A57 or A65 for lowlight wildlife?

Started Oct 28, 2012 | Questions thread
theswede
theswede Veteran Member • Posts: 4,009
Re: A57 or A65 for lowlight wildlife?
3

sensibill wrote:

It's been said, 'Never underestimate the power of denial.'

And never have I seen that so strongly as in those die-hard defenders of the 16MP sensor, defying measured reality in their quest to prove their perception trumps any objective measurement.

Chroma noise is still noise.

Naturally. It is one kind of noise. Most sensors will perform rather aggressive chroma noise reduction since many people associate "noise" simply with "chroma noise" and do not comprehend the connection between signal and noise, and how the highly visible chroma noise is only one aspect of how much information a photo contains.

A rather small aspect at that.

The A57 has a chroma noise advantage at higher ISO.

In purely OOC photos this is correct. This advantage in one kind of noise comes at the cost of other types of noise, as evidenced by the SNR ratio being identical.

This also results in more accurate shadow colors at high ISO.

Not correct. The shadow colors are the same. The visible shift is noise, not color. When cleaned up the images look comparable to the point of being indistinguishable, as expected with identical SNR.

Chroma noise does not always equate to lost pixel level detail, but NR can reduce pixel detail.

Which is what happens inside the A57 sensor. Again, as evidenced by the SNR ratio. Signal to noise measurement is not fooled, like our eyes are.

This is less evident in brighter or lighter hued areas.

The relationship is linear. If there is loss of pixel detail it will not be different in different areas.

Small variances in exposure do not account for the kind of chroma discrepancies we see in A57 vs A65 at higher ISO.

And no-one has said this. Chroma noise is one kind of noise. Not the only one, and not even the most important one. Blur noise is much worse at destroying information, which is why NR is so hard.

Nor does it render irrelevant what you get from each camera when both are set to ISO-1600 or higher.

What does this sentence even mean? Of course what we get from the cameras is not irrelevant - it's the whole point of having a camera.

The A57 doesn't 'lose' or surrender any shadow detail vs the A65 at higher ISO.

So you're saying the A57 has higher SNR than the A65. You will have to back that up.

The A65 doesn't have more pixel level detail than A57 when equalized to 16MP.

Whatever "pixel level detail" means. It has the same amount of signal, only distributed differently. That is what matters.

One A77 DxO test doesn't mean the A65 has equal chroma performance at high ISO.

And no-one has said that it does. Can you get through your head that there are more kinds of noise than chroma noise, and that chroma noise is easy to clean up without noticeable loss of information, as opposed to many other more insidious (but less easy to see with the naked eye) kinds of noise?

NR in post processing is lossy. How much so is going to depend on many factors.

Which is why the A65 doesn't do it, and why the A57 has less signal despite having less chroma noise - on sensor NR is still NR, and it is more aggressive on the A57.

Whether the A65 chroma noise will affect your shooting style is subject to individual needs.

The easiest kind of noise to clean up will hardly affect your shooting style much. More insidious sources of noise such as blur noise definitely will. But in the end it's pretty much a toss-up. Click one button or another button to improve the image and you're done, the end result will be indistinguishable.

Whether the A57 color and chroma performance at high ISO mitigates the other advantages of the A65 (EVF, 24MP, etc.) is subject to individual needs.

The A57 and the A65 have images with the exact same amount of noise at high ISO. Your chroma noise fixation is not only tiresome, it is outright daft. There is nothing special about chroma noise warranting this fanatical attention of yours.

People who prioritize chroma performance and shadow hue at high ISO are not stupid, mistaken, wrong, ignorant, rude or dumb.

Yes they are. Ignoring worse problems in favor of easy to spot ones is ignorant at best, dumb at worst. And misleading SLT newbies with shrill shouts of the superiority of a sensor which performs objectively precisely the same is at least rude, and definitely wrong.

There are plenty of reasons to choose a 16MP system over a 24MP system. I know, I did so. But superior high ISO performance is not one of them, and that myth should go the way of the dodo.

You can both keep voting down my posts, insulting me and doing your level best to shout me down on this, but unlike other former forum regulars, neither I nor the chroma noise are going away.

The chroma noise is a simple click to remove. Try replacing detail lost by in sensor NR the same way and we'll see how far you get.

And you make a lousy martyr. You started the name calling, and I don't vote.

Jesper

 theswede's gear list:theswede's gear list
Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D Sony SLT-A37 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony a7 Sony a5000 +7 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow