Reading mode: Light Dark

Nikon Z 5 Sensor Measurements at PhotonsToPhotos.net

Go to last post
B

bclaff

Forum Pro
Messages
14,415
Solutions
24
Reaction score
13,409
Location
Metro-West Boston, MA, US
The only "surprise" is that it's not a dual conversion gain sensor.

Here's the Photographic Dynamic Range (PDR) :

7f8e54714e0d4d92b09f834e1e943195.jpg.png

--
Bill ( Your trusted source for independent sensor data at PhotonsToPhotos )
 
Are differences at low ISO statistically significant, and if so - what might be the main reasons?
 
It looks like we have D750 sensor without any changes. So Z6 will have an edge from ISO 800 due to second gain stage. Still a good sensor though. I personally don't see any differences till ISO 6400. And at low ISO D750 sensor seems a little bit sharper probably due to smaller photosites.
 
The dynamic range of the Z5 varies from 1/3 of a stop better than the Z6 to 1/2 stop behind.
  • 11.33 vs. 11.01 +0.32 (ISO 100)
  • 10.46 vs. 10.37 +0.09 (ISO 200)
  • 9.57 vs. 9.42 +0.15 (ISO 400)
  • 8.67 vs. 9.16 -0.49 (ISO 800)
  • 7.74 vs. 8.17 -0.43 (ISO 1600)
  • 6.83 vs. 7.19 -0.36 (ISO 3200)
  • 5.89 vs. 6.18 -0.29 (ISO 6400)
I'm confused about the values for ISO 3200 and 6400. The triangle up indicates scaling, which I think means that these are implemented by using the same analog amplification as ISO 1600, and multiplying the output of the analog to digital converter by 2 or 4, respectively. The multiplication should reduce the dynamic range by exactly one or two stops, respectively, but the data show a smaller reduction in dynamic range.
 
Dynamic range of the Z5 vs. the D750 :
  • 11.33 vs. 11.48 -0.15 (ISO 100)
  • 10.46 vs. 10.69 -0.14 (ISO 200)
  • 9.57 vs. 9.65 -0.08 (ISO 400)
  • 8.67 vs. 8.74 -0.07 (ISO 800)
  • 7.77 vs. 8.74 +0.03 (ISO 1600)
  • 6.83 vs. 6.83 +0.00 (ISO 3200)
  • 5.86 vs. 5.89 -0.03 (ISO 6400)
Basically the same at ISO 400 and above. So maybe the Z5 is performing analog scaling like the D750?
 
I asked Bill about the implications of scaling as well, but I'm not sure if it's straight analog amplification like you mention, or if its channel specific scaling like he talks about in his Sensor Analysis primer. If I get a reply and he doesn't answer here I'll check back in. Otherwise I couldn't find more detail about his scaling note on his site.
Kenneth Almquist said:
The dynamic range of the Z5 varies from 1/3 of a stop better than the Z6 to 1/2 stop behind.
  • 11.33 vs. 11.01 +0.32 (ISO 100)
  • 10.46 vs. 10.37 +0.09 (ISO 200)
  • 9.57 vs. 9.42 +0.15 (ISO 400)
  • 8.67 vs. 9.16 -0.49 (ISO 800)
  • 7.74 vs. 8.17 -0.43 (ISO 1600)
  • 6.83 vs. 7.19 -0.36 (ISO 3200)
  • 5.89 vs. 6.18 -0.29 (ISO 6400)
I'm confused about the values for ISO 3200 and 6400. The triangle up indicates scaling, which I think means that these are implemented by using the same analog amplification as ISO 1600, and multiplying the output of the analog to digital converter by 2 or 4, respectively. The multiplication should reduce the dynamic range by exactly one or two stops, respectively, but the data show a smaller reduction in dynamic range.
Click to expand...
 
Kenneth Almquist said:
I'm confused about the values for ISO 3200 and 6400. The triangle up indicates scaling, which I think means that these are implemented by using the same analog amplification as ISO 1600, and multiplying the output of the analog to digital converter by 2 or 4, respectively.
Click to expand...
Scaling can be hard to detect properly and signs of scaling in the histograms don't necessarily mean by an integer factor since we're talking about intermediate ISO settings. Honestly this part of the analysis is a little more art than science sometimes.

Noise reduction can be tricky too.
It looks like a very small amount starting at ISO 2500 and then additional at ISO 16000.
Because I saw no effect in the 2D Fourier Transforms until ISO 16000 that's the way I coded the chart.
(This is easiest to see in the Input-referred Read Noise ).
 
Now I'm curious to see if Z6s brings any DR improvements...
 
Sony manufacturers the sensors that would possibly have that higher DR....no way they sell those to Nikon before they put them in their own cameras, right now the A7iii/Z6 have the highest DR for 24mp sensors.
 
EricTheAstroJunkie said:
Sony manufacturers the sensors that would possibly have that higher DR....no way they sell those to Nikon before they put them in their own cameras, right now the A7iii/Z6 have the highest DR for 24mp sensors.
Click to expand...
In the past Nikon has gotten more out of Sony sensors than Sony.
There's more to the full signal chain than just the sensor.
 
Bill, thanks for keeping this up. Are the Z6 data (and Z7 data) on your site updated after the firmware that improved the situation with respect to horizontal banding ? The heat map data on the Z5 seems to have improved compared to the Z6 data.
 
atigun said:
Bill, thanks for keeping this up. Are the Z6 data (and Z7 data) on your site updated after the firmware that improved the situation with respect to horizontal banding ? The heat map data on the Z5 seems to have improved compared to the Z6 data.
Click to expand...
The heat maps have not been updated. Here is the current state:

Best viewed "original size"
Best viewed "original size"

It would be interesting to see if the revised firmware has an effect.
Perhaps someone with a Z 6 and/or Z 7 and the newer revision will get in touch and I can perform the measurements.

