A7V dynamic range is extremely good
p.10 #1A7V dynamic range is extremely good
aCuria wrote:
However, in thousands of images shot under a variety of home and public LED lighting, I have virtually never gotten a banded image with either an A9, A1, or A1 II. They are all fast enough to not have a problem with common modern lighting.
On the other hand, with an A7iii, A7RIII, A7Cii, and A7CR, banding under common LED lights is universal and extreme.
So it is a matter of degree rather than an absolute, but the degree of difference between stacked and unstacked is very great.
My question is where will the A7V fall?As you can see from my A1 sample, I’ve definitely run into everyday light bulbs that cause banding when using the A1’s electronic shutter. This wasn’t anything exotic either, just a single standard domestic fixture with cheap E27 bulbs.Yes, but you shot it at 1/32000s (i.e. A1's max shutter speed) 
... That is not really typical when shooting with indoor LED lightning .The high shutter is on purpose to maximize the visibility of the banding effect. This way, the lines where the light is flickered OFF will be completely black.
At slower shutter speeds the banding is not as high contrast but its still there!
If I used the A9iii to take the same shot, it would be completely clean even at 1/32000s!
Global Shutter
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54985118913_eaa2ea3a6d_b.jpguntitled-15 by acurian, on Flickr
On some frames you can see the bulbs flickering on and off
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54984052542_9c4ddd3854_b.jpguntitled-14 by acurian, on FlickrYes, that's what I meant. Unless @chiron@@ shoots his indoor events at 1/32000s, it won't affect his shooting.
And as you noted, GS has its own share of problems with flicker ...No! At lower shutter the banding is still there.
...GS does not have issues in practice for me.
First, the anti flicker setting will help you catch shots when the lights at their maximum cycle.
Second, my subjects are not on the ceiling. The light bulb being dimmer does not affect a shot of the subject.
The lower shutter speed, the less visible the banding is. If it's not visible, then it's as good as it wasn't there at 1/32000s.
BTW, A1 also has anti-flicker setting.
I guess the difference in brightness (GS) can show up in the images depending on the lightning...
j4nu wrote
aCuria wrote
j4nu wrote
aCuria wrote
chiron wrote
Yes, but no. Jim Kasson has previously demonstrated that some LED lights can produce banding even with a stacked sensor. This is especially true of some stadium and theatrical lighting and the occasional home, public or retail lightingHowever, in thousands of images shot under a variety of home and public LED lighting, I have virtually never gotten a banded image with either an A9, A1, or A1 II. They are all fast enough to not have a problem with common modern lighting.
On the other hand, with an A7iii, A7RIII, A7Cii, and A7CR, banding under common LED lights is universal and extreme.
So it is a matter of degree rather than an absolute, but the degree of difference between stacked and unstacked is very great.
My question is where will the A7V fall?
... That is not really typical when shooting with indoor LED lightning .At slower shutter speeds the banding is not as high contrast but its still there!
If I used the A9iii to take the same shot, it would be completely clean even at 1/32000s!
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54985118913_eaa2ea3a6d_b.jpguntitled-15 by acurian, on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54984052542_9c4ddd3854_b.jpguntitled-14 by acurian, on Flickr
And as you noted, GS has its own share of problems with flicker
...j4nu wrote
Yes, that's what I meant. Unless @chiron@@ shoots his indoor events at 1/32000s, it won't affect his shooting.j4nu wrote
GS has its own share of problems with flicker ...First, the anti flicker setting will help you catch shots when the lights at their maximum cycle.
Second, my subjects are not on the ceiling. The light bulb being dimmer does not affect a shot of the subject.
The lower shutter speed, the less visible the banding is. If it's not visible, then it's as good as it wasn't there at 1/32000s.
BTW, A1 also has anti-flicker setting.
I guess the difference in brightness (GS) can show up in the images depending on the lightning...
Dec 15, 2025 at 01:00 AM
p.10 #2A7V dynamic range is extremely good
aCuria wrote:
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54170824145_f7eddd8ce9_b.jpgDSC06561 by acurian, on Flickr
As you can see in the image sample, even the A1 has trouble in some situations so I would not expect much too much from the A7V. Global shutter is the only answer afaik
I have never seen such banding in my A1 images. What settings do you have to get that?
EDIT: Maybe my question isn't the right one to ask: I shot two series of images with the A1. LED bulbs and a low energy tube lamp respectively, electronic shutter, no anti flicker, no variable shutter speed, power line is 50Hz here, shutter speed ranging from 1/40 - 1/640 in 1/3 steps and got no accentuated banding. With the tube light I got color shifting over large areas but that's it.
I also regularely shoot in different kinds of light having the camera set to aperture priority without any problems.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54170824145_f7eddd8ce9_b.jpgDSC06561 by acurian, on Flickr
As you can see in the image sample, even the A1 has trouble in some situations so I would not expect much too much from the A7V. Global shutter is the only answer afaik
I have never seen such banding in my A1 images. What settings do you have to get that?
EDIT: Maybe my question isn't the right one to ask: I shot two series of images with the A1. LED bulbs and a low energy tube lamp respectively, electronic shutter, no anti flicker, no variable shutter speed, power line is 50Hz here, shutter speed ranging from 1/40 - 1/640 in 1/3 steps and got no accentuated banding. With the tube light I got color shifting over large areas but that's it.
