Archive 2017 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.20 #1 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
Pixel Perfect wrote:
It might be a case of DxO shows 1 stop increase but the actual photographic real world DR is only 1/4 stop or so better. Read noise was already low, but things like how fast the ADC's are clocked can also introduce DR limiting noise which is why A9 DR is much lower. If they have cleaned up the whole pipeline it might not be unreasonable to see a larger than expected improvement.
Well, I don't think you are diagnosing the A9 correctly. It has lower DR, but only from ISO 100 to ISO 200 otherwise it does as well as the Nikon D810. If it was overclocking the ADC that is causing the lower DR, then I think you would see the effects at all ISOs. Instead, I think it is more likely to have to do with well depth, but we really don't know. What I think you are missing is that the A7r II has excellent DR and the only reason it falls behind the Nikon D810 and D850 is because they have a true Iso 64, whereas the A7r II only has a true ISO 100. Sony didn't address that issue, and the A7r III only has ISO 100 as well. It is not as if Nikon doesn't try to clean up their pipeline and Sony would have to be much much better at cleaning up the pipeline than Nikon if they are going to get anywhere near a 1 stop improvement. I still think a quarter stop is about max that we can expect and even to get that they will have to have a much cleaner pipeline than Nikon, which is a lot to expect.
p.20 #2 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
davewolfs wrote:
I’m curious Charles. Why did you leave Sony and what feature here has you wanting to come back. I know you are enjoying your D850.
Agreed Charles on the DR front. I notice the d750’s better retention of information in the highlights especially. Some people don’t mind, but having owned an a9, a7rii and D750 I found it pretty noticeable. Hard to go back, as you say. The a9 is impressive, but I find the colors choppy and the files feel more plasticy.
p.20 #3 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
Steve Spencer wrote:
Well, I don't think you are diagnosing the A9 correctly. It has lower DR, but only from ISO 100 to ISO 200 otherwise it does as well as the Nikon D810. If it was overclocking the ADC that is causing the lower DR, then I think you would see the effects at all ISOs. Instead, I think it is more likely to have to do with well depth, but we really don't know. What I think you are missing is that the A7r II has excellent DR and the only reason it falls behind the Nikon D810 and D850 is because they have a true Iso 64, whereas the A7r II only has a true ISO 100. Sony didn't address that issue, and the A7r III only has ISO 100 as well. It is not as if Nikon doesn't try to clean up their pipeline and Sony would have to be much much better at cleaning up the pipeline than Nikon if they are going to get anywhere near a 1 stop improvement. I still think a quarter stop is about max that we can expect and even to get that they will have to have a much cleaner pipeline than Nikon, which is a lot to expect....Show more →
The k-1 and D750 have better DR at iso 100 than the a7rii though Steve. Too bad on only a quarter stop if true. That’s the one area I am constantly pushing in my shooting.
p.20 #5 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
Steve Spencer wrote:
Well, I don't think you are diagnosing the A9 correctly. It has lower DR, but only from ISO 100 to ISO 200 otherwise it does as well as the Nikon D810. If it was overclocking the ADC that is causing the lower DR, then I think you would see the effects at all ISOs. Instead, I think it is more likely to have to do with well depth, but we really don't know. What I think you are missing is that the A7r II has excellent DR and the only reason it falls behind the Nikon D810 and D850 is because they have a true Iso 64, whereas the A7r II only has a true ISO 100. Sony didn't address that issue, and the A7r III only has ISO 100 as well. It is not as if Nikon doesn't try to clean up their pipeline and Sony would have to be much much better at cleaning up the pipeline than Nikon if they are going to get anywhere near a 1 stop improvement. I still think a quarter stop is about max that we can expect and even to get that they will have to have a much cleaner pipeline than Nikon, which is a lot to expect....Show more →
According to a Sony engineer interviewed on Peta they have changed the micro lenses relative to the A7rII to get a bit more light (though that would only help at medium to high ISO) . Also they claim to get more light by better unit-relfection tech on the sensor cover.
I simply don't believe that's not a trivial amount of light. BUT it might help with the residual sensor reflections that even A7rII gets...
p.20 #6 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
just realised A7R3 use a different battery, I don't like it. Very inconvenient for those who also use A6xxx, RX10, or other A7. Why not let users to use same charger when they design the battery? Selling charger won't make them rich (I wouldn't buy one from Sony since I prefer dual charger from other brands) but different charger for different camera is bad for those travel with the gears. I'm fine with buying a new charger if that can backward compatible with old batteries.
p.20 #7 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
To me, the resolution of 7RIII is too much. If there are a model with a BSI sensor at 20M pixels, it will be perfect for me.
