolo, on Flickr

    What I see here:

    The file is over sharpened, and this is the reason for which i never apply sharpening to the A7r files, unless this is required by limits of the lens used.

    The camera shows the correct resolution for 36 Mp, with total pixel sharpness, while the lens has a lot more high frequency energy to supply to the sensor.

    It is impossible to obtain better results resolution wise by 36 Mp sensors.

    I am completely satisfied by the quality of the files, and don't expect anything better.

    Sergio

  47. #47
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    I think Sony is experimenting with different concepts with their Bionz X chip which they in part call "Digital Reproduction Technology".

    "Processor. Output from the Sony A7R's image sensor is handled by a brand-new BIONZ X-branded image processor. Compared to the previous generation, BIONZ X has improved performance. Sony also says that it has improved area-specific noise reduction, which varies noise reduction strength across the image in an attempt to yield a clean result without disturbing image detail.

    BIONZ X also brings two new features. Diffraction-reducing technology combats the effects of diffraction limiting, improving detail at smaller apertures. Interestingly, the effect applied is both lens and aperture specific, and said to work even with Alpha-mount lenses shot through an adapter. It also has what Sony bills as "Detail reproduction technology", which tries to draw out finer details without creating halos in the process."
    _-DP Review (Same thing has been said on other reviews). DP Review hasn't varivied any of this, so ...

    Blah, blah, blah ... marketing speak ... BUT:

    It seems to imply that what they are doing is more specific to their data bus lenses (FE and A Mount). Which makes sense because the Sony LAEA-3&4 adapters are brand new just for this camera and have the data bus connections ... what we do not know is if they differ from 3rd party ones that may include data bus connections to use lenses on the NEX cameras. I can say that the A mount ZAs do very well on this camera with the LAEA-4 adapter. Very well.

    The notion of less dependance on edge sharpening verse the over-all "impression" of image sharpness reminds me of "Micro Contrast", and resulting debates/discussions. Whatever they are doing to provide that appearance of acuity without the creation of halos may be why there is less tendency to moiré ... and perhaps why some folks feel compelled to sharpen when viewing on screen at 100%+.

    My impression so far has been that the over-all image looks and feels more organic and doesn't require any Herculean effort in post ... quite the contrary, these are very easy to PP. This impression is based on prints as well as on screen ... however, I can see that some may wish nothing done to an image so they can do as they wish. I'm not one of those people and never have been (thus the switch from the D3X to the A900). The base image from the A7R still leaves plenty of creative latitude and malleability to play with IMHO.

    The other achievement that I like is the stabilization of color and skin tones as one moves up the ISO scale (something my pal Irakly marveled at also). Perhaps not that important to some, of paramount importance to me.

    Here is an example: (pardon the repetitious "Sleeping Grandma" subject matter, but Ive been stuck here with family )

    Basically, it printed beautifully on 13" X 19" paper, with a nice sense of depth, faithful color, and organic sense of detail at the point of focus ... and while the extreme detail crops on screen could be viewed as needing sharpening, the print says otherwise.

    Personally, I think we are dealing with some new ideas here, and need to be patient while learning whether we like it or not. So far, I do. Others may not.

    A7R, ISO 400, 1/80 shutter, FE55/1.8 @ f/4 Processed in LR4:

    - Marc
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  48. #48
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    One more peel of the onion...
    The jpeg encoding is huffman so it should not be lossy although it can be if precessed in-camera. It ought to be good quality unless the math is screwed up.
    The Bayer array is a conventional RGGBRGGB...
    The non-debayered image is a yucky green as is usual,
    There is no embedded icc camera profile.