I also regularely shoot in different kinds of light having the camera set to aperture priority without any problems.
Dec 15, 2025 at 01:15 AM
p.10 #3A7V dynamic range is extremely good
Jonas B wrote:
As you can see in the image sample, even the A1 has trouble in some situations so I would not expect much too much from the A7V. Global shutter is the only answer afaikI have never seen such banding in my A1 images. What settings do you have to get that?
EDIT: Maybe my question isn't the right one to ask: I shot two series of images with the A1. LED bulbs and a low energy tube lamp respectively, electronic shutter, no anti flicker, no variable shutter speed, power line is 50Hz here, shutter speed ranging from 1/40 - 1/640 in 1/3 steps and got no accentuated banding. With the tube light I got color shifting over large areas but that's it.
I also regularely shoot in different kinds of light having the camera...Show more →
Are you saying you're not shooting at 1/32000s indoors normally?
Weird.
aCuria wrote
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54170824145_f7eddd8ce9_b.jpgDSC06561 by acurian, on FlickrAs you can see in the image sample, even the A1 has trouble in some situations so I would not expect much too much from the A7V. Global shutter is the only answer afaik
EDIT: Maybe my question isn't the right one to ask: I shot two series of images with the A1. LED bulbs and a low energy tube lamp respectively, electronic shutter, no anti flicker, no variable shutter speed, power line is 50Hz here, shutter speed ranging from 1/40 - 1/640 in 1/3 steps and got no accentuated banding. With the tube light I got color shifting over large areas but that's it.
I also regularely shoot in different kinds of light having the camera...Show more →
Are you saying you're not shooting at 1/32000s indoors normally?
Weird.
Dec 15, 2025 at 02:19 AM
p.10 #4A7V dynamic range is extremely good
j4nu wrote:
Are you saying you're not shooting at 1/32000s indoors normally?
Weird.
So it is, weirdly enough.
I did get interested in snapsys super banding 1/400 image. How did that happen?
Are you saying you're not shooting at 1/32000s indoors normally?
Weird.
So it is, weirdly enough.
I did get interested in snapsys super banding 1/400 image. How did that happen?
Dec 15, 2025 at 02:40 AM
p.10 #5A7V dynamic range is extremely good
Jonas B wrote:
Weird.So it is, weirdly enough.
I did get interested in snapsys super banding 1/400 image. How did that happen?
they use a dimmer switch which is based on frequency pulse, its all set up to fail, its beginner electronics.
j4nu wrote
Are you saying you're not shooting at 1/32000s indoors normally?Weird.
I did get interested in snapsys super banding 1/400 image. How did that happen?
they use a dimmer switch which is based on frequency pulse, its all set up to fail, its beginner electronics.
Dec 15, 2025 at 02:56 AM
p.10 #6A7V dynamic range is extremely good
A74me wrote:
Weird.So it is, weirdly enough.
I did get interested in snapsys super banding 1/400 image. How did that happen?they use a dimmer switch which is based on frequency pulse, its all set up to fail, its beginner electronics.
Ah, like the PWM monitors?! OK, that may need a global shutter.
Jonas B wrote
j4nu wrote
Are you saying you're not shooting at 1/32000s indoors normally?Weird.
I did get interested in snapsys super banding 1/400 image. How did that happen?
Ah, like the PWM monitors?! OK, that may need a global shutter.
Dec 15, 2025 at 02:58 AM
p.10 #7A7V dynamic range is extremely good
Jonas B wrote:
Weird.So it is, weirdly enough.
I did get interested in snapsys super banding 1/400 image. How did that happen?
Depends on the light source (flicker frequency). We were talking about standard indoor LEDs here until now . Snapsy uses a custom arduino LED + program to blink it I think. I bought one as well as he asked about it once ...
j4nu wrote
Are you saying you're not shooting at 1/32000s indoors normally?Weird.
I did get interested in snapsys super banding 1/400 image. How did that happen?
Depends on the light source (flicker frequency). We were talking about standard indoor LEDs here until now
. Snapsy uses a custom arduino LED + program to blink it I think. I bought one as well as he asked about it once ...Dec 15, 2025 at 03:00 AM
p.10 #8A7V dynamic range is extremely good
j4nu wrote:
Weird.So it is, weirdly enough.
I did get interested in snapsys super banding 1/400 image. How did that happen?Depends on the light source (flicker frequency). We were talking about standard indoor LEDs here until now . Snapsy uses a custom arduino LED + program to blink it I think. I bought one as well as he asked about it once ...
So he is having his Arduino thing controlling the ceiling lamp? I think I recognize an IKEA plafond.
Jonas B wrote
j4nu wrote
Are you saying you're not shooting at 1/32000s indoors normally?Weird.
I did get interested in snapsys super banding 1/400 image. How did that happen?
. Snapsy uses a custom arduino LED + program to blink it I think. I bought one as well as he asked about it once ...So he is having his Arduino thing controlling the ceiling lamp? I think I recognize an IKEA plafond.
Dec 15, 2025 at 03:07 AM
p.10 #9A7V dynamic range is extremely good
Jonas B wrote:
Weird.So it is, weirdly enough.