Oct 25, 2017 at 11:31 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.20 #8 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
nehemiahphoto wrote:
The k-1 and D750 have better DR at iso 100 than the a7rii though Steve.
Not as measured on William Klaff's site only (at least not to any noticeable margin). Klaff has them as A7rII 11.4; Pentax K1 11.43, and D750 11.48 stops in what he calls photographic dynamic range. So we art talking not even a 1/10th of a stop difference between the three. Keep in mind that Klaff uses actual photographs from several different cameras for his measurements whereas DXO appears to test just one camera. I think there is a real possibility that DXO's measurement of DR for the A7rII under reports it a bit.
Oct 25, 2017 at 11:32 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.20 #9 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
DavidBM wrote:
According to a Sony engineer interviewed on Peta they have changed the micro lenses relative to the A7rII to get a bit more light (though that would only help at medium to high ISO) . Also they claim to get more light by better unit-relfection tech on the sensor cover.
I simply don't believe that's not a trivial amount of light. BUT it might help with the residual sensor reflections that even A7rII gets...
Improving the coating on the sensor glass is something they mention on the main spec sheet for the camera (as opposed to just vague statement about DR) and I had the same thought about that as you say here. I think some improvement on reflections would be great.
p.20 #10 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
ytwong wrote:
just realised A7R3 use a different battery, I don't like it. Very inconvenient for those who also use A6xxx, RX10, or other A7. Why not let users to use same charger when they design the battery? Selling charger won't make them rich (I wouldn't buy one from Sony since I prefer dual charger from other brands) but different charger for different camera is bad for those travel with the gears. I'm fine with buying a new charger if that can backward compatible with old batteries.
So, you like having to carry a lot of extra batteries? I'm sure the new processor on the a7RIII is more demanding than previous models, so using the FW50's will probably drain quicker. The FW50's have terrible battery life, one of the biggest complaints from the cameras that you mentioned. I run the new FZ100 batteries for almost an entire 8hr wedding day on my a9. Yes, they cost more, but you won't need more than two. Just sayin
p.20 #11 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
Steve Spencer wrote:
Not as measured on William Klaff's site only (at least not to any noticeable margin). Klaff has them as A7rII 11.4; Pentax K1 11.43, and D750 11.48 stops in what he calls photographic dynamic range. So we art talking not even a 1/10th of a stop difference between the three. Keep in mind that Klaff uses actual photographs from several different cameras for his measurements whereas DXO appears to test just one camera. I think there is a real possibility that DXO's measurement of DR for the A7rII under reports it a bit.
I’ll have to read up on his methodology. But looking at his scores for the a7s, rx1 and a7, I think they are odd. I’ve owned those three cameras, and the rx1 and a7 are very similar in my experience, but not in his. And the dr on A7s is noticeably worse than the a7, but similar in his estimation. I’ll need to check how he gets his numbers. My d750 had better dr than my a7rii in real world usage.
Oct 26, 2017 at 12:00 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.20 #12 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I’ll have to read up on his methodology. But looking at his scores for the a7s, rx1 and a7, I think they are odd. I’ve owned those three cameras, and the rx1 and a7 are very similar in my experience, but not in his. And the dr on A7s is noticeably worse than the a7, but similar in his estimation. I’ll need to check how he gets his numbers. My d750 had better dr than my a7rii in real world usage I felt.
Well I don't know. I have had both the A7 II and the A7s (the A7II scores very close to the A7) and I think the number 10.73 for the A7 (or A7 II) and 11.13 for the A7s or about 4/10th of a stop fit pretty well with my experience and it wouldn't surprise me if the RX1 was a third of stop better yet than the A7s.. DXO mark has even bigger discrepancies for these cameras. DXO has it 13.06 for the A7s, 14.1 for the A7, and 14.27 for the RX1.
Also keep in mind that the scores at Klaff's site and DXO correlate very highly and that the A7rII is one of the cameras in which the divergence of the scores from the two sites is the biggest.
p.20 #13 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
ryuemura wrote:
So, you like having to carry a lot of extra batteries? I'm sure the new processor on the a7RIII is more demanding than previous models, so using the FW50's will probably drain quicker. The FW50's have terrible battery life, one of the biggest complaints from the cameras that you mentioned. I run the new FZ100 batteries for almost an entire 8hr wedding day on my a9. Yes, they cost more, but you won't need more than two. Just sayin
Carrying a few batteries is better than carrying a lot of different type of batteries. It depends on whether you also use other cameras. RX10MK4 is new and it is not using the new FZ100 battery.
