Imaging Resource interviewed Sony engineer and manager Kimio Maki. The main talk was the new 42MP sensor and here are some key answers:
1) Why 42MP: 42-megapixel was the best pixel size to realize 4K movies. Super 35mm gives the best picture quality, from oversampling 15 megapixels down to the eight-megapixel 4K size. The picture quality is better than a professional video camera.
2) Noise improvement: in terms of ISO, this sensor’s sensitivity is better than 36-megapixel chips. The A7R Mark II has better noise performance; better than the A7R.
3) Why not 50MP: But 42 (MP) is not a good word. But actually, the engineers said “if you prefer 50, you have to lose sensitivity”. Of course 50 [would] give better resolution, and 45 would be more impressive, but it wouldn’t be perfectly balanced.
4) Advantages of backside illuminated sensors: in order to realize this kind of sensitivity, we have to prefer backside-illuminated. That’s the first priority, to gather lots of light, more light, effectively. The other decision was in the wiring layers; we used to use the aluminum, but aluminum is not good enough to transfer the data faster. Therefore we change the material from the aluminum to the copper to make it faster. [Ed. Note: Copper is more conductive than aluminum, so there’s less resistance in the circuit lines on the chip, meaning signals can propagate faster.] Therefore, then we could get a faster transition from the light to an electrical signal.
5) Uncompressed RAW: Sony RAW is compressed, not uncompressed. But if we’re getting a lot of requests for it, we should make such a kind of no-compression raw. We recognize the customer’s requirement, and actually we are working on it. And yes Sony could provide that via simple firmware upgrade!
6) Hybrid Autofocus: in terms of autofocus, we are using a hybrid focus, so first we use the phase-detection focus to get close to the object. Then near the object, we start to use contrast AF to get a clear peak. Then we adjust the focus. Then in order to make very precise focus (because 42-megapixel means very very small pixels), and also the focusing point could be a very small one, therefore we phase-detection together with contrast AF, contrast focus.
Recap: Hurray! Sony will give us uncompressed RAW at last! And let’s make no bargain here Sony, we want that addition on all current cameras 🙂
One more thing: Imaging Resource editor than writes:
They showed me as an example an A7R II with a Canon EF 24-70mm attached via a Metabones “smart” adapter. Even though we were in a pretty dimly-lit conference room, the A7R II seemed extremely responsive, with very little delay between me half-pressing the shutter button and the beep of focus-confirmation. Sony’s Mark Weir noted that this was the first time a full-frame mirrorless camera could focus traditional SLR lenses as fast as SLRs could. He noted that in this mode, the A7R Mark II was using only phase-detect AF, vs the two-stage hybrid approach Maki-san mentioned earlier.
Store links:
In USA:
A7rII at Amazon, BHphoto, Adorama, Uniquephoto.
RX10m2 at Amazon, BHphoto, Adorama, Uniquephoto.
RX100m4 at Amazon, BHphoto, Adorama, Uniquephoto.
In Europe at:
A7rII at Sony DE, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT. Wex UK.
RX100m4 at DE, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT. Wex UK.
RX100m2 at DE, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT. Wex UK.
In Asia at:
A7rII at Digitalrev, CameraPro.
RX10m2 at Digitalrev, CameraPro.
RX100m4 at Digitalrev, CameraPro.
245 Responses
After this firmware update and the 7R II what will all the people have left to complain about?
Battery life, because carrying extra batteries smaller than the size of a box of Tic Tacs is too much effort lol
and a new complaint will appear, file size
Those are $80 tic tac boxes, of which I need 4 to make it through some events. It’s not entirely insignificant.
I will complain about touchscreen and hope if sony release after sell hardware upgrade… hahaha…
This sensor should be in in the A99m2!
This confirms that the entire camera design process is now being distorted to deliver 4K video – something that many of us couldn’t care less about.
Read carefully – 42Mp was chosen not only to give 5K (Super 35) but also to balance resolution ISO sensitivity and speed. They said it will have better high ISO than A7R had! That’s huge. I would imagine DR will also increase a bit.
Hope that’s true and not just hype to disguise the fact that video is now in the driver’s seat in the marketing department.
without video features, cut the sales of the system by at least half. watch as either the price of the camera goes up to recoup profitability, or see the system fail as a whole.
Probably true. I’m expressing regret about that situation.
You know you don’t actually have to buy the camera. Don’t know why the “I don’t care about video” crowd still whines about video features in the camera. Sony is not making a camera for you, and they haven’t since the A900. Video is their edge and they’re going to push it as much as possible.
Whereas “I need to shot black cats in the dark” did no such thing …
Uncompressed RAW-Uncompressed RAW-Uncompressed RAW is holy grail… But it’s damn size consuming as I remember in time when owned A850 with it’s about 35mb uncompressed raws that got stucked fast x266 CF cards of that time, so after few tries I had never used it seriously…
Just give us Lossless compressed RAW instead of compressed 11-7 bit as it was in time of Sony A100, A700…
Absolutely correct!
It’s not uncompressed RAW that people actually want even though they may be asking for that – they don’t realize what they are asking for. That would cause all sorts of screams about file size. It is losslessly compressed RAW like every other manufacturer does that we actually want rather than a compression scheme that essentially renders the files as just 11 bits per pixel rather than 14. Nikon NEF and Canon CR2 files are compressed RAW formats but they are compressed in a lossless way and preserve full integrity of the 14 bit per pixel data coming off of the sensor.
Some people simply don’t know what they are talking about. It’s quite laughable that people use the term “uncompressed RAW” instead of “lossless RAW” which is quite a huge different.
One also has to anknowledge that Sony is one of the worst when it comes to firmware. Just look at the Playmemories store — so much potential but for some reason they don’t allow 3rd party apps or some sort of function that would make it so that people could create their own functions (also called ‘macros’ and not macros as in close focus). What would the Apple store or Google Play be without 3rd party apps…?