    So the test is to use the damned thing and if you like it, then great.
    Every camera is subject to close and perhaps over-examination.
    Personally, I have a lot of cash in what I have, and unless there is a striking improvement I do not plan on changing. I do not see a striking improvement.
    On the positive note, the files can be easily converted to tiffs using dcraw which is available as a c code distribution for those of you who like to play in the command-line space.
    -bob

    my usual raw file play tools are:
    dcraw Decoding raw digital photos in Linux
    exiftool ExifTool by Phil Harvey
    and of course your favorite xml editor
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  49. #49
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob View Post
    One more peel of the onion...
    The jpeg encoding is huffman so it should not be lossy although it can be if precessed in-camera. It ought to be good quality unless the math is screwed up.
    The Bayer array is a conventional RGGBRGGB...
    The non-debayered image is a yucky green as is usual,
    There is no embedded icc camera profile.

    So the test is to use the damned thing and if you like it, then great.
    Every camera is subject to close and perhaps over-examination.
    Personally, I have a lot of cash in what I have, and unless there is a striking improvement I do not plan on changing. I do not see a striking improvement.
    On the positive note, the files can be easily converted to tiffs using dcraw which is available as a c code distribution for those of you who like to play in the command-line space.
    -bob

    my usual raw file play tools are:
    dcraw Decoding raw digital photos in Linux
    exiftool ExifTool by Phil Harvey
    and of course your favorite xml editor
    Bingo!

    I have a lot of cash wrapped up in my tools also, and I could not care less if this camera lags, equals or out does my Leica S2. What it does do for sure is allow me to travel with less to carry, shoot casually with AF and less to carry ... do some paying work with less to carry, do some interesting things in the studio with improved mag EVF/focus peaking, and so on. Those attributes fall with-in "striking improvements" for what I do these days.

    Even if IQ only equaled my Sony A99, it'd still be the choice for the above reasons.

    Frankly, IF I didn't already have an array of A mount lenses, I'm not sure I would've paid as much attention to it no matter how revolutionary it may or may not be ... if ALL M lenses had worked well, then it would've been a different story ... however, since I will not pay $7K for color M work (my main M focus is the M Mono for rangefinder work), what M lenses do work on the little Sony will have to do for now ... supplemented by the FEs, including hopefully the 24-70/4 zoom. Camera + 3 lenses, all at a cost less than the M240 body ... with a wad of change left over for a "fun with" adventure.

    Fun times for sure.

    - Marc
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  50. #50
    Senior Member dchew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    970
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony A7r sensor not the same

    Quote Originally Posted by k-hawinkler View Post
    Could you please be more specific?
    I have lots of images also with shutter shake.
    How about this one?
    Leica User Forum - Einzelnen Beitrag anzeigen - A7[R] Images with Leica lenses (open thread)
    Taken with A7R. I think it's okay.

    Or this one.
    http://www.getdpi.com/forum/559634-post149.html
    Taken with NEX-7.

    These are full resolution images, files.
    So, a computer is probably required to inspect them.
    I downloaded the raw file from the first link. Yes, I see the same thing there. It is so darn hard to tell in most of these images which is why Bob, Marc and others are exactly right: Too much analysis...

    If I zoom into your raw file, the trees on the top ridgeline have haze and climate impacts that lose detail. But somewhere down closer to the bottom, where it looks like the plane of focus was, has what I'm talking about. I can't tell from the other getDPI link because the jpeg makes it look a bit plastic up close and personal.

    I went back and looked at another test I did, comparing my IQ180/sk150 with the a7r/Canon 70-200 f/4 IS set at 93mm to get close to the sk150's coverage. Unfair? Well maybe not so much. That combination looks very comparable. Of course the IQ180 file is zoomed in twice as far at 100% because of the additional pixels, but the amount of capture sharpening I add to get it sharp to my taste is actually less on the a7r. My 70-200 is wonderful; almost as good as the 135 f/2.

    So In my case what I'm seeing (or imagining) is lens dependent. I don't think it is from the shutter. I think either I've gone in the weeds, or I am seeing lens variation at levels I couldn't before in a 135 format. Doesn't explain Jack's impression though.

    Dave
    How glorious a greeting the sun gives the mountains! - John Muir

    davechewphotography.com

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •