• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / a7III / Sony a7III raw filtering

Sony a7III raw filtering

April 6, 2018 JimK 5 Comments

The a7III is about to ship in the US — it’s already in the wild elsewhere — and, although it is exceedingly attractively priced, I’m not expecting to be a customer. Nothing wrong with the camera, to my way of thinking, but I just don’t see the utility to someone who already has an a7RIII and an a9.

But I did notice the spectacular noise performance on Bill Claff’s Photons to Photos site, especially the read noise at ISO 640, and that got my curiosity bump itching.

A reader provided me with a set of dark frame images captured at 1/1000 second, at all ISOs. The details of the capture protocol I asked for, and I think the reader used:

  • Body cap installed, no lens
  • Single shot shutter mode
  • EFCS off
  • uncompressed raw
  • All noise reduction off
  • All lens corrections off

I analyzed the spectrum of a 1000×1000 pixel crop of the red raw planes. Here’s what I found:

 

 

 

 

 

fs is the sampling frequency, and thus f/fs = 0.5 is the Nyquist frequency. There is low pass filtering evident in all of the above plots, decreasing in strength as the ISO increases.

The a7III appears, like many alpha cameras, to use the Aptina DR-Pix conversion gain algorithm, and to switch to high conversion gain at ISO 640.

And indeed the ISO 640 plot does not look all that different from the ISO 100 one.

The pattern starts to repeat as the ISO goes up:

I don’t usually spend a lot of time with raw files that I haven’t captured myself, but I thought these were interesting enough to share. Hopefully, others, some with access to the camera itself, will carry on this investigation.

If Sony is using these kinds of tricks to achieve their impressive noise numbers for the a7III, that would, I think, be a shame. This kind of thing is much better done in postproduction.

 

a7III

← Sony a9 has an AA filter Capture One and Fuji GFX 50S focus stacking →

Comments

  1. Jack Hogan says

    April 8, 2018 at 12:47 am

    Yes Jim, they seem to be doing something different there. As an additional data point, from back of the envelope SNR calculations off DPR studio scene data, I am getting clipping at 5-6000e-/um^2, which is 1.5-2x what we have been seeing till now.

    Reply
  2. Arthur says

    April 10, 2018 at 6:39 am

    Jim

    I think you readership would always benefit if you had some kind of dumb it down summary as if you were explaining this to C-level executive.

    Not every – but many of your articles and readers would benefit from this practice.

    Kind regards,

    Reply
    • JimK says

      April 10, 2018 at 6:45 am

      Here it is: If Sony is using these kinds of tricks to achieve their impressive noise numbers for the a7III, that would, I think, be a shame. This kind of thing is much better done in postproduction. 

      Reply
      • AndrewZ says

        April 20, 2018 at 5:39 am

        To be fair I think they’re all using some form of noise reduction on raw (except maybe Canon which is why for a time asto preferred Canon). Samsung did some pretty heavy handed noise reduction to their raws towards the end as well as lens corrections baked in, Pentax is well known to cook, I’ves suspected some chroma noise reduction on Nikons for years (especially when they achieve much better figures with the same sensor). Fuji is doing some by default with X-trans and I’ve heard comments about cooking on their bayer sensor APS-C as well.

        Reply
        • JimK says

          April 20, 2018 at 7:17 am

          As far as I can see, there is no digital filtering on the GFX, and on the D810 and D850 at high shutter speeds. There is no general digital filtering on Sony a7x except at nosebleed ISO settings and long shutter speeds.

          Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.