Playmemories is a huge piece of crap. If you check lag in remote camera app you’ll be mad. It absolutely useless for comfort everyday usage. I have it on my 5T and only use it when I can’t do it another way like ir remote or cable remote…
And yes for last decade Sony was just hardware company…
I think there is a big danger of malicious apps.
Saying Sony “will give us uncompressed” raw at the end is huge jump from something they’re working on. There are plenty of other things customers have been complaining about that never gets addressed – just see the firmware update post from earlier. That statement is spreading false hope and untrue at the moment.
They will make it. 100% sure.
if possible, will be at the cost of slower frame rate.
I think eventually Sony adds improved raw capabilities as an option as well. But if its almost a year or longer – you’re spreading false hope. Just from reading comments here, there are people stupid enough to buy based on features that don’t actually exist, or to complain about a feature said camera lacks after buying.
See the whining for XAVC in the A6000. I can only imagine the whining if it doesn’t hit until months after the A7sII or A7III is released. “Sony has abandoned us A7rII users by now giving us uncompressed raws like the lower models.” Aye…
I think you do a great job with the site and I’m 90% sure I’m preordering a A7rII tomorrow, if so I’ll do it through this site. Thank you.
What’s the rush? Why pre-order? I always wait for 1. real reviews, 2. firmware updates and 3. post launch price drops and deals.
Got a new A7r for half price, £1090, Amazon open box about a year ago.
Reviews will be out before it ships. I can always cancel. I’m running dual systems with a Samsung NX1 so I can get 4k internal and I’m using a Came7800 3-axis gimbal, the A7rII means I can consolidate both into one small body.
Me too. I’ve got a stack of Pentax DSLR gear (K-5IIs and K-3, all the FA Limited’s, Macro, Siggy and PK UWA’s, couple of 50/1.2’s), which now sit in plastic zippy bags packed with silica gel – unused, never get round to selling.
Consolidation is what it’s all about. I’ve got it down to A7r plus Samyang 14/2.8, FE28/2, FE35/1.4, FE55/1.8 and FE 70-200/4. More than enough. Just need a body that will do it all and the A7rII looks like the candidate right now, yet I’ll hang on.
Would love to know about that gimbal!
The gimbal is a PITA, you have to rebalance it and tune the PID’s with every lens change and larger lenses like the 35/1.4 are too big, they throw the balance off. The only other option is a larger more expensive gimbal like the MOVI. The A7rII will replace that setup. The video from the A7II is amazing from a stabilization standpoint, just low IQ.
@SAR_admin do you mean they will make a new A9 after this A7Rii? Please confirm it, Im quite excited
If Sony can deliver UHS-II compatibility for fast cards as well as lossless or uncompressed RAW, really good lowlight AF and better battery life too, then the whole rig is about there.
Most likely see all this in the A9 pro camera if they make one.
Most of complains seem to be more difficult to fix than uncompressed raw
Like being able to custom white balance in video mode? Making something other than an error message pop up when you touch the shutter in video mode? The minimum shutter speed with auto ISO that the new camera finally addresses. A custom button function to switch between EVF/LCD? I think there are many complaints that are smaller than how the camera compresses data from the sensor. Just my opinion.
Dear SAR. Please stop posting all these rumors today. My bank account is in overdrive right now and I haven’t even cashed my check this week. I’m still at work and the excitement is causing a ruckus around my desk as I dance for joy. The sounds of laughter and celebration may require me to take the next few days off and I’d still like to take my vacation next month. Yours truly- THKPIC
Wrong job.
My preorders A7RII, Batis 85 and G90 are in place, and I am enjoying my vacation in greece since last saturday.
So dear SAR
Please get rumors on an A7SII and a FE 135/2 🙂
Yours truly TLE
@THKPIC, i’m just kidding. 🙂
135mm F2 might put me in cardiac arrest:)
Hope Greece will still “exist” on Saturday 🙁
About RAW: Nikon has options:
Uncompressed RAW (lossless)
Compressed RAW (lossless)
Compressed RAW (lossy)
The user can decide which to use.
This is what Sony should offer to us! Great it can be done via firmware update.
I don’t think the A7 cameras have that much computing/bandwidth power. At most you get gigantic uncompressed RAWs that bog down shooting speed.
We’re entering a new era of pro-grade equipment for the masses (ok, let’s rephrase that as “attainable”). The statement that Super35 offers better IQ than a pro video camera is a bold one and, judging from 1) first samples they’ve posted, and 2) the absurd sensitivity Sony achieved with A7S, which to this day no pro-video camera regardless of $$ can match… I’d say is more than a bunch of hot air.
Take your elitism to your therapist.
huh? how you arrived at elitism out of my comment is beyond me, though you a) missed the point of a comment, b) turned the discussion away from the relevant stuff (sony’s claims about how good they say the camera is), c) dropped they played out “therapist” line. what’s your deal?
here is.
> pro-grade equipment for the masses
> absurd sensitivity
so should Sony omit it just because some pro cameras don’t have it and some snobs think nobody needs it?
Bro, that wasn’t meant to imply someone’s inferiority. Instead, it was a positive statement to note that even the “masses”… a.k.a. broke indie-film makers, for instance (as opposed to hollywood DPs) can get their hands on seriously high-end gear.
as to “absurd sensitivity”… again, a positive statement about just how good A7S is.
I suspect that you either forgot to take your Prozac, or there’s just a language barrier. If it’s the former, then it’s a real shame… first time I’ve ran into someone from Novosibirsk, a place where I was born.
So, let’s start over – Hi, I’m Neo, nice to meet you, I love A7Rii. How about you? LOL
a7rii is cool camera, but lacks focus stacking and sensor tilt.
I won’t buy or suggest to buy Sony A7R II unless it offers uncompressed RAW firmware.
It’s not uncompressed RAW that you actually want even though you may be asking for that. It is losslessly compressed RAW like every other manufacturer does that we actually want rather than a compression scheme that essentially renders the files as just 11 bits per pixel rather than 14. Nikon NEF and Canon CR2 files are compressed RAW formats but they are compressed in a lossless way and preserve full integrity of the 14 bit per pixel data coming off of the sensor.
I fully get your point. Actually, I was referring to either uncompressed raw or lossless raw that enables the full fidelity.
CR2 is not really lossless. (At least on some cameras) I experienced noise-reduction with it.
Yeah at higher ISOs some of the manufacturers do cook the RAW files a bit but not at base ISO and the lower ISO values. Sony does it at all ISO levels.
So can you show us a photo you’ve taken that that’s been ruined by Sony’s RAW compression?
A7R ii already provides lossless raw files.
It employs the same compression scheme as the a7R which is lossy.
Welcome to 75MB RAW files…
a 4TB hard drive is $129. Storage is almost irrelevant these days, within reason.
Do a wedding with 2500 photos, and consider backup and redundancy and you are quickly adding hard disks and time over the year. For casual use you are right.
Well for a wedding you probably wouldn’t need or use uncompressed RAWs
I think he’s mostly talking about transfer and SD Card write speeds . He has a point but let us choose if we want to use it or not.
Really? There’s backup to consider (I keep two independent copies, one off site and rotate them), and my main storage disks are mirrored (I use flash storage for the working areas). I like to keep the backup (which is synchronised copy) to just one volume as it makes management easier. Once it strays onto two, it becomes a hassle.
Then there’s the time it takes to flush data to the card in the camera.
Not that it can’t be done, but discs (flash apart) aren’t really getting significantly faster; a bit better on sequential, but that only goes up as to the square root of areal density. Everything starts becoming less responsive with huge amounts of storage.
I understand, I manage enterprise storage infrastructure so I’m very familiar with mirroring, off-site, etc.. For the 98% of users though (and this is after they chose to enable uncompressed RAW) if they are spending $3200 on a body the file size difference isn’t really a big deal. Assuming they aren’t cheap skates with aspects of their PCs, storage, backup, etc…
Having a choice isn’t really a bad thing.
75MB is not a problem, if you have already invested $3k to buy this camera.
Yes, I realize that uncompressed means larger files. I am fine with it.
Well it probably be an option. A900 had both uncompressed and compressed.
I’m sure it will be. The earlier DSLRs had the option. I never really found any difference so stuck to the cRAW format. Several of the low order bits don’t really record image data in mid- and high-light areas it’s encoding shot noise. Where there is a potential problem is in the 4 x 4 blocks used in the algorithm under some extreme situations.
It is a bit odd Sony didn’t continue to offer uncompressed RAW. My suspicion is that they found, in practice, most people stuck to cRAW so just omitted it as it would slow everything down.
What’s that hassle with uncompressed RAW? I do net get it. Have you actually evaluated the file format and compression algorithm Sony is using and shown that it is not lossless? Where did you get the ide of ‘increased image quality’ for uncompressed RAW?
check the link:http://www.sonyalphaforum.com/topic/951-complaints-about-a7rii/ and see the reply from”Max the Dog”
He’s the only guy with that issue.
I understand. Not everyone needs uncompressed/lossless raw. However, if spent $3200, you don’t want the performance be compromised, especially the cons could be solved simply by firmware updating.
Name one camera that has zero compromise of any aspect of its performance, ever.
I am not saying every aspect. I hope you get the point. As a customer, I just don’t want the more expensive camera to have the compromised feature in which a cheaper camera has not compromised, such as lossless/uncompressed raw.
I would argue that pretty much no one needs it for most realistic output. I’ve yet to see a ruined photo, just some 100% crops pushed into oblivion and filtered through analyzing software, far removed from any real usage. Sure, in principle, Sony could provide better, but all the whining, especially from the likes of the person you linked it to, is simply preposterous.
Not necessarily true. I believe I have experienced limitations of the compressed RAW with some of my photos using my A77II (which is listed as being 14-bit). Wasn’t so much of an issue with 12-bit cameras being compressed to the 11-bit plus 7-bit method (never had a problem with the 12-bit A77), but it seems to get fuddled up when doing the same with 14-bit. In particular it is most noticeable in a high contrast scene and limits how much headroom you have in a photo. It can also cause posterization with certain colors.
Here is a link to a thread I started documenting this:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3772422
That’s what I’m talking about! Yes! Love you Sony! Let those stubborn folks stay far far behind, we ride far in front. Bravo!
Sound good!!!
No need for nikon and canon (flap flap) anymore, Sony is soon dominating. deal with it.. Even Kai Wong is playing with the “dark side” now 😀
Perhaps I am not versed in the intricacies of the japanese language but he said that they’re working on it and they COULD provide it via firmware upgrade. I don’t get a lot of assurance from this.
Actually, if they wanted to say they cannot give it, they would have said “We will try, its difficult”.
it was already implemented before as RAW and sRAW. just put it back.
Where all the lossy RAW file posters? Not chiming in today?
could != will
Imaging Resource have a lot of details.. Probably we will experience 15-stop DR for the first time..
As if anyone could see the difference …
Stunned that Imaging Resources doesn’t appear to have asked about the dynamic range of the A7rII…
lets see what Kai from Digital Rev has to say about this camera
http://bokeh.digitalrev.com/article/how-the-sony-a7r-ii-murdered-the-canon-5ds-and-5ds-r
Here it is 🙂
Curious to see focus speed with Canon lenses when hybrid (pdaf + cdaf) AF is active.
Curious to see as well the focus accuracy when only pdaf is active. Both
will propably lessen current euphoria…
Uncompressed raw? This will probably be more helpful for memory card manufacturers.
An option for lossless (but compressed) raw would be fine.
4K from A7RII better then from a professional video camera? To which camera do you compare???
Not sure I buy the “PDAF only focus with DSLR lens” stuff by Mark Weir at all. 1st they explain why hybrid focus is needed (accuracy and low light performance due to small on-sensor PDAF sensels), yet some guy says it works great without CDAF part. I quess there will be no Face Detect, Eye-AF etc. either inthat claimed PDAF-only mode as those are CDAF features.
It takes years for sony to implement a firmware change on request of customers that makes up about only a few minutes of work? Sounds like Samsungs Android Update Policy on android devices.
Finally Sony didnt go all the way with the a7r2 again. always only little steps at now ridiculous prices. they even closed down the education store – didnt read that here did i? there is still no competitive af in terms of speed + low light capabilties. so most probably i’ll finally dump my 2013 a7 this year since sony wont ever deliver and get myself a decent dslr. i am tired of waiting and being delayed for the final true pro FE camera.
Gods, there is never a shortage of idiots. How do you figure uncompressed RAW constitutes ‘about only a few minutes of work’? What in this entire history on the subject of cRAW would give you that impression?
What other $3200 mirrorless FF camera delivers the same feature/size/weight combo? What is ‘competitive in terms of AF speed’ to you? Do you know how the A7RII performs in that sense? Where’s the testing data?
For real. With some arguable exceptions, Sony has consistently cheaper cameras than everyone else with at least some features that are noticeably better.
I’m sure it’s nothing like the ‘few minutes’ of work Frank mentioned, but it can’t be a huge project either since raw is supposed to be the data right off the sensor – it’s what it starts out with. I’d rather it be compressed, just lossly compressed.
Why did they put the effort to implement a lossy raw in the first place. thats simply dumb. so activating pure raw is deactivating compression. so its a matter of minutes u idiot. lossless compressed raw would of course be appreciated after years also….
i am talking speed in terms of turning the cam on and getting the shot. and in terms of the a7 + sel35f28z thats not happening. even with the person being stll the af sometimes hunts for an eternity and loses the moment. i regret not having decided for the 6d instead of the a7 at that time not even talking loss of cam value over time. its better with the 55 but not good and i dont wont to be forced to use certain focal lengths to gain af speed.
Hey Frank, since you’re smarter than a Sony Engineer and more business savvy than a Sony CEO, can you explain to us why lossy raw is simply dumb and how Sony couldn’t understand that? Also if you can let us know why they didn’t spend hundreds of more hours on R&D for the turn on time to be faster? Thanks!
It’s only dumb to the dumbest. The key is read-out speed. When you have processors with low read-out speeds (the early years), it makes A LOT OF SENSE to compress the RAW output straight off the sensor, even with low pixel counts (16MP NEX 3/5). With the newer processors, and larger buffers, Sony may be able to upgrade lossy compression to lossless compression. That they can do this on a 42MP sensor is remarkable. I very much doubt whether they will be able to go back to earlier models with a lossless upgrade, without slowing the burst rates.
Do you know how long Canon charged $3,500 for their 5D mkIII? Years. And the D800 was at $3,000 (or more) for a couple years too. Those cameras couldn’t have had even 1/4 the R&D costs that Sony spent to produce the a7R II.
People here have no idea what anything should cost in the world of cameras because it seems everyone’s first camera was the a7 or a6000. To dismiss the a7R II point blank as “not good enough” or “too expensive” is to fundamentally not understand camera technology and the camera market. Sure, it might not fit your work/hobby or your budget, but these blanket statements are so naive and ignorant.
bye.
yeah, well meet again in 1 year and see whos been right about sonys technological policy. as long as theres no competition they wont go all the way since theres people like u paying 3grant for a nice but half baked cam.
You are boring. Go away and stop up-voting yourself
I’m happy they went with 42 rather than just going as large as possible. Shaping up to be their best release yet imo
4) aah where’s small lenses
So we could see an A9 for still pictures with much higher resolution.
Since copper wire is better than aluminum…silver would be better, and gold better yet.
Silver would be the best.
I heard something about silver sublimating under a current load which would be disastrous for microcircuitry but I’m not sure about it.
http://www.metaldetectingworld.com/07_photogallery/singles/conductive_order.jpg
Submit that request to Hassi, they’ll bling it out with some gold for you.
Gold is not better than copper and silver. Its a common misconception.
Silver and copper is better than gold, but it can oxidize. That’s why they use gold for contacts. Gold is about 45% more resistive than cooper and aluminum is 65-70% more resistive than copper. The difference between copper and silver is really small (5-10%).
I think the biggest question is – will this FW update be available for cameras other than the A7RII?
Nobody said it WILL be a firmware update for the A7RII. They said it COULD be done via a firmware update.
I will remember number 3 when hey come out with a 50MP camera…
Good news, but they need to make sure their enthusiast cameras get serviced by Sony, not contractors like Precision. No way would I drop $3K on a body that would have to get serviced by anyone other than the manufacturer.
The other thing is the the blue LED problem. It plagued my A6000 and I’ve seen it on A72 files as well. No, it’s not a WB issue or something easily worked around, if at all, so don’t apologize for Sony here. Something is wrong and they need to fix it. This will be the first thing I look for in A7R2 samples.
Interesting interview.
They could have asked about a IBIS high resolution mode, not that I personally need
it but maybe some other people does. Hmmm maybe that could be an PlayMemories camera
app if possible?
Very interesting to see what a A6000 mkII will have as sensor and more.
Maybe more in my price range for new camera one day.
42 is the answer to life, the universe, and everything.
guys who been waiting for a99ii will end up getting a7rii with LA-EA3 adaptor because they are just tired of waiting for the mythical a99ii/a9 with 50+ mp. and when a99ii/a9 does come out later this year, they will end up buying it too. sony wins
Wrong!
No, you are Wong. you got Wong number!
you probably right about many a99ii guys. good for the ones who can afford.
I was holding off for the A99II but not too much now. The advances on the A7rII have pretty much made it moot unless fast white primes become a priority.
Wrong!
why?
For my uses, the a7rii won’t cut it. Hobbled by a makeshift adaptor, it will cut it even less. And why would I want to buy a $3000+ camera that requires me to use an awkward, expensive, heavy adaptor in the first place? Makes no sense to me. I’m happy to wait. Why not? The cameras that I have now are working great with my a mount lenses. I can’t speak for everyone . . . just me. I’m not buying an a7rII.
Please make the uncompressed raw retroactive to at least NEX 7 generation or any camera generation since the lossy compression started.
MANY THANKS!!!!
I am happy with the new hotshoe because I can use Yongnou…
– a Idiot
Sooooo good to hear!
The only things between me and a Sony E-mount camera (A7II, A7RII or A7000) are lossy compression RAW files and money. Soon there will only be one obstacle left…
A7rII is the very first Sony’s camera worth living.
I would rather hope that some coder some day learns to hack the Sony firmware so that we, the people, (yes — i talk for everyone!) doesn’t have to rely on what Sony execs somewhere in the world think is important and not in their firmware.
I’ve said this before but one function that could solve the lack of X or Y with function Z could be solved with a function that would let the user record and playback macros (or actions if you’re familiar with Photoshop). That and also configure custom buttons to jump into macro a, b or c.
One thing that a macro could solve is complex bracketing of all sorts, take this sequence for example:
Yes, that sequence wouldn’t be super useful but it do describe something that would take some time to achieve without using a macro playback function. With this function it would basically take around 5-6 seconds if the lightning conditions doesn’t require slower shutter speeds of course.
isn’t this a simple app?
Yes, it would be quite simple. The most hard part would be to create something that parses each command into native code that the camera understand. Also one would have to create a recorder *AND* importer (so that people could share macros).
But if you know where this app already exist — where can i download it?
The hard part would be making sure that ANY sequence possible doesn’t tear the camera apart, doesn’t fry it, doesn’t require support, a larger legal department etc etc. And doesn’t lead to a 5 second auto-focus speed.
Sony are trying to cram a quart into a high-speed pint pot. You’d lose all that specialist engineering if you had to build an open, generalised interface driven camera system.
So a function to record and playback and record macros would make it an “open, generalised interface driven camera system”?
I do not see that logic, sorry.
Macros usually expose a set of lower-level API functions that form the basic operations of the device: in this case a camera. It really depends on how ‘low’ the supplier is prepared to go to expose lower functions. On mobile phones, people hack into the firmware itself, and effectively rebuild the internal operating system. I just don’t believe that Sony have got to the stage of maturity that they can expose lower-level calls without impacting the mechanical, electrical and heat properties of the device: they really do operate near the edge of what the device can handle. To make ANY combination of these functions available, for ANY period of time, would probably require them to limit the performance of each individual function. For example, how many shutter activations could be crammed into a day, if they were driven by a 1/8,000 sec exposure time? Would the device cease to function under this load? How would Sony restrict the load envelope?
First — thank you for the non-stupid answer, you clearly have some sort of grown up thoughts to share in comparison with some other people commenting here.
And yes, the problems you describe could pose somewhat of a problem. But at the same time you mention phones which actually has the solution to this very problem. Why couldn’t Sonys camera division do like Sony Mobile does regarding unlocking their bootloader on their Xperia devices? They supply the means to do it but are very clear about voiding the gurantee etc.
Can you do it through Playmemories? I haven’t looked into it yet, but i thought that 3rd party apps weren’t allowed in playmemories app store?
If 3rd party are allowed, then yes, it’s just a matter of tying into an API and building a macro framework app.
Sony do allow 3rd party apps, but only using the WIFI-api and that one is simply terrible and only allows a small subset of functions. Thus there has been no apps worth mentioning for it as far as i know.
Looks pretty extensive to me: https://developer.sony.com/develop/cameras/
There are all sort of problems with it though and it’s hardly “native” as in “native speed”. Just starting to fiddle around with a phone to take a photo is stupid at best.
Well, for macros the speed shouldn’t matter, as you’re uploading instructions to the camera via WI-FI. So any camera lag is virtually non-existent, because only the initial function is noticeably lagging, the timing for the rest will be in sync against the previous function.
Not saying that it will be great, but it’s an option. I’m too lazy to build a macro framework app. Maybe when I finally upgrade by A65 to a camera that supports playmemories.
Yeah, but… yeah. In some situations it would be “ok:isch” i guess.
You can do this via Wi-Fi, using Camera Remote API (https://developer.sony.com/develop/cameras/get-started/). It will involve writing code, but it can be done.
ofc it can but the WIFI-app is so slow and cumbersome to use that one might just do everything manually instead. The main point with macro playback/record/import is that it is something that could be triggered fast without the hassle of fiddling around with a phone (for when you want to use your camera …)
Are you even reading what I wrote? Sony cameras with Wi-Fi support Camera Remote API. It is a protocol which allows an application to control the camera remotely. You do not have to use existing PlayMemories app. You can actually write your own application on the iOS, Android phone or PC which does whatever you want it to, including executing complex bracketing series like you wrote above.
If you are clueless about software development, HTTP, JSON and other related technologies, then you obviously cannot write the application yourself and will have to wait until someone else does.
