That would also likely imply that Sony needs to update the ARW spec (from 2.3 or 2.3.1, whatever the current version is) as no software would understand how to handle the RAW file. (If they added lossless compressed capability.)
-Tim
Matt Grum wrote:
I found the original a900 manual and there is no lossless RAW option, and given the a900 RAWs I've found have been uncompressed I don't think Sony have ever offered lossless compression, so they would have to go and develop it from scratch (or rather develop an implementation from scratch, there are plenty of algorithms out there to choose from) so it's looking even less likely we'll see lossless in this firmware update.
Okay I'm going to do something crazy myself . Going to remove the VC 15 hood. Off to Home Depot and get me a mean ass grinder. I'll start a thread on its destruction. I'm using the lossy raw compression algorithm since I can't use it on Sony. ROTFLMAO
The hood is just stupid and ineffective. Fred sent his to SK Grimes I'm going to risk a 700 dollar lens. Looks like I will own it forever. Lol
Matt Grum wrote:
But will it fix the scratch on my LCD screen?
Good luck with that. I've been waiting nearly two months for Sony to replace the defective rear LCD on my A7R, and they still don't seem to know when (or if...?) they will be able to fix it... but they still want me to pay them $400 for the work.
People have done that on the Zeiss 15mm ZE/ZF.2....before Zeiss offered a service to do it. That takes some guts, sending a $3,000 lens to someone to cut off of the petals.
GMPhotography wrote:
Okay I'm going to do something crazy myself . Going to remove the VC 15 hood. Off to Home Depot and get me a mean ass grinder. I'll start a thread on its destruction. I'm using the lossy raw compression algorithm since I can't use it on Sony. ROTFLMAO
The hood is just stupid and ineffective. Fred sent his to SK Grimes I'm going to risk a 700 dollar lens. Looks like I will own it forever. Lol
p.13 #10 · Uncompressed 14 bit for A7sii and A7rii
I did the Leica 19 R and shaved down the rear shroud to fit my Canons back in the day. That one was scary. Im thinking of getting it down to where a empty 58mm filter rim would go than build out to 67mm . That way my 15, 25 and 85 use the same filter.
p.13 #11 · Uncompressed 14 bit for A7sii and A7rii
I've considered sending my ZE 15 to Zeiss, but then I'm not sure what I'd do in cases where I might want a hood.
GMPhotography wrote:
I did the Leica 19 R and shaved down the rear shroud to fit my Canons back in the day. That one was scary. Im thinking of getting it down to where a empty 58mm filter rim would go than build out to 67mm . That way my 15, 25 and 85 use the same filter.
p.13 #12 · Uncompressed 14 bit for A7sii and A7rii
That's not value posterization, that's really processing and a color profile issue... Value posterization in a blue sky is quantiation noise (actual value > qantized value error), and that is very rarely visible in cases like this.
-unfortunately it is an issue that is amplified when you apply the profiles needed for the Sony type color filters, AFTER your chosen raw converter applies pre-processing noise reduction. THAT may induce posterization into bands of clearly visibly delimited colors in very smooth gradients.
Could you mail me that exact raw, then I could show you a few things about the "posterization" in it?
sounds great, will pm you.
GMPhotography wrote:
Okay I'm going to do something crazy myself . Going to remove the VC 15 hood. Off to Home Depot and get me a mean ass grinder. I'll start a thread on its destruction. I'm using the lossy raw compression algorithm since I can't use it on Sony. ROTFLMAO
The hood is just stupid and ineffective. Fred sent his to SK Grimes I'm going to risk a 700 dollar lens. Looks like I will own it forever. Lol
may i suggest you remove the optics before you cut off the hood, then put them back in?
p.13 #16 · Uncompressed 14 bit for A7sii and A7rii
tsdevine wrote:
Never thought of looking for a 95mm screw in hood, and given how wide the lens is, it never occurred to me there'd be one that would be good/usable.
Can't say I've looked myself, but if one exists, it can probably be customized to purpose
(course, I'm surprised Zeiss didn't do this themselves, or hell, modify production for all future lenses, given that they made filters just for this lens!)
p.13 #17 · Uncompressed 14 bit for A7sii and A7rii
alundeb wrote:
So in sebboh's example, the posterization in the dark blues is a result of the raw data being limited to 13 bits linear?
That would be devastating for all 12 bits raw files out there....
Late back to the party...
What I was doing a bad job saying was:
1. The JPEG should not have introduced the posterization since it was only converted to JPG on the output.
2. It is *possible* that highly processed 12, 13 or 14 bit data can produce posterization if you apply enough of a tone curve to it.
3. There are plenty of other things besides 13 bit data that could cause the posterization.
The key point being number 3 - I have no idea what is causing the posterization because color transforms with bad profile management can cause the exact same thing and we have no idea of the details about the processing applied. I was just trying to explain that the fact that it was output to JPEG for web display is not a likely source of the posterization.
As to the comment of 12 bit being even worse the 13 bit for posterization that is of course true in the simplest sense. But also realize that seeing posterization requires and extremely smooth and noise free gradient. Many 12 bit cameras have plenty of read noise and so you are still unlikely to get posterization if the read noise is higher than the quantization noise - instead people will complain about noisy skies at base ISO...
I suspect that for most of the examples shown that with RAW analysis and careful conversion it will be found that 13 bit quantization is only one factor and perhaps not even the dominant factor in causing the posterization. My money is on color space transforms in the processing being the larger cause.
Since Joakim is already on the case I'll step back and let his more capable hands and mind run with it
p.13 #18 · Uncompressed 14 bit for A7sii and A7rii
Matt Grum wrote:
Did the A900 definitely have a lossless RAW mode? It's hard to find a definitive answer online - I thought there were only two options, normal and compressed, and I've just downloaded a bunch of A900 RAWs from here and they were all ~36MB which is exactly what you'd expect if they were completely uncompressed.
Indeed, I am mistaken on the compressed lossless raw for the a900. It seems Sony previously offered a compressed lossless format (I saw someone mention it was Huffman like) for their older CCD cameras but starting with the CMOS based cameras, Sony switched to uncompressed raw (before dropping the option later). I wonder why they changed from lossless compressed raw to uncompressed...
p.13 #19 · Uncompressed 14 bit for A7sii and A7rii
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Indeed, I am mistaken on the compressed lossless raw for the a900. It seems Sony previously offered a compressed lossless format (I saw someone mention it was Huffman like) for their older CCD cameras but starting with the CMOS based cameras, Sony switched to uncompressed raw (before dropping the option later). I wonder why they changed from lossless compressed raw to uncompressed...
Maybe they stopped paying for it? I'm assuming that while Sony develops great sensors the lossless compression technology is something they licence. I could be wrong so don't take my opinion for anything more than that
p.13 #20 · Uncompressed 14 bit for A7sii and A7rii
Hardcore wrote:
Maybe they stopped paying for it? I'm assuming that while Sony develops great sensors the lossless compression technology is something they licence. I could be wrong so don't take my opinion for anything more than that
I don't know. There were apparently even cheaper CCD DSLR options that Sony sold simultaneously with more expensive CMOS based cameras that offered the lossless raw compression so it almost sounds like to me it had something to do with CCD vs CMOS processing.
Value posterization in a blue sky is quantiation noise (actual value > qantized value error), and that is very rarely visible in cases like this.