Regarding NR, that's what I expected. It's one of the reasons A7V beats S1II in DR department (the other being 33 mpx is my guess ).
If there's no indication, then it means that mechanical shutter was used on ptp, I think.
Lower DR than its predecessor is understandable, since the latter does not "waste" any sensor space on bumping up readout speed (and that's without NR!) .
I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that the dual output gain technology shouldn't work with ES. There was a case when Bill Claff saw this PDR drop for ES vs. MS for Panasonic G9II. However he subsequently corrected this as a mistake, although the origin of the problem wasn't explained. Now, the coorected ES PDR and MS PDR are the same for G9II, as seen on photonstophotos. I can only suspect that the problem encountered by Bill could be due to the fact that DOG on the G9II works only when SS > 1s. At 1s and slower, the DR drops precipitously. There is no ES data for Panasonic S1 II; thus, I am not sure where the expected/proposed DR drop with ES on this camera comes from?
I hope Bill hasn't run into some technical problems with the ES on A7V, of the kind he had earlier with the G9II. If I had the camera, I would have simply collected a series of dark frames at different shutter speeds, with ES and MS, then pushed the exposure by 4 stops in post. This is the simplest way to see differences in noise.
j4nu wrote:
I think it's the same sensor tech, so that is to be expected.
The bonus is DGO, which coupled with NR, gives A7V 2 stop advantage at base ISO...
Maybe its the same sensor tech, hard to tell. Doesn't change the fact that on top of this "same sensor tech" Sony also added NR. Kinda weird. I wonder how the score would look like without it.
Otherwise it's the same story for MCH - "2 stops more" coz you cant disable NR so you don't know how much it really is. I doubt Sony would add NR to both modes for shit and giggles.
Either way the title of this thread should be changed lol.
ruthenium wrote:
There is no ES data for Panasonic S1 II; thus, I am not sure where the expected/proposed DR drop with ES on this camera comes from?
It comes from the S1II not using DGO for the ES. While there may be no technical reason that prevents DGO working with the ES, Panasonic appears to have done so due to DGO's 2x readout speed. Panasonic has a history of favoring readout speed over IQ for their ES's, including for their shutterless MILCs.
The PDR of the mechanical shutter is 1.5EV higher than the ES.
This is highly suggestive of the A7V's mechanical using DGO like the S1 II, provided it doesn't drop down to 12 bits for the ES.
May I ask you, in your animation of S1II mechanical vs electronic shutter noise, in the DPR article, that shows different amounts of noise, what was the shutter speed?
ruthenium wrote:
I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that the dual output gain technology shouldn't work with ES. There was a case when Bill Claff saw this PDR drop for ES vs. MS for Panasonic G9II. However he subsequently corrected this as a mistake, although the origin of the problem wasn't explained. Now, the coorected ES PDR and MS PDR are the same for G9II, as seen on photonstophotos. I can only suspect that the problem encountered by Bill could be due to the fact that DOG on the G9II works only when SS > 1s. At 1s and slower, the DR drops precipitously. There is no ES data for Panasonic S1 II; thus, I am not sure where the expected/proposed DR drop with ES on this camera comes from?
I hope Bill hasn't run into some technical problems with the ES on A7V, of the kind he had earlier with the G9II. If I had the camera, I would have simply collected a series of dark frames at different shutter speeds, with ES and MS, then pushed the exposure by 4 stops in post. This is the simplest way to see differences in noise....Show more →
Yes, you're right. I thought you were questioning the drop coming from the lack of GDO, not the reason for the lack of GDO .
ruthenium wrote:
May I ask you, in your animation of S1II mechanical vs electronic shutter noise, in the DPR article, that shows different amounts of noise, what was the shutter speed?