Also, I have mentioned about backward compatibility of charger. I remember I could snap a FW50 into a Sony E-mount camcorder, which ships with a much larger battery.
p.20 #14 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
Steve Spencer wrote:
Well I don't know. I have had both the A7 II and the A7s (the A7II scores very close to the A7) and I think the number 10.73 for the A7 (or A7 II) and 11.13 for the A7s or about 4/10th of a stop fit pretty well with my experience and it wouldn't surprise me if the RX1 was a third of stop better yet than the A7s.. DXO mark has even bigger discrepancies for these cameras. DXO has it 13.06 for the A7s, 14.1 for the A7, and 14.27 for the RX1.
Also keep in mind that the scores at Klaff's site and DXO correlate very highly and that the A7rII is one of the cameras in which the divergence of the scores from the two sites is the biggest....Show more →
The discrepancies could be attributed to sample variation. The IC's used in the circuitry all have varying degrees of performance, including heat and noise. I had three A7R's over the years, and there seemed to be some difference in their noise performance. The same can be said for my Canon DSLR's.
Oct 26, 2017 at 12:42 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.20 #15 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
pdmphoto wrote:
The discrepancies could be attributed to sample variation. The IC's used in the circuitry all have varying degrees of performance, including heat and noise. I had three A7R's over the years, and there seemed to be some difference in their noise performance. The same can be said for my Canon DSLR's.
I think that is likely and the sample variation should be greater for DXO that seems to test just one camera than from Klaff's site which tends to analyze images from multiple cameras for its measurements.
p.20 #16 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
I agree with the backwards compatibility, that would be very useful, since lots of people use the cameras you mentioned above as a backup body or for different shoots.
The only thing that bothered me was your first sentence, "just realised A7R3 use a different battery, I don't like it." It just makes it seem like the much improved battery was the deal breaker for you. Sorry, it just sounded absolutely absurd, but I get what you're saying. I use both the a9 and a7SII on shoots, I just have a bunch of extra batteries so I never have to worry about charging during an event. To me, it's not that inconvenient, I also charge my AA and AAA Eneloops at the same time. That's 4 different types of batteries at once, not a big deal. Keep in mind, Sony did this because of complaints from the FW50's poor battery life. It's a compromise in size, but I find it very convenient overall. I can honestly say that these new batteries will be in every new Sony Alpha body going forth for the next few generations. I'm not in your shoes, your needs and wants will be very different to mine. To each their own.
p.20 #17 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
nightscrawler wrote:
To me, the resolution of 7RIII is too much. If there are a model with a BSI sensor at 20M pixels, it will be perfect for me.
_______
Then wait for the A7III . . . when it comes out. Maybe.
p.20 #19 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
Steve Spencer wrote:
Well, I don't think you are diagnosing the A9 correctly. It has lower DR, but only from ISO 100 to ISO 200 otherwise it does as well as the Nikon D810. If it was overclocking the ADC that is causing the lower DR, then I think you would see the effects at all ISOs. Instead, I think it is more likely to have to do with well depth, but we really don't know. What I think you are missing is that the A7r II has excellent DR and the only reason it falls behind the Nikon D810 and D850 is because they have a true Iso 64, whereas the A7r II only has a true ISO 100. Sony didn't address that issue, and the A7r III only has ISO 100 as well. It is not as if Nikon doesn't try to clean up their pipeline and Sony would have to be much much better at cleaning up the pipeline than Nikon if they are going to get anywhere near a 1 stop improvement. I still think a quarter stop is about max that we can expect and even to get that they will have to have a much cleaner pipeline than Nikon, which is a lot to expect....Show more →
Steve, does it look like 5th generation Exmor R (same as A7Rii) plus the NIR mod (as increasing of the pixels well depth) ? if this was the case then we now have better DR in both low and hi ISO range compared to A7Rii. TIA, Michael
p.20 #20 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
People are loosing their minds with scepticism over this 15 stop DR. ...it’s not 64 iso so it’s impossible ...it’s the same sensor ...Sony haven’t been quite as good as Nikon in the past ...and so on.
This sort of talk is simply noise. Why would Sony be lying? Maybe Sony found a new way to get more DR that Nikon hasn’t. We won’t know for sure until the camera is tested. It’s just silly reading people on forums who seem to think they know more than Sony experts, without any testing.
