G9 vs. Z6 @ 2.8 in low light

Started 3 months ago | Questions thread
Anders W
Anders W Forum Pro • Posts: 22,144
Re: The theory isn't all that difficult

bobn2 wrote:

Anders W wrote:

As I pointed out in a prior post, for example, the data at our disposal suggest that the OP's camera (the G9) has about one stop more dynamic range (and thus correspondingly less shadow noise) than the one he is considering (the Z6) when the two are used to shoot equivalent photos at higher ISOs.

Which data are you talking about?

My reasoning as well as the data were presented in a prior post of mine here , where I said the following:

"In addition, you should be aware that the difference between the G9 and the Z6 might be less than two stops wrt to shadow noise at higher ISOs when they're shot at the same exposure. The difference in this regard may be more like one stop than two. See graphs below. DxO hasn't tested the G9, only the GH5.2. But since the two do very similarly with respect to Bill Claff's "photographic dynamic range", it is reasonable to think that they do very similarly with respect to dynamic range as measured by DxOMark as well."

I might add that although I appreciate the work Bill Claff is doing, I am not a fan of his PDR metric any more than I have reason to think you are. I use his PDR data here only because it strongly suggests that the G9 and GH5.2 have very similar sensor characteristics inasmuch as their PDR graphs coincide rather perfectly.

The problem is that DxOMark data isn't available for the G9, so we have to rely on Bill Claff, who doesn't give proper DR measurements. But, Bill's input referred read noise chart (https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/RN_e.htm#Nikon%20Z%206_14,Panasonic%20Lumix%20DC-G9_12) shows that the per pixel read noise at high ISOs is better than the G9. So, for instance set to 1600 ISO the G9 is giving 1.866 e- per pixel, whilst the Z6 manages 1.206 at 6400 ISO, so the read noise advantage is to the Nikon. So the Nikon is producing 0.65 times the read noise. This alone suggests that what you say about shadow noise is back to front. it should be the Nikon that produces less shadow noise. (which does seem to be the case, comparing DPR studio shots.

Both very good but the Z6 just slightly better


Of course it has more pixels, so we need to correct for that, giving 0.71, or a stop better read noise. The problem is finding data for the top end of the scale. I haven't found a good way of getting this from Bill's data, but we can do it from raw images, such as the DPR studio scene, which are quite well controlled with respect to exposure. Downloading the raw files from the above and looking at them with Raw digger, selecting the white background from the vertical wedge midscreen the G9 gives an average of 966.8 and a standard deviation of 37.3 in the green channel whilst the Nikon gives 8001.7 and 313 for a similar patch. Thus the SNR for the Panasonic is 25.92 whilst for the Nikon it is 25.56. We can find the photoelectron count per pixel by squaring this. For the Panasonic it is 672 e- and for the Nikon it is 653 e-. Now again we need to correct for pixel size. At 20MP the Nikon figure is 783 e-, suggesting that the QE of the Nikon is 1.16 times or 0.2 stops better (i.e., not worth worrying about) than the Panasonic.

So, for equivalent exposures (same 'total light') and ISO settings the Z6 will produce slightly better DR than the G9, as one might expect given that it has a BSI sensor, larger pixels but lower read noise. However, the difference is tiny, and not worth worrying about either way.

 Anders W's gear list:Anders W's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Olympus PEN-F Olympus E-M1 II Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +20 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow