Reading mode: Light Dark

News Reviews Articles Buying Guide Sample Images Videos Cameras Lenses Phones Printers Forums Galleries Challenges

Now reading: Sony Alpha 7R test scene samples added to first impression review 28 comments

Sony Alpha 7R test scene samples added to first impression review

Published Nov 15, 2013 | dpreview staff

We've updated our first impressions review of the Sony Alpha 7R with our studio test scene showing image quality for both JPEG and Raw files. The new scene also offers downloadable Raw samples of both daylight and low light scenes. As always, you can compare the A7R to the increasing number of cameras in our test scene.

See the Sony Alpha 7R in our new test scene

Tags: sony, studio-samples, test-scene

Comments

All (28)

Most popular (1)

Editors' picks (0)

DPR staff (4)

Oldest first

yabokkie

good image quality, not so good usability.
it could be a great platform to test all SLR lenses.
scores should at least be comparable among similar formats.

Nov 22, 2013permalink

Vitruvius

Holy Crap! I am actually really impressed with how well the RX1 does against the others at "only" 24 MP against the two with 33% more resolution. Check out the lock of hair. Wow.

Is that a superior lens resolution issue?

Nov 18, 2013permalink

ijustloveshooting

comparing to jpeg, iso 3200 interestingly shows more and better detail than D800 at iso 800...very strange...
check the old man BW photo at the right side...

Nov 18, 2013*permalink

kecajkerugo

why so strange? could be a better jpeg engine?

Nov 19, 2013permalink

yabokkie

JPEG means nothing if image quality is the issue.
also people see more "details" which are actually noise.
especially for cameras with no LPF (why we need it).

Nov 22, 2013permalink

Lan

Please can we have the D800E added to the test scene too?

Nov 15, 2013permalink

Richard Butler

It's one we do intend to add to the test scene.

Nov 15, 2013permalink

Tomee21

Not like if it were so important...but Canon's overall image quality and color rendition still looks more pleasing to my eyes.

Nov 15, 2013permalink

SMPhoto

Really the only way to do an apples to apples comparison would be to download both Raw images, process them the same way, then downsize or upsize them to the same resolution, then compare. At a glance, the lower resolution Canon seems to have greater "sharpness" due the the fact that the same subject area is smaller. It's hard to appreciate the detail difference at different size images.

Nov 15, 2013*permalink

Richard Butler

Or you could click on the 'Print' or 'Web' buttons on the top right of the widget, where it takes the Raw files that we've processed the same way, then downsizes them to a common resolution.

Nov 15, 2013permalink

SMPhoto

Yeah, what he said!

Nov 16, 2013permalink

Tomee21

Yeah, but I was referring to the color rendition, not details or sharpness. Color is one of the few things not changing during downsizing. Of course, you can modify the colors of your photos greatly in PS, or in raw editors, but that's exactly my problem. I always have to work quite hard with my GH2 to get the colors which are closer to pleasant, but they never look good enough. These FF cameras are close to each other in this term, but the difference is still visible.

Nov 17, 2013permalink

SMPhoto

I understand, I just didn't know whether you were comparing the JPG or RAW versions. Obviously there is a greater difference in JPGs. I have processed RAW 5DII shots of the same subject along side D800 when shooting a wedding with a 2nd photographer that i hire occasionally that shoots Canon. When ran through LR with the same processing settings, I can't tell much difference, certainly not enough that anyone would ever notice they were shot on different cameras.

Nov 18, 2013permalink

Tomee21

I was comparing the RAW versions. Yeah, the difference is always slighter there, but it is there. It sounds odd but I kinda like Canon's strong red and orange channel. Gives a warmer tone to the image.

Nov 18, 2013permalink

Spectro

Canon color r usually more saturated. Sony sensor has higher color profile more gradent. It is easy to add saturation to raw in editing. Nikon raw is about collecting as much info as u can. Post processing editing is an individual thing. Some like it more natural other like processing more contrast, sat.

Nov 19, 2013permalink

alatchin

Looks good to me. Release a good 100mm f3.5 macro and I will probably buy one!

Nov 15, 2013permalink

CeleryBeats

Impressive. Slightly more noise then the D800 so it seems.

