Sony A7R on DXO - Highest full frame IQ ever

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I find it hilarious that a DXO Mark report that effectively states the new A7R has the same sensor as the (nearly two year old) D800, has reignited the same tired old tirade that we had back then. If you still haven't made up your mind which system to shoot with, you've expended far to much energy worrying! :

This is not the same thing. The whole point here is that assuming the adapters work out well and don't tilt the lens alignment too much, you don't have to jump into an commit to a full system switch now if you want more DR. You can keep all your Canon lenses and still shoot a 5D3 for RAW video and general AF hungry stills and, if not for everything, at least get more DR for some landscape work.

But some fanboys seem to think it's some dirty sin to use Canon glass on a body not labelled with the Canon brand and then make up all sorts of excuses about how DxO is a joke, or how the desire for more DR just means the photographer stinks and probably doesn't even know how to set an exposure or is just some silly person who shoots test shots in a lab all day and night.

 

[JohnDizzo15]

I'm interested to find out how many people in this forum and elsewhere are going to be getting this body specifically to shoot landscape with their Canon glass?

Once I get money saved up again (wasn't expecting any chance for more DR with my current lenses at this time since Canon surely wasn't releasing anything of the sort and had no clue the Sony was coming) and if Canon has nothing for better DR by next spring when I start shooting more again (entering winter here now) or at least a development announcement for something not too far off that specifically promises much better DR then yes I will nab this Sony then.

My second question is, how many of you in here will be taking photos on a regular basis where the extra 2.7 stops of DR will make or break your capture?

Just curious.

Often enough I could use it that I do want more DR.

(The only reason I, and many to most of the others who want it, it is because of things that happen in the field, contrary to all the nonsense spouted by fanboys who claim it's just indoor lab nonsense. Not everyone will need more all that often, perhaps some never, but certainly man could make use of it, and I'd be willing to be a lot of money, that many who say it's useless and makes no difference and stupid and so on would suddenly find some more shooting opportunities opening up and find it useful at times themselves. I'd also bet a lot of money that at least some of the naysayers would be trumpeting it from every mountain top if Canon had the lead now and a few of those would probably even say ridiculous stuff like Nikons are useless for taking pictures. Although you don't sound like you fall into that latter category at all, you just seem honestly curious.)

You are absolutely correct in your assumption. I am genuinely curious as I will be the first in line to get one after the initial wave of preorder people get theirs in their hands and produce amazing results.

After having processed some D800 files, I'd say that anyone who is incapable of seeing the utility in DR increase (especially combined with low ISO shooting) is lying to themselves. I recognize that there are and will definitely be people that put the Sony sensor to good use.

My only issue thus far with some of the statements being made are with the forum members that believe Canon IQ is now somehow trounced by the Sony sensor. Based on what I see in the raw files so far, my feeling is that the average user will primarily benefit from the ability to correct for poor exposure as opposed to regularly crafting the absolute best images possible by exposing properly and utilizing every bit of DR available.

As far as end results go though, I have yet to see any noticeable number of photos around the web that scream "this was made by the new Sony sensor and there was no way it came out of a Canon body." Because of this, I still don't quite understand the reasoning behind when people say Canon is crap and the IQ is thereby so much worse because of the inferior sensors. The proof really is in the pudding which in this case is IQ of the end product...and I have yet to find anything that is easily distinguished from everything else.

 

[JohnDizzo15]

For what it's worth, here is a before and after of one of the shots I processed. Definitely impressive and would be useful in many instances.

 

[neuroanatomist]

For what it's worth, here is a before and after of one of the shots I processed. Definitely impressive and would be useful in many instances.

Interesting exposure choice for the 'before' image. Did you spot meter off the sky in the upper right corner? Or maybe you had another reason for such a severe underexpose...

Thanks to Mikael and Aglet, we've known for quite some time about how useful SoNykon sensors are when you underexpose by several stops. For me, those instances aren't 'many' they're few and far between.

 

[JohnDizzo15]

For what it's worth, here is a before and after of one of the shots I processed. Definitely impressive and would be useful in many instances.

Interesting exposure choice for the 'before' image. Did you spot meter off the sky in the upper right corner? Or maybe you had another reason for such a severe underexpose...