I did get interested in snapsys super banding 1/400 image. How did that happen?Depends on the light source (flicker frequency). We were talking about standard indoor LEDs here until now . Snapsy uses a custom arduino LED + program to blink it I think. I bought one as well as he asked about it once ...So he is having his Arduino thing controlling the ceiling lamp? I think I recognize an IKEA plafond.
Hmm, I'm lost I'm afraid .
Can you link to that post so I can have a look?
j4nu wrote
Jonas B wrote
j4nu wrote
Are you saying you're not shooting at 1/32000s indoors normally?Weird.
I did get interested in snapsys super banding 1/400 image. How did that happen?
. Snapsy uses a custom arduino LED + program to blink it I think. I bought one as well as he asked about it once ...Hmm, I'm lost I'm afraid
.Can you link to that post so I can have a look?
Dec 15, 2025 at 03:09 AM
p.10 #10A7V dynamic range is extremely good
j4nu wrote:
Hmm, I'm lost I'm afraid .
Can you link to that post so I can have a look?
Some misunderstanding I think. Last page, the ceiling lamp. Then you wrote something about the Arduino and (I guess the rolling shutter project) I asked if the ceiling lamp was connected to the Arduino as i thought that was strange.
We can just drop it.
regards
Hmm, I'm lost I'm afraid
.Can you link to that post so I can have a look?
Some misunderstanding I think. Last page, the ceiling lamp. Then you wrote something about the Arduino and (I guess the rolling shutter project) I asked if the ceiling lamp was connected to the Arduino as i thought that was strange.
We can just drop it.
regards
Dec 15, 2025 at 03:29 AM
|
p.10 #11A7V dynamic range is extremely good
Jonas B wrote:
.
Can you link to that post so I can have a look?Some misunderstanding I think. Last page, the ceiling lamp. Then you wrote something about the Arduino and (I guess the rolling shutter project) I asked if the ceiling lamp was connected to the Arduino as i thought that was strange.
We can just drop it.
regards
Ah, ok - I though there was some other post by snapsy with banding, as you mentioned him...
Edited on Dec 15, 2025 at 03:55 AM · View previous versions
j4nu wrote
Hmm, I'm lost I'm afraid .Can you link to that post so I can have a look?
We can just drop it.
regards
Ah, ok - I though there was some other post by snapsy with banding, as you mentioned him...
Edited on Dec 15, 2025 at 03:55 AM · View previous versions
Dec 15, 2025 at 03:32 AM
p.10 #12A7V dynamic range is extremely good
Jonas B wrote:
Weird.So it is, weirdly enough.
I did get interested in snapsys super banding 1/400 image. How did that happen?they use a dimmer switch which is based on frequency pulse, its all set up to fail, its beginner electronics.Ah, like the PWM monitors?! OK, that may need a global shutter.
if you want 99% the a93 is for you, whats wrong with using mechanical shutter ?
A74me wrote
Jonas B wrote
j4nu wrote
Are you saying you're not shooting at 1/32000s indoors normally?Weird.
I did get interested in snapsys super banding 1/400 image. How did that happen?
if you want 99% the a93 is for you, whats wrong with using mechanical shutter ?
Dec 15, 2025 at 03:51 AM
p.10 #13A7V dynamic range is extremely good
On my rolling shutter project I have a full description of how the lighting frequency and shutter speed interact to produce banding with electronic shutters:
https://github.com/horshack-dpreview/RollingShutter?tab=readme-ov-file#rolling-shutter-issues
https://github.com/horshack-dpreview/RollingShutter?tab=readme-ov-file#rolling-shutter-issues
Dec 15, 2025 at 05:45 AM
p.10 #14A7V dynamic range is extremely good
If my upcoming A7V performs like my R6MKII in ES I'll be happy. With the Canon I shot some outdoor tennis and indoor volleyball with it and I didn't see any distortions (i.e. elongated racquets, oblong balls and etc.). I'll be able to test how good the DR as well (i.e. dark skinned player with white outfits or vice versa). My 135GM should be long enough on secondary courts (not stadium) and if it is slightly short, there's always the APS-C mode albeit only 14MP which is more than good enough for me.
Dec 15, 2025 at 07:40 AM
p.10 #15A7V dynamic range is extremely good
aCuria wrote:
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54170824145_f7eddd8ce9_b.jpgDSC06561 by acurian, on Flickr
As you can see in the image sample, even the A1 has trouble in some situations so I would not expect much too much from the A7V. Global shutter is the only answer afaikYes, but no. Jim Kasson has previously demonstrated that some LED lights can produce banding even with a stacked sensor. This is especially true of some stadium and theatrical lighting and the occasional home, public or retail lighting
However, in thousands of images shot under a variety of home and public LED lighting, I have virtually never gotten a banded image with either an A9, A1, or A1 II. They are all fast enough to not have a problem with common modern lighting.
On the other hand, with an A7iii, A7RIII, A7Cii, and A7CR, banding under common LED lights is universal and extreme.
So it is a matter of degree rather than an absolute, but the degree of difference between stacked and unstacked is very great.
My question is where will the A7V fall?Basically you lucked out. I’ve definitely run into my fair share of everyday light bulbs that cause banding when using the A1’s electronic shutter.
The image sample wasn’t anything exotic either, just a single standard domestic fixture with cheap E27 bulbs shot with the A1 at high shutter speed.
The mechanical shutter on the A1 is remarkably fast, and does mitigate banding to a greater extent.
j4nu's analysis is exactly right. With a stacked sensor shooting ES under LED lights, it is almost always easy to avoid banding by limiting one's shutter speed. With a non-stacked sensor under LED light, it is impossible not to get extensive banding when using ES.
I usually shoot under available light, so my shutter speed indoors is usually not faster than 1/250th of a second. As the light goes down (and the flicker interval of an LED becomes longer), so does my shutter speed. Result with a stacked sensor is no banding.
I just never have a problrem with my A1 II, A1, or A9 under LED lights and ES. I always have a problem with LED banding with my A7CR, A7CII and any other camera with a non-stacked sensor while using ES.
Luck has nothing to do with it, obviously.
chiron wrote
aCuria wrote
chiron wrote
Does anyone have any educated estimates of how well the semi-stacked sensor in the A7V will deal with the banding problem caused by the flickering of modern LED lighting (which is becoming ubiquitous)?As you can see in the image sample, even the A1 has trouble in some situations so I would not expect much too much from the A7V. Global shutter is the only answer afaik
However, in thousands of images shot under a variety of home and public LED lighting, I have virtually never gotten a banded image with either an A9, A1, or A1 II. They are all fast enough to not have a problem with common modern lighting.
On the other hand, with an A7iii, A7RIII, A7Cii, and A7CR, banding under common LED lights is universal and extreme.
So it is a matter of degree rather than an absolute, but the degree of difference between stacked and unstacked is very great.
My question is where will the A7V fall?
chiron wrote
However, in thousands of images shot under a variety of home and public LED lighting, I have virtually never gotten a banded image with either an A9, A1, or A1 II. They are all fast enough to not have a problem with common modern lighting.The image sample wasn’t anything exotic either, just a single standard domestic fixture with cheap E27 bulbs shot with the A1 at high shutter speed.
The mechanical shutter on the A1 is remarkably fast, and does mitigate banding to a greater extent.
j4nu's analysis is exactly right. With a stacked sensor shooting ES under LED lights, it is almost always easy to avoid banding by limiting one's shutter speed. With a non-stacked sensor under LED light, it is impossible not to get extensive banding when using ES.
I usually shoot under available light, so my shutter speed indoors is usually not faster than 1/250th of a second. As the light goes down (and the flicker interval of an LED becomes longer), so does my shutter speed. Result with a stacked sensor is no banding.
I just never have a problrem with my A1 II, A1, or A9 under LED lights and ES. I always have a problem with LED banding with my A7CR, A7CII and any other camera with a non-stacked sensor while using ES.
Luck has nothing to do with it, obviously.
Dec 15, 2025 at 08:25 AM
p.10 #16A7V dynamic range is extremely good
chiron wrote:
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54170824145_f7eddd8ce9_b.jpgDSC06561 by acurian, on Flickr
As you can see in the image sample, even the A1 has trouble in some situations so I would not expect much too much from the A7V. Global shutter is the only answer afaikYes, but no. Jim Kasson has previously demonstrated that some LED lights can produce banding even with a stacked sensor. This is especially true of some stadium and theatrical lighting and the occasional home, public or retail lighting
However, in thousands of images shot under a variety of home and public LED lighting, I have virtually never gotten a banded image with either an A9, A1, or A1 II. They are all fast enough to not have a problem with common modern lighting.
On the other hand, with an A7iii, A7RIII, A7Cii, and A7CR, banding under common LED lights is universal and extreme.
So it is a matter of degree rather than an absolute, but the degree of difference between stacked and unstacked is very great.
My question is where will the A7V fall?Basically you lucked out. I’ve definitely run into my fair share of everyday light bulbs that cause banding when using the A1’s electronic shutter.
The image sample wasn’t anything exotic either, just a single standard domestic fixture with cheap E27 bulbs shot with the A1 at high shutter speed.
The mechanical shutter on the A1 is remarkably fast, and does mitigate banding to a greater extent.j4nu's analysis is exactly right. With a stacked sensor shooting ES under LED lights, it is almost always easy to avoid banding by limiting one's shutter speed. With a non-stacked sensor under LED light, it is impossible not to get extensive banding when using ES.
I usually shoot under available light, so my shutter speed indoors is usually not faster than 1/250th of a second. As the light goes down (and the flicker interval of an LED becomes longer), so does my shutter speed. Result with a stacked sensor is no banding.
I just never have a problrem with my A1...Show more →
https://youtu.be/CTgEZa2ZPyA
Chiron, I wrote some software to simulate this. It lets you see the kind of banding you’d get at different LED flicker frequencies when you’re shooting at a 1/250 s shutter speed.
aCuria wrote
chiron wrote
aCuria wrote
chiron wrote
Does anyone have any educated estimates of how well the semi-stacked sensor in the A7V will deal with the banding problem caused by the flickering of modern LED lighting (which is becoming ubiquitous)?As you can see in the image sample, even the A1 has trouble in some situations so I would not expect much too much from the A7V. Global shutter is the only answer afaik
However, in thousands of images shot under a variety of home and public LED lighting, I have virtually never gotten a banded image with either an A9, A1, or A1 II. They are all fast enough to not have a problem with common modern lighting.