But the point is that it can be done, it can be done today.
Sorry, i’m tired.
But it’s still WIFI requiring the server start etc etc etc. That is still slow and cumbersome.
And no, not clueless about HTTP and JSON. Clueless on how to write native android/ios/ms apps though and clueless about how to not use slow WIFI + phone using the WIFI-api.
What part of WiFi is slow? Image transfer? Quick glance at the API reference suggests that you do not have to use it to control camera remotely, you can leave the captured images in camera, and just use API to adjust settings and trigger shutter.
I think he was referring to a lag between the action taken and action executed. Shouldn’t matter for macros, as it’s all automated.
especially if he plans 5-6 seconds for executing
I was more talking about this:
1. Take your phone out of your pocket
2. Turn screen on
3. Navigate to app + open
4. Set camera to connect etc
5. Trigger connect request from app
6. Wait for connect….
7. Do stuff
Instead of:
1. Push C1
2. Trigger shutter to trigger whatever sequence you set as C1 or choose a macro from a “macro selection list” + trigger shutter to trigger sequence
You can, however, reduce this to:
1) Take phone out;
2) Turn screen on;
3) Launch app which does 4,5,6,7 for you. Or even allows you customize what it does.
Or, if you are into electronics, you can create an bluetooth device with big red single button, which instructs the app on phone to do all this stuff on camera.
Exactly what I was trying to say. 🙂
Can you actually shoot raw with the API now? If memory serves only jpegs could be shot using the API before.
I am not 100% sure, I do not have A7x camera, only RX100II and A99. On RX100II you can set camera to RAW+JPEG and RAWs will be captured and stored on SD card when controlled remotely.
There is a Camera Setup API that can be used. Not sure how extensive the access is.
Oh, and I’m pretty sure you couldn’t use manual mode from the API before either.
Latest release was today 🙂 And it’s still beta. I’m sure work is continuously in progress 🙂
The API reference suggests that you can – set the mode dial to M and API provides methods for setting Fno/ShutterSpeed/ISO. This is new, however.
Is focus stacking possible through this API?
No. It can’t “manually” focus drive-by-wire lenses, which would be required for focus stacking.
They did add the possibility of changing the focus modes with it, in one of the updates, though, so perhaps they will eventually include that too.
it’s useless, then
I have experience with assemblers, C/C++, HTTP and JSON, but Android helloworld scares crap out of me.
We, the people using Sony cameras, in order to get more perfect photography…
Why do people keep asking for uncompressed raw instead of lossless raw?
They don’t. There are 2 trolls here who just like to go on about uncompressed RAW. Most of us are OK with compressed RAW, but of course lossless compressed would be great.
Unfortunately there are more than just 2 trolls:
If it was right what you claimed, *lossless* RAW would be the used wording in the interview 🙁
Yeah, maybe you are right. Don’t get myself why people keep insisting on an uncompressed fat raw file.
I hope Sony makes two different versions of firmware update:
One with lossless RAW for us.
One with uncompressed RAW for those who insist on.
I don’t need to choose between both options 🙂
Or just give compressed and lossless options. Though I suspect most of the people who complain about raw compression also complain about the jpeg engine…
Because they don’t know better and technology terms are confusing them.
They need to specify bit depth as well. 12-bit lossless raw is not enough. Sony keeps releasing statements about how their SNR & dynamic range is great, but if you can’t store 14 bits or more it’s of little use.
Bit depth is not the issue. The current 14 (lossy) compressed RAW files can cover the same (DR) range from bright to dark, just with less steps, of which some can become visible when the noisefloor is low enough (meaning that the usual noise dithering that visually hides those steps, is no longer doing its work) and there are extreme dark/light transitions in shadows.
Compressed isn’t the issue either, since there is lossless compression too (think about all those RAR/ZIP programs we use to compress computer software). The issue is (visually) lossy compression. It would be nice to have lossless compression as an option for example.
uncompressed = lossless. compressed lossless can reduce file size only slightly depends on the photo. compressed lossy gives you small sizes
If you want to compress noise, true.
But for most pictures with natural color gradients like blue skys, run-length encoding may be small as 11+7, or even smaller.
certainly not RLE… you will have lots of photon shot noise
Sorry – mixed up the terms.
I meant a variable length code for deltas. I am not sure if the length-code should be stored for each value or only for a small group of values.
The effectiveness of lossless compression is only dependent on the effectiveness of the compression algorithm and the amount of processing power available. If you’ve ever used a program like WinRar, which allows you to tailor compression of documents, you don’t lose data when you use a higher compression, you simply exhaust more CPU cycles getting it smaller.
Thanks Perry – good explanation. And don’t worry about processing power or compression speed:
Compared to WinRar a lossless RAW-compression algorithm is way simpler and way faster, too. It is not as effective as WinRar in terms of size reduction – but the output is still way smaller than uncompresed and it can be compressed in real-time.
Or flac. Higher levels of compression are more cpu intensive (in terms of processing power and time). You get a smaller file without any impact on playback.
Depends on the photo, of course, but “only slightly” is still about 20%. That’s 20% more photos. My point was that people should be focusing on the lossless part in their request to Sony, not the uncompressed part.
actually, modern compression algorithms can compress it a lot, even more than sonys 11+7. but cpus were expensive back then when sony chose 11+7
Exactly. It’s all about the algorithm. Just look at what you can do with audio these days compared to 5 years ago…
Because for those of us who can push files to certain limits can often see compression artifacts, or posterization, which would normally not be visible if the files had lesser compression, allowing for greater malleability of colours, gradients, shadows and maybe (not confirmed) highlights too.
That has nothing to do with compression. That has to do with LOSSY compression. Compression only makes the files smaller. Lossy compression sacrifices subtle information.
