Panasonic G9 vs G9M2 Normalised PDR Chart

Interceptor121 said:

This chart shows the PDR from photonstophotos with a normalised ISO.

You can see if you convert the RAW files to DNG that the G9 has a baseline exposure of 0.66 while the G9M2 has zero. This means that ISO 200 on the G9 is internally ISO 125 on the G9M2, Note you cannot see this shooting JPEGs the camera will meter identically but adjust the exposure internally when there is a value to protect the highlights



What you can see from this chart where I have eliminated the extended ISO values:

1. The overall improvement of PDR is small more or less 0.3 Ev until the G9M2 noise reduction kicks in at ISO 3200

Click to expand...

Interceptor121 said:

2. The absolute DR of the G9M2 is 0.24 Ev higher

Some considerations

1. Panasonic dual gain output does not really bring a massive change in PDR, noise reduction instead is effective at ISO higher than 3200

Click to expand...

Interceptor121 said:

2. If you don't need the autofocus and want to use the camera for landscapes and long exposures you are probably better off with the original G9 so you don't have to worry about the boost being on or not

Click to expand...

Interceptor121 said:

3. The G9M2 offers some unique features compared to the G9 that may be important to you as long as they don't interfere with the DGO architecture see long exposures

Click to expand...

Interceptor121 said:

I keep thinking why did Panasonic not introduce PDAF earlier on Sony sensor but we can't change the past I guess.

Click to expand...

Interceptor121 said:

Autofocus is probably the major improvement and quite an important one especially for certain type of shooters and for those doing talking heads video that will not see the DFD flutter. I hope the GH7 does similary as I will be getting one

Click to expand...

Interceptor121 said:

This chart shows the PDR from photonstophotos with a normalised ISO.

You can see if you convert the RAW files to DNG that the G9 has a baseline exposure of 0.66 while the G9M2 has zero. This means that ISO 200 on the G9 is internally ISO 125 on the G9M2, Note you cannot see this shooting JPEGs the camera will meter identically but adjust the exposure internally when there is a value to protect the highlights



What you can see from this chart where I have eliminated the extended ISO values:

1. The overall improvement of PDR is small more or less 0.3 Ev until the G9M2 noise reduction kicks in at ISO 3200

2. The absolute DR of the G9M2 is 0.24 Ev higher

Some considerations

1. Panasonic dual gain output does not really bring a massive change in PDR, noise reduction instead is effective at ISO higher than 3200

2. If you don't need the autofocus and want to use the camera for landscapes and long exposures you are probably better off with the original G9 so you don't have to worry about the boost being on or not

3. The G9M2 offers some unique features compared to the G9 that may be important to you as long as they don't interfere with the DGO architecture see long exposures

I keep thinking why did Panasonic not introduce PDAF earlier on Sony sensor but we can't change the past I guess.

Autofocus is probably the major improvement and quite an important one especially for certain type of shooters and for those doing talking heads video that will not see the DFD flutter. I hope the GH7 does similary as I will be getting one

Click to expand...

Interceptor121 said:

This chart shows the PDR from photonstophotos with a normalised ISO.

You can see if you convert the RAW files to DNG that the G9 has a baseline exposure of 0.66 while the G9M2 has zero. This means that ISO 200 on the G9 is internally ISO 125 on the G9M2, Note you cannot see this shooting JPEGs the camera will meter identically but adjust the exposure internally when there is a value to protect the highlights



What you can see from this chart where I have eliminated the extended ISO values:

1. The overall improvement of PDR is small more or less 0.3 Ev until the G9M2 noise reduction kicks in at ISO 3200

2. The absolute DR of the G9M2 is 0.24 Ev higher

Some considerations

1. Panasonic dual gain output does not really bring a massive change in PDR, noise reduction instead is effective at ISO higher than 3200

2. If you don't need the autofocus and want to use the camera for landscapes and long exposures you are probably better off with the original G9 so you don't have to worry about the boost being on or not

3. The G9M2 offers some unique features compared to the G9 that may be important to you as long as they don't interfere with the DGO architecture see long exposures

I keep thinking why did Panasonic not introduce PDAF earlier on Sony sensor but we can't change the past I guess.

Autofocus is probably the major improvement and quite an important one especially for certain type of shooters and for those doing talking heads video that will not see the DFD flutter. I hope the GH7 does similary as I will be getting one

Click to expand...

Bassam Guy said:

This is really impressive and shows an astounding improvement!

But I do have one question that would help me understand: what is PDR?

Click to expand...

Interceptor121 said:

This chart shows the PDR from photonstophotos with a normalised ISO.

You can see if you convert the RAW files to DNG that the G9 has a baseline exposure of 0.66 while the G9M2 has zero. This means that ISO 200 on the G9 is internally ISO 125 on the G9M2, Note you cannot see this shooting JPEGs the camera will meter identically but adjust the exposure internally when there is a value to protect the highlights



What you can see from this chart where I have eliminated the extended ISO values:

1. The overall improvement of PDR is small more or less 0.3 Ev until the G9M2 noise reduction kicks in at ISO 3200

2. The absolute DR of the G9M2 is 0.24 Ev higher

Some considerations

1. Panasonic dual gain output does not really bring a massive change in PDR, noise reduction instead is effective at ISO higher than 3200

2. If you don't need the autofocus and want to use the camera for landscapes and long exposures you are probably better off with the original G9 so you don't have to worry about the boost being on or not

3. The G9M2 offers some unique features compared to the G9 that may be important to you as long as they don't interfere with the DGO architecture see long exposures

I keep thinking why did Panasonic not introduce PDAF earlier on Sony sensor but we can't change the past I guess.

Autofocus is probably the major improvement and quite an important one especially for certain type of shooters and for those doing talking heads video that will not see the DFD flutter. I hope the GH7 does similary as I will be getting one

--
If you like my image I would appreciate if you follow me on social media
instagram http://instagram.com/interceptor121
My flickr sets http://www.flickr.com/photos/interceptor121/
Youtube channel http://www.youtube.com/interceptor121
Underwater Photo and Video Blog http://interceptor121.com
If you want to get in touch don't send me a PM rather contact me directly at my website/social media

Click to expand...

DaveyB said:

Interceptor121 said:

This chart shows the PDR from photonstophotos with a normalised ISO.

You can see if you convert the RAW files to DNG that the G9 has a baseline exposure of 0.66 while the G9M2 has zero. This means that ISO 200 on the G9 is internally ISO 125 on the G9M2, Note you cannot see this shooting JPEGs the camera will meter identically but adjust the exposure internally when there is a value to protect the highlights



What you can see from this chart where I have eliminated the extended ISO values:

1. The overall improvement of PDR is small more or less 0.3 Ev until the G9M2 noise reduction kicks in at ISO 3200

2. The absolute DR of the G9M2 is 0.24 Ev higher

Some considerations

1. Panasonic dual gain output does not really bring a massive change in PDR, noise reduction instead is effective at ISO higher than 3200

2. If you don't need the autofocus and want to use the camera for landscapes and long exposures you are probably better off with the original G9 so you don't have to worry about the boost being on or not

3. The G9M2 offers some unique features compared to the G9 that may be important to you as long as they don't interfere with the DGO architecture see long exposures

I keep thinking why did Panasonic not introduce PDAF earlier on Sony sensor but we can't change the past I guess.

Autofocus is probably the major improvement and quite an important one especially for certain type of shooters and for those doing talking heads video that will not see the DFD flutter. I hope the GH7 does similary as I will be getting one

Click to expand...

Not really that concerned about technical charts, more with real world photographs. I have taken around 300,000 photos with the G9 and have just started using the G9 II. Yes, the AF is a massive step forward but the sensor is a big improvement, too. There is more detail for cropping, which I welcome as a wildlife photographer but more impressive is the ability to raise shadows with little or no noise penalty. Correcting under exposure with the G9 was always something which impacted image quality, even using Deep Prime noise reduction. I don’t have to think twice about pushing for shadow detail with the G9 II. My experience thus accords with the tests conducted by Richard Wong, which showed the G9 II to be better at recovering shadow detail than two of the leading APS-C cameras and well ahead of the OM sensor. I doubt that anyone using the G9 II would find themselves wishing for the 20 mp sensor!

Click to expand...

knickerhawk said:

Serguei, could you share the raw files for the G9 and G9ii dark frame shots used in your analysis? Much appreciated.

Click to expand...

SharedPhotos – Google Drive

drive.google.com

jrsforums said:

DaveyB said:

Interceptor121 said:

This chart shows the PDR from photonstophotos with a normalised ISO.

You can see if you convert the RAW files to DNG that the G9 has a baseline exposure of 0.66 while the G9M2 has zero. This means that ISO 200 on the G9 is internally ISO 125 on the G9M2, Note you cannot see this shooting JPEGs the camera will meter identically but adjust the exposure internally when there is a value to protect the highlights



What you can see from this chart where I have eliminated the extended ISO values:

1. The overall improvement of PDR is small more or less 0.3 Ev until the G9M2 noise reduction kicks in at ISO 3200

2. The absolute DR of the G9M2 is 0.24 Ev higher

Some considerations

1. Panasonic dual gain output does not really bring a massive change in PDR, noise reduction instead is effective at ISO higher than 3200

2. If you don't need the autofocus and want to use the camera for landscapes and long exposures you are probably better off with the original G9 so you don't have to worry about the boost being on or not

3. The G9M2 offers some unique features compared to the G9 that may be important to you as long as they don't interfere with the DGO architecture see long exposures

I keep thinking why did Panasonic not introduce PDAF earlier on Sony sensor but we can't change the past I guess.

Autofocus is probably the major improvement and quite an important one especially for certain type of shooters and for those doing talking heads video that will not see the DFD flutter. I hope the GH7 does similary as I will be getting one

Click to expand...

Not really that concerned about technical charts, more with real world photographs. I have taken around 300,000 photos with the G9 and have just started using the G9 II. Yes, the AF is a massive step forward but the sensor is a big improvement, too. There is more detail for cropping, which I welcome as a wildlife photographer but more impressive is the ability to raise shadows with little or no noise penalty. Correcting under exposure with the G9 was always something which impacted image quality, even using Deep Prime noise reduction. I don’t have to think twice about pushing for shadow detail with the G9 II. My experience thus accords with the tests conducted by Richard Wong, which showed the G9 II to be better at recovering shadow detail than two of the leading APS-C cameras and well ahead of the OM sensor. I doubt that anyone using the G9 II would find themselves wishing for the 20 mp sensor!

Click to expand...

Massimo (Interceptor) loves his ‘Photons to Photos’ chart, which are interesting, but limited to the real world. Back in December, I posted lots of G9ii vs G9 raw images, which clearly showed the G9ii recovered deep shadows at least 2 stops better than the G9 (if I remember correctly, someone (Lothar?) showed 1+ stop better than Om-1).

Click to expand...

DaveyB said:

jrsforums said:

DaveyB said:

Interceptor121 said:

This chart shows the PDR from photonstophotos with a normalised ISO.

You can see if you convert the RAW files to DNG that the G9 has a baseline exposure of 0.66 while the G9M2 has zero. This means that ISO 200 on the G9 is internally ISO 125 on the G9M2, Note you cannot see this shooting JPEGs the camera will meter identically but adjust the exposure internally when there is a value to protect the highlights



What you can see from this chart where I have eliminated the extended ISO values:

1. The overall improvement of PDR is small more or less 0.3 Ev until the G9M2 noise reduction kicks in at ISO 3200

2. The absolute DR of the G9M2 is 0.24 Ev higher

Some considerations

1. Panasonic dual gain output does not really bring a massive change in PDR, noise reduction instead is effective at ISO higher than 3200

2. If you don't need the autofocus and want to use the camera for landscapes and long exposures you are probably better off with the original G9 so you don't have to worry about the boost being on or not

3. The G9M2 offers some unique features compared to the G9 that may be important to you as long as they don't interfere with the DGO architecture see long exposures

I keep thinking why did Panasonic not introduce PDAF earlier on Sony sensor but we can't change the past I guess.

Autofocus is probably the major improvement and quite an important one especially for certain type of shooters and for those doing talking heads video that will not see the DFD flutter. I hope the GH7 does similary as I will be getting one

Click to expand...

Not really that concerned about technical charts, more with real world photographs. I have taken around 300,000 photos with the G9 and have just started using the G9 II. Yes, the AF is a massive step forward but the sensor is a big improvement, too. There is more detail for cropping, which I welcome as a wildlife photographer but more impressive is the ability to raise shadows with little or no noise penalty. Correcting under exposure with the G9 was always something which impacted image quality, even using Deep Prime noise reduction. I don’t have to think twice about pushing for shadow detail with the G9 II. My experience thus accords with the tests conducted by Richard Wong, which showed the G9 II to be better at recovering shadow detail than two of the leading APS-C cameras and well ahead of the OM sensor. I doubt that anyone using the G9 II would find themselves wishing for the 20 mp sensor!

Click to expand...

Massimo (Interceptor) loves his ‘Photons to Photos’ chart, which are interesting, but limited to the real world. Back in December, I posted lots of G9ii vs G9 raw images, which clearly showed the G9ii recovered deep shadows at least 2 stops better than the G9 (if I remember correctly, someone (Lothar?) showed 1+ stop better than Om-1).

Click to expand...

That chimes with my experience but I guess there’s another agenda at play

Click to expand...

DaveyB said:

Interceptor121 said:

This chart shows the PDR from photonstophotos with a normalised ISO.

You can see if you convert the RAW files to DNG that the G9 has a baseline exposure of 0.66 while the G9M2 has zero. This means that ISO 200 on the G9 is internally ISO 125 on the G9M2, Note you cannot see this shooting JPEGs the camera will meter identically but adjust the exposure internally when there is a value to protect the highlights



What you can see from this chart where I have eliminated the extended ISO values:

1. The overall improvement of PDR is small more or less 0.3 Ev until the G9M2 noise reduction kicks in at ISO 3200

2. The absolute DR of the G9M2 is 0.24 Ev higher

Some considerations

1. Panasonic dual gain output does not really bring a massive change in PDR, noise reduction instead is effective at ISO higher than 3200

2. If you don't need the autofocus and want to use the camera for landscapes and long exposures you are probably better off with the original G9 so you don't have to worry about the boost being on or not

3. The G9M2 offers some unique features compared to the G9 that may be important to you as long as they don't interfere with the DGO architecture see long exposures

I keep thinking why did Panasonic not introduce PDAF earlier on Sony sensor but we can't change the past I guess.

Autofocus is probably the major improvement and quite an important one especially for certain type of shooters and for those doing talking heads video that will not see the DFD flutter. I hope the GH7 does similary as I will be getting one

Click to expand...

Not really that concerned about technical charts, more with real world photographs. I have taken around 300,000 photos with the G9 and have just started using the G9 II. Yes, the AF is a massive step forward but the sensor is a big improvement, too. There is more detail for cropping, which I welcome as a wildlife photographer but more impressive is the ability to raise shadows with little or no noise penalty. Correcting under exposure with the G9 was always something which impacted image quality, even using Deep Prime noise reduction. I don’t have to think twice about pushing for shadow detail with the G9 II. My experience thus accords with the tests conducted by Richard Wong, which showed the G9 II to be better at recovering shadow detail than two of the leading APS-C cameras and well ahead of the OM sensor. I doubt that anyone using the G9 II would find themselves wishing for the 20 mp sensor!

--
Cheers
David

Click to expand...

timmer350 said:

Bassam Guy said:

This is really impressive and shows an astounding improvement!

But I do have one question that would help me understand: what is PDR?

Click to expand...

My thought exactly. Google gave me the following:

Physicians Desk Reference

Preliminary Design Review

But the winner is: Paintless Dent Repair!!

Click to expand...

Caledonia said:

And it is a measure of sensor performance used by Bill Claff at his photons to photos web site when characterizing sensors. See the definition here:

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Gen...ngineering_and_Photographic_Dynamic_Range.htm

It's often cited in sensor comparisons.

Click to expand...

Tom Caldwell said:

Caledonia said:

And it is a measure of sensor performance used by Bill Claff at his photons to photos web site when characterizing sensors. See the definition here:

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Gen...ngineering_and_Photographic_Dynamic_Range.htm

It's often cited in sensor comparisons.

Click to expand...

When we run out of theory simply because of the science involved needs explaining then it is the actual results that sell cameras and keep us interested.

Somewhere along the line the blank looks and polite "uh-huh" noises give way to orders being placed and the quiet enjoyment of making images to the best of our capability is restored.

Why do we always clamour for sample images even though is is always the camera's fault if we don't like them? .... and if the images are ordained "perfect" then the skills of the actual photographer who made them are disregarded.