On the other hand, with an A7iii, A7RIII, A7Cii, and A7CR, banding under common LED lights is universal and extreme.
So it is a matter of degree rather than an absolute, but the degree of difference between stacked and unstacked is very great.
My question is where will the A7V fall?
chiron wrote
However, in thousands of images shot under a variety of home and public LED lighting, I have virtually never gotten a banded image with either an A9, A1, or A1 II. They are all fast enough to not have a problem with common modern lighting.The image sample wasn’t anything exotic either, just a single standard domestic fixture with cheap E27 bulbs shot with the A1 at high shutter speed.
The mechanical shutter on the A1 is remarkably fast, and does mitigate banding to a greater extent.
I usually shoot under available light, so my shutter speed indoors is usually not faster than 1/250th of a second. As the light goes down (and the flicker interval of an LED becomes longer), so does my shutter speed. Result with a stacked sensor is no banding.
I just never have a problrem with my A1...Show more →
https://youtu.be/CTgEZa2ZPyA
Chiron, I wrote some software to simulate this. It lets you see the kind of banding you’d get at different LED flicker frequencies when you’re shooting at a 1/250 s shutter speed.
Dec 18, 2025 at 05:19 AM
p.10 #17A7V dynamic range is extremely good
aCuria wrote:
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54170824145_f7eddd8ce9_b.jpgDSC06561 by acurian, on Flickr
As you can see in the image sample, even the A1 has trouble in some situations so I would not expect much too much from the A7V. Global shutter is the only answer afaikYes, but no. Jim Kasson has previously demonstrated that some LED lights can produce banding even with a stacked sensor. This is especially true of some stadium and theatrical lighting and the occasional home, public or retail lighting
However, in thousands of images shot under a variety of home and public LED lighting, I have virtually never gotten a banded image with either an A9, A1, or A1 II. They are all fast enough to not have a problem with common modern lighting.
On the other hand, with an A7iii, A7RIII, A7Cii, and A7CR, banding under common LED lights is universal and extreme.
So it is a matter of degree rather than an absolute, but the degree of difference between stacked and unstacked is very great.
My question is where will the A7V fall?Basically you lucked out. I’ve definitely run into my fair share of everyday light bulbs that cause banding when using the A1’s electronic shutter.
The image sample wasn’t anything exotic either, just a single standard domestic fixture with cheap E27 bulbs shot with the A1 at high shutter speed.
The mechanical shutter on the A1 is remarkably fast, and does mitigate banding to a greater extent.j4nu's analysis is exactly right. With a stacked sensor shooting ES under LED lights, it is almost always easy to avoid banding by limiting one's shutter speed. With a non-stacked sensor under LED light, it is impossible not to get extensive banding when using ES.
I usually shoot under available light, so my shutter speed indoors is usually not faster than 1/250th of a second. As the light goes down (and the flicker interval of an LED becomes longer), so does my shutter speed. Result with a stacked sensor is no banding.
I just never have a problrem with my A1 II, A1, or A9 under LED lights and ES. I always have a problem with LED banding with my A7CR, A7CII and any other camera with a non-stacked sensor while using ES.
Luck has nothing to do with it, obviously.https://youtu.be/CTgEZa2ZPyA
Chiron, I wrote some software to simulate this. It lets you see the kind of banding you’d get at different LED flicker frequencies when you’re shooting at a 1/250 s shutter speed.
Thank you for very much for your efforts on this. I think 4 msec is faster than the A7V? I don't want to and I won't get into a long exchange on this topic. But I actually don't need a simulation to judge banding on the the A1, the A1 II, or the A9 because I have shot all three of those cameras extensively under LED lights while using electronic shutter and I have that experience to judge from.
My shutter speeds indoors are virtually always at 1/250 or slower and, at those speeds and under the LED lights that I have encoutered, I do not get banding that is visible to me or to others looking at the images. On the other hand, when using a non-stacked sensor, I always get banding under LED lights.
As Github writes:
"Note that as the shutter speed is slowed further and approaches the readout speed the bands start to become indistinguishable. This is because the brightness difference of missing one cycle of light at slow shutter speeds has a commensurately smaller effect since one cycle represents a smaller percentage of the total light the bands are receiving."
The readout speed of the A1/A1 II is 1/256 of a second. The readout speed of the A9 is 1/152 of a second. (Both are close to the speed at which under mechanical shutter the shutter slit traverses the sensor.) At those shutter speeds or slower, I don't get visible banding. As the LED light levels go down and their flicker interval becomes longer, my shutter speeds, of course, become slower in a way that continues to prevent visible banding.
In your simulation, you maintain a 1/250 simulated shutter even while the light level falls and the length of the flicker interval increases. This will, of course, eventually produce visible banding. But it does not match what I do (or what I think most other photographers would do) under conditions of falling light--I lower my shutter speed as light falls, often down to 1/8 second or even slower. That compensates for the longer flicker interval.
The Github reference is from https://github.com/horshack-dpreview/RollingShutter
chiron wrote
aCuria wrote
chiron wrote
aCuria wrote
chiron wrote
Does anyone have any educated estimates of how well the semi-stacked sensor in the A7V will deal with the banding problem caused by the flickering of modern LED lighting (which is becoming ubiquitous)?As you can see in the image sample, even the A1 has trouble in some situations so I would not expect much too much from the A7V. Global shutter is the only answer afaik
However, in thousands of images shot under a variety of home and public LED lighting, I have virtually never gotten a banded image with either an A9, A1, or A1 II. They are all fast enough to not have a problem with common modern lighting.
