• 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 / a9 / Sony a9 eats stars

Sony a9 eats stars

May 27, 2017 JimK 9 Comments

This is the fourth in a series of posts on the Sony a9. The series starts here.

I’ve been asked to look into the digital lowpass filtering in the Sony a9 as a function of exposure time, to see it it has the same “star-eater” filtering beginning as 4 second exposures that was introduced to the a7RII with firmware 3.30.

First, I lo0ked at read noise in general as it relates to exposure time, with electronic shutter on, at ISO 1000, and no lens attached:

You can see a suspicious drop right at the transition from 3.2 to 4 seconds. By the way, the gap on the left is because the a9 has no exposure time settings between 1/32000 second and 1/16000 second.

Let’s take a look in the spatial frequency domain at the 4 second exposure to see if we observe the low-pass behavior that is a telltale sign of star munching:

Yes, indeed. The a9 eats stars. But what’s going on with the ripples in the horizontal direction? Let’s look at 3.2 seconds: By the way, f is the frequency, fs is the sampling frequency, so f/fs equal to a half is the Nyquist frequency.

Yes. Even though the vertical direction shows only a small droop with increasing frequency, 

At 1 second:

At 1/30 second:

At 1/125 second:

At 1/1000 second:

Looks like the a9 does that all the time, at least in electronic shutter mode. I’ll have to test the mechanical shutter.

The noise is low, so should the patterning indicated by the frequency response plots. What’s it look like? here’s a tight crop of the red channel (which was used for the above graphs), show at about 200% and brutally treated with curves in Photoshop:

 

There is some patterning visible, but it’s not particularly objectionable to my eyes.

 

a9, The Last Word

← Sony a9 EDR vs ISO setting How fast is the Sony a9 electronic shutter? →

Comments

  1. John Leathwick says

    May 27, 2017 at 3:12 pm

    Thanks for doing this – It might seem odd, but as an A7RII user, I’m relieved that Sony have applied their median filtering in the A9 just the same as it is in the A7RII and SII. This hopefully means that there will be even greater pressure for them to release firmware updates that solve this issue for everyone – my fear was that they would have removed it on the A9, and left A7RII and SII users marooned in an astro-shooting dead-end.

    -John

    Reply
  2. Ari Aikomus says

    June 5, 2017 at 1:59 am

    Jim, check this:

    “…The conclusion: Sony star-eater reduces the number of detectable stars in this equivalent images by 167 or by about 26%”

    https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59658425

    Reply
  3. Ian Norman says

    June 8, 2017 at 4:31 am

    Jim,

    A purported Star Eater fix may have been issued for the a7RII or a7SII. (New firmware v4.00 and 3.00, respectively. ) The Sony a9 was included in this wave of updates but there is no mention of similar changes. I haven’t tested it yet as it’s just released but I’m hopeful it makes it better for the a7RII and a7SII at least. Not sure if it will improve Bulb Mode or not:

    http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sony-releases-new-firmware-update-%CE%B19-%CE%B17-ii-%CE%B17r-ii-%CE%B17s-ii-%CE%B16300-%CE%B16500/

    Reply
  4. Derrick says

    June 5, 2019 at 2:26 pm

    Hi Jim
    I daresay you are too busy to have tested it but do you know if the new Sony firmware fixes the star eater issues? My particular concern is for the a9.
    Thanks
    Derrick

    Reply

Trackbacks

  1. Sony and the star-eater algorithm | John Leathwick says:
    May 27, 2017 at 3:16 pm

    […] just reported that they same issue occurs with Sony’s new flagship model, the A9 – see here – so one can guess that astro-photographers won’t be flocking to that […]

    Reply
  2. First Sony A9 overheating issue report. And yes, it "eats stars" too :( - sonyalpharumors sonyalpharumors says:
    May 28, 2017 at 3:50 am

    […] there is more bad news. Jim Kasson confirms that the A9 is a “star eater” too. He tested the electronic shutter only, so […]

    Reply
  3. L’a9 : Un problème de surchauffe affecterait le nouvel appareil phare de Sony – Le blog photo says:
    May 28, 2017 at 6:05 am

    […] ce n’est pas tout; le photographe Jim Kasson aurait confirmé que l’A9 serait également un « star eater ». Mais il […]

    Reply
  4. Sony a9 overheating? (and other reported problems) | Photo Rumors says:
    May 28, 2017 at 10:46 am

    […] Let’s take a look in the spatial frequency domain at the 4 second exposure to see if we observe the low-pass behavior that is a telltale sign of star munching. Yes, indeed. The a9 eats stars. But what’s going on with the ripples in the horizontal direction? Let’s look at 3.2 seconds: By the way, f is the frequency, fs is the sampling frequency, so f/fs equal to a half is the Nyquist frequency. (Jim Kasson) […]

    Reply
  5. Star Eater – UPDATED. Why I No Longer Recommend Sony Cameras for Astrophotography: An Open Letter to Sony – Lonely Speck says:
    June 9, 2017 at 4:37 pm

    […] UPDATE: May 30, 2017: The Sony a9 does it. […]

    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.