Thanks to Mikael and Aglet, we've known for quite some time about how useful SoNykon sensors are when you underexpose by several stops. For me, those instances aren't 'many' they're few and far between.

That shot was actually sent to me from a buddy of mine. Not quite sure why he decided to expose that way. I specifically asked for poorly exposed ISO 100 RAW files so that I could experience first hand how much flexibility I would have in PP with images from the D800 (and compare it to the 5D3 which is what I shoot).

And I tend to agree with you regarding how often there are instances where I would absolutely need this latitude. Although, I can also think of some situations where it would help a lot. None of that ultimately makes for images that are easily set apart from the ones that I am making with my own equipment though assuming I am exposing properly. Sony sensor = more PP latitude (for me). Doesn't necessarily mean it makes my canon images look like poo though.

 

[chilledXpress]

Every camera in the world has sensor limitations. Knowing and working with sensor limitations is a part photography, no matter what camera you are using. Ansel Adams frequently wrote about sensor limitations.

Yes, all true. And so?
We know what they are and shoot around them and have fun doing so.

How does that make the A7R useless for everyone? How does that explain why it's sin to like the idea about having more DR and more shooting options open?

You are angry... Love how you resort to calling others fanboys because they have a different opinion than you on the value of a test. I see the problem, you saved all your hard earned pesos and now feel betrayed by Canon because you can't afford anything else. Some of us have multiple brands and don't have to rely on just Canon. We also can rationally think about pluses and minuses on many levels. You should read the posts a little more when you're not ragging with DR constipation. You like the cherry picking other comments and excel at jumping to conclusion on rage induced dyslexia. No one said the A7r was useless. Take a deep a couple deep breathes and try to relax a little. The initial complaint about the A7r was wonky AF and metering.

Some of us might like a little more DR or god forbid better AF, or some could care very little about DR... Why are different opinions causing you to convulse. Just because you have a personal axe to grind don't take it out on others. You saw DR and immediately jumped in with your axe to attack all ill-perceived naysayers.

Take your winter vacation from photography, save up some money, threaten any manufacture not living up to your standards with "If they don't... I'm going" and buy anything else you like, nobody cares what you shoot with.

 

[Skulker]

What makes ME feel the need? Why don't you ask the people who I was responding to who were trashing the A7R here? I only responded because they were questioning the need and questioning how the A7R could be useful for anyone. So I told them why it could be.

Thanks for the long explanation. I still can't understand how you end up feeling as you do it all seems illogical to me. But of course I fully respect your feelings.

You asked why I wasn't asking my question of those "slagging" the Sony. Its quite simple. Not many of them have used the Sony. So I'm not all that interested in their comments.

I asked you because you seem so intense about you feelings about Canon. If I felt as you appear to I think I would not be using Canon equipment.

I'm interested in how you get to "were you are" because so many people on here seem so intense and I don't understand why they have such intense views.

 

[Skulker]

Every camera in the world has sensor limitations. Knowing and working with sensor limitations is a part photography, no matter what camera you are using. Ansel Adams frequently wrote about sensor limitations.

Yes, all true. And so?
We know what they are and shoot around them and have fun doing so.

How does that make the A7R useless for everyone? How does that explain why it's sin to like the idea about having more DR and more shooting options open?

Did he say the A7R was "useless for everyone?" He said "no matter what camera you are using."

Who said it was a sin to like more DR?

 

[neuroanatomist]

I specifically asked for poorly exposed ISO 100 RAW files...

Oh, ok then. So it was a planned failure. I try to avoid those, myself.

 

[JohnDizzo15]

I specifically asked for poorly exposed ISO 100 RAW files...

Oh, ok then. So it was a planned failure. I try to avoid those, myself.

LOL. As do I. Not always successful though.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I specifically asked for poorly exposed ISO 100 RAW files...

Oh, ok then. So it was a planned failure. I try to avoid those, myself.

LOL. As do I. Not always successful though.

True. In the past 20,000 or so images, there was one that I really wanted to keep that needed to be pushed 4 stops because I messed up the exposure. After some very aggressive NR in the shadows, it made a barely acceptable 4x6" print. Of course, that one image was at ISO 3200 to start, by which point the DR advantage of SoNykon sensors would have evaporated.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Every camera in the world has sensor limitations. Knowing and working with sensor limitations is a part photography, no matter what camera you are using. Ansel Adams frequently wrote about sensor limitations.

