• 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 a7RII long exposure spatial filtering with FW 3.30

Sony a7RII long exposure spatial filtering with FW 3.30

November 29, 2016 JimK 18 Comments

I have previously reported that the Sony a7RII performs low-pass spatial filtering on raw files under some conditions: bulb and high-ISO exposures. This behavior is now often called the “star-eater” algorithm, a reference to its degradation of some astro images.  Recently, an astrophotographer posted some images here, and claimed that the star-eating behavior affected timed exposures of 4 seconds and above.

This report was greeted with widespread skepticism, including some from me. However, the photographer kept producing images that seemed to hint that the effect was real. I had done my original testing shortly after the a7RII was first shipped using firmware version 1.0. The current  version is 3.30. Could it be that the camera’s behavior has changed?

It has.

I retested the camera with FW 3.3, and found that out. I will now present my findings. If you are a skeptic — as I was — I hope this convinces you.

Here are spectra from raw red channel dark-field exposures at 3.2 and 4 seconds. Take a look, then read on for my explanation:

3p2-unp-ss

 

4-sec-unc-ss

First, the conditions under which I made the exposures:

  • No lens on camera
  • Uncompressed raw (compressed gives similar results)
  • EFCS on (not that it matters)
  • Mechanical second curtain
  • Single shot shutter mode (this does matter).

fs is the sampling frequency of the sensor. f/fs = 0.5 is thus the Nyquist limit.

Dark field exposures are images of the read noise of the camera. Read noise is divided into two components: that part that is correlated from frame to frame, and that part that is  uncorrelated. The portion that is correlated tends to have higher energy at low frequencies. The part that is uncorrelated should be what engineers call white, that is, have equal energy at all frequencies. 

If the read noise were truly white, the charts of the read noise would be flat from the left side of the above graphs to the right. If you look at the top graph, that is the case for the vertical frequency components. Such flatness indicates no spatial filtering on the part of the camera firmware. The horizontal component shows a roller-coaster periodic behavior. I am not entirely sure as to its origin, but I saw similar behavior at some ISO settings with FW 1.0, I believe it is related to differences in the column ADCs and column amplifiers on the a7RII sensor.

In the 4-second image, the vertical curve is no longer flat, but hows a 1 db droop from low frequencies to the Nyquist frequency. That is the result of the camera’s firmware. It didn’t happen with FW 1.0.

The spectra that happen at 4 seconds continue all the way up to a 30 second timed exposure:

30-sec-unc-ss

However, with a bulb exposure, things are different:

20-sec-bulb-unc-ss

When bulb is used, there is less spatial filtering of the vertical components, and, once you mentally subtract off the peaks of the horizontal component and look only at the troughs, about the same amount of filtering of the horizontal component.

While I was conducting the testing that lead to the above graphs, I noticed some anomalies in the histograms of the FW 3.3 camera. I’ll be tracking those down and reporting on them soon. Also, I’ll be exploring other ISOs than the base ISO. Unfortunately, I have upgraded (although if I were an astrophotographer, I’d argue that it wasn’t an upgrade) all my a7RII’s to FW 3.3, so I won’t be able to do side by side comparisons. 

Fortunately, I did fairly extensive spectral testing of the original firmware, and I’ll give pointers to what I posted about that. If you want to see how the old firmware performed in tests similar to those posted today, take a look here and here.

The Last Word

← More slit scan experiments — dealing with vertical striping Sony a7RII in-camera lowpass raw filtering with FW 3.30 →

Comments

  1. Herb Cunningham says

    November 30, 2016 at 7:13 am

    Ok, so if I have the Fw 1.0, leave it alone?

    Reply
    • Jim says

      November 30, 2016 at 7:38 am

      Are you happy with your camera? There’a an old saying. “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” I don’t know of a downgrade path, but I bet people will research that now.

      Jim

      Reply
  2. Herb Cunningham says

    November 30, 2016 at 7:59 am

    Plenty happy with the camera, so living in the past is just fine-when FW 1 becomes an issue, I can respond to the issue.

    Great site, Jim (much is beyond my tech ability, but much is not)

    Reply
  3. CarVac says

    November 30, 2016 at 10:13 pm

    By the way, Jim.

    When you mention “do you have Matlab” on the dpr thread I kept thinking… there’s always Octave which is free and open-source and completely compatible with all this basic signal processing stuff.

