DxOmark tests the new A99II: It’s almost as good as the A7rII

[paulnelson88]

Interesting....

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/dxomark-tests-new-a99ii-almost-good-a7rii/

 

[Digital Bliss Photography]

I just don't know. The low-light performance scores they're showing isn't jiving with everything else's I've been seeing. Most have said low light performance is a touch better than the A7RII.

Interesting....

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/dxomark-tests-new-a99ii-almost-good-a7rii/

 

[GED115]

Interesting....

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/dxomark-tests-new-a99ii-almost-good-a7rii/

Low-light iso is very low score…

 

[lhkjacky]

DXO Review:

https://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Sony-SLT-Alpha-99-II-sensor-review-New-super-resolution-contender

A99II vs A7Rii vs A99:

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Com...R-II-versus-Sony-SLT-Alpha-99___1120_1035_831

A99II vs 5D mk4 vs 5DS:

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Com...Mark-IV-versus-Canon-EOS-5DS___1120_1106_1008


Sony SLT Alpha 99 II vs Canon EOS 5D Mark IV vs Canon EOS 5DS

 

[tqlla]

Interesting....

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/dxomark-tests-new-a99ii-almost-good-a7rii/

Low-light iso is very low score…

--
a cafe : http://acafe.msc.sony.jp/20548655/
Flickr : https://www.flickr.com/photos/115177331@N02/

Its a hair lower than I had expected. But IMO, not major. I was expecting 2400-2600.

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Sony/SLT-Alpha-99-II

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Com...R-II-versus-Sony-SLT-Alpha-99___1120_1035_831

 

[subferno]

Wow, lower than my current d800e.

 

[tbcass]

It's iso score is about 1/3 lower than the A7rii which translates to the 30%, 1/2 stop light loss with the SLT mirror. Overall it's high iso score is still excellent but it's speed, handling and ergonomics put it over the top for us A Mount users.

 

[tbcass]

I just don't know. The low-light performance scores they're showing isn't jiving with everything else's I've been seeing. Most have said low light performance is a touch better than the A7RII.

Maybe they're shooting JPEGs and the A99ii has better JPG processing.

 

[tbcass]

Interesting....

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/dxomark-tests-new-a99ii-almost-good-a7rii/

Low-light iso is very low score…

No it's not. It's excellent. It's just not as good as the A7Rii which is better than almost every other camera out there. Apparently it's either the best or no good in your eyes or you don't know how to interpret DXO's scores.

 

[mick232]

The gap between A99ii and A7Rii is actually bigger than between A99 and A99ii.

 

[tbcass]

Wow, lower than my current d800e.

So, your point is, or are you just trolling?

 

[tqlla]

I just don't know. The low-light performance scores they're showing isn't jiving with everything else's I've been seeing. Most have said low light performance is a touch better than the A7RII.

Interesting....

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/dxomark-tests-new-a99ii-almost-good-a7rii/

It looks like the difference is in the advertised ISO, vs actual ISO.

ISO12800 on the A7Rii is 9173
ISO12800 on the A99ii is 6953

 

[mick232]

You will have to accept the fact that the mirror causes a higher loss of overall image quality than what Sony was able to compensate in 4 years of sensor development. Whether you like it or not, people will keep pointing that out.

 

[Digital Bliss Photography]

Interesting

I just don't know. The low-light performance scores they're showing isn't jiving with everything else's I've been seeing. Most have said low light performance is a touch better than the A7RII.

Interesting....

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/dxomark-tests-new-a99ii-almost-good-a7rii/

It looks like the difference is in the advertised ISO, vs actual ISO.

ISO12800 on the A7Rii is 9173
ISO12800 on the A99ii is 6953

 

[tbcass]

The gap between A99ii and A7Rii is actually bigger than between A99 and A99ii.

No you're misinterpreting the score. It's not a raw number 1 to 1 score. You have to look at it as a % where 25%=1/4 stop according to DXO. A99=1555. A99ii=2317. 2317-1555=762 which makes the A99ii 49% better than the A99, about 1/2 stop. A7Rii=3434. 3434-2317=1117 which is 48% better, the same 1/2 stop. The A7Rii is about 1 full stop better than the A99. Subtract the 1/2 stop light loss due to the SLT mirror and you get the 1/2 stop difference between the A99ii and the A7Rii.

 

[mick232]

No you are misinterpreting my statement. Look at the combined score and include dynamic range. See my point?

 

[subferno]

Wow, lower than my current d800e.

So, your point is, or are you just trolling?

 

[lhkjacky]

The gap between A99ii and A7Rii is actually bigger than between A99 and A99ii.

ISO is not linear.

ISO 3434 is 5.102 Stop above base ISO.
ISO 2317 is 4.534 Stop above base ISO.
ISO 1555 is 3.959 Stop above base ISO.

The difference between is 0.567 Stop vs 0.575 Stop

 

[tbcass]

You will have to accept the fact that the mirror causes a higher loss of overall image quality than what Sony was able to compensate in 4 years of sensor development. Whether you like it or not, people will keep pointing that out.

Actually they have done just that. The A7 has the same sensor as the A99.

A99=1555

A7=2248

A99ii=2317

So sensor tech today compared to 4 years ago has overcome the SLT light loss of 1/2 stop. Add to that the A99ii has much higher resolution with greater pixel density. Of course compared to today's sensors there will always be that 1/2 stop SLT light loss but it's getting to the point that all FF cameras are so good at high iso who cares any more? It's getting like a horsepower race where extreme high iso capability has limited practical value. It's a fringe benefit.

 

[tbcass]

Not intentionally. I am switching from Nikon and just slightly bumbed that my switch didn't come with higher score. Although my main goal was having evf so I am satisfied.

Fair enough. The differences in the scores relative to IQ of these high end cameras is more nitpicking than real because you won't see it in real life.