I also just got a shipping notice from B&H with a Thursday (tomorrow) delivery date - and I didn’t pre-order until last week (so hopefully that means most folks will get their pre-orders promptly).
Sony cameras can't do internal raw for one simple reason that has nothing to do with its hardware - Red owns the patent for compressed raw video and sues the shit out of anyone that tries to implement it. Nikon got into hot water when they rolled out Nraw, then there was a settlement and the suit was dismissed. Nikon bought Red shortly after.
Uncompressed raw files are obnoxiously large, ask any Canon or Zr user or anyone shooting Prores raw. Blackmagic figured out a workaround to the Red patent for Braw compression. Options like Prores and Braw require a license that Sony clearly isn't willing to pay.
And raw video isn't super hardware taxing, remember the tiny OG Blackmagic pocket shot raw video 13 years ago. Canon 5d2's from 2008 can output raw video in much higher resolutions than the internal 1080p thanks to incredible work of the Magic Lantern team. Any recent Sony has many times the processing power of both of those cameras combined.
Cheers
Chris
Canons RAW is compressed, the Zr using compressed RAW, and ProResRAW is compressed. if Sony really wanted to put RAW video in their cameras they have options that have nothing to do with RED. They either dont have the power in their chips to do it, dont want to pay licensing fees to ProResRAW or they dont want to put it in cameras that aren 25k and up(Burano and Venice 2)
I am very well versed in the cinema and codec space. CinemaDNG, ARRIRAW and Sony full X-OCN are all uncompressed, but ProResRAW, Canon CinemaRAW LT and any RAW format the Zr use are all compressed.
Canon has raw because of an agreement to license the RF mount for the Komodo. Nikon has raw because it acquired Red. Everyone else is stuck with Braw or licensing Prores - which itself required a license from Red to even allow it to exist after Apple backed down from its challenge to Red's patents. Canon raw will likely go away once that agreement expires unless Nikon is willing to license it, but my bet is they won't. If Red didn't agree to any of this, nobody would have internal compressed raw other than Red and Braw or some old Cinema DNG like the OG Pocket.
But that's beside the point - Raw is not processor intensive as demonstrated by an 18-year-old camera that can record raw in the 5d2 - especially compared to 10-bit h265. Compressing all of that raw data in real time requires an incredible amount of processing. Canon's processors can't handle it, all of its oversampled 4k modes cause rampant overheating. Most have a varying degree of noise reduction as well. Just look at how bad Nikon's own h265 is with the Zr and Z6III. It's comical to think Sony cameras lack the power to do raw video when its h265 absolutely crushes Nikon's - especially with the Zr and Z6III. It's just a licensing issue - they're not paying for one.
Cheers
Chris
I was references your claim that
“ Uncompressed raw files are obnoxiously large, ask any Canon or Zr user or anyone shooting Prores raw”
Which implied that Canon, the Zr or ProResRAW is uncompressed, which they are not.
And you are right, Canon and Apple do have arrangements with RED for their compressed RAW, but theres no reason to think those would end just because Nikon bought them. It also still stands that no Sony under 25,000$ shoots internal RAW, and honestly thats a dealbreaker for me and anyone who wants that feature.
10bit-4:2:2 H265 is just not the same quality as a RAW format, or 12bit-4:4:4, such as ProRes4444 or ProRes4444XQ
And while Sony doesnt want to pay a license to RED, they also have their own compressed RAW format, X-OCN LT which is one the Burano and Venice.
I theorize that Sony will never put RAW video into their E mount cameras for the simple fact of, they want u to buy their 25k and up cameras for that feature. Which is a terrible thing to do.
I havent used a Canon in a while, but i do know from experience when i had one and talking to some friends that the overheating issues are blown way out of proportion and any H265 issues with the Zr or Z6iii has been solved or has also been blown out of proportion.
Bill Claff has posted the dynamic range measurements for the A7R6 at photonstophotos.net. Below it is compared to the faster stacked sensor of the Z8 and to the mini-MF sensor of GFX100II:
Edit: this is in mechanical shutter mode where the A7R6’s dual gain optimization is active, it does not look like Bill has posted the electronic shutter measurement yet.
rob_ww wrote:
I've seen lots of comparisons to the A7R5 but not many to the A1ii. Hypothetical: if you had the chance to buy either the A7R6 or the A1ii for roughly the same price, which one would you choose?
I have the A1ii and A7rV. I use both regularly, but have found I have a few more keepers, and tend to reach for, the A1II a bit more often. I did buy the A7rVI and am taking it up Mt Baker this weekend, so we'll see how that goes but the A1II is really good. The shutter feeling is also better IMO than any other Sony
The two areas the A1II I've had issues with:
1. Dumb learning lesson early on I bumped the AF switch on the upper left into AF-S and didn't realize it. I was on a backpacking hike and didn't have a chance to really look at a ton of pics on the camera and so many of the ones with friends are out of focus as a result. Lesson learned
2. It is lower res obviously, and shooting field sports I can crop in more with the A7rV. I did a recent shoot with the A1II using the 300mm f2.8 + the A7rV with the 50-150F2 and love the combo. However, found a few more keepers out of the A1II + 300. Obviously in field sports (soccer) that's not surprising but there's a reason I put that lens on that body instead of the higher res rV which is specifically to AF hit rate and tracking is much better on the A1II for me.
Ross Martin wrote:
Bill Claff has posted the dynamic range measurements for the A7R6 at photonstophotos.net. Below it is compared to the faster stacked sensor of the Z8 and to the mini-MF sensor of GFX100II:
You did not show the a7rV, but it looks like the a7rVI has significantly better low-gain IQ, and is about 0.2-0.25 stops better in high-gain. That makes sense in keeping with the general purpose market and having great IQ in the studio. Surely this sensor will eventually be used in other Sonys and Leicas, etc.
I'd rather they had used the stackable sensors more to improve readout speed, since I'm usually at 400-3200.
EB-1 wrote:
You did not show the a7rV, but it looks like the a7rVI has significantly better low-gain IQ, and is about 0.2-0.25 stops better in high-gain. That makes sense in keeping with the general purpose market and having great IQ in the studio. Surely this sensor will eventually be used in other Sonys and Leicas, etc.
I'd rather they had used the stackable sensors more to improve readout speed, since I'm usually at 400-3200.
EB-1 wrote:
Is all the Sony data in MS or does it matter? Claff often shows different modes for other cameras.
EBH
This data is for mechanical shutter. Bill has not yet added measurements for ES. The new dual gain optimization only works in mechanical shutter mode (at least for stills), so the ES measurements will not be as high. The biggest difference will be below the 2nd gain ISO.
-Meraki- wrote:
I have the A1ii and A7rV. I use both regularly, but have found I have a few more keepers, and tend to reach for, the A1II a bit more often. I did buy the A7rVI and am taking it up Mt Baker this weekend, so we'll see how that goes but the A1II is really good. The shutter feeling is also better IMO than any other Sony
The two areas the A1II I've had issues with:
1. Dumb learning lesson early on I bumped the AF switch on the upper left into AF-S and didn't realize it. I was on a backpacking hike and didn't have a chance to really look at a ton of pics on the camera and so many of the ones with friends are out of focus as a result. Lesson learned
2. It is lower res obviously, and shooting field sports I can crop in more with the A7rV. I did a recent shoot with the A1II using the 300mm f2.8 + the A7rV with the 50-150F2 and love the combo. However, found a few more keepers out of the A1II + 300. Obviously in field sports (soccer) that's not surprising but there's a reason I put that lens on that body instead of the higher res rV which is specifically to AF hit rate and tracking is much better on the A1II for me. ...Show more →
I have an A1 II and and A7RV as well. I tend to reach for the A1 II because I think it handles white balance better (in Auto). I bit the bullet and ordered a an A7RVI. We'll see.
Jun 03, 2026 at 11:41 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Here is a the A7r VI vs A1 II. Note A1 II in electronic shutter is basically the same. Low ISO will not be the same in electronic shutter for A7r VI. Expect at ISO 640 and higher equal DR performance between these two cameras. The A7r VI will have an advantage at low ISOs in DR, but likely only in mechanical shutter mode.
Here's your chart but with the A7M4 added (must manually copy+paste the link below into URL bar because Fred's site software excludes the trailing ES from link):
This demonstrates a 0.6EV penalty for the A7M5's ES vs A7M4's ES, likely owing to the extra read noise from the A7M5's partially-stacked logic, which obviously the A7M5's DGO offsets as part of its improvement vs the ES.
Bill Claff @bclaff_too, thank you for your work in posting the A7RV6 mechanical shutter DR data. Do you know when you’ll have the electronic shutter measurements?
Jun 03, 2026 at 01:04 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
snapsy wrote:
Here's your chart but with the A7M4 added (must manually copy+paste the link below into URL bar because Fred's site software excludes the trailing ES from link):
This demonstrates a 0.6EV penalty for the A7M5's ES vs A7M4's ES, likely owing to the extra read noise from the A7M5's partially-stacked logic, which obviously the A7M5's DGO offsets as part of its improvement vs the ES.
Thanks snapsy for fixing that and posting the fixed link.
The A1 will likely remain the king of electronic shutter DR. A7RM6 ES likely will not match it in compress raw, maybe similar in 14 bit lossless compressed raw
snapsy wrote:
This demonstrates a 0.6EV penalty for the A7M5's ES vs A7M4's ES, likely owing to the extra read noise from the A7M5's partially-stacked logic, which obviously the A7M5's DGO offsets as part of its improvement vs the ES.
In recent times Sony cameras did not suffer from any extra read noise in their ES implementations, stacked or not, as evidenced by A1 and A7RV each having the same DR regardless of the shutter setting. The 0.6EV gap is not a noise penalty, but a pure bonus offered by DGO. I expect the A7RVI ES DR to be a touch higher than A7RV's.