I, for one (and probably for more than one), don’t want uncompressed files. I want losslessly compressed files, so the files are no bigger than they need to be, but still preserve all the data captured by the sensor.
This.
Why not return to the way they used to do it with a900…?
The choice between RAW and CRAW (touted as lossless) was taken away after that camera.
Wouldn’t you like to have the choice? I would, because I can see the difference in extreme highlight blending with mid-tones.
Too bad you are getting overinflated decompressed RAW files that are much bigger than they need to be. AKA Oversized RAW! (or ORAW for short)
Examples? Didn’t think so.
https://photographylife.com/reviews/sony-a7-ii/3
Examples. Now think.
https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/2015/03/18/we-are-not-alone-sonys-lossy-117-bit-raw-files/
off topic. I think in the US people tend to read about experiences without digging into technical side of the story. In Asian technical disadvantages is going to stir up some real storm. I have seen people in the States never checked their lens for de-centering….
Step 1 in getting a new lens in my book. Make sure it was built properly. If not return it. The sham is that most sellers put it right back into stock because 98% of the people out there aren’t disciplined enough to test their gear.
Some people never give a thought about checking.
To ensure the message to Sony is as clear and simple as possible: Don’t mess with the raw data. As LOSSLESS compression apparently is too difficult for Sony to understand (or implement), just start with no compression at all. We can deal with bigger files, at least give us the unmolested raw data.
lossless compression is easy – and no problem for the company that makes A7Rii
They will be molested… all manufacturers except Canon are known to mess with raw.
I believe fuji raw files are uncompressed 14bit files. They are always the same.file size
uncompressed and unmolested are not the same thing
The raw files are actually great, it’s just Lightroom and them don’t really mix (improvement with LR 6.1). However this is a Sony forum so I’ll keep on topic
If they are the same file size there is a problem. I just did a scan of ~1600 Nikon D810 NEF files – they range from 72,091 up to 77,065 in file sizes. Now and then there are 2 or 3 of the same size but the vast majority are different in sizes.
Incorrect. They are always the sale size as they are uncompressed. My Nikon Nefs all varied as well, but this is because they are lossless compressed raw files. The Fuji Rafs are less less uncompressed raw files, so it’s the same file size regardless if you shoot with the lens cap on or s detailed scene. My Nikon Nefs were great files, and that is what Sony users are wanting (lossless raw files, but they can still be compressed)
I think you know exactly that with ‘un-molested’, I meant the kind of lossy compression Sony applies. There are other modifications that are much less egregious like hot pixel mapping.
I think part of the problem is the comments are aimed at people who don’t have a clue what lossless compression is and will just see compression = bad.
And to have that constituency also bark at Sony, we simplify the message such that can get behind it as well.
Because they don’t understand.
42 mpix in 14bit uncompressed will give you a RAW file of 73.5MB. At the same time they ask for 10 frames per second (= 735 MB/s) and of course maximum image quality. There is no storage media that can write even close to 735 MB/s.
What people want is compressed RAW, lossless if possible. Personally, I take the 11+4 compression any day and have relatively small RAW files. The compression was never a problem for me, and I push my A99 RAW files pretty strong.
bravo! that’s the question. If they design a high level camera for still shoots, well the top standard is 14bit uncompressed raw image or let improve it in the direction of MF backs, if they like to win the market. If they are proposing a high level video camera, ok it’s different, another direction and evolution. Compromises make some people unhappy and 11+4 is something less even if imperceptible.
Willkommen zurück Anton.
Es sieht so aus als ob Deine Gebete erhört wurden 🙂
Ich kann nur hoffen dass Sony mit uncompressed in Wirklichkeit lossless meint.
Can someone clarify how the storage calculation works?
14 bit refers to a single color, and there are three, right? RGB = Red, Green, Blue, assuming there is no transparency aka alpha channel.
14 bit for a single color means 14 * 3 = 42 bit for a single pixel, yes?
bits_per_pixel = 42
pixels_per_sensor = 42 mega = 42 * 1024 * 1024 = 44040192
bits_per_sensor = pixels_per_sensor * bits_per_pixel = 1849688064
bits_per_byte = 8
bytes_per_sensor = bits_per_sensor / bits_per_byte = 231211008
mbytes_per_sensor = bytes_per_sensor / (1024 * 1024) = 220
So I get 220 mb for a single image uncompressed.
Is the logic right or am I grossly missing something? Thanks.
Your logic is correct – but there is a thing you don’t know:
A pixel in a bitmap-file with 24bit color-depth is a RGB composite, each 8 bit.
But in RAW* things are different. What in RAW is called “pixel” is in reality one photo-cell, and it is either Red or Green or Blue. A RAW-file-viewer converts a single-colored “RAW-pixel” into a RGB-colored pixel on screen by mixing it with its adjacent RAW-pixels of different color.
In theory you could make a very easy RAW converter that always takes 4 RAW-pixels from a quad:
RG
GB
and generate 1 single RGB-pixel out of it. The disadvantage of this method is that you lose fine-details and resolution.
*RAW-files for Bayer-sensors
Hi LittleCam,
ok thanks, so in Bayer sensor raw it is just a single color and the two missing ones get interpolated in the converted image file..
Now I understand, how the 73 MB in the raw file comes together.. Thanks.
>There is no storage media that can write even close to 735 MB/s.
PCI-E SSDs? That’s why there’s a buffer btw.
If they provide a lossless raw file format, I will likely buy this camera. Until then, they won’t be getting any money from me. Thank goodness they are considering providing it via a firmware update.
Before I go ballls deep on the A7RII I’m wondering now…what are the possibilities of the A7SII having this focusing system. I mean, it would be absolutely insane. More expensive or nah? I don’t know if to wait or just drop the cash.
Give me your cash. I’ll make better use of it than Sony 🙂
If by A7SII you mean bigger pixels, it can’t be the same. (you can’t scale pixel linearly)
OSPDAF on NEX-6 with big pixels didn’t work as well as A6000 with small pixels.
What about a second card slot?
They should’ve started using OCC copper a long time ago
You should have told them that a long time ago.
I’m pretty sure this is a mix of lost in translation and some misuse of tech speak. Uncompressed RAW has no function other than lengthening writing times to memory cards and transferring to computers. I’m sure everybody is actually talking about ‘lossless compression’. I would like to see that too. I need every bit of quality I can squeeze out of my RAW file for commercial work. That would be a good thing.
Actually, if all we need is to avoid posterisation, it can be fixed by using Floyd-Steinberg dithering before compressing too.
If the discrete color value isn’t there it can’t be created or injected accurately.
more color values is a METHOD, and there are other methods
Let’s see side-by-side comparison?
I think 42 mpx was a great compromise. As far as my research shows, pretty much all lenses can’t resolve that high of resolution.
Lenses do not consist of pixels. Put `73 lens on a 400 mpix sensor and you`ll get 80 Mpix detail… Put Otus on it, and you`ll get 180 Mpix. (thats dxo method.) Every lens will be boosted with better sensor, every sensor will be boosted by better lens, they work completely different and supplement each other. It is not computer hardware where one component is deffinitely limited by another.
But lenses have diffraction discs. And where does dxo claim that a lens resolves 180MP on FF?
DXO doesn’t put lenses on anything. They calculate scores. All of DXOs ‘scores’ are estimates and often they get them absolutely wrong.
M43 has +60MP eq. to FF sensor – so the systems best lenses are wasted on it?
You need a single pixel sensor. billion ISO without noise and no lens needed.
Buy better lenses or do better research.
What precisely isn’t true? I read your first post and you describe an issue in 2-3 of your photos when pushed upwards of 3 stops. Any file will start falling apart one way or another, under extreme shooting conditions, followed by heavy PP. Also, I am not sure what you are describing is related to the compression, the problem generally presents differently.
Did you read the rest of the post and viewed the other examples?
If you read it in its entirety, you will see that I pointed out that I pushed them to the extreme for ease of web viewing but that the anomalies can be seen at less extreme pushes.
This issue doesn’t exist with the 12-bit cameras, but only the 14-bit. Being that the “lossy” compression is taking 14-bits of data and cutting it down to an 11-bit + 7bit format, a lot of information is cut out. While you would expect it to look no worse than its 12-bit counterparts, it does when the compression doesn’t interpolate the data properly, mainly in high contrast scenes. It doesn’t happen often, but when it does it can be a challenge to correct.
So, yes, I do believe the compression method used by Sony is the problem.
Bingo.
Question #3: silliest question ever. Why not 50 MP? same as “Why not 32 MP? Why not 64 MP…”
btw: The RAW compression is lossless, so what advantage does any customer expect from uncompressed RAW files? More SD cards needed?
Doesn’t matter – it gives marketing another box to tick and reviews one less thing to say “yes, but…” about. In 6 years of shooting Sony raw, I’ve never found raw compression to be an issue.
Sony’s RAW compression is not lossless, that’s the issue.
Pay attention to what was said – and not said.
‘Sony could provide that via simple firmware upgrade!’
That doesn’t say whether the A7RII will have uncompressed or lossless cRAW (but I think it indicates the camera will ship with the same lossy cRAW), nor does it say which (if any other) cameras would get the FW update.
I ask again: Will this be possible for cameras other than the A7RII?
I don’t know any shooter the shoots the Nikon uncompressed….pointless.
I do with every shot. https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/2015/06/06/sony-mirrorless-in-three-simple-graphics/
Good for you….:)
Coming in the next firmware update 😉
Compressed or uncompressed doesn’t matter. Sony should realize the fact that pixel peepers and tech freaks are potential buyers of this camera at this price and they must provide them with LOSSLESS RAW. Lossy RAW could be a serious drawback. I don’t understand why Sony has difficulty offering such a thing, it doesn’t sound to be a formidable task.
It’s like the Y2k code. It’s easier to build around smaller files. Sony would never get the FPS they had in the NEX7 (as an example) with full size files. Now processing power and storage allow for it.
About time, amazed the lack of understanding in Sony of how important Image Quality is to photographers, Lossless RAW is a must, get it done already Sony….
Just say no to lossless raw! As someone who knows what pros need (despite never having sold an image in my life) I’m running out of excuses as to why Sony don’t make pro cameras.
I demand 6 SD card slots, a USB8 connector and a service engineer following me 24/7 in a fully fitted lab lorry. Pros like me refuse to shoot without these basics.
I would really love to buy this camera. It’s almost perfect. For me though, I just can’t bring myself to spend this kind of money on a camera without USB3. I tether almost all of my studio shoots. A lossless RAW would also be preferred. I guess my A7r will just have to do for another year until they make a MkIII which will hopefully have USB3, and I’m sure they will have the Raw issue sorted by then.
But what an amazing camera. Sony’s really done something great here.
“I guess my A7r will just have to do for another year until they make a MkIII which will hopefully have USB3”
I would hope that Sony’s cameras a year from now, @james_ogilvie:disqus , will feature a Thunderbolt 3-enabled Type-C port (40Gbps), which has in-built backwards compatibility with USB 3.1 Gen 2 (10Gbps).
How about imbedding the Lens profiles into the raw files… or have that feature as an option.
Exactly…
So its a Fullframe NX1?
Prioritize 14 bit SONY. No sale until you do.
I owned a A7R with FE55 and FE35 and subsequently A7II , sold both of them and went back to Nikon, still keeps the FE55 for the day when Sony start giving us un-compressed RAW.