On the other hand, with an A7iii, A7RIII, A7Cii, and A7CR, banding under common LED lights is universal and extreme.
So it is a matter of degree rather than an absolute, but the degree of difference between stacked and unstacked is very great.
My question is where will the A7V fall?
chiron wrote
However, in thousands of images shot under a variety of home and public LED lighting, I have virtually never gotten a banded image with either an A9, A1, or A1 II. They are all fast enough to not have a problem with common modern lighting.The image sample wasn’t anything exotic either, just a single standard domestic fixture with cheap E27 bulbs shot with the A1 at high shutter speed.
The mechanical shutter on the A1 is remarkably fast, and does mitigate banding to a greater extent.
I usually shoot under available light, so my shutter speed indoors is usually not faster than 1/250th of a second. As the light goes down (and the flicker interval of an LED becomes longer), so does my shutter speed. Result with a stacked sensor is no banding.
I just never have a problrem with my A1 II, A1, or A9 under LED lights and ES. I always have a problem with LED banding with my A7CR, A7CII and any other camera with a non-stacked sensor while using ES.
Luck has nothing to do with it, obviously.
Chiron, I wrote some software to simulate this. It lets you see the kind of banding you’d get at different LED flicker frequencies when you’re shooting at a 1/250 s shutter speed.
Thank you for very much for your efforts on this. I think 4 msec is faster than the A7V? I don't want to and I won't get into a long exchange on this topic. But I actually don't need a simulation to judge banding on the the A1, the A1 II, or the A9 because I have shot all three of those cameras extensively under LED lights while using electronic shutter and I have that experience to judge from.
My shutter speeds indoors are virtually always at 1/250 or slower and, at those speeds and under the LED lights that I have encoutered, I do not get banding that is visible to me or to others looking at the images. On the other hand, when using a non-stacked sensor, I always get banding under LED lights.
As Github writes:
"Note that as the shutter speed is slowed further and approaches the readout speed the bands start to become indistinguishable. This is because the brightness difference of missing one cycle of light at slow shutter speeds has a commensurately smaller effect since one cycle represents a smaller percentage of the total light the bands are receiving."
The readout speed of the A1/A1 II is 1/256 of a second. The readout speed of the A9 is 1/152 of a second. (Both are close to the speed at which under mechanical shutter the shutter slit traverses the sensor.) At those shutter speeds or slower, I don't get visible banding. As the LED light levels go down and their flicker interval becomes longer, my shutter speeds, of course, become slower in a way that continues to prevent visible banding.
In your simulation, you maintain a 1/250 simulated shutter even while the light level falls and the length of the flicker interval increases. This will, of course, eventually produce visible banding. But it does not match what I do (or what I think most other photographers would do) under conditions of falling light--I lower my shutter speed as light falls, often down to 1/8 second or even slower. That compensates for the longer flicker interval.
The Github reference is from https://github.com/horshack-dpreview/RollingShutter
Dec 18, 2025 at 08:54 AM
p.10 #18A7V dynamic range is extremely good
chiron wrote:
As you can see in the image sample, even the A1 has trouble in some situations so I would not expect much too much from the A7V. Global shutter is the only answer afaikYes, but no. Jim Kasson has previously demonstrated that some LED lights can produce banding even with a stacked sensor. This is especially true of some stadium and theatrical lighting and the occasional home, public or retail lighting
However, in thousands of images shot under a variety of home and public LED lighting, I have virtually never gotten a banded image with either an A9, A1, or A1 II. They are all fast enough to not have a problem with common modern lighting.
On the other hand, with an A7iii, A7RIII, A7Cii, and A7CR, banding under common LED lights is universal and extreme.
So it is a matter of degree rather than an absolute, but the degree of difference between stacked and unstacked is very great.
My question is where will the A7V fall?Basically you lucked out. I’ve definitely run into my fair share of everyday light bulbs that cause banding when using the A1’s electronic shutter.
The image sample wasn’t anything exotic either, just a single standard domestic fixture with cheap E27 bulbs shot with the A1 at high shutter speed.
The mechanical shutter on the A1 is remarkably fast, and does mitigate banding to a greater extent.j4nu's analysis is exactly right. With a stacked sensor shooting ES under LED lights, it is almost always easy to avoid banding by limiting one's shutter speed. With a non-stacked sensor under LED light, it is impossible not to get extensive banding when using ES.
I usually shoot under available light, so my shutter speed indoors is usually not faster than 1/250th of a second. As the light goes down (and the flicker interval of an LED becomes longer), so does my shutter speed. Result with a stacked sensor is no banding.
I just never have a problrem with my A1 II, A1, or A9 under LED lights and ES. I always have a problem with LED banding with my A7CR, A7CII and any other camera with a non-stacked sensor while using ES.
Luck has nothing to do with it, obviously.https://youtu.be/CTgEZa2ZPyA
Chiron, I wrote some software to simulate this. It lets you see the kind of banding you’d get at different LED flicker frequencies when you’re shooting at a 1/250 s shutter speed.Thank you for very much for your efforts on this. I think 4 msec is faster than the A7V? I don't want to and I won't get into a long exchange on this topic. But I actually don't need a simulation to judge banding on the the A1, the A1 II, or the A9 because I have shot all three of those cameras extensively under LED lights while using electronic shutter and I have that experience to judge from.
