• 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 / a7RIV / Sony a7RIV EDR and dark-field spectra

Sony a7RIV EDR and dark-field spectra

August 23, 2019 JimK 12 Comments

This is one in a series of posts on the Sony alpha 7 R Mark IV (aka a7RIV). 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 “A7RIV”.

I don’t have my a7RIV yet, but I received a set of uncompressed dark frames today from the camera. The were made at 1/8000 second shutter speed, and I think, but do not know, that they were made with no lens attached (the metadata says: E-Mount, T-Mount, Other Lens or no lens so that’s probably a safe bet), so that Sony’s lens corrections won’t mess up the files. I will digress for one sentence: Sony, please, pretty please, stop futzing around with the raw values in your files; instead, put the recipe for what you want done in the metadata fields.

Here’s the Engineering Dynamic Range (EDR) — which I’m defining as full scale over read noise (and yeah, I know that’s not the high road, but it sure improves my ability to measure it accurately.

The ISOs from 50 through 80 are the usual Sony shuck and are achieved by setting the ISO onoe full stop higher than the one dialed in, adding one stop of positive exposure compensations, brightening up the JPEG preview image, and adding metadata to tel the raw developer to do the same. Now that it’s clear that Sony hasn’t changed its low-ISO ways, let’s ignore those settings:

There is a surprise here. The camera switches the conversion gain into its high mode on the transition from ISO 250 to ISO 320. That’s two-thirds of a stop earlier than the GFX 100 and the IQ4 150 MP. Fuji changed that setting in a firmware release. Will Sony do the same? This is firmware 1.00. The improvement in EDR that happens above ISO 12800 is smoke, mirrors, and digital signal processing. The camera starts doing low-pass filtering there. We’ll see that in the frequency plots immediately below. Otherwise, this is precisely what we would expect from looking at the GFX 100 and the Phase One IQ4 150 that also employ the new BSI Sony 3.76 micrometer (um) sensors.

By the way, the Bayer pattern is what we’ve come to expect from Sony: RGGB.

At ISO 50, the read noise spectrum is a little funky:

The above is for the R raw plane. I’m not going to spend any more time on that since it’s for an ISO setting that few will use.

At ISO 100 (Plane 1 is R, plane 2 is G, plane 3 is G1, and plane 4 is B):

 

 

 

 

There is mild rolloff of the high frequencies, but there are no periodic signals like we saw with the GFX 100.

ISO 640:

 

 

 

 

The high-frequency rolloff is getting weaker as we go up in ISO.

I’ll skip to the highest ISO with no obvious digital signal processing in the EDR plot:

 

 

 

 

The R, G, and G1 planes are pretty flat, but noisy since there’s a lot of noise at these high ISOs. The blue plane is rolled off. I didn’t show you all the graphs, but as the ISO setting has gone up, this has become more apparent. This looks to me like interpolation over some pixels in the blue plane, probably those used for on sensor phase detect autofocus.

Let’s set the ISO to Ludicrous Mode:

 

 

 

 

Low-pass filtering everywhere, and even more in the blue plane.

From this data, I’m surmising that the a7RIV wont have the same PDAF banding the plagues the GXF 100 and the Nikon Z cameras. I’m relieved. I may have PDAF striping, but that’s the lesser of the two evils.

a7RIV

← Visibility of aliasing GFX 50R, 100 aliasing in prints More Sony a7RIV dark-field spectra →

Comments

  1. Jack Hogan says

    August 23, 2019 at 11:38 pm

    Interesting Jim. I forget: to generate the spectrograms do you use every available pixel or just pixels from a smaller target area?

    Reply
    • JimK says

      August 24, 2019 at 6:15 am

      These are from a 600×600 sample. I’ll rerun the code with the whole frame selected and see if there are any differences.

      Reply
      • JimK says

        August 25, 2019 at 6:59 am

        Here are the full-frame spectra:

        https://blog.kasson.com/a7riv/more-sony-a7riv-dark-field-spectra/

        Reply
  2. David Braddon-Mitchell says

    August 24, 2019 at 3:02 am

    The r3 has a menu setting for high isoNR on or off.
    Do you know if the frames you were given were made with that on or off?

    Cheers
    David

    Reply
    • JimK says

      August 24, 2019 at 6:16 am

      I think off, but I’m not 100% sure. Do you know the EXIF field with that information?

      Reply
    • David Braddon-Mitchell says

      August 24, 2019 at 4:28 pm

      No I don’t know, but it does seem like the settings for high ISO NR only apply to JPEGs, so there’s no co troll over the spatial filtering. Sorry!

      Reply
      • JimK says

        August 24, 2019 at 9:02 pm

        Found it:

        Long Exposure Noise Reduction : Off
        High ISO Noise Reduction : Off

        Reply
  3. Wolfgang says

    August 24, 2019 at 3:53 am

    If you compare this data to the measurements you did with the GFX100, there is a 0.25stop difference at base ISO and 0.4stops with HCG. If that is true that really interesting, as the pixels are supposed to be the exact same size.

    Reply
    • JimK says

      August 24, 2019 at 6:13 am

      Could be sample or temperature variation. I’ll get another sample soon, I hope.

      Reply
    • JimK says

      August 24, 2019 at 9:04 pm

      Battery temp was 30 degrees C. Camera temp was 24 deg. C.

      Reply
  4. Dave says

    August 24, 2019 at 5:50 pm

    Are you making an assumption about full well capacity? If so, what is it and how did you get it?

    Reply
    • JimK says

      August 24, 2019 at 5:56 pm

      This is EDR, so I don’t need to make any assumptions about FWC. I’m guessing it will be between 40000 and 50000 electrons.

      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

  • 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.