Yes, all true. And so?
We know what they are and shoot around them and have fun doing so.

How does that make the A7R useless for everyone? How does that explain why it's sin to like the idea about having more DR and more shooting options open?

You are angry... Love how you resort to calling others fanboys because they have a different opinion than you on the value of a test.

No, I call fanboys people who make up stuff about all DxO tests are garbage if a test shows Canon does worse on something and then praise DxO when it shows Canon does better. I call fanboys on people who trash and insult those who wouldn't mind having something Canon isn't the best at now.

I see the problem, you saved all your hard earned pesos and now feel betrayed by Canon because you can't afford anything else.

Umm what? That doesn't even make sense. I saved up all my money but now I can't afford anything??

I'm betrayed by Canon because I can't afford anything else? Huh??

And I've been hoping they'd bump up more DR for years.

Some of us have multiple brands and don't have to rely on just Canon. We also can rationally think about pluses and minuses on many levels. You should read the posts a little more when you're not ragging with DR constipation. You like the cherry picking other comments and excel at jumping to conclusion on rage induced dyslexia. No one said the A7r was useless. Take a deep a couple deep breathes and try to relax a little. The initial complaint about the A7r was wonky AF and metering.

Yeah and then I simply countered that not everyone cares about the AF or wonky metering on the AF, especially not likely Canon users who'd get one, because you don't need that when you are doing tripod based landscape work but for apparently daring to point out that the A7R might be of some use to Canon users and that those other aspects won't matter for those wanting the A7R just to get more MP and more DR for landscape stuff then how I dare I bother to bring up such a thing.

Why the hell is it OK to to post about ow the A7R misses on that this and the other thing but not OK to say that those things won't matter for some for the particular purpose they need it for?

And who is the one who went to insults? You are the one who started going on about how you are such a serious pro and have no need for more DR and that people who do just need to buy the latest thing so they can take more shots of test charts in some lab.

Some of us might like a little more DR or god forbid better AF, or some could care very little about DR... Why are different opinions causing you to convulse.

I think you need to look in the mirror.

Just because you have a personal axe to grind don't take it out on others. You saw DR and immediately jumped in with your axe to attack all ill-perceived naysayers.

Yeah sure. More like opposite.

First I jumped in to explain that DxO using normalization made sense and was not a WTF thing as an earlier poster had suggest and then I jumped in with:

"Yes and that of course makes it more restrictive than if Canon could just put such a sensor in a 5D4 or 1DX2 or whatnot, but it least we now have an option for all the landscape type work where you can just focus by liveview zoomed mode and none of those complaints matter a whit. For a 5D3/1DX this won't replace those cameras but just be in supplement to get the MP and vastly better low ISO DR."

And then I get jumped for saying that.

And what about all those who toss of quick insults about learn how to expose you jokers or learn how to shoot to anyone who dares mention a non canon sensor has more DR. Because in some cases people have merely posted results and not even commented and gotten such nonsense trashings here. It's happened too many times to count.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1339351

DxOmark just published the full Sony A7r sensor test. And according to their measuresand ranking system the camera scores the same points as the Nikon D800-D800E (and that for $500 less). And it literally kicks the Canon5DIII in the butt.



Source: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1339351

Well played Sony! And thanks to the wonderful metabones adapter, I guess we could say that this really is the "Canon body" we have been waiting for.

You seem to be confused. DXO does not rate the IQ of the camera, they do not even take a photo or mount a lens for this test. All they did was test the sensor without a lens.

At least DPR tests the camera, not just a sensor. DXO tests the sensor but gives the camera a rating when the images might be horrible, or it might have some really nasty flaws.

And what horrible IQ disasters have people found with the D800?
Sure there could be some hidden disaster in the A7R, but there also might not be.
Why is it a sin for a Canon user to be glad he has a way to get more DR for some types of shooting while still getting to use his Canon glass and not have to immediately jump into some whole system switch to Nikon at the moment? Is it a sin for a Canon user to own something non-Canon branded?