My shutter speeds indoors are virtually always at 1/250 or slower and, at those speeds and under the LED lights that...Show more →
chiron wrote:
Thank you for very much for your efforts on this. I think 4 msec is faster than the A7V?
The tool can simulate any readout speed really. This is 16ms and led flicker at 90hz
https://youtu.be/fL_EV1BzHSY
chiron wrote:
My shutter speeds indoors are virtually always at 1/250 or slower and, at those speeds and under the LED lights that I have encoutered, I do not get banding that is visible to me or to others looking at the images. On the other hand, when using a non-stacked sensor, I always get banding under LED lights.
If it works for your shooting conditions, that’s really all that matters for you. From what I can tell, if the LED flicker frequency is somewhere around 125 to 500 Hz, you should see banding on the A1 quite easily at 1/250s. You could probably prove this pretty easily with an LED and an Arduino, but I’m not great with the hardware side of things.
In real life, you have not encountered anything flickering at those frequencies, and that’s what I mean when I say it comes down to “luck.”
Other people have certainly encountered flicker on the A1 electronic shutter. Everyone's shooting conditions are different, It is what it is https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1747977/
chiron wrote:
Note that as the shutter speed is slowed further and approaches the readout speed the bands start to become indistinguishable. This is because the brightness difference of missing one cycle of light at slow shutter speeds has a commensurately smaller effect since one cycle represents a smaller percentage of the total light the bands are receiving.
Idea is correct but this is poorly written as it has nothing to do with readout speed. I rewrote it below:
The slower your shutter speed is and the faster the LED is flickering, the less noticeable the banding becomes. That’s because when many flicker cycles are captured inside the exposure time, missing a single flicker cycle makes a much smaller difference to the total amount of light being captured. One cycle is just a tiny fraction of the overall exposure, so the brightness difference between bands is much less obvious.
chiron wrote:
As the LED light levels go down and their flicker interval becomes longer, my shutter speeds, of course, become slower in a way that continues to prevent visible banding.
Your idea here is that the LED must be dim in order to have a long flicker interval. I don't really agree with this. You can have a very bright LED billboard or non-dimmable LED that's flickering with a relatively long flicker interval.
chiron wrote:
I lower my shutter speed as light falls, often down to 1/8 second or even slower. That compensates for the longer flicker interval.
I shoot my kids at around 1/500s even if the light is poor. I will shoot at f/1.4 and use a speedlight or strobes to compensate, because shooting at say 1/250s results in majority of frames having motion blur.
Frankly "1/8s" means subject isn’t moving. And if the subject isn’t moving, there’s usually no need for high burst rates in the first place. If we don’t need high burst rates, then the obvious question is: why are we using electronic shutter at all?
With a mechanical shutter, banding is far less of an issue than with electronic shutter, even on cameras with relatively slow sensors like the A7R IV. So in those low-movement, low-shutter-speed situations, mechanical shutter is often the more robust and predictable choice.
The mechanical shutter on the A1 is remarkably fast, the 1/400s flash sync speed with mechanical shutter while electronic flash sync is only 1/200s suggests that Sony's mechanical shutter tech is at least twice as fast (2ms, or 1/500s) as A1 electronic.
aCuria wrote
chiron wrote
aCuria wrote
chiron wrote
aCuria wrote
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54170824145_f7eddd8ce9_b.jpgDSC06561 by acurian, on FlickrAs you can see in the image sample, even the A1 has trouble in some situations so I would not expect much too much from the A7V. Global shutter is the only answer afaik
However, in thousands of images shot under a variety of home and public LED lighting, I have virtually never gotten a banded image with either an A9, A1, or A1 II. They are all fast enough to not have a problem with common modern lighting.
On the other hand, with an A7iii, A7RIII, A7Cii, and A7CR, banding under common LED lights is universal and extreme.
So it is a matter of degree rather than an absolute, but the degree of difference between stacked and unstacked is very great.
My question is where will the A7V fall?
chiron wrote
However, in thousands of images shot under a variety of home and public LED lighting, I have virtually never gotten a banded image with either an A9, A1, or A1 II. They are all fast enough to not have a problem with common modern lighting.The image sample wasn’t anything exotic either, just a single standard domestic fixture with cheap E27 bulbs shot with the A1 at high shutter speed.
The mechanical shutter on the A1 is remarkably fast, and does mitigate banding to a greater extent.
I usually shoot under available light, so my shutter speed indoors is usually not faster than 1/250th of a second. As the light goes down (and the flicker interval of an LED becomes longer), so does my shutter speed. Result with a stacked sensor is no banding.
I just never have a problrem with my A1 II, A1, or A9 under LED lights and ES. I always have a problem with LED banding with my A7CR, A7CII and any other camera with a non-stacked sensor while using ES.
Luck has nothing to do with it, obviously.
Chiron, I wrote some software to simulate this. It lets you see the kind of banding you’d get at different LED flicker frequencies when you’re shooting at a 1/250 s shutter speed.
My shutter speeds indoors are virtually always at 1/250 or slower and, at those speeds and under the LED lights that...Show more →
chiron wrote:
Thank you for very much for your efforts on this. I think 4 msec is faster than the A7V?
The tool can simulate any readout speed really. This is 16ms and led flicker at 90hz
https://youtu.be/fL_EV1BzHSY
chiron wrote:
My shutter speeds indoors are virtually always at 1/250 or slower and, at those speeds and under the LED lights that I have encoutered, I do not get banding that is visible to me or to others looking at the images. On the other hand, when using a non-stacked sensor, I always get banding under LED lights.
If it works for your shooting conditions, that’s really all that matters for you. From what I can tell, if the LED flicker frequency is somewhere around 125 to 500 Hz, you should see banding on the A1 quite easily at 1/250s. You could probably prove this pretty easily with an LED and an Arduino, but I’m not great with the hardware side of things.
In real life, you have not encountered anything flickering at those frequencies, and that’s what I mean when I say it comes down to “luck.”
Other people have certainly encountered flicker on the A1 electronic shutter. Everyone's shooting conditions are different, It is what it is https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1747977/
chiron wrote:
Note that as the shutter speed is slowed further and approaches the readout speed the bands start to become indistinguishable. This is because the brightness difference of missing one cycle of light at slow shutter speeds has a commensurately smaller effect since one cycle represents a smaller percentage of the total light the bands are receiving.
Idea is correct but this is poorly written as it has nothing to do with readout speed. I rewrote it below:
The slower your shutter speed is and the faster the LED is flickering, the less noticeable the banding becomes. That’s because when many flicker cycles are captured inside the exposure time, missing a single flicker cycle makes a much smaller difference to the total amount of light being captured. One cycle is just a tiny fraction of the overall exposure, so the brightness difference between bands is much less obvious.
chiron wrote:
As the LED light levels go down and their flicker interval becomes longer, my shutter speeds, of course, become slower in a way that continues to prevent visible banding.
Your idea here is that the LED must be dim in order to have a long flicker interval. I don't really agree with this. You can have a very bright LED billboard or non-dimmable LED that's flickering with a relatively long flicker interval.
chiron wrote:
I lower my shutter speed as light falls, often down to 1/8 second or even slower. That compensates for the longer flicker interval.
I shoot my kids at around 1/500s even if the light is poor. I will shoot at f/1.4 and use a speedlight or strobes to compensate, because shooting at say 1/250s results in majority of frames having motion blur.
Frankly "1/8s" means subject isn’t moving. And if the subject isn’t moving, there’s usually no need for high burst rates in the first place. If we don’t need high burst rates, then the obvious question is: why are we using electronic shutter at all?
With a mechanical shutter, banding is far less of an issue than with electronic shutter, even on cameras with relatively slow sensors like the A7R IV. So in those low-movement, low-shutter-speed situations, mechanical shutter is often the more robust and predictable choice.
The mechanical shutter on the A1 is remarkably fast, the 1/400s flash sync speed with mechanical shutter while electronic flash sync is only 1/200s suggests that Sony's mechanical shutter tech is at least twice as fast (2ms, or 1/500s) as A1 electronic.
Dec 18, 2025 at 12:46 PM
p.10 #19A7V dynamic range is extremely good
All the technical talk is great and interesting. However, I think the question that Chiron is asking is whether or not the A7V will be good for shooting indoors in electric shutter without worry of banding from lights, whatever lights they may be.
The A9 and A1 series are great for this, which makes them ideal for indoor event, wedding, meeting, etc. type of work. Obviously banding CAN happen in elec. shutter, but it's honestly very rare. After 5 years of mostly event work, I can attest to that.
The real question is if the A7V can perform at the same level, just for this particular shooting type. And I don't think a single YouTube or written review has answered that question yet.
The A9 and A1 series are great for this, which makes them ideal for indoor event, wedding, meeting, etc. type of work. Obviously banding CAN happen in elec. shutter, but it's honestly very rare. After 5 years of mostly event work, I can attest to that.
The real question is if the A7V can perform at the same level, just for this particular shooting type. And I don't think a single YouTube or written review has answered that question yet.
Dec 18, 2025 at 01:19 PM
p.10 #20A7V dynamic range is extremely good
maestrofilms wrote:
All the technical talk is great and interesting. However, I think the question that Chiron is asking is whether or not the A7V will be good for shooting indoors in electric shutter without worry of banding from lights, whatever lights they may be.
The A9 and A1 series are great for this, which makes them ideal for indoor event, wedding, meeting, etc. type of work. Obviously banding CAN happen in elec. shutter, but it's honestly very rare. After 5 years of mostly event work, I can attest to that.
The real question is if the A7V can perform at the same level,...Show more →
Exactly! Thank you for making the point so clearly.
All the technical talk is great and interesting. However, I think the question that Chiron is asking is whether or not the A7V will be good for shooting indoors in electric shutter without worry of banding from lights, whatever lights they may be.
The A9 and A1 series are great for this, which makes them ideal for indoor event, wedding, meeting, etc. type of work. Obviously banding CAN happen in elec. shutter, but it's honestly very rare. After 5 years of mostly event work, I can attest to that.
The real question is if the A7V can perform at the same level,...Show more →
Exactly! Thank you for making the point so clearly.
Dec 18, 2025 at 01:37 PM