the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

  • site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge
You are here: Home / The Last Word / Simulating Sony a7II photon transfer curves

Simulating Sony a7II photon transfer curves

January 12, 2015 JimK 2 Comments

In yesterday’s post, we saw markedly worse low-signal-level performance when the camera shutter mode is changed from single shot to continuous. We know from looking at histograms that the analog to digital converter (ADC) resolution changes from 13 to 12 bits when the shutter mode is thus changed. Is that sufficient to cause the observed change in the photon transfer curves? I wrote a simulator in Matlab to explore the issue.

Here’s the code which simulates the paired capture, mean and standard deviation calculations that the photon transfer curve software that I wrote with Jack Hogan does:

sim code

Matlab users, contact me if you want the text file.

Here’s what we get if we plot three offset voltages for two main cases where the ADCs differ in resolution by one bit, the read noise by a factor of two (the higher precision ADC gets the lower RN), and the gain by a factor of two (the lower precision ADC gets the higher gain):

double everything

The horizontal axis is the calculated (not the actual) mean in stops above the higher-precision ADC’s LSB, and the vertical axis is the calculated standard deviation with the same log scale. The curves have similar shapes and bear similarity to the real curves you saq yesterday, but the higher precision, lower noise, lower gain case has lower standard deviations. No surprises here.

Now lets leave the gain the same between the two sets of curves, as you would expect that Sony would do if they had to lower the precision to get the data out faster:

same gain

Now let’s make the read noise the same in both sets of curves:

rn same too

My take is, looking at these curves and the ones from yesterday’s post, is that we are seeing a real increase in read noise as the shutter mode is changed to continuous, not just an increase in quantization noise, but perhaps short of a doubling of non-quantizing read noise.

Bill Claff suggested to me yesterday that that could be the case. My money was on mostly quantizing noise. Looks like I was wrong.

 

The Last Word

← Does DRO in the a7II affect noise? Photo credits →

Comments

  1. Jerry Fusselman says

    January 27, 2015 at 8:02 pm

    On the theory that authors want to hear all reactions to their writing, I’ll admit to you that I keep hoping that someday soon you will switch from Matlab to R. You might like R better, and many people have already switched to R. If not, it looks like I’ll be learning Matlab when I have more time .

    Reply
    • Jim says

      January 27, 2015 at 9:40 pm

      Gee, Jerry, at my advanced age it was hard enough going from Smalltalk to Matlab…

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

March 2023
S M T W T F S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
« Jan    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • Good 35-70 MF lens
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
  • 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 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 Fujifilm GFX 100S pixel shift, visuals
  • Sarmed Mirza on Fujifilm GFX 100S pixel shift, visuals
  • lancej on Two ways to improve the Q2 handling
  • JimK on Sony 135 STF on GFX-50R, sharpness
  • K on Sony 135 STF on GFX-50R, sharpness
  • Mal Paso on Christmas tree light bokeh with the XCD 38V on the X2D
  • Sebastian on More on tilted adapters
  • JimK on On microlens size in the GFX 100 and GFX 50R/S
  • Kyle Krug on On microlens size in the GFX 100 and GFX 50R/S
  • JimK on Hasselblad X2D electronic shutter scan time

Archives

Copyright © 2023 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.