re: A99 Fast iso test: raw and jpeg crops

Started Sep 24, 2012 | Discussions
thubleau7
Contributing MemberPosts: 516
Like?
Re: Absolutely.
In reply to TrojMacReady, Sep 25, 2012

3-4 stops ?? nahh more like a third to one stop but it still does not account for all the noise at that ISO setting and the sensor cannot be that bad if it is the same sensor in the D600.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
thubleau7
Contributing MemberPosts: 516
Like?
re: A99 Fast iso test: with rawdigger 1600 and 3200
In reply to GuyMcKie, Sep 25, 2012

still looks awful.........I have doubts about whether these tests are indicative of the A99 performance.
I will wait to have a look at some decent samples and then decide.
have you got any JPEGS ? or what about RAW converted to TIFF printed.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
thubleau7
Contributing MemberPosts: 516
Like?
re: A99 Fast iso test: with rawdigger 1600 and 3200
In reply to thubleau7, Sep 25, 2012

Oh dear, silly me, these are JPEGS .

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
GuyMcKie
Contributing MemberPosts: 534
Like?
Re: Absolutely.
In reply to Dustinash, Sep 25, 2012

Show iso3200 raw files without nr and without chroma or luminance noise.

probably with sharpening applied

no sharpening

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
a_d_r_y_y
Junior MemberPosts: 44
Like?
re: 2700$ FOR THIS ?!?!
In reply to GuyMcKie, Sep 25, 2012

no thanks.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
VirtualMirage
Senior MemberPosts: 2,338Gear list
Like?
re: A99 Fast iso test: raw and jpeg crops
In reply to GuyMcKie, Sep 25, 2012

GuyMcKie wrote:

24,256 kb 24,320 kb and 24,384 kb

Strange that there are different sizes.

Thanks!

It isn't surprising to me. The A77's RAWs will vary in size slightly from one image to the next. The files, despite not being labeled as such, are really a form of compressed RAW. The other thing that can cause a slight variation is any extra information the camera is storing alongside the RAW image information (Lens corrections, GPS coordinates, etc.). Also, don't forget that RAW files usually have a very small sidecar photo that is in a JPEG/JFIF format for quick preview. That can cause the file size to vary a bit as well.
--
Paul

 VirtualMirage's gear list:VirtualMirage's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony SLT-A77 Sony a77 II Sony 50mm F1.4 Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX +23 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TrojMacReady
Senior MemberPosts: 8,425
Like?
I read, do you?
In reply to Dustinash, Sep 25, 2012

Dustinash wrote:

TrojMacReady wrote:

Dustinash wrote:

What do you mean it looks good. It looks like crap. This is not even on par with the d800 at 25600 .

There is not just excessive noise in these photos there are major artifacts which distort and corrupt the image. I have noticed the same artifacts in all video I have seen shot on the a99 and yet when I looked at the rx1 video it looked awesome.

I want to get sonys new camera so bad but I fear this is a natural consequence of the SLT.

Absolutely, the SLT design compromises output by at least 3 stops. I'd say closer to 4.

Seems like you'd be better off with those 3 extra stops at Nikon.

/ sarcasm.

Do you read or just bleet? baaahhh.. Im a sony sheep... baaaaahhh.

/ disdain

You just said that the D800 looks better at ISO 25600 than those ISO 3200 crops. That's 3 stops. And then you state that you "fear this is a natural consequence of the SLT".

And then you expect me to take you seriously?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TrojMacReady
Senior MemberPosts: 8,425
Like?
Re: Absolutely.
In reply to thubleau7, Sep 25, 2012

thubleau7 wrote:

3-4 stops ?? nahh more like a third to one stop but it still does not account for all the noise at that ISO setting and the sensor cannot be that bad if it is the same sensor in the D600.

IDC (cough cough) conversion of highly underexposed bits, pushed a bit as well and that leads to certain conclusions?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads