nikon->sony switchers - are you bothered by the 12 bit RAW ?

[jubilatu]

lately, there are a lot of nikon FF body/system selling adds in my country. the stated reason of selling - switching to a7/a7r.

i hadn't the opportunity of shooting both the a7 and the nikon FF in order to see what's the difference between the 12bit RAW of the sony and the 14 bit RAW of nikon, so the only available resource is the dpreview testing shoots (and of course my fellow forum colleagues).

From the dpreview raw test files, converted in PS it seems that the 14bit files have more vivid colors. i could not identify any artifacts due to the lossy compression, but my doctor said that after 40 you are beginning to not see things...

anybody has made the switch and could help me with a user information regarding how big is the difference between files (and prints) from nikon FF 14 bit RAW and the 12 bit RAW of the sony a7 series ?

thank you for your time.

 

[Alpha Photo]

A) Lossy compression is a thing of the past, cause Sony now offers lossless RAW.

B) 14bit versus 12 bit would DEFINITELY NOT translate into "more vivid colors", quite in contrary, color transitions will be more subtle. Vivid colors use only few of the available bits.

 

[jubilatu]

A) Lossy compression is a thing of the past, cause Sony now offers lossless RAW.

B) 14bit versus 12 bit would DEFINITELY NOT translate into "more vivid colors", quite in contrary, color transitions will be more subtle. Vivid colors use only few of the available bits.

thanks for reply.

i believed that the firmware update (on 22nd i guess) would be only for a7r II. if that would touch the a7 or at least a7 ii ... nice...

by vivid i mean intense/pleasant/full/superior, etc.

--
Please forgive my grammar but if you find it inconceivable address me in romanian.

 

[jackalopemaui]

A) Lossy compression is a thing of the past, cause Sony now offers lossless RAW.

B) 14bit versus 12 bit would DEFINITELY NOT translate into "more vivid colors", quite in contrary, color transitions will be more subtle. Vivid colors use only few of the available bits.

thanks for reply.

i believed that the firmware update (on 22nd i guess) would be only for a7r II. if that would touch the a7 or at least a7 ii ... nice...

by vivid i mean intense/pleasant/full/superior, etc.

 

[TheTom]

A) Lossy compression is a thing of the past, cause Sony now offers lossless RAW.

B) 14bit versus 12 bit would DEFINITELY NOT translate into "more vivid colors", quite in contrary, color transitions will be more subtle. Vivid colors use only few of the available bits.

thanks for reply.

i believed that the firmware update (on 22nd i guess) would be only for a7r II. if that would touch the a7 or at least a7 ii ... nice...

by vivid i mean intense/pleasant/full/superior, etc.

--
Please forgive my grammar but if you find it inconceivable address me in romanian.

It only is for the A7RII. Sony said they would update them all if possible, but it seems they put more speed on the high quality newer cameras. It is likely older cameras get the update later, once it is (a) more tested and (b) likely aligned with a more "regular" or planned firmware update. There also are (some) rumours about a new lossless compression. It seems that the next totally uncompressed was mostly done for (a) time and (b) compatibility (already supported from other cameras, on the RAW processor side). It is possible more will come here.

 

[alarmchrono]

I switched from the D600 to the A7 2 years ago and have never seen any difference.

 

[FOTONOTO]

All the A7 series have 14bit ADC, but in continuos shooting mode, BULB mode, and when LENR is needed, it transfers to 12bit mode.

So you can't say A7 series are 12bit cameras...

I wish the coming uncompressed RAW firmware update can also shows global 14bit selection though.

 

[siderean]

I switched from a D810/D750 to an A7RII and A7S and have not noticed a difference in color/quality but have noticed a difference in the lenses - I really like the 55mm and 35mm (both!) lenses for their subject isolation looks. I shoot weddings, portraits and landscapes. I'm loving the Sony system.

 

[Alpha Photo]

"... by vivid i mean intense/pleasant/full/superior, etc..."

These adjectives do not describe the effect bit depth. They describe the effect of in-camera jpg processing, or what you do in post.

 

[jubilatu]

thanks all for useful feedback.

I switched from a D810/D750 to an A7RII and A7S and have not noticed a difference in color/quality but have noticed a difference in the lenses - I really like the 55mm and 35mm (both!) lenses for their subject isolation looks. I shoot weddings, portraits and landscapes. I'm loving the Sony system.

 

[KennyXL]

lately, there are a lot of nikon FF body/system selling adds in my country. the stated reason of selling - switching to a7/a7r.

i hadn't the opportunity of shooting both the a7 and the nikon FF in order to see what's the difference between the 12bit RAW of the sony and the 14 bit RAW of nikon, so the only available resource is the dpreview testing shoots (and of course my fellow forum colleagues).

From the dpreview raw test files, converted in PS it seems that the 14bit files have more vivid colors. i could not identify any artifacts due to the lossy compression, but my doctor said that after 40 you are beginning to not see things...

anybody has made the switch and could help me with a user information regarding how big is the difference between files (and prints) from nikon FF 14 bit RAW and the 12 bit RAW of the sony a7 series ?

thank you for your time.

 

[jubilatu]

"... by vivid i mean intense/pleasant/full/superior, etc..."

These adjectives do not describe the effect bit depth. They describe the effect of in-camera jpg processing, or what you do in post.

in an attempt to equalize things, i let cameraraw on "auto" to do all the batch conversion, but, yes, it might be gone after some P&P.

but looking at the test pics made by dpreview i had the same feeling that i got when i tested the nikon 24 1.4 vs my 28 1.8 in a yellowstore. the "fullness" of the color that 24 1.4 delivered was not comparable with the "correct and sharp" image provided by my 28. even on a 3.2inch screen it was visible.

 

[jubilatu]

When absolute best picture quality is my concern, I reach for the Nikons, but when it comes to most other situations, the Sony is used.

thanks kenny. do you print your pics (big) ?

 

[KennyXL]

When absolute best picture quality is my concern, I reach for the Nikons, but when it comes to most other situations, the Sony is used.

thanks kenny. do you print your pics (big) ?

 

[JimKasson]

lately, there are a lot of nikon FF body/system selling adds in my country. the stated reason of selling - switching to a7/a7r.

i hadn't the opportunity of shooting both the a7 and the nikon FF in order to see what's the difference between the 12bit RAW of the sony and the 14 bit RAW of nikon, so the only available resource is the dpreview testing shoots (and of course my fellow forum colleagues).

From the dpreview raw test files, converted in PS it seems that the 14bit files have more vivid colors. i could not identify any artifacts due to the lossy compression, but my doctor said that after 40 you are beginning to not see things...

anybody has made the switch and could help me with a user information regarding how big is the difference between files (and prints) from nikon FF 14 bit RAW and the 12 bit RAW of the sony a7 series ?

First off, as FOTONOTO said, the a7x has 13 bits of precision except in some shutter modes.

Second, if you want to see what 12-bit raw looks like, just set your Nikon for 12-bit raw and snap away.

Loading…

blog.kasson.com

Compare that to similar effect of the Sony's 12-bit precision, when it occurs:

Sony a7II 12-bit mode’s effect on shadows - the last word

When you change shutter modes on the Sony alpha 7II, you may affect the bit depth. Because of the raw compression algorithm on this and all the other alpha 7 cameras, which is not defeatable, I need to go into a little detail about just what bit depth I'm talking about. The raw compression scheme

blog.kasson.com

Both the D810 and the a7x cameras have sufficient read noise that 13 bit precision is adequate, in my opinion:

Loading…

blog.kasson.com

Loading…

blog.kasson.com

Jim

 

[jubilatu]

http://blog.kasson.com/?p=8770

Compare that to similar effect of the Sony's 12-bit precision, when it occurs:

http://blog.kasson.com/?p=8586

Both the D810 and the a7x cameras have sufficient read noise that 13 bit precision is adequate, in my opinion:

ok jim, this homework that you gave me is at a geeky level that needs some beer (for me) in order to fully attain it. but i'll do it.

nevertheless is interesting that bit depth of the raw file is depending of the shutter mode... gee, i miss my Смена.

Loading…

lamcdn.net

 

[JimKasson]

http://blog.kasson.com/?p=8770

Compare that to similar effect of the Sony's 12-bit precision, when it occurs:

http://blog.kasson.com/?p=8586

Both the D810 and the a7x cameras have sufficient read noise that 13 bit precision is adequate, in my opinion:

ok jim, this homework that you gave me is at a geeky level that needs some beer (for me) in order to fully attain it. but i'll do it.

I have found that beer does not improve my math skills.

Jim

 

[sgoldswo]

lately, there are a lot of nikon FF body/system selling adds in my country. the stated reason of selling - switching to a7/a7r.

i hadn't the opportunity of shooting both the a7 and the nikon FF in order to see what's the difference between the 12bit RAW of the sony and the 14 bit RAW of nikon, so the only available resource is the dpreview testing shoots (and of course my fellow forum colleagues).

From the dpreview raw test files, converted in PS it seems that the 14bit files have more vivid colors. i could not identify any artifacts due to the lossy compression, but my doctor said that after 40 you are beginning to not see things...

anybody has made the switch and could help me with a user information regarding how big is the difference between files (and prints) from nikon FF 14 bit RAW and the 12 bit RAW of the sony a7 series ?

thank you for your time.

 

[ArtAlt]

lately, there are a lot of nikon FF body/system selling adds in my country. the stated reason of selling - switching to a7/a7r.

i hadn't the opportunity of shooting both the a7 and the nikon FF in order to see what's the difference between the 12bit RAW of the sony and the 14 bit RAW of nikon, so the only available resource is the dpreview testing shoots (and of course my fellow forum colleagues).

From the dpreview raw test files, converted in PS it seems that the 14bit files have more vivid colors. i could not identify any artifacts due to the lossy compression, but my doctor said that after 40 you are beginning to not see things...

anybody has made the switch and could help me with a user information regarding how big is the difference between files (and prints) from nikon FF 14 bit RAW and the 12 bit RAW of the sony a7 series ?

thank you for your time.

 

[exdeejjjaaaa]

lately, there are a lot of nikon FF body/system selling adds in my country. the stated reason of selling - switching to a7/a7r.

i hadn't the opportunity of shooting both the a7 and the nikon FF in order to see what's the difference between the 12bit RAW of the sony and the 14 bit RAW of nikon, so the only available resource is the dpreview testing shoots (and of course my fellow forum colleagues).

From the dpreview raw test files, converted in PS it seems that the 14bit files have more vivid colors. i could not identify any artifacts due to the lossy compression, but my doctor said that after 40 you are beginning to not see things...

anybody has made the switch and could help me with a user information regarding how big is the difference between files (and prints) from nikon FF 14 bit RAW and the 12 bit RAW of the sony a7 series ?

thank you for your time.