Not that it matters ;)

Nov 15, 2013permalink

jpr2

I really do MISS two things in the new DPR's comparometer:

- nowhere in the scene there is an object of a relatively large, uniform surface, like it was a flat blue face of the watch, and yet with some very firmly outlined and crisp ciphers of the OLD comparometer - the bottle at the bottom can't replace that blue watch entirely, alas; the new scene is just a wee bit too busy with lots of pretty "talkative" object;

- and the ability to compare OLDER cameras with the new ones (this would be easier to rectify, but are there any such plans?);

Nov 15, 2013permalink

Richard Butler

We hope to add some old cameras but are working furiously to increase the number of contemporary cameras that are included.

Nov 15, 2013*permalink

TrojMacReady

As posted in the other thread:
There's something odd going on with the A7R files in the comparison tool.
For example all the daylight RAW shots in the tool, are nosier than the actual files available for download. In the tool it looks to have more noise than the D800, when you download the files from both, they are practically identical. A difference in sharpening applied to the files?

Here's an example:
http://i40.tinypic.com/2pryagl.jpg

Nov 15, 2013*permalink

luigibozi

"There's something odd going on with the A7R" on this site. It doesn't appear in "Cameras receiving the most clicks in reviews and specs in the last five days". I know it's a bug, I'm just kidding... Seriously.

Nov 15, 2013permalink

TrojMacReady

Just trying to figure out the reliability of the comparison tool in general. I would rather rely on that than having to download RAW files or converted RAW files for every ISO from cameras I want to compare.

Nov 15, 2013permalink

ageha

Are you looking at the files in a browser? Don't do that, some browsers apply filters.

Nov 15, 2013permalink

TrojMacReady

The comparison tool only works in a browser and no, I compared the full files in Irfanview. Also, I don't believe it should add filters to file A but not to file B. ;-)

Nov 15, 2013permalink

ageha

lol, that's not what I said, of course the tool doesn't do that. I said "files".

Nov 15, 2013permalink

TrojMacReady

And notice what I said about the files.

Nov 15, 2013permalink

Richard Butler

The crops displayed in the on-site widget are generated directly from the original file (the one available for download).

I've tried overlaying a pair of the images displayed in the tool on top of the original file (the one available for download) and I can't see a difference until I zoom in to 300%.

Having checked with the developer of the comparison tool, the process is to load the original file, crop and save each crop as a 90% quality JPEG - which is visually indistinguishable. There's no sharpening step.

I certainly can't reproduce the sharpness difference you're showing.

Nov 15, 2013permalink

TrojMacReady

Consider my comment as retracted, the differences are indeed so minimal that it's not worth investigating.

Nov 15, 2013permalink


Top tips for composing great landscapes Jul 23, 2016	Sony announces camera shipment delays due to Kumamoto earthquake Jun 28, 2016	Looking Sharp: A focus stacking tutorial May 29, 2016	Go with the glow: How to effectively use Orton Layers in post processing May 8, 2016


Playing goofball... by Leonostro from Animals that look stupid funny	Flower in flower by atdigit from Random Items Challenge 26	Surface tension by atdigit from Right in the middle	A Normal Dat at Thomas's Clap 2016-9379 by Andrew Maltzoff from Show us SCHOOL!

80	Why Olympus E-M1 II doesn't have such impressive sequence speed
67	fuji 50-140 f/2.8 vs canon 70-200 2.8 II in low light for events
65	Let's choose new Pentax Forum Moderators
64	Dynamic Range X-T2 vs A6300
63	Panasonic I'm really angry, no GH5 for me!
62	X-E2 dissapointment.
45	A couple of questions for Great Bustard…
45	I hope the E-M1 MkII fixes one issue...
43	K-1 visits the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam
39	Upload picture issue with new Firefox 49.0.1
39	What is the repair rate on Sony alpha models?
37	Sony does not use XQD cards in a99II ??
33	How Much Leica in PanaLeica?
32	OMD em10 mark ii unimpressive IQ
31	Need To Step My Game Up...
31	Why so few member galleries ???
30	At Last! Sigma CEO says they will make FE lenses!
30	[Equiv] A different take on equivalence
29	Retouching Forum Weekly Project #4
28	Canon 5d mk IV - 4k video - wow!