• 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 / Sony a6300 — PRNU

Sony a6300 — PRNU

March 16, 2016 JimK Leave a Comment

This is part of a long series of posts about the Sony a6300. The series starts here.

Pixel response non-uniformity, or PRNU, doesn’t get much notice these days. That’s because, with most modern cameras,  it’s so low that it doesn’t affect normal photography. I didn’t expect the a6300 to be any different, but I looked at the PRNU anyway. There are two reasons for that. First, it’s the traditional first step in photon transfer analysis, and I’m about to do that for the camera. And second, because I thought that the Aptina conversion gain switching technology employed in the a6300 might affect PRNU, and I was curious to see whether that was true.

The Aptina technology configures the sensor in two different ways, depending on the ISO setting of the camera. In the a6300, below ISO 400, an additional capacitor is switched in parallel with each pixel, lowering the conversion gain and raising the full well capacity (FWC). Might variations in the additional capacitor cause greater PRNU, or is that capacitance better controlled than the high ISO capacitance, and would the PRNU go down at low ISO settings? Or would it make no difference whatsoever?

I made four each 128 exposure sets of a white card lit by two Wescott LED panels set to 5000K, with the camera set somewhat differently:

  • ISO 100 (low conversion gain), single shot shutter mode
  • ISO 400 (high conversion gain), single shot shutter mode
  • ISO 100 (low conversion gain), continuous shutter mode
  • ISO 400 (high conversion gain), continuous shutter mode

I used the Sony 90mm f/2.8 FE macro lens, set to f/8.  Shutter speed was 1/50 second for the ISO 100 pictures, and 1/200 for the ISO 400 ones, which was slightly under a stop below clipping.

I developed all the images to raw color planes with DCRAW, brought them into Matlab, averaging each series as each new image was added, selected an 800×800 pixel central crop, relit the images with a 99×99 pixel equalization filter to get rid of lighting non-uniformity, normalized the variations to the average signal levels, and plotted the curves.

Here are the ISO 100, single shot curves for three raw color planes.

6300 prnu conv 100 ss

You can see that averaging 64 exposures seems to be enough to get rid of all the photon noise, which is uncorrelated image  to image. 128 gives us a little extra margin.

If we boost the ISO to 400 to get the high conversion gain setting, here’s what we see:

6300 prnu conv 400 ss

The PRNU gets worse, but, by the time we get to 128 samples, not much worse.

In continuous mode, ISO 100:

6300 prnu conv 100 cont

Pretty much the same as single shot mode.

In continuous mode, ISO 400:

6300 prnu conv 400 cont

Also pretty much the same as single shot mode.

Averaging all the raw channels for each test case converting to percent, and plotting as a bar graph, we get this:

6300 aberage PRNU

My conclusions:

  • Shutter mode doesn’t affect PRNU,
  • PRNU is slightly better at lower ISOs. Presumably, this would apply to all ISOs 320 and below.
  • PRNU is slightly worse at higher ISOs. Presumably, this would apply to all ISOs 400 and above, at least until Sony starts doing digital filtering.
  • PRNU is in all cases so low as to be negligible in normal photography.

I’m trying hard to find a drawback for users to the Aptina technology, but I’m not finding one. It makes the chip more complicated, but it sure does the job. It may lower the fill factor, but I have no way of testing that.

It is sometime instructive to look at equalized renditions of averaged light-field images to get a sense of the pattern of a camera’s PRNL. The a6300, or, I should say, my a6300, shows a strong horizontal pattern. Here is one of the green planes:

AvdCorEq3

Don’t draw any conclusions from the amount of white or black; the image is stretched so that the whole gray axis is used.

The patterning on the other three layers is similar, but not identical:

Blue
Blue
Red
Red
The other green layer
The other green layer

 

The Last Word

← Sony a6300 — read noise modeling Sony a6300 — underexposure and pushing in post →

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.