• 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 / a7RIII / a7RIII shadow noise — ISOs 500 & 640

a7RIII shadow noise — ISOs 500 & 640

July 25, 2018 JimK Leave a Comment

This is one more in a series of posts on the Sony a7RIII.   You should be able to find all the posts about that camera in the Category List on the right sidebar, below the Articles widget. There’s a drop-down menu there that you can use to get to all the posts in this series; just look for “a7RIII”.

Earlier today, I showed graphs relating to the a7RIII’s noise to the ISO setting in the camera. Then I posted visual takes on the noise differences from ISO 100 through 500. Inthe next post, I did the same thing for ISOs 640 through 5000. In the one just before this one, I extended the series to ISOs 640 through 10000. As expected, the a7RIII looked pretty ISOless above ISO 400. In each of the three sets of images, the exposure was the same, and I compensated for the “underexposure” at lower ISO settings by boosting Exposure in Lightroom.

In all of the above tests, I avoided spanning the point in the ISO setting on the camera where the conversion gain changes, from ISO 500 to ISO 640. Now I’m going to show you pairs of images made with those two ISO settings, with the exposure being increased by one-third stop for the ISO 500 images. Can the increased signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) away from the deepest shadows from the more generous ISO 320 exposure compensate for the increased read noise in those dark shadows?

I made two images of my standard subject for this test all with the same shutter speed, using an Otus 55/1.4 set to f/4. I processed them all in Lightroom with default settings except for a custom white balance that assured that the WB wouldn’t change from image to image. Here are the full-frame images.

ISO 640

 

ISO 500

 

I boosted Lightroom’s the shadow slider in Lightroom to +100. I looked at the noise in each image. Here are some crops, magnified to about 200%.

ISO 640

 

ISO 500

 

The very deepest shadows — where read noise is the biggest contributor — are less noisy at ISO 640, but the spine of the Siera Club book — where photon noise is the long pole in the tent — is a hair better at ISO 500. I think that, so long as you’re not going to push the shadows really hard in postproduction, there is no practical reason to try to avoid ISO 500 in the a7RIII, in spite of what the numbers say.

a7RIII

← a7RIII shadow noise — ISOs 640-10000 a7RIII shadow noise — ISOs 500 & 640, 4 stop push →

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

  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • 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

Archives

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

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.