Archive 2016 · M5 vs. A6500 In camera Raw Processing

Roy_H
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · M5 vs. A6500 In camera Raw Processing

I know the Sony A6500 is faster, has more options like 4K, and such. So setting that aside, is a sony lossy compressed raw file at a distinct disadvantage to a Canon M5 raw file? I have done some searching and reading and have not been able to really find a definitive discussion. It seems the compression technique used by SOny cooks the file a bit more than Canon and this can cause issues with bright areas light like star trails? Do I have this right?

Any guidance is much appreciated.

Nov 06, 2016 at 02:29 PM

jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · M5 vs. A6500 In camera Raw Processing

Well, regardless of the technical aspects of possible lossy compression, I think a more direct question would be:

"which camera has better RAW image quality?",

in which case, the hows & whys of Sony compression are moot. If the M5 RAW image is better than the A6500 image, then it might be worth seeking improvements in Sony compression algorithms (if there's anything to this, at all).

Of course, the question on relative image quality can't be answered, because the M5 hasn't yet shipped.

Nov 06, 2016 at 03:06 PM

Roy_H
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · M5 vs. A6500 In camera Raw Processing

OK to re-phrase the question -- however, that gets to your point that it has not shipped yet and that relative may be different in different lighting situations.

The Sony compression and Canon raw files are not unique to these two cameras so I was hoping to hear from some users of older models.

Nov 06, 2016 at 03:57 PM

jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · M5 vs. A6500 In camera Raw Processing

Sure. The M5 should be pretty similar to the 80D, but it's premature to make any conclusions. Won't be long, though.

Nov 06, 2016 at 04:20 PM

garyvot
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · M5 vs. A6500 In camera Raw Processing

OT, but... the Sony may have a faster framerate, but I'm pretty sure the M5 will actually be faster to use (for me), due to Canon ergonomics.

It will be interesting to see the RAWs, but I would expect only subtle improvements over the 80D. Sony will still likely have a small edge in DR and noise I suspect.

Nov 06, 2016 at 08:23 PM

scalesusa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · M5 vs. A6500 In camera Raw Processing

The issue with Sony compression is artifacts in the image. The artifacts vary from image to image. Additional post processing may or may not play well with the compression.

Since the A6500 is not really aimed at high end photo enthusiasts, Sony apparently believes that the arget audience will find the compressed images better overall.

Canon does not use lossy compression, so compression artifacts are not generated.

Nov 07, 2016 at 12:46 PM

dtolios
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · M5 vs. A6500 In camera Raw Processing

scalesusa wrote:
Since the A6500 is not really aimed at high end photo enthusiasts, Sony apparently believes that the target audience will find the compressed images better overall.

The A6300 being the most expensive alpha APS-C camera Sony puts out, I guess you are being sarcastic ?

The A6300 is definitely one of the most competent APS-C cameras IQ wise, but like all of them, you need an actual RAW developer to unfold its potential. In-Camera raw / straight out of camera JPEGs will fall short. Won't be bad, just the nature of the 8-bit JPEG will force the camera to make decisions, clipping DR from the RAW file that will displease us one way or another. Maybe you can get away with some in-camera HDR mixing, but that's a different story and again, you have no real control on how the blending is happening. You need to do that manually.

I don't think the M5 will be any different, other perhaps than having a slightly better color tonality out of camera, especially for skins, which seems to be Canon's strong point regardless of model.

The Fuji's are in general considered to have the most successful in-camera processing algorithms, but again, extreme scenarios like star-scapes / star-trails are very hard to produce with generic factory presets for JPEGs.

Nov 07, 2016 at 02:48 PM

Roy_H
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · M5 vs. A6500 In camera Raw Processing

scalesusa wrote:
Additional post processing may or may not play well with the compression.

.

Any further thoughts on this? -- I am not a photoshop guru, but my experience (albeit not with Sony a6300 or A7r II) with processed/lossy compressed raws are that they dont take post-processing as well my Canon 5D III or 5Dsr files did.

Nov 14, 2016 at 02:18 PM


FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.