--
Bill ( Your trusted source for independent sensor data at PhotonsToPhotos )
 
Thanks for the information, Bill. Yes that would be interesting - hope someone helps out (unfortunately I do not posses any of these bodies).
 
I can get them for you this morning Bill. Do you need all 3 tests or just 16 pink and black ISO 100 frames?
bclaff said:
atigun said:
Bill, thanks for keeping this up. Are the Z6 data (and Z7 data) on your site updated after the firmware that improved the situation with respect to horizontal banding ? The heat map data on the Z5 seems to have improved compared to the Z6 data.
Click to expand...
The heat maps have not been updated. Here is the current state:

Best viewed "original size"
Best viewed "original size"

It would be interesting to see if the revised firmware has an effect.
Perhaps someone with a Z 6 and/or Z 7 and the newer revision will get in touch and I can perform the measurements.

--
Bill ( Your trusted source for independent sensor data at PhotonsToPhotos )
Click to expand...
 
AdaptedLenses said:
I can get them for you this morning Bill. Do you need all 3 tests or just 16 pink and black ISO 100 frames?
Click to expand...
Just the 16 "pink" and 16 black.
AdaptedLenses said:
bclaff said:
atigun said:
Bill, thanks for keeping this up. Are the Z6 data (and Z7 data) on your site updated after the firmware that improved the situation with respect to horizontal banding ? The heat map data on the Z5 seems to have improved compared to the Z6 data.
Click to expand...
The heat maps have not been updated. Here is the current state:

Best viewed "original size"
Best viewed "original size"

It would be interesting to see if the revised firmware has an effect.
Perhaps someone with a Z 6 and/or Z 7 and the newer revision will get in touch and I can perform the measurements.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...


--
Bill ( Your trusted source for independent sensor data at PhotonsToPhotos )
 
AdaptedLenses said:
I can get them for you this morning Bill. Do you need all 3 tests or just 16 pink and black ISO 100 frames?
bclaff said:
atigun said:
Bill, thanks for keeping this up. Are the Z6 data (and Z7 data) on your site updated after the firmware that improved the situation with respect to horizontal banding ? The heat map data on the Z5 seems to have improved compared to the Z6 data.
Click to expand...
The heat maps have not been updated. Here is the current state:

Best viewed "original size"
Best viewed "original size"

It would be interesting to see if the revised firmware has an effect.
Perhaps someone with a Z 6 and/or Z 7 and the newer revision will get in touch and I can perform the measurements.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
No significant difference:

[ATTACH alt="Best viewed "original size" "]2563375[/ATTACH]
Best viewed "original size"

Red boxes show new files.

I suspect that any firmware change might affect JPG production as opposed to the raw data.

--
Bill ( Your trusted source for independent sensor data at PhotonsToPhotos )
 

Attachments

  • 7c408a28e8a84c91bc88439693fdc744.jpg.png
    7c408a28e8a84c91bc88439693fdc744.jpg.png
    908 KB · Views: 0
bclaff said:
AdaptedLenses said:
I can get them for you this morning Bill. Do you need all 3 tests or just 16 pink and black ISO 100 frames?
bclaff said:
atigun said:
Bill, thanks for keeping this up. Are the Z6 data (and Z7 data) on your site updated after the firmware that improved the situation with respect to horizontal banding ? The heat map data on the Z5 seems to have improved compared to the Z6 data.
Click to expand...
The heat maps have not been updated. Here is the current state:

Best viewed "original size"
Best viewed "original size"

It would be interesting to see if the revised firmware has an effect.
Perhaps someone with a Z 6 and/or Z 7 and the newer revision will get in touch and I can perform the measurements.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
No significant difference:

Best viewed "original size"
Best viewed "original size"

Red boxes show new files.

I suspect that any firmware change might affect JPG production as opposed to the raw data.
Click to expand...
Thanks, so the little improvement seen in the Z5 is not just the last firmware improvement of the other bodies. But it is mostly in the stacked dark frames, which could help in astrophotography applications.

Some who have been brave and gotten a full spectrum converted Z6 (one of the worst problem areas with the banding) have reported that it has become a little more usable after the firmware upgrades though. So that would point to improvement beyond the jpg processing.

https://www.ultravioletphotography....-a-uvir-conversion-the-bad-news/page__st__160 (post # 180 down the page)

https://www.ultravioletphotography....-a-uvir-conversion-the-bad-news/page__st__220

The hope is that as times goes Nikon gets better and better at correcting these artifacts just like they did in the transition from the D7100 to the D7200 version of the same sensor, but the case of the phase detect rows in the Z bodies seems more complicated and improvements much slower.

--
Atigun valley, a place north in Alaska
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Nikon Z 5II Sensor Measurements at PhotonsToPhotos.net
Replies
1
Views
274
AWG_Pics
AWG_Pics
B
PhotonsToPhotos.net Cosmetic Changes
Replies
4
Views
5K
bclaff
B
B
Panasonic Lumix DC-S1M2 Sensor Measurements at PhotonsToPhotos
2 3
Replies
49
Views
1K
Off The Mark
O
B
Nikon Z 6 III Sensor Measurements at PhotonsToPhotos
4 5 6
Replies
104
Views
5K
primeshooter
primeshooter
B
Sony ILCE-1M2 Sensor Measurements at PhotonsToPhotos
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
Interceptor121
I

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top