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!

A7s!

horshack

New member
Thank you, but it is not high ISO that I am interested in.
For base ISO it will be very challenging for the A7s to outperform the A7r. Megapixel/resolving differences aside, it's very difficult to achieve the same level of low ISO dynamic range using large pixels vs small. The D4/D4s/Df are good examples - they are the best performing large-pixel sensors to date yet their base ISO DR is still > 1EV below the A7r/D800.
 

ZoranC

New member
For base ISO it will be very challenging for the A7s to outperform the A7r. Megapixel/resolving differences aside, it's very difficult to achieve the same level of low ISO dynamic range using large pixels vs small. The D4/D4s/Df are good examples - they are the best performing large-pixel sensors to date yet their base ISO DR is still > 1EV below the A7r/D800.
That is what people say but sometimes I like to see things myself so I will still give it a try. Why? Because from where I am at I don't see how 3 smaller pixels that occupy same surface area as one larger pixel can give me extra stop of data with everything else being same.
 

horshack

New member
That is what people say but sometimes I like to see things myself so I will still give it a try. Why? Because from where I am at I don't see how 3 smaller pixels that occupy same surface area as one larger pixel can give me extra stop of data with everything else being same.
If you take another peak at the link I provided in the earlier post I also compare low ISO DR between the D800 and Df. The reason larger pixels have less dynamic range is because a larger pixel holds a larger charge (more electrons), and the process of holding and reading out those extra electrons creates extra electronic read noise. Also, with more, smaller pixels (higher MP), more of that electronic read noise can be averaged during the process of downsampling to produce the equivalent MP image as the larger-pixel sensor. This is why for example the 12MP Nikon D3s has a relatively poor base ISO DR of just under 12EV vs 14EV+ on the A7r/D800. With the introduction of the D4 sensor, Nikon improved base ISO DR significantly by using what is purported to to be Aptinas (A-Pix technology, PDF here), which allows two levels of conversion gain, one optimized for low ISO and the other for High ISO, but even with this significant improvement the D4's low ISO DR performance is still 1EV below the A7r/D800.
 

ZoranC

New member
If you take another peak at the link I provided in the earlier post I also compare low ISO DR between the D800 and Df. The reason larger pixels have less dynamic range is because a larger pixel holds a larger charge (more electrons), and the process of holding and reading out those extra electrons creates extra electronic read noise. Also, with more, smaller pixels (higher MP), more of that electronic read noise can be averaged during the process of downsampling to produce the equivalent MP image as the larger-pixel sensor. This is why for example the 12MP Nikon D3s has a relatively poor base ISO DR of just under 12EV vs 14EV+ on the A7r/D800. With the introduction of the D4 sensor, Nikon improved base ISO DR significantly by using what is purported to to be Aptinas (A-Pix technology, PDF here), which allows two levels of conversion gain, one optimized for low ISO and the other for High ISO, but even with this significant improvement the D4's low ISO DR performance is still 1EV below the A7r/D800.
Thank you! I don't think that D3S can be used as good example because it is three to four years older than say D800/D4S/Df but even if we ignore that we are not comparing same generations of technology D3s has better tonal range and color sensitivity per pixel than any of them, it is only DR that it has worse by a bit and only until ISO 400, after which it matches D4s and both seem to be significantly better than D800.

That is with 12 MP technology that is 3-4 years older than sensor with more MP. Which makes me very curious what the results will look like with 12 MP technology that is newer than 36 MP one. Having A7S by the side of A7R will satisfy my curiosity. Now lets keep our fingers crossed that price is within reason.
 

horshack

New member
Thank you! I don't think that D3S can be used as good example because it is three to four years older than say D800/D4S/Df but even if we ignore that we are not comparing same generations of technology D3s has better tonal range and color sensitivity per pixel than any of them, it is only DR that it has worse by a bit and only until ISO 400, after which it matches D4s and both seem to be significantly better than D800.
I agree, but keep in mind that per-pixel metrics don't have any correlation to IQ since we work with images rather than individual pixels. This is why you'll see references to "per area" metrics when sensor performance is discussed and compared.

That is with 12 MP technology that is 3-4 years older than sensor with more MP. Which makes me very curious what the results will look like with 12 MP technology that is newer than 36 MP one. Having A7S by the side of A7R will satisfy my curiosity. Now lets keep our fingers crossed that price is within reason.
I'm very curious about how the A7s will perform as well. My guesstimate on the A7s price is $3,299.
 

ZoranC

New member
I agree, but keep in mind that per-pixel metrics don't have any correlation to IQ since we work with images rather than individual pixels. This is why you'll see references to "per area" metrics when sensor performance is discussed and compared.
While we do work with images in the mind of this layman during capture and processing we work with "individual pieces of information" (pixels) so if color sensitivity / whatever of fatter pixel is better then file / final result should follow that too. I guess I will see for myself relatively soon.

I'm very curious about how the A7s will perform as well. My guesstimate on the A7s price is $3,299.
I too feel price is likely to be in that ballpark. If I had to guess my wishful thinking is $2,999.
 

Tim

Active member
I too feel price is likely to be in that ballpark. If I had to guess my wishful thinking is $2,999.
I don't really get why it should be any more than an A7?

Can anyone enlighten me/us, Q: is a 12Mpixel FF sensor likely to be harder to make and hence have lower yields than the A7/r?
Surely a lot of the development of the A7s is already done in the form of the A7/r ?

I am not arguing the point, rather trying to understand why it should cost more than the A7/r?
 

horshack

New member
I don't really get why it should be any more than an A7?