No one said anything about it being a sin. Claiming super IQ due to a test that did not test for IQ seems wrong. Its like claiming a car will have great handling because it has a sports car engine. Sony Cameras do not have a great reputation.

As for the D800, I sold mine after a month, and before the big issue with bad AF points on the left side popped up. DXO claimed wonderful High ISO performance for the sensor, but forgot to mention that the DR was rated a ISO 200, and that the 5D MK III has better DR at the very high ISO settings I was using, 12800 and up. I got some horrible high ISO images with the D800. I took about 5,000 images in the 4-6 weeks I had it, it was a nice camera in bright sunlight, but far from great. That's why resale value of the D800 is so low, buyers like me went for the hype.

Then, there was the Nikon 24-70 f/2.8G. It had so much CA that Lightroom could not correct it.

 

[MichaelHodges]

I'm giving Canon a year and a half to catch up in low ISO dynamic range.

The low ISO dynamic range exhibited in the Sony sensors would be a gigantic boost to how I shoot. Most of what I film is nature (I'm writing this from a tent in Glacier National Park, where it's below freezing). The ability to expose for sky in landscapes, and raise shadows in post with minimal noise would allow me to not fuss with GND filters in the field. Also, the absolute worst lighting conditions are when shooting wildlife. Underexposure is common when a large mammal retreats into woods or runs. Same for birds in flight. The shadow lifting capabilities of the fantastic Sony sensors would help with back-lit birds. A hunting golden eagle or sprinting grizzly bear or rutting bighorns really don't care if you're ready or not.

Those shooting in a controlled lighting environment such as arenas, sports fields, portrait sessions, etc may not desire this technological advancement. But for nature shooters, it is a tremendous leap forward.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Claiming super IQ due to a test that did not test for IQ seems wrong. Its like claiming a car will have great handling because it has a sports car engine. Sony Cameras do not have a great reputation.

So a posting about DxO sensor tests doesn't even hint at talk of image quality???

And it's pretty funny that the guy above me accuses me of jumping into this thread and interjecting DR when the very OP of this thread was all about that and actually NOT all about whether it was the best all around body and so on that everyone else DID inject into the thread.

As for the D800, I sold mine after a month, and before the big issue with bad AF points on the left side popped up. DXO claimed wonderful High ISO performance for the sensor, but forgot to mention that the DR was rated a ISO 200, and that the 5D MK III has better DR at the very high ISO settings I was using, 12800 and up.

Where did they forget that? Look at their plots of DR and it shows 5D3 with a 1/2 stop advantage there (it is true they don't measure banding and maybe that under-emphases the 5D3 advantage a little at ISO12800+ but it also under-emphases the advantage of the D800 at ISO100 to be fair).

The D800 does perform very well at high ISO1600-6400 maybe even 8000 so saying it does well at high iso is hardly a stretch.

Also note that I'm not suggesting that you learn how to expose, learn how to shoot, learn how to shoot only with 'proper' lighting just because you need ultra high iso quality a lot. Yet how often do those who wouldn't mind having more DR at low ISO get told to learn how to expose, learn how to shoot, learn how to stop shooting in 'garbage' lighting. I'm not saying you have done that, but plenty have and plenty who talked about wanting more DR have been driven from the forums.

I got some horrible high ISO images with the D800. I took about 5,000 images in the 4-6 weeks I had it, it was a nice camera in bright sunlight, but far from great. That's why resale value of the D800 is so low, buyers like me went for the hype.

It depends what your needs are. Nobody said that if you live at ISO12,800 to rush after the D800.

Then, there was the Nikon 24-70 f/2.8G. It had so much CA that Lightroom could not correct it.

Yeah it does struggle a bit at the edges at 36MP FF density.
Which is also precisely why this A7R is cool, because if the adapter works well, then you get the D800 sensor plus the Canon 24-70 II and 24 T&S II for now and you can put off a decision about switching to Nikon longer perhaps and perhaps by then Canon gets back in the low ISO game fully for those with high demands there. And it puts more pressure on Canon marketing to move forward again instead of milk, milk, milk. On another forum, someone who works at Canon (although not in their DSLR division but apparently has enough contact to know) said they suddenly called a special meeting right after the A7R and adapter were announced.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I'm giving Canon a year and a half to catch up in low ISO dynamic range.

