• 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 / a9II / Sony a9II precision

Sony a9II precision

November 4, 2019 JimK 3 Comments

This is the second in a series of posts about the Sony alpha 9 Mark II, aka the a9II. The series starts here. You can find other posts in this series by using the category list on the right, and selecting “a9II”.

In the previous post, I looked at the read noise of the Sony a9II in various shutter modes, shutter timings,  and ISO settings. Now I’ll look at the histograms of selected dark-field captures from that test.

We’ll start at ISO 100 with the mechanical shutter in single-shot mode, uncompressed raw:

The green channels look fairly symmetric, with enough noise that 13 bits would be adequate precision.

When we switch to compressed raw and continuous shutter mode, the camera reduces the precision to 12 bits:

This is barely adequate for the ISO 100 read noise of the camera, but there should be no real problems from that loss of precision.

If we look at the histograms at ISO 500, which is just before the camera switches to high conversion gain, we see more noise. First in uncompressed mode:

 

And in continuous compressed:

 

When we switch to ISO 640, the noise goes down.

Uncompressed:

Continuous compressed:

I’ll ignore the continuous compressed case, and just lok at the uncompressed raw frames as we go higher in ISO setting.

At ISO 5000, we begin to get some combing in the blue channel, likely due to PDAF pixel processing:

At ISO 25600, dropouts due to scaling are visible:

The scaling is more evident as the ISO goes up and we have to expand the z-axis of the histogram to get most of it all in. Note that there is some filing in of the gaps in all channels, but mostly in the blue one, probably due to digital signal processing that is taking place after the scaling.

 

In general, I consider this good performance. I am please to see the absence of a lot of digital gain as the ISO settings climb to their upper reaches.

a9II

← Sony a9II EDR Sony a9II dark-field spectra →

Comments

  1. Den says

    November 4, 2019 at 10:55 am

    Looking forward to this series of tests.

    In particualr if any real world improvement in high iso noise compared to A9.

    Reply
  2. Alex says

    November 10, 2019 at 1:10 pm

    As a user of Canon for the past 15+ years, The A9, A7RIV and particularly the new A9ii, have all tempted me to switch over.

    During your various tests, what key features stand out to you as marked improvements in the A9 mark ii vs the mark i? likewise, did you find anything that has remained the same/no change?

    Thankyou

    Reply
    • JimK says

      November 10, 2019 at 1:21 pm

      It’s looking like the sensor didn’t change. That means the electronic shutter is the same. The ergonomics are better in small ways: the battery door is easier to open one-handed, the button that unlocks the ring on the left top of the camera is easier (possible?) to operate one-handed, the grip is like the a7RIV grip. USB-C, both SD card slots are fast. The camera appears to operate more snappily. I haven’t tested the AF yet.

      It’s a modest, yet welcome, improvement.

      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.