NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Camera Talk => Topic started by: Michael Erlewine on April 07, 2016, 15:20:08
-
There is a fascinating discussion at Luminous Landscape:
Thread: A7rIII 70-80 MPx
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=109694.0
Scroll down to a post by BartvanderWolf
Here are some details on Nikon sensors, but they also have Canon, Sony, etc.
Nikon:
D3: saturation level = 50626 e-, with 8.4 micron pitch = 717 e- per square micron.
D3s: saturation level = 84203 e-, with 8.4 micron pitch = 1193 e- per square micron.
D3X: saturation level = 47765 e-, with 5.9 micron pitch = 1372 e- per square micron.
D4: saturation level = 118339 e-, with 7.2 micron pitch = 2282 e- per square micron.
D4s: saturation level = 128489 e-, with 7.3 micron pitch = 2411 e- per square micron.
D800: saturation level = 48818 e-, with 4.7 micron pitch = 2210 e- per square micron.
D800E: saturation level = 54924 e-, with 4.7 micron pitch = 2486 e- per square micron.
D810: saturation level = 78083 e-, with 4.9 micron pitch = 3252 e- per square micron.
D5:
-
Holy moly!! Wouldn't that be something sweet for those of us who like to capture detail? (Well, who doesn't?)
And if a 70-80MP sensor shows up in a Sony a7 body, can its appearance be far behind in a Nikon body?
I've read that even if one does not really need so many pixels, oversampling at X megapixels and downsizing to Y megapixels produces a better photo than simply shooting at Y megapixels in the first place. I suppose that is one of those experiments we should all perform to prove it to ourselves.
I've not before seen the data expressing number of electrons gathered per square micron. Very interesting. And given what I've seen with my D810, not surprising that it leads the pack on that particular measurement. That D810 has more headroom in the highlights than I have ever seen in any Nikon body yet. And I'm sure some Sony bodys can show similar high measurements.
-
I would buy a Sony A7rII if it stored images in a lossless format. But best for me to wait for the next D810 successor, which is by far the best camera I have ever used, especially LiveView and particularly ISO 64.
-
I thought Sony provided a lossless format update?
Interesting thing about the LCD on my D810 and a7R (first version) is that while both have the same resolution, Live View on the D810 seems better to me than on the a7R. There are a lot of factors that go into that like backlighting, refresh rate and so forth. So I do not know what particular factor seems lacking on the a7R monitor. But the a7R in Live View has a "swimmy, swarmy" appearance like gazillions of little tiny dots are rambling over the view - especially noticeable in dark areas. So in spite of focus peaking (which is a mixed bag), it is somewhat harder to focus in Live View on the a7R than on the D810. Live View on the D810 seems exceptionally clear and the swimmy-swarms are barely noticeable on it.
Added: Michael I don't recall if you have ever used digital medium format? Have you ever rented a Phase One to experiment with?
-
I would buy a Sony A7rII if it stored images in a lossless format.
It does, 14 bits lossless compressed RAW files.
-
Thanks, JA. Did they offer that on any of the older models?
-
Live View on the D810 seems exceptionally clear and the swimmy-swarms are barely noticeable on it.
But it sure took a long time for them to figure it out. It doesn't seem to be an easy thing to juggle all this data and stream it in a form that looks good.
Diffraction, after all, follows well-known laws of physics, so it can be done.
This is a common fallacy --- there are many physical laws that don't conserve information.
-
It does, 14 bits lossless compressed RAW files.
Since when is this true? My understanding from Lloyd Chambers that it does NOT save in lossless?
-
Added: Michael I don't recall if you have ever used digital medium format? Have you ever rented a Phase One to experiment with?
I had a Mamiya RZ67 with a 33 MPx digital back and ultimately did not like it.
-
Kimio Maki of Sony says:
KM: Sony RAW is compressed, not uncompressed. But if we're getting a lot of requests for it, we should make such a kind of no-compression raw. Of course we recognize that. But I cannot give you a guarantee when we're going to fix or not fix.
-
What a camera system can do about diffraction is to offer very fine pitched focus series (bracketing) & stacking inside the camera software. I remember the first camera who did focus series for that purpose was the "Contax N" an early digital I am sure no one remembers( http://www.lonestardigital.com/n_digital.htm ), but there have been later cameras who could do in camera like the "Olympus OMD EM1" starting with Firmware 4.0: http://cameras.olympus.com/stack/en/
For the non physicists: This IS a measure against diffraction because it allows users to take photos at wider apertures (less diffraction) with the same DOF
-
I did some checking and they now do have a lossless uncompressed format for the A7RII, that takes something like 86 MB a file, due the fact that they did not pack carefully. What they don't have is a lossless compressed file like Nikon.
-
I did some checking and they now do have a lossless uncompressed format for the A7RII, that takes something like 86 MB a file, due the fact that they did not pack carefully. What they don't have is a lossless compressed file like Nikon.
Also the 24mp A7II offers 14 bit lossless uncompressed raw.
