Upload & Sell: On
| Re: Sony A7R sensor gets high scores from DxOMark |
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Yea and CFA almost exactly like D800E. No A7R for me then..
I thought it has slightly worse colors than A99, but said to myself, well its JPGs. Apparently it wasnt JPGs. Sigh. :/
Well, f*ck that.. back to dSLRs.
I take it you are referring to the individual \"color response\" measurement and not the overall \"Portrait (Color Depth)\" score? Interestingly, it appears that it might be the case that Sony sensors with AA filters have a higher color response measurement than those without an AA filter. That is the case with the RX1 vs RX1r anyway. I don\'t know ultimately how important that measurement is - that it actually makes as much difference as it might seem...at least I believe theSuede said something to that extent. It was a while back when discussing the A900 (which does have amazing color and color response #s?) so I\'m not 100% sure.
Simply called SMI. A7R result of 78/75 is a \"meh\". D800E has 77/74 (I guess these sensors are really very similar). And for example 1D-X has 73/74, which is a bit.. tragic. Especially compared to 1D/s MK3 .
Bottom is currently 6D with 69/70. Thats somewhere around \"tragicomedy\" level. Quite visible in all pics taken with it.
Obviously people dont have same vision of colors and some are more or less colorblind. Since most photographers are still men, which are even more colorblind, it doesnt matter that much as it could.
That said, SMI is directly tied to CFA used. Better you get, better SMI you will have as results. Downside is that thicker CFA means also less light = more noise (tho in case of something like D4 sensor, it wouldnt have exactly big impact on SNR).
Issue with SMI is that it doesnt tell \"where those color errors are\". It doesnt tell if camera cant find difference between violet and blue flowers, or pink vs red skin tone. Even then its rather good tool for getting overall idea how much good or bad colors will be.
In case of A7R, if you are fine with current Nikon and Canon offerings, you will be fine with this. Actually you will probably gain in colors too.
Me? I will pass and wait if Nikon came to senses with Nikon \"Pure\" DF or whatever that will be and see then.
So, if we take the RX1 (84/81) and RX1r (79/75) example I cited, your conclusion is that these two cameras are using a completely different CFA which is why they differ? I suspect there is more to it, perhaps including the AA filter as well as software tuning. Anyway, I bet the A7 with it\'s AA filter will likely have a better measurement. Incidentally, the Leica M 240 only scores 75/71 but I really don\'t hear folks talking about how bad Leica color is. I suspect the delta has to be pretty large to really matter. Per DxO:
\"In practice, the SMI for DSLRs ranges between 75 and 85, and is not very discriminating.\" Given the somewhat arbitrary nature of these scores you mentioned (and theSuede previously also mentioned), I don\'t think these scores really mean that much in practice.
Well, some people do complain about M\'s color. I was struggling with 6D color, though you can always heavy process your file make it looks like your color or some color but never accurate color and saturated, vivid color. some channel will easily get blown up because of color information is gone at the time of capture.
This is a pretty serious issue which most people ignore or insensitive about. Since there is no real spec and no objective target, most manufacture choose cheating this (leading by Canon) with ISO25600 performance with 2 stop push, which people from online forum do that all the time.