    Reply
  4. Chris says

    May 2, 2017 at 2:55 am

    So, this will probably also effect the image quality of daytime long exposure (1 min+) and nightime cityscapes with illuminated buildings? I ve only seen one example for this cases until now. And it didn’t look good….can anyone confirm this has also (visible) impact on these other 2 fields? A7R2 mainly. I am at the verge of getting a DSLM, but all have “issues”. Fuji XT2….worms….A7X….fallback to 12bit on certain modes and now this, image quality loss because of long exposure….

    Reply
  5. akmt says

    May 24, 2017 at 12:47 am

    Is A7RII installed with firmware v3.2 affected by this low-pass spatial filtering issue?

    Reply
    • JimK says

      May 24, 2017 at 9:12 am

      Yes, but not for similar timed exposures between 3.2 and 30 seconds.

      Reply
  6. Simon says

    June 13, 2017 at 11:16 am

    Just wondering if this could have anything to do with the “Long Exposure NR” setting? Haven’t tested this myself, but maybe…

    Reply
    • JimK says

      June 13, 2017 at 12:02 pm

      LENR was off.

      Reply
  7. Jens says

    July 2, 2017 at 1:35 am

    Thanks for the excellent explanations*

    By reading your statement on bulb mode (“When bulb is used, there is less spatial filtering of the vertical components,”) , is it correct to conclude, that with FW3.3
    it is preferable to shoot exposures of 4sec and higher in bulb mode to reduce the impact of the issue?

    Do you have plans on testing FW4.0 as well, as Sony claimed to have improved on LENR?

    Reply
    • JimK says

      July 2, 2017 at 7:20 am

      I don’t think that the difference between the spatial filtering in 4 second timed exposures and bulb mode is worth worrying about.

      I did test FW 4.0:

      http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/sony-a7rii-fw-4-0-star-eating/

      Reply

Trackbacks

  1. LENR and Sony a7RII FW 3.30 lowpass filteering says:
    November 30, 2016 at 2:15 pm

    […] have seen here and here that the Sony a7RII running firmware 3.30 spatially filters raw images prior to writing […]

    Reply
  2. Specific A7sII astrophotography fix request... - sonyalpharumors sonyalpharumors says:
    April 16, 2017 at 9:37 pm

    […] there is less than 10.000 astrophotographers… Here is some links to prove what I say : http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/sony-a7rii-long-exposure-spatial-filtering-with-fw-3-30/ http://www.cloudynights.com/topic/498339-sony-a7s-star-eater-algorithm/ […]

    Reply
  3. Sony and the star-eater algorithm – or, ‘how Sony crippled the world’s (possibly) best cameras for astrophotography’ | John Leathwick says:
    April 28, 2017 at 9:37 pm

    […] on their Sony cameras, disturbing reports began to surface in the astrophotography community (here) – it appeared that Sony had extended their application of median filtering used with bulb […]

    Reply
  4. Why I No Longer Recommend Sony Cameras for Astrophotography: An Open Letter to Sony – Lonely Speck says:
    May 3, 2017 at 1:30 pm

    […] places around the online photography community, particularly on the DPReview forums, Cloudy Nights, Jim Kasson’s Last Word, and more recently on Sony Alpha […]

    Reply
  5. The Star Eater Issue: Why I No Longer Recommend Sony Cameras for Astrophotography – Photography News World says:
    May 4, 2017 at 9:07 am

    […] places around the online photography community, particularly on the DPReview forums, Cloudy Nights, Jim Kasson’s Last Word, and more recently on Sony Alpha […]

    Reply
  6. The Star Eater Issue: Why I No Longer Recommend Sony Cameras for Astrophotography – Get Photo Tips says:
    May 4, 2017 at 9:42 am

    […] places around the online photography community, particularly on the DPReview forums, Cloudy Nights, Jim Kasson’s Last Word, and more recently on Sony Alpha […]

    Reply
  7. Sony Mirrorless Cameras Still Eat Stars – Photography News World says:
    June 13, 2017 at 8:51 am

    […] circulate that smoothing was now being applied to all exposures of 4 seconds or longer. Eventually an analysis by Jim Kasson provided the conclusive evidence that this was case. While many users of these cameras probably […]

    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.