• 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 vs raw format and shutter mode

Sony a7RIV EDR vs raw format and shutter mode

September 14, 2019 JimK 9 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 picked up my a7RIV this morning, after FedEx wouldn’t deliver it. The first think I did was some dark-field tests. So far, I have not taken the body cap off the camera, and I’ve still learned a lot, which I’ll share with you in this and the subsequent post.

I define engineering dynamic range (EDR) as full scale over the read noise. Some reserve the term for full scale over the mean value that produces a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of one, but that’s a lot harder to measure. Here is the EDR at base ISO and above for uncompressed raw format, single shot, using electronic first-curtain shutter (EFCS).

The switch to high conversion gain occurs at the transition from ISO 250 to ISO 320, as we saw before with the samples from a prototype a7RIV.

If we switch to electronic shutter, which Sony calls silent shutter, not much changes (I think I missed ISO 16000 in the sequence below):

 

Going back to EFCS and turning on compression costs us a tiny bit of DR at low ISOs:

Turning on the electronic shutter doesn’t change things (this time I got the ISO 16000 data point in):

If we plot the average of the four raw channels for EFCS with both uncompressed and compressed formats, we can see the difference, and how small it is:

Now let’s turn to EDR vs shutter speed. I made a series of exposures at varying shutter speeds at ISO 1000, using EFCS and uncompressed raw:

There’s a little wiggle at the transition from 0.7 seconds to 1 second. I’m not sure what that’s about. I looked at the spectra and there’s nothing obvious going on there. However, something dramatic happens at the transition from 3.2 seconds to 4 seconds. This looks like the Sony “star-eater” behavior, which is cause by their digital filtering of the raw image before writing it to the card. I’ll report on the spectra in the next post. Note that the jump is greatest for the blue channel. We’ll see why  in the next post.

a7RIV

← Epson P800 — high speed or not? Sony a7RIV raw spectra vs shutter speed →

Comments

  1. Calphate says

    September 14, 2019 at 2:09 pm

    A7RIV doesn’t have this “boost mode” in A7III/A7RIII/XT3 which trade EDR for readout speed. They are still using 8-lane SLVS-EC which becomes a limiting factor. The sensor itself supports 16-lane mode. I guess we will only see its full potential when A7RV is announced.

    Reply
  2. Den says

    September 16, 2019 at 5:10 am

    I have seen some mentions that the electronic shutter is worse than the mk3 for still in terms of ‘jello’/rolling shutter. Would you be able to confirm if that’s the case?

    Not that I’m much surprised given that the A9II is announced next month . Do you think the A9II may do away with the mechanical shutter completely?

    Reply
    • JimK says

      September 16, 2019 at 6:55 am

      I have seen some mentions that the electronic shutter is worse than the mk3 for still in terms of ‘jello’/rolling shutter. Would you be able to confirm if that’s the case?

      I’ll run a test and report the results in a post here.

      Reply
    • JimK says

      September 16, 2019 at 6:56 am

      Do you think the A9II may do away with the mechanical shutter completely?

      I’d be amazed if it did.

      Reply
    • JimK says

      September 16, 2019 at 8:41 am

      I have seen some mentions that the electronic shutter is worse than the mk3 for still in terms of ‘jello’/rolling shutter. Would you be able to confirm if that’s the case?

      It is true:

      https://blog.kasson.com/a7riv/how-fast-is-the-sony-a7riv-silent-shutter/

      Reply
  3. david stock says

    September 16, 2019 at 12:41 pm

    Thanks for your tests, Jim. Maybe I’m not understanding correctly, but it seems like the camera has more DR at ISO 320 than at ISO 200. And the increase in noise is moderate. Hmm. Is it fair to say that one should shoot either at ISO 100 or at ISO 320 up until ISO 1600?

    Reply
    • JimK says

      September 16, 2019 at 12:45 pm

      For the same exposure, that wouldn’t be a bad plan.

      Reply
  4. Den says

    October 17, 2019 at 12:04 am

    Jim, going back to the change by Sony of moving the high gain mode down to 320 – can you shed some light and why they might have done this and what the advantage is?

    Thanks

    Reply
    • JimK says

      October 17, 2019 at 7:06 am

      It provides better results at ISO 320, 400, and 500, and worse from there on up. Sony probably prioritized the lower ISO settings for this camera.

      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.