cvrle59 wrote:
Let's isolate this particular issue, when we talk about fairness, please.
Can you point anywhere on the net if some of those "professional reviews" found it on A7III or A7RIII?
I think I saw something about A7RIII, but it was mentioned as a very minor issue, it didn't make highlighted banner like in case of Z cameras.
To me, it was radicules the way how a common problem for all these sensors with phase af detection on image sensor was associated to only Nikon Z cameras.
If you call it fair, I need to go back to the school to relearn some stuff, the world got changed. ...Show more →
The EOS R doesn't show banding on dpreview's +5EV and +6EV DR tests, whereas the Z's do. PL's EOS R +6EV samples show banding but only a few lines across the image, whereas the Z's show the bands for every PDAF row (every 12th row). To determine why dpreview's EOS R samples don't show the modest banding in PL's EOS R samples we'd need to compare both the raws and processing applied - dpreview provides the raws for their samples but I don't see raws provided in PL's article.
The Sony FF MILCs don't have a banding issue - even PL's sample shows only a tiny hint of it. However the current Sony cameras due have a PDAF striping issue, and this was featured prominently in dpreview's review of the A7III, and was mentioned again in their Z7 review in the section where they discuss the Z7's banding. They even did an entire article about the Sony striping including possible workarounds.
Almass wrote:
The fact of the matter is that Steve Perry himself dissed the Nikon Z7 and thus did a disservice to himself with his credibility left in tatters.
Any reviewer who would profess knowledge based on a Pdf instead of a real review based on a hands on experience has only himself to blame and shows where his true professionalism value takes residence.
He is very much now part of the Pontificates sharing stardom space with the Northrumps - The blind Guy and his elephant Hue blindstone and of course the Supremo Pontificate Lanier.
All hail the Pontificates Sony Fraternity.
Why does B.S. like this have to show up in so many thread where people share differing opinions?
This started as a positive thread about the negligible relevance to most photographers of an issue that does in fact exist in a camera. The issue was confirmed in this article, as well as by all those miligned in the quoted post. Everyone is entitled to make their own call on how important that issue is. Nothing is learned or gained by this childish bashing.
Imagine that you are an FM member that is considering buying one of the Z cameras, and reading this thread trying to understand the significance of the banding issue. How does this kind of post contribute to his research, or the FM community in general?
RobCD wrote:
I'm not disagreeing with your point here but I think some context would be useful. Saying 3-5 stops only confuses the issue in my view. There is a difference between 3 to 4 stops and 5 to 6 stops. Most reviews indicate some banding starts to appear at 5 stops so to imply that you can't push the Z7 3 or 4 stops is misleading. The other point I'd like to make is that you have to weigh the percentage of situations where you'd actually be limited by not being able to push an image 5 or 6 stops with other reasons you might prefer a system like the Z7. I've tried to find landscape images that I would push 5 stops and still consider usable and it's hard - 3 stops seems to be my extreme but it may be that my post processing skills aren't up to par. In any case it just isn't something I think I'd do often enough to give up my Z7 and especially upcoming lenses like the 14-30 for the D850. You might be working around limitations of an older F mount lens design while I'm working around limitations of banding at 5+ stops. For me I'll benefit from a better lens more than I would from being able to push an image 5 to 6 stops.
So I think you have to not only believe that the banding will have an impact on your images but that it will have an impact often enough to deter you from other reasons you'd buy the Z7. If the impact is that significant then you're probably wise to buy the D850 but I know that isn't the case for me. I'm easily swayed though so if you post a few amazing landscape images pushed 5+ stops I'll probably change my mind ....Show more →
Agreed. I should say "up to 5 stops", but this also valid for most on-sensor phase detect AF and not specific to the Z's. Banding can also be an issue using silent shutter, high ISO and LED lights, which are becoming very common. I only used 5 stops when comparing the Z7 with the D810 because that's the limit of my version of LR, so my mistake referring to 6 stops...oops. When the ambient light was under exposed 5 stops, the D810 produced a clean image when pushed 5 stops that was comparable to a normal exposure at base ISO, imo. Banding is a product of mirrorless only. You're right about your last point too. Whether one encounters certain limitations often enough to deter its utility, is very subjective area. One that shouldn't get in the way of a really good 1st. gen. mirrorless.
Almass wrote:
The fact of the matter is that Steve Perry himself dissed the Nikon Z7 and thus did a disservice to himself with his credibility left in tatters.
Any reviewer who would profess knowledge based on a Pdf instead of a real review based on a hands on experience has only himself to blame and shows where his true professionalism value takes residence.
He is very much now part of the Pontificates sharing stardom space with the Northrumps - The blind Guy and his elephant Hue blindstone and of course the Supremo Pontificate Lanier.
All hail the Pontificates Sony Fraternity.
Steve has done more for fellow (wildlife) photographers than any other (professional) photographer I know. Even me, a simple photographer from Belgium gets advice from him. His books learned me a lot in improving my photography and understanding how my pictures can be made better. Just discrediting him for his views on the Z is unfair.
I have a Z7 and as I said from day 1, this is not a wildlife (or sport/action) camera as it has, for me, not enough buffer for example. On the other hand, I love to use my Z for studio work for instance and regular travel.
Pretty sure Steve feels nu grudge towards Nikon unlike the Northrumps for not getting the invite for the launch event.
Anyway, that is just my take on it.
Almass wrote:
The fact of the matter is that Steve Perry himself dissed the Nikon Z7 and thus did a disservice to himself with his credibility left in tatters.
Any reviewer who would profess knowledge based on a Pdf instead of a real review based on a hands on experience has only himself to blame and shows where his true professionalism value takes residence.
He is very much now part of the Pontificates sharing stardom space with the Northrumps - The blind Guy and his elephant Hue blindstone and of course the Supremo Pontificate Lanier.
All hail the Pontificates Sony Fraternity.
Wow, this is just strange. I thought I was on FM, and then I saw this dpreview post. Something is wrong with my ipad.
It is interesting that MILC PDAF banding issue has been correctly acknowledged for quite some time but it was as an issue you rarely encounter. The banding with PDAF with the announcement of the Z6/Z7 became quite a problem almost unique to the Z6/Z7 and it is excellent to have real comparisons and see how it truly compares with other FF MILC's and not in isolation
Ok, here's a very unscientific experiment with my model "Mandy", ( yeah, it's Winter and I have to get out more...), but nonetheless, here's what adding 5 stops of exposure does to the Z7 sensor. I used an adapted Leica M 50mm Lux at 64 ISO and am actually impressed at the what I would consider a useable image in terms of exposure. Mandy thinks she looks fat, but otherwise no banding at all.
johnld wrote:
Ok, here's a very unscientific experiment with my model "Mandy", ( yeah, it's Winter and I have to get out more...), but nonetheless, here's what adding 5 stops of exposure does to the Z7 sensor. I used an adapted Leica M 50mm Lux at 64 ISO and am actually impressed at the what I would consider a useable image in terms of exposure. Mandy thinks she looks fat, but otherwise no banding at all.
The banding requires pretty specific lighting scenarios to manifest. Unlike other cameras that have had banding, the Z's banding doesn't occur on all images. This is because the Z's banding is actually caused by firmware rather than being a characteristic of the sensor itself. The working theory is that Nikon is actively attempting to avoid the PDAF striping seen on the Sony MILCs, which is caused by oblique light reflecting off the metal masks of the PDAF pixels, and so to counteract that Nikon is employing a pixel-averaging technique around the PDAF rows when certain light intensity transitions are detected during firmware processing of an image and it's this averaging that manifests as deep-shadow banding. IMO it would have been much better to just let that striping happen, since the scenarios it occurs in are relatively rare, rarer than the instances the Z's firmware thinks it happens and thus it could avoid the banding issue entirely.
gdsf2 wrote:
Wow, this is just strange. I thought I was on FM, and then I saw this dpreview post. Something is wrong with my ipad.
Yup! I had the same feelings.
Read it, felt I had to react in defense of Steve then clicked the hide me button.
No more waste of time reading posts coming from a clearly restricted mind not able to read nor interprete Steve's responses on reviewing a camera from specs alone, which btw came true in every aspect Steve stated.
How are people finding these things? I've been really impressed with the image quality on this camera so I just went and found the darkest images I could find. Z6, f1.8, 1/80, ISO 3200 with a pitch black background. I boosted it 5 stops in lightroom which puts it at iso 102,400 equivalent. I don't see any banding on it. And even the noise isn't all that bad considering how much it's being pushed. So when exactly would this present a problem?
Full res image below. Faces overexposed +10 stops for anonymity.
EDIT, I guess FM resizing huge images so it's not the full resolution image, but still shows how crazy it is at iso 3200 +5 stops.
I've had the Z6 for about a week now. I've not been able to see any banding in my shooting. Personally, I don't need to increase 5+ stops after the fact. I've done some long 30sec exposures and brought it back a couple stops. No issues.
eSchwab wrote:
How are people finding these things? I've been really impressed with the image quality on this camera so I just went and found the darkest images I could find. Z6, f1.8, 1/80, ISO 3200 with a pitch black background. I boosted it 5 stops in lightroom which puts it at iso 102,400 equivalent. I don't see any banding on it. And even the noise isn't all that bad considering how much it's being pushed. So when exactly would this present a problem?
Full res image below. Faces overexposed +10 stops for anonymity.
EDIT, I guess FM resizing huge images so it's not the full resolution image, but still shows how crazy it is at iso 3200 +5 stops....Show more →
The banding doesn't happen in all images. It actually requires some pretty specific lighting conditions, usually an intense, isolated source of light in the frame with much darker areas in the same frame. Generally speaking outdoor shoots with the sun don't typically manifest it but it does happen on occasion in that scenario. You can read more about this in my post here.
For most photographers banding will never be an issue with on sensor PDAF but if you are a serious landscape/starscape photographer the on sensor PDAF may not suit if you pushing the shadows or consistently under exposing. This is where DSLR's may suit better.
Another option for landscape shooters that might need to preserve highlights, but want to avoid any potential banding, is to use old fashioned graduated ND filters. This way you can expose for the shadows and not be concerned about blowing highlights against a bright sky. I think understanding the fundamentals of photography and not being obsessed with technology or apps to get us there, goes a long way to taking better, more compelling images. I say this for myself too. When shooting film, I never worry about tech and it's so liberating!
.
