• 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 / The Last Word / Pattern Error in Sony a7S dark-field images

Pattern Error in Sony a7S dark-field images

November 11, 2014 JimK 2 Comments

A couple of posts ago I reported getting rid of almost all the Nikon 810 low-frequency dark-field noise by averaging many (256) dark-field images and subtracting the average from individual images.

I wondered if the same trick would work with the Sony alpha 7S. Sadly, the answer is no.

Here’s the standard deviation of the average of 7S dark-field images as they are added into the mix one by one:

First with the raw values as the vertical axis:

a7siso100avgc

And with the vertical axis converted to electrons:

a7siso100avg

Either way, it doesn’t look very promising. The curves are almost straight lines on the log-log plot, with vertical values halving every time the horizontal values are quadrupled, indicating that almost all the dark-field noise is different from exposure to exposure.

I tried testing at ISO 3200:

a7siso3200avgc

a7siso3200avge

That’s a little more promising. If we look at the histogram of the average of 256 exposures, we can see what’s going on:

Avgda7s3200histo

There are two Gaussian distributions, one narrow one (It’s only narrow because it’s the average of 256 exposures) and one wider one with slightly lower mean and much lower population. The latter one is the fixed error.

But subtracting our the averaged image makes little difference to the low-frequency energy:

Without subtraction:

a7s3200

With subtraction:

a7s3200subref

You win some, you lose some…

The Last Word

← A million pageviews D810 read noise characteristics vs shutter speed, long exposures →

Comments

  1. Igor says

    February 18, 2015 at 12:00 am

    May be Sony already did that trick in their RAW files?

    Reply
    • Jim says

      February 18, 2015 at 8:16 am

      If they did any spatial filtering, it would show up in dark-field Fourier analysis. When I do that analysis, I don’t see any evidence of spatial filtering until above ISO 50K.

      Jim

      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Your email address will not be published.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.