Can anyone enlighten me/us, Q: is a 12Mpixel FF sensor likely to be harder to make and hence have lower yields than the A7/r?
Surely a lot of the development of the A7s is already done in the form of the A7/r ?

I am not arguing the point, rather trying to understand why it should cost more than the A7/r?
From a cost basis, the A7/A7r use sensors Sony already had - the A7r appears to be the identical sensor to the one sold to Nikon for the D800, and the A7 the same as the D600/D610/A99 (pixel design) with minor changes like PDAF sensor arrangement. Sony has manufactured a few million of these for Nikon and so their R&D costs have long since been amortized.

The A7s is a brand new sensor design. The one-time R&D costs (NRE) are significant but its volumes will likely be far less than the A7/A7r sensors, even if Sony decides to sell it to other camera makers. That cost needs to be recaptured.

From a value basis, the A7s is tailored toward high-end video production. The inclusion of S-Log2 is a good indicator of that. Such users would see more value in this product and are also less sensitive to price.
 

philip_pj

New member
In setting a price Sony find themselves dealing with crossover markets again - low Mp mainly stills shooters and the video people. What proportions are likely for these two groups? Will a 90% video user group be large enough sales wise?

The 36Mp sensor first saw light of day in Feb 2012 and the 24Mp sensor debuted in Nikon D600 guise in Sept 2012 and in Sony's a99 at around the same time. These were landmark sensors in all the good things - DR, recovery, colour - and are aging very gracefully.

The extra 2 stops of range at base was the key, but how much more would be really compelling as a trade-off for a return to 12Mp, for one camera users? If they ask three large it will have to be very special for stills photographers to get on board. I still expect a pleasant surprise price-wise, the body is tooled up already and the other a7 models are discounted.

Note too this new sensor is, as far as we know, a Sony-only release at this stage. Maybe that is a victory of the camera division over the sensor outfit, which needs little help right now.
 

Annna T

Active member
In setting a price Sony find themselves dealing with crossover markets again - low Mp mainly stills shooters and the video people. What proportions are likely for these two groups? Will a 90% video user group be large enough sales wise?

The 36Mp sensor first saw light of day in Feb 2012 and the 24Mp sensor debuted in Nikon D600 guise in Sept 2012 and in Sony's a99 at around the same time. These were landmark sensors in all the good things - DR, recovery, colour - and are aging very gracefully.

The extra 2 stops of range at base was the key, but how much more would be really compelling as a trade-off for a return to 12Mp, for one camera users? If they ask three large it will have to be very special for stills photographers to get on board. I still expect a pleasant surprise price-wise, the body is tooled up already and the other a7 models are discounted.

Note too this new sensor is, as far as we know, a Sony-only release at this stage. Maybe that is a victory of the camera division over the sensor outfit, which needs little help right now.
May be that Sony could also put this sensor into their expensive movies cams ?
 

philip_pj

New member
It's a strange one, Annna, it might be very special. It's a good position for them to be in as many folks still really like that resolution level in their FF cameras, and it is no coincidence two of the most loved DSLRs are the classic 5D and the D700. We will soon see if Sony have anything up their sleeve besides their arm ;-)
 

ZoranC

New member
It's a good position for them to be in as many folks still really like that resolution level in their FF cameras, and it is no coincidence two of the most loved DSLRs are the classic 5D and the D700.
I love my D700 for many reasons none of which have anything to do with resolution. If user interface and firmware of A7 series are any indicator A7S will still fall quite short of D700 when it comes to that.
 

philip_pj

New member
For sure tastes vary widely, for example I feel an acute revulsion just picking up a DSLR now! For me they are already part of the richness of the past, but for others - just right.

''However much resolution you guys throw, we will catch'' - Garret Brown talks with Philip Bloom and Sony re what happens next with 4K, might be of interest in this thread:

Garrett Brown (inventor of Steadicam and Stanley Kubrick cameraman) is “excitied” about the Sony A7s! | sonyalpharumors

Garret wants cameras as small as possible too, and: "We have an endless hunger for resolution."
 

ZoranC

New member
For sure tastes vary widely, for example I feel an acute revulsion just picking up a DSLR now! For me they are already part of the richness of the past, but for others - just right.
Me, I choose tool based on how fit it is for task I have in mind, not based on anything else. But when tool is aspiring to be professional and has price to match I am expecting that tool to be well thought out, at least as well as tools that are few generations older than it is, and even better than tools that are much cheaper.

For example, there is no excuse for A7 series to offer only two image ratios while EM5, camera two years older than it and half it's price, offers four, especially whan it's a simple firmware matter. That is what causes revulsion in me when I pick up my A7R. It's great perfromance deserves a well throught out wrapper around it, not one that makes you feel it has been designed by pop designers just out of high school for Hello Kitty generation with attention deficit disorder, not by high level professionals for high level professionals / amateurs.

It makes me wonder what whole Sony chain of command was thinking when signing off on it, did they at all solicit and pay attention to opinion of people that used it long enough before doing so.
 

philip_pj

New member
Yep, the feeling seems to be that street US prices will be much more reasonable. It would have to be the final solution for video for them to price it out of the reach of most interested would be buyers. Only one dealer too, and not a particularly good one.
 

ZoranC

New member
Sony will be walking the fine line there. On one side it won't be mass demand item with matching volume price. On other side they will have to be careful not to price themselves out of the market, especially when one remembers what kind of fan base GH4, that will very likely be much cheaper, is having.
 

Steve P.

New member
Mirrorless rumours reports that A7s pricing will be announced on May 7th.
It is rumoured to be around $1800, according to them. Fingers ( and everything else!) crossed.
 
Top