Jman13
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
FlyPenFly wrote:
I don't think a picture of a picture is a good way to judge ISO performance, the sampling rate available from the source is too low. I think a real scene maybe an outdoor night or milky way shot would have shown just how much more noise or detail loss there is.
I would have loved to have done some milky way shots when I did that test. Unfortunately, it was the middle of winter and I live about 2 hours from areas without light pollution, meaning I would have had to drive for hours just to freeze my rear end off...sometimes I'm up for that, but since I fit my reviewing periods around my regular job, it makes it hard to do in many cases.
The 'picture of a picture' shouldn't pose any issues, though...the full picture is of my bookshelf, with the crop coming from one book (that happens to still not be detail limited on these shots...go in close and you can see the dots from the printing....though at these magnifications that's not possible.) Aside from that, it shouldn't affect noise performance. I may agree with you if this was a pure detail test.
In any case, I do wish I'd done a few more different tests under different circumstances, though this test was done in an area where the light isn't great, and so provides situations one would regularly encounter in dim indoor light.
Overall, I found the A7 to be quite good in low light, though not remarkably better than my Fuji cameras (probably a smidge better in several circumstances, but nothing major). At least with RAW. I did notice that C1 Pro does a really nice job with their NR algorithm on the A7 shots...producing really clean images...better than LR. The A7 does have better RAW image quality over the Fuji bodies...more detail, slightly better noise control (though pretty close) and better dynamic range. If you really want the ultimate in image quality, the A7 will do a better job, though I don't think the differences are enormous.
On the JPEG front, on the other hand, the Fuji cameras are significantly better. At least as of the A7 when released, the JPEG engine Sony uses is absolutely atrocious. (I notice it on my NEX-6 too...files look fine at 1600 and 3200 in RAW, but the JPEG previews at these ISO are so bad that I can't even judge focus on them).
FWIW, I don't think you can really go wrong with either. The A7 is a great camera, with outstanding RAW image quality and the few FE lenses released are all quite good. On the down side, the lens lineup is very limited for native lenses, and the Fuji lens lineup is absolutely stellar, and covers almost everything at this point, at least from an enthusiast POV (they are somewhat lacking in inexpensive consumer grade lenses). I personally love the Fuji controls and really love the interface, so for me, I'd take (and I did) the X-T1 hands down, but the A7 is the best Sony body I've used, and is really outstanding aside from JPEG quality. If you have a chance to handle them, that may push you one way or another, since they are very different in use, and everyone's preferences for these cameras is a bit different.
|
