• 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 raw spectra vs shutter speed

Sony a7RIV raw spectra vs shutter speed

September 14, 2019 JimK 22 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’m not going to bury the lede here: this Sony a7RIV eats stars just about like the a7RIII does.

Dark field spectra at fast shutter speeds all look about like this set, which was made at 1/8000 second:

 

 

 

There is a very gradual rolloff on all the channels. The rolloff is greater on the blue channel, presumably because of PDAF pixel interpolation.

At 2.5 seconds, not much has changed:

 

 

 

 

But at 3.2 seconds, all hell breaks loose:

 

 

There is special torture reserved for the blue channel:

 

This is about what we saw with the a7RIII, except that the new behavior starts at 3.2 seconds instead of 4 seconds.

Ugh. My position is that this kind of filtering should be done in postproduction.

a7RIV

← Sony a7RIV EDR vs raw format and shutter mode Sony a7RIV raw histograms →

Comments

  1. Mike Broomfield says

    September 15, 2019 at 3:46 am

    Thanks for the testing Jim.,
    On the A7R2 you could get around this by selecting high speed in the drive mode (your testing I believe). This wasn’t the case for the A7R3 but could you test the A7R4?

    Thanks

    Reply
  2. Nigel Tutt says

    September 17, 2019 at 12:58 am

    You wrote: “I’m not going to bury the lede here: ths Sony a7RIV eats stars just about like the a7RIII does.”

    Was your proof reader on holiday?

    6/10 — can do better.

    Reply
    • Alex Nail says

      September 17, 2019 at 9:26 am

      Nigel, what gives you the right to talk to someone like that? Jeeeez.

      Reply
    • JimK says

      September 17, 2019 at 11:55 am

      I assume that you’re complaining about the spelling that I used for the word “lede”. The etymology of the term is interesting. It is a neologism, but older than “mic” instead of “mike” as a short form of microphone, which I’m seeing more and more. The word refers to the first sentence of a news story, and is therefore more specific than the word “lead”, which can mean wither the first sentence or the first paragraph. It also has the advantage in the printing world in that it can’t be confused with the work “lead”, pronounced like the element, which is used to describe the layout of typeset text. The usage of the word “lede” in “bury the lede” is also colloquial, in that it refers to information that should be in the lede.

      Reply
      • karl says

        October 20, 2019 at 12:25 pm

        ” ths Sony a7RIV eats stars just about like the “

        Reply
        • JimK says

          October 20, 2019 at 12:51 pm

          That is not a fault in proofreading. Grammar, maybe, but I wanted to strike an informal note.

          Reply
          • Dave says

            December 29, 2019 at 12:39 pm

            While I find Karl’s tone inappropriate, he is correct. Look at the FIRST word in the sentence fragment he quoted:

            ” ths Sony a7RIV eats stars just about like the “

            Reply
            • JimK says

              December 29, 2019 at 2:04 pm

              Got it now, thanks. Fixed.

              Reply
  3. NickA says

    September 17, 2019 at 11:50 pm

    Can you explain how to interpret these graphs? In my world dB are measured as 20 x log (gain), meaning a 1dB loss is a gain of 0.9 (ie a 10% loss). Doesn’t seem catastrophic to me. Is this the wrong way to look at this?

    Reply
    • JimK says

      September 18, 2019 at 7:39 am

      Yeah, 20 dB is a factor of ten for voltage, and a factor of 100 for power. It’s not that the high-frequency losses are in themselves indicative of serious problems, but rather that they indicate the presence of a type of digital signal processing that can cause issues in particular situations, like some kinds of astrophotography.

      Reply
  4. YAS says

    September 27, 2019 at 3:53 am

    You can turn off noise reduction and high sensitivity noise reduction, but does the phenomenon of star erosion still appear?

    Reply
    • JimK says

      September 27, 2019 at 4:13 am

      Yes. It appears because that’s the way Sony designed the camera.

      Reply
      • YAS says

        September 27, 2019 at 5:14 pm

        Other filters may be the cause. I contacted Sony. Sony responded as follows : Image processing has been changed in the products after ILCE-7RM2 Ver.4.00 to alleviate the phenomenon.
        Isn’t it completely fixed yet?

        I am sorry for my poor English because I am Japanese. 🙂

        Reply
        • JimK says

          September 27, 2019 at 5:44 pm

          After the III cameras came out, it got better but didn’t go away.

          Reply
          • YAS says

            September 28, 2019 at 4:53 pm

            Thank you.
            I reported this problem to Sony.
            I’m inquiring if some kind of filter is in the shooting.
            If so, I told Sony I wanted to off the menu from the filter.

            Reply
  5. Ed Hurst says

    May 13, 2020 at 4:16 pm

    Hey Jim,

    I have a question linked to use of the camera for star trails. Assume we are shooting in uncompressed RAW and everything set to maximum quality. Assume we have a fast enough card that the bottleneck is the camera, not the card. What is the shortest exposure that can be used if I want to shoot thousands of consecutive RAW files without the camera pausing at all for the write process to catch up? On one of my other cameras, I can do 2 second exposures in this way, but anything shorter and the camera pauses as the buffer fills up. Any idea what the exposure length tipping point is for this camera? THANKS!

    Reply
    • JimK says

      May 13, 2020 at 4:37 pm

      I had the same experience as you with an a7RIII. With a 300 MB/s SD card, the a7RIV is faster. I just tried it and it works fine at 1 second exposure intervals. That’s the closest I can do without going downstairs and rooting around in the intervalometer box.

      Reply
      • Craig Johnson says

        October 2, 2020 at 8:39 pm

        What Mirrorless Camera do you recommend for solid Milkyway shots? Thanks.

        Reply
        • JimK says

          October 2, 2020 at 8:44 pm

          Of the ones I’ve used, I think a FF camera like the a7RIII, a7RIV, a7III, Z6 or Z7 would be good choices. If the Sony’s raw filtering at long exposures bothers you, go with the Nikons. You can use Sony E lenses on Z cameras, but not the other way around.Fast lenses are more of an issue with MF cameras.

          Reply
          • Adam says

            August 19, 2021 at 10:54 am

            What about a9ii? Not being iso invariant do you believe its an issue for astro? Should i go for a9ii or a7iv? Thanks buddy

            Reply
            • JimK says

              August 19, 2021 at 11:11 am

              The a9II has the same sensor as the a9.

              https://blog.kasson.com/a9ii/a9ii-edr/

              https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7RM4,Sony%20ILCE-9M2

              Reply
  6. Caleb says

    September 9, 2022 at 10:54 am

    yeah i have an 7r ii i use for 8K timelapse….but it does leave a lot to be desired using it in bulb mode for tracked astrophotography. Thinking of selling it and getting a used 5DS/5DS R. much better battery life as well with those canons vs the old sony batteries

    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.