The low ISO dynamic range exhibited in the Sony sensors would be a gigantic boost to how I shoot. Most of what I film is nature (I'm writing this from a tent in Glacier National Park, where it's below freezing). The ability to expose for sky in landscapes, and raise shadows in post with minimal noise would allow me to not fuss with GND filters in the field. Also, the absolute worst lighting conditions are when shooting wildlife. Underexposure is common when a large mammal retreats into woods or runs. Same for birds in flight. The shadow lifting capabilities of the fantastic Sony sensors would help with back-lit birds. A hunting golden eagle or sprinting grizzly bear or rutting bighorns really don't care if you're ready or not.

Those shooting in a controlled lighting environment such as arenas, sports fields, portrait sessions, etc may not desire this technological advancement. But for nature shooters, it is a tremendous leap forward.

exactly!

the A7R at least lets the landscape side of that work out reasonably well for now (assuming the adapters don't toss out how the lens align with the sensor too badly), although I'm not sure it will pull off the wildlife side of things as often, probably just here and there

(even for sports more DR could help at times and certain more MP could for the extra reach)

for now my plans have switched from looking at the 7D2 for spring to the A7R as priority instead (although a Canon announcement by then could change that) and then once with the A7R I'll be willing to give Canon an extra year to get better ISO100 in a reasonably sized body and won't feel quite as rushed to make a switch (although the A7R isn't ideal, it's enough to hold me out longer)

 

[neuroanatomist]

DXO claimed wonderful High ISO performance for the sensor, but forgot to mention that the DR was rated a ISO 200, and that the 5D MK III has better DR at the very high ISO settings I was using, 12800 and up.

Where did they forget that?

When they base two of their three Subscores solely on performance at base ISO, and use those Biased Subscores (BS) to determine (via an undisclosed weighting) an overall Biased Score (bigger, smellier BS).

 

[zlatko]

Every camera in the world has sensor limitations. Knowing and working with sensor limitations is a part photography, no matter what camera you are using. Ansel Adams frequently wrote about sensor limitations.

Yes, all true. And so?
We know what they are and shoot around them and have fun doing so.

How does that make the A7R useless for everyone? How does that explain why it's sin to like the idea about having more DR and more shooting options open?

Did he say the A7R was "useless for everyone?" He said "no matter what camera you are using."

Who said it was a sin to like more DR?

Thank you Skulker. Exactly right.

 

[Pi]

4 pictures are worth 4,000 words...

OK, so we are back to our favorite topic - DR. Here are my one thousand words.

Default settings in LR, no lens correction, ISO 100:

---------
Corrected image, lens correction on, 69% vignetting correction (it is f/10 anyway):

--------
Center crop:

------
Corner crop:

 

[sanj]

Every camera in the world has sensor limitations. Knowing and working with sensor limitations is a part photography, no matter what camera you are using. Ansel Adams frequently wrote about sensor limitations.

Yes, all true. And so?
We know what they are and shoot around them and have fun doing so.

How does that make the A7R useless for everyone? How does that explain why it's sin to like the idea about having more DR and more shooting options open?

You are angry... Love how you resort to calling others fanboys because they have a different opinion than you on the value of a test. I see the problem, you saved all your hard earned pesos and now feel betrayed by Canon because you can't afford anything else. Some of us have multiple brands and don't have to rely on just Canon. We also can rationally think about pluses and minuses on many levels. You should read the posts a little more when you're not ragging with DR constipation. You like the cherry picking other comments and excel at jumping to conclusion on rage induced dyslexia. No one said the A7r was useless. Take a deep a couple deep breathes and try to relax a little. The initial complaint about the A7r was wonky AF and metering.

Some of us might like a little more DR or god forbid better AF, or some could care very little about DR... Why are different opinions causing you to convulse. Just because you have a personal axe to grind don't take it out on others. You saw DR and immediately jumped in with your axe to attack all ill-perceived naysayers.

Take your winter vacation from photography, save up some money, threaten any manufacture not living up to your standards with "If they don't... I'm going" and buy anything else you like, nobody cares what you shoot with.

Easy man! You sound rude and biased.