[Mikesul]

Also came up on D800 and E too. I hope that Sony can get on the Lossless compressed. Not bothered at the compressed, just as long as it is lossless.

But the lossless people always cite the D800 as an example of the losey not being necessary.

[itshimitis]

But the lossless people always cite the D800 as an example of the losey not being necessary.

It is one of the weaknesses of the Sony sensors that they tend to posterise if you push blues in skies too hard where they meet brighter light - e.g. in the direction of a sunset/rise. They have oodles of headroom in the shadows department but blues and cyans highlights can be problematic in my experience. When I had the D800/E, I usually had it on lossless compressed.

[Mikesul]

It is one of the weaknesses of the Sony sensors that they tend to posterise if you push blues in skies too hard where they meet brighter light - e.g. in the direction of a sunset/rise. They have oodles of headroom in the shadows department but blues and cyans highlights can be problematic in my experience. When I had the D800/E, I usually had it on lossless compressed.

Thanks for the explanation. This, however, does not seem to be related to the type of compressions Sony uses in some modes but is a separate issue. Also is it only a FF sensor issue? I do not recall seeing complaints about it for the K-3 or D7000 series. In any case your explanation is appreciated.

[luftfluss]

diglloyd didn't take that shot, it was sent in to him by someone else, who knows what's been done to it... look at the sizes that are posted, 100% at 828x412, and 100% at 286x414.

an a7r image is 7360x4912, how much would you see after processing?

nasim over at photographylife has also trolled this subject pretty hard, and just like diglloyd, he doesn't link to original raw files, he just posts super-tiny 100% nighttime crops.

ruggiex claims to have seen this problem in photos that he took, but you'll notice that he's totally failed to prove it with any raw files.

I have no reason to believe the photos posted by diglloyd were doctored in any way. I also believe that my photography would be unaffected by whatever peccadilloes this "lossy RAW" may introduce. That said, Sony should knock it off and quell this tempest in a teacup... but I doubt they will, as they are historically an arrogant company.

So tempted by the low prices on used A7r's.

[osv]

if we look at all the changes that were made with the a7rii, it's nothing short of revolutionary... not evolutionary, it's ground-breaking, they have the engineering expertise.

sony has been using the same lossy raw compression scheme on all their cameras, for years now... they probably asked their focus groups if lossy raw compression mattered, and just like in this thread, no one was able to come up with any real-world photos that showed a problem.

people sometimes get an a7r and try to use it as a p&s af rig, i.e., they want to do things like shoot grandkids with flash at slow shutter speeds... not it's strong suit.

until the a7rii comes out, the a7r is currently the best mf camera on the market; it has, for instance, the highest level of evf magnification out of all the a7* series cameras... watch out for things like the lower shutter speed ranges that some people have shutter shock issues with, for longer lenses especially i sometimes use ~1/3xfocal length rule.

[kadajawi]

Sony Q&A: The must-have sensor tech of the future?

[Ratcheteer]

It is one of the weaknesses of the Sony sensors that they tend to posterise

i dont think its the sensor more likely the programing

sony has been using the same lossy raw compression scheme on all their cameras, for years now

sony also programed in chromatic aberration removal and lens distortion correction which also gets applied to the raw data (at least on the nex lines don't know about the new alpha lines), that said the real culprit behind the image artifacts could actually be image processing not the file compression

but we will never know, being proprietary and all

they are historically an arrogant company.

if you act superior, the mark will believe your superior (also slapping zeiss on your products help)

[osv]

photozone claimed that in their testing, they saw that sony had touched the raw files on the fe35/2.8 lens, whatever that means... so it's certainly possible with sony ff mirrorless.

[luftfluss]

if we look at all the changes that were made with the a7rii, it's nothing short of revolutionary... not evolutionary, it's ground-breaking, they have the engineering expertise.

sony has been using the same lossy raw compression scheme on all their cameras, for years now... they probably asked their focus groups if lossy raw compression mattered, and just like in this thread, no one was able to come up with any real-world photos that showed a problem.

people sometimes get an a7r and try to use it as a p&s af rig, i.e., they want to do things like shoot grandkids with flash at slow shutter speeds... not it's strong suit.

until the a7rii comes out, the a7r is currently the best mf camera on the market; it has, for instance, the highest level of evf magnification out of all the a7* series cameras... watch out for things like the lower shutter speed ranges that some people have shutter shock issues with, for longer lenses especially i sometimes use ~1/3xfocal length rule.

If I were to acquire the A7r, mostly I would use it with m42 glass and on a tripod or with pretty high shutter speeds, at least 1/(2*FL). I doubt I'd go longer than 200mm - I like landscape photos that focus on a specific aspect of a landscape, rather than panoramic.

[Mikesul]

photozone claimed that in their testing, they saw that sony had touched the raw files on the fe35/2.8 lens, whatever that means... so it's certainly possible with sony ff mirrorless.

In Camera Lens correction?

[osv]

yes, in-camera, fwiw: "The situation changes when looking at the uncorrected data. At fully open aperture, the falloff is a hefty 2.6EV. Stopping down to f/8 gives you 1.6EV which is still not good. Please note that the auto-correction effect is clearly visible in the image corners - due to the signal amplification they are more noisy than the image center. It is interesting to note that the RAW files are also touched when activating the auto-correction in the camera."
Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA (Sony SEL35F28Z) - Review / Test Report - Analysis

haven't seen that with any other sony lens on the camera??

[philbaum]

if we look at all the changes that were made with the a7rii, it's nothing short of revolutionary... not evolutionary, it's ground-breaking, they have the engineering expertise.

sony has been using the same lossy raw compression scheme on all their cameras, for years now... they probably asked their focus groups if lossy raw compression mattered, and just like in this thread, no one was able to come up with any real-world photos that showed a problem.

until the a7rii comes out, the a7r is currently the best mf camera on the market; it has, for instance, the highest level of evf magnification out of all the a7* series cameras... watch out for things like the lower shutter speed ranges that some people have shutter shock issues with, for longer lenses especially i sometimes use ~1/3xfocal length rule.

Coming from my Pentax background, i was initially uncomfortable about the lossy compression on RAW, not so much concerned anymore. Wish they would offer the option, like Nikon, though. Compression vs lossy compression.

Its going to be the A7rII for me. It presses all my buttons. With Sony offering 2 quiet options on the A7RII - Elect. first curtain and rolling shutter - perfect for the theatre shooting that i do.

Designing any product always involves compromises. Many folks don't ask the follow-up question - why did Sony go with such an aggressive compression idea. I don't know for sure - just a guess - but i suspect that when they designed the early e-models, they looked for ideas which would allow them to build smaller lighter cameras than their competitors. We might not like the compromises they chose, but one can't ignore the linkage to the small designs they were able to produce. At 500 gm, the FF A7 is 300 gms lighter than my APS 800 gm K3. Now, since then they've back-tracked and added more weight into critical areas to make the A7II 600 gm about. And one of the interesting things that happened, was some reviewers, like DPReview, criticized Sony for making their A7II heavier. Even at 600 gms, its still 200 gms lighter than my K3. Of course, the A7 series doesn't compare to any Pentax camera for their water resistance - ahhh....lifes full of compromises.

I agree with OSV - REVOLUTIONARY.

[Ratcheteer]

Designing any product always involves compromises

i think part of the compromise was to do with the memory stick, by the time 2006 rolled up the new revision of SD cards (SDHC) had eaten away the speed and storage advantage memory sticks had over SD, and it would take them 3 years to catch up only to be outdone again the same year by SDXC