Memory cards are big and hard drives cheap these days, so the file size is not a show stopper.
-
Also the 24mp A7II offers 14 bit lossless uncompressed raw.
Memory cards are big and hard drives cheap these days, so the file size is not a show stopper.
Correct, would be nice though if Sony improved the write times of their camera in line with the increased file sizes.
Bought the Sandisk 280MB/s SD card for a7RII but didn't see any improvement over the 95MB/s, so it still takes ages for the 42MP 14 bits files to be written to card :-\
-
Correct, would be nice though if Sony improved the write times of their camera in line with the increased file sizes.
Bought the Sandisk 280MB/s SD card for a7RII but didn't see any improvement over the 95MB/s, so it still takes ages for the 42MP 14 bits files to be written to card :-\
With 24mp files I fortunately have no issues.
-
Well, my a7II has very slow write speeds. Shooting side by side with the D750 really shows the Sony to be extremely slow. Just one of the things Sony has to do something about . I have a gut feeling that the next Sony will be bigger, faster to operate, better build, and the a7 series will just slowly move forward, or maybe not. Sony has already dropped the 'small is beautiful' idea for FX.
-
Seems a good idea to wait till the technology matures.
-
Well, my a7II has very slow write speeds. Shooting side by side with the D750 really shows the Sony to be extremely slow. Just one of the things Sony has to do something about . I have a gut feeling that the next Sony will be bigger, faster to operate, better build, and the a7 series will just slowly move forward, or maybe not. Sony has already dropped the 'small is beautiful' idea for FX.
"FX" is a Nikon term. Sony refers to it as "35mm Full Frame".
Sony hasn't necessarily dropped the "small is beautiful" for 35mm full frame either. It's more like they are running several lines or options, and there is no way that a 24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8 or a 85/1.4 can be small. The nice thing is that Sony also offers 28/2 FE, 35/2.8ZA FE and the recently introduced 50/1.8 FE that are small, all three with a 49mm filter thread.
Another point to "small is beautiful" is the Zeiss Loxia 21/2.8 for Sony FE at 394g with a 52mm filter thread, which is still in short supply, so that trend is not gone. The DSLR Zeiss Milvus 21/2.8 ZF.2/ZE weighs 735g/851g respective of mount and has a filter thread of 82mm.
-
Can't disagree except wait for the next generation of a7 series bodies (if there is one) . I fully expect the next new Sony 35mm Full Frame will be as big and heavy as my D750/Df. With Sony, they may put a 35mm FF in a very small, light weight body a step below the a7 series. You just never know which way Sony will jump ;) , :( .
Heck, I'm not particularly fond of shooting my 24-70 2.8 or 70-200 2.8vr II on the Df ( have used them a few times when needed) so no plans to consider the new G series.
-
The rumoured Sony's D5 competitor apparently also has dual XQD card slots and supposedly an unlimited RAW buffer, the latter isn't a very relevant fact though without knowing the MP's, bit rate and frame rate.
I hope the a9 will have a slim integrated grip to improve the handeling of heavy lenses.
SAR link
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-bomb-rumor-first-a9-specs-dual-xqd-card-slot-unlimited-raw-burst/ (http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-bomb-rumor-first-a9-specs-dual-xqd-card-slot-unlimited-raw-burst/)
-
I actually think that it would be nice if we could choose the depth and width of the grip ourselves, much like you can with a custom pistol grip. That would improve the ergonomics a lot on both mirrorless and DSLRs.
-
The rumoured Sony's D5 competitor apparently also has dual XQD card slots and supposedly an unlimited RAW buffer, the latter isn't a very relevant fact though without knowing the MP's, bit rate and frame rate.
I hope the a9 will have a slim integrated grip to improve the handeling of heavy lenses.
SAR link
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-bomb-rumor-first-a9-specs-dual-xqd-card-slot-unlimited-raw-burst/ (http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-bomb-rumor-first-a9-specs-dual-xqd-card-slot-unlimited-raw-burst/)
Let's hope it's true, and not just someone making a rumour on beefing up the D5 spec. The XQD cards seem to be a good design, so hopefully it's gaining tracktion.
-
A full-frame 70-80MP camera might be impossible to hand-hold? The image stabilization would be the absolute necessity, in-lens or in-body.
-
A full-frame 70-80MP camera might be impossible to hand-hold? The image stabilization would be the absolute necessity, in-lens or in-body.
IBIS as well as EFCS helps. In addition micro contrast won't be hampered by a mirror moving up and down. 64mp on full frame is just a tad more pixel density than 16mp on m43. Or 20mp on m43 vs 80mp on full frame.
Let's see which parts of the rumour that are true. Just like there are 12mp, 24mp and 36/42mp A7 versions, there could be more than one A9 version. Maybe a 70-80mp sensor would be for a Sony A9R or a Nikon D5X or a D850? Lots of things we don't know yet. I think that a Sony A9 professional press or sports camera would rather have something like a 20-24mp sensor like the new Nikon D5.
-
I want the 42MP Sony from the A7R2 in a D8x0 chipholder