SAR readers DAN sent me the link to his video. It shows how the A7rII start-up time seems to have been reduced on the new 3.0 firmware:
Just a quick test of the new 3.0 Firmware and how much fast the boot time is over 2.0. Pretty negligible, but every bit helps, I suppose. Other benefits to the 3.0 firmware are well welcomed.
I hope other readers can confirm this. And I do hope Sony will reduce the many lags of the camera during normal operation (not only at startup) via future firmware update.
34 Responses
Is the difference even outside of the variables such a test would have?
I don’t think I would trust my finger to have an accuracy of tenths of a second, nor care!
Still, it’s a bit of harmless fun.
I do now have one observation of my own and wonder if it echoes other users’ experience.
If I didn’t use my cameras for a day or two the start up was much slower than if only turned off for a short while (never did understand why), but now it is almost immediate no matter what. It was only after watching this video I thought I’d see how I felt about any perceivable difference and I hadn’t used them yesterday. I got a bit of a surprise at how quick it is!
This ^
I was holding down the shutter button until it fired. I was not timing it to be ready, then hitting the shutter button. Not meant to be a scientific test, just an observation of my camera’s performance.
Fair enough.
I did mention I thought it was fun, if not scientific.
However, I would be curious to know if you have experienced the same as I have, in that the start up after a 24 hour period unused is much better.
It has been a puzzle to me why the interval between turning on the camera should make any difference in start up, but it always seemed like switching back on after lunch, for example, was always fast, whereas if the camera had been off for a weekend it took several seconds more.
I’m pretty certain it wasn’t my imagination, either, but the new firmware has resolved it. Odd!
I saw that, and thank you for understanding its purpose.
I tried it today, took the battery out as well to make sure it was starting fresh, and added those tests back in tot he edit timeline. All were within 2 frames of each other for triggering. (1/30th second variance)
There could be manufacturing variance between cameras that might have it working faster for others. Who know?
wow… 8%!!!
Still waiting for a firmware update for A6000…
and I’m waiting for the R1 update…
TBH not scientific but with a Metabones IV seems start up 100% faster (v noticeable). I’m happy.
My eyes are firmly rolled. Five one-hundredths of a second, on a single test, is not evidence of any improvement in start-up times. Make 100 tests, before and after, find the average time for each, then compare. MAYBE, you’d have a statistically valid result. This? Absolute garbage.
You would need multiple cameras to make any conclusive data. I compared 3 start times for each firmware, and saw only 1/60th of a second variances that likely just comes down to where the frame rate landed. It was just an example of my camera, so please go make your own video on your own camera to widen the results if it matters that much to you.
“I compared 3 start times for each firmware, and saw only 1/60th of a second variances that likely just comes down to where the frame rate landed.”
Do you not think that variances in the time it takes you to switch on the camera and press the shutter would have an even greater impact than frame rate?
Switch on time was aligned to the frame in post, and I was holding the shutter button until it was capable of triggering an exposure. So they were aligned within a 1/60th of a second.
How does that account for variances in the time it takes your finger to move from the power switch to pressing the shutter?
because the camera won’t take a photo until it is fully booted. Getting to the shutter button faster or slower is irrelevant when I have to wait for it to actually fire while my finger is pressing it.
Hey, nothing personal. You can’t rightly present this as evidence of any difference in startup time. Your sample size is insufficient, and there are confounding variables that you have not controlled for.
For any statistical significans he should have run the test for 10 ten times for example, and then take the average value. The two timings are too close to each other to call a winner.
Startup time is everything.
I can’t wait to see those 8% better photos.
Really, the guy who made that video has to be trolling.
Pure mathematic:
5/131 = 3,8% (not 8%)
Where did you get 131?
a6000 change much in one on to another . It is also in the A7x , A7xII?? i miss my reflex (K-5) XD
The difference is MUCH greater than displayed by this test. The time from power-on to a shutter firing might be insignificant, but there is a huge difference to how the start-up is done if you DO NOT press the shutter. Previously, it took a really long time until all the information was displayed. Now it is MUCH faster. Not just 10% faster, more like 300% faster.
Agreed! Experienced the same thing. Love this update.
Agree too! much faster!!!
yawn
Good to see that Sony spits firmwares for this camera faster than the time it takes to download each one.. must be to compensate jerks like me that bought a more expensive camera, the Sony RX1-R (my last Sony purchase EVER), and NEVER got a SINGLE update.. EVER.. go go go Sony:)
If you take bad picture with that camera I don’t think it’s the firmware fault.
Man^, just forget about those tests and go and take some pictures, you’ve got an awesome camera, even with the 1.0 firmware. Not sure who cares about those 8%.
Well it’s good that someone does that for us so we can know what our cameras are capable of.
😐
Meanwhile in the Fujiland they are the first to do a firmware recall.
If this is true, why wasn’t it in the release notes?
That’s super fast compared to my A7. A7 takes forever to turn on lol