I'd have to check but in case you were wondering, the S1 II's DGO isn't gated by shutter speed like it is on Panasonic's MFTs, so the shutter speed doesn't affect the output.
snapsy wrote:
It comes from the S1II not using DGO for the ES. While there may be no technical reason that prevents DGO working with the ES, Panasonic appears to have done so due to DGO's 2x readout speed. Panasonic has a history of favoring readout speed over IQ for their ES's, including for their shutterless MILCs.
I am asking the above question because the dual output gain doesn't work at slow SS. I haven't seen reports on when this happens on S1II. Do you know?
Immortal wrote:
Maybe its the same sensor tech, hard to tell. Doesn't change the fact that on top of this "same sensor tech" Sony also added NR. Kinda weird. I wonder how the score would look like without it.
Otherwise it's the same story for MCH - "2 stops more" coz you cant disable NR so you don't know how much it really is. I doubt Sony would add NR to both modes for shit and giggles.
Either way the title of this thread should be changed lol.
I guess I wasn't clear in my post, the main reason for A7V's DR advantage is GDO (which Nikon lacks), not NR (which Nikon also lacks ).
snapsy wrote:
I'd have to check but in case you were wondering, the S1 II's DGO isn't gated by shutter speed like it is on Panasonic's MFTs, so the shutter speed doesn't affect the output.
If you comprehensively tested this on S1II, I am willing to take your word. This should be tested for A7V, nevertheless.
ruthenium wrote:
I am asking the above question because the dual output gain doesn't work at slow SS. I haven't seen reports on when this happens on S1II. Do you know?
As I indicated, the S1 II's DGO implementation isn't gated by shutter speed like it is on their MFTs - per my testing it works at all shutter speeds.
j4nu wrote:
I guess I wasn't clear in my post, the main reason for A7V's DR advantage is GDO (which Nikon lacks), not NR (which Nikon also lacks ).
Nah, you were clear, just we can't disable NR so it's hard to say what the real DR really is. Also Nikon lacking NR in my view is a good thing, you can also apply NR later in post if you wish... Still its more than fine for most people and A7 V is a good body no doubt about it.
Immortal wrote:
Nah, you were clear, just we can't disable NR so it's hard to say what the real DR really is. Also Nikon lacking NR in my view is a good thing, you can also apply NR later in post if you wish... Still its more than fine for most people and A7 V is a good body no doubt about it.
Yes, as well as Nikon lacking the DGO is the bad thing, because that's what gives A7V the advantage in DR (for the most part at least, as can be seen on the MS vs ES charts).
Regarding the A7V's presumed NR as reported by BIll, I would have to see the FFTs myself to make that same determination. Based on my S1 II testing, the algorithm for merging the two gain readouts for DGO creates FFTs that look very similar to NR frequency filtering but which may in fact not be NR. Here's my post about it for the S1 II:
snapsy wrote:
Regarding the A7V's presumed NR as reported by BIll, I would have to see the FFTs myself to make that same determination. Based on my S1 II testing, the algorithm for merging the two gain readouts for DGO creates FFTs that look very similar to NR frequency filtering but which may in fact not be NR. Here's my post about it for the S1 II:
aCuria wrote:
Meanwhile, the other camp swings so far the other way that they basically believe cameras are decorative accessories. According to them, image quality comes entirely from the photographer’s soul, and any sufficiently enlightened artist could produce a Pulitzer-winning portrait with a potato with a pinhole in it.
Somewhere between “this camera is ruined by 0.2 stops of shadow noise” and “gear doesn’t matter, I shoot masterpieces on a boiled russet” lies reality.
Sigh.
Though in the spirit of this group I feel compelled to wonder if you could do better by not boiling the russet as I imagine the coherence of the pinhole would be easier to maintain in the raw state...
Though in the spirit of this group I feel compelled to wonder if you could do better by not boiling the russet as I imagine the coherence of the pinhole would be easier to maintain in the raw state...
I want this thread to happen now... I imagine it running longer than the 3d Pop thread.
Did you add salt to the water before boiling?
What elevation is your stove at?
Are the potatoes grown at an organic farm?
).
.
).