Click to expand...

Tom Caldwell said:

Caledonia said:

And it is a measure of sensor performance used by Bill Claff at his photons to photos web site when characterizing sensors. See the definition here:

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Gen...ngineering_and_Photographic_Dynamic_Range.htm

It's often cited in sensor comparisons.

Click to expand...

When we run out of theory simply because of the science involved needs explaining then it is the actual results that sell cameras and keep us interested.

Somewhere along the line the blank looks and polite "uh-huh" noises give way to orders being placed and the quiet enjoyment of making images to the best of our capability is restored.

Why do we always clamour for sample images

Click to expand...

Tom Caldwell said:

even though is is always the camera's fault if we don't like them?

.... and if the images are ordained "perfect" then the skills of the actual photographer who made them are disregarded.

Click to expand...

Bassam Guy said:

Interceptor121 said:

This chart shows the PDR from photonstophotos with a normalised ISO.

You can see if you convert the RAW files to DNG that the G9 has a baseline exposure of 0.66 while the G9M2 has zero. This means that ISO 200 on the G9 is internally ISO 125 on the G9M2, Note you cannot see this shooting JPEGs the camera will meter identically but adjust the exposure internally when there is a value to protect the highlights



What you can see from this chart where I have eliminated the extended ISO values:

1. The overall improvement of PDR is small more or less 0.3 Ev until the G9M2 noise reduction kicks in at ISO 3200

2. The absolute DR of the G9M2 is 0.24 Ev higher

Some considerations

1. Panasonic dual gain output does not really bring a massive change in PDR, noise reduction instead is effective at ISO higher than 3200

2. If you don't need the autofocus and want to use the camera for landscapes and long exposures you are probably better off with the original G9 so you don't have to worry about the boost being on or not

3. The G9M2 offers some unique features compared to the G9 that may be important to you as long as they don't interfere with the DGO architecture see long exposures

I keep thinking why did Panasonic not introduce PDAF earlier on Sony sensor but we can't change the past I guess.

Autofocus is probably the major improvement and quite an important one especially for certain type of shooters and for those doing talking heads video that will not see the DFD flutter. I hope the GH7 does similary as I will be getting one

Click to expand...

This is really impressive and shows an astounding improvement!

But I do have one question that would help me understand: what is PDR?

Click to expand...

Serguei Palto said:

Below (#1) is dark frame of linear data from G9MII raised by +13 stops after the black level subtraction (gain amplification 8192). Even after this amplification the following DR-room remains before the saturation:

For red channel - 1.78 eV

For green channel - 2.43 eV

For blue channel - 1.67 eV

Thus the scientific dynamic range for the G9MII has the following values (sum of 13 eV and left DR which one can read at Data Statistics iWE-pannel in #1):

For red channel 13eV+1.78eV=14.78 eV

For green channel 13eV+2.43eV=15.43 eV

For blue channel 13eV+1.67 eV=14.67 eV

The same for G9, but only with +10 stops amplification (gain is 1024), is shown in #2

The values of the dynamic range for G9 are as follows:

For red channel 10eV+1.99eV=11.99 eV

For green channel 10eV+2.91eV=12.91 eV

For blue channel 10eV+2.0 eV=12 eV

Thus, the difference in dynamic range between G9II and G9 is of about 2.5 stops for all the RGB channels. The huge DR of the G9II justifies the new 16-bit per channel Raw format introduced by Panasonic.

The data you show can not be considered as reliable.


#1. Dark-frame linear data from G9MII compensated by +13 Stops (eVs)


#2. Dark frame linear data from G9 compensated by +10 stops (eVs).

Click to expand...

• ISO (100 for the G9ii and 200 for the G9, but that only accounts for a possible 1 EV difference at most);
• Shutter mode (ES for the G9ii and mechanical for the G9);
• Shutter speed (1/32000 for the G9ii and 1/500 for the G9, but both are fast enough to rule out meaningful impact from heat buildup);
• Lens related auto-distortion correction (the G9ii had no lens mounted and presumably was shot with the body cap on while the G9 was shot with the Oly 12-100mm mounted and presumably with a lens cap on, but there are no visible signs of correlated noise patterns in the G9 screenshot indicative of distortion-correction).
• Possible difference in external light leak most likely due to viewfinders not being consistently covered.