Sony a7R II vs III

Have questions about the equipment used for macro- or micro- photography? Post those questions in this forum.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

Macrero
Posts: 1166
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:17 am
Location: Valladolid , Spain

Post by Macrero »

ray_parkhurst wrote:Just looks like they didn't critically-focus properly on the Sony picture.
That actually might be the case, but compared to the a7R III in "normal mode" and other cameras, the difference is still there. It would be very unlikely that the K-1 were the only properly focused camera...

You can download the RAW files and process them to your liking:

URL HERE

- Macrero

[Admin edit RJL for formatting]
https://500px.com/macrero - Amateurs worry about equipment, Pros worry about money, Masters worry about Light

Lou Jost
Posts: 5944
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

I saw one website in which the reviewer noted that during pixel shift photos, he heard a click, then a delay in silence during which the four pixel-shifted photos were taken, and then another click. From this he concluded that the camera had EFCS!

Many people seem to confuse EFCS and silent shutter. Ricoh/Pentax adds to the mystery by saying that their new electronic shutter "almost" eliminates shutter vibration. A true silent shutter should completely eliminate it, unless they are counting the vibration of pressing the shutter button....

JohnyM
Posts: 463
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2013 7:02 am

Post by JohnyM »

I just wonder, what's the advantage of pixel shift over taking 4x shots for panorama on 2x magnification?
It's not time, it's not resolution, what is it?

According to my guts A7rII sensor hits best sharpness on EA8 and absolute detail resolving on EA16. If there were half pixel shift mode available i would need EA 2.8 1:1 lens to get max sharpness.
Last edited by JohnyM on Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

Macrero
Posts: 1166
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:17 am
Location: Valladolid , Spain

Post by Macrero »

Lou Jost wrote:I saw one website in which the reviewer noted that during pixel shift photos, he heard a click, then a delay in silence during which the four pixel-shifted photos were taken, and then another click. From this he concluded that the camera had EFCS!

Many people seem to confuse EFCS and silent shutter. Ricoh/Pentax adds to the mystery by saying that their new electronic shutter "almost" eliminates shutter vibration. A true silent shutter should completely eliminate it, unless they are counting the vibration of pressing the shutter button....
I just contacted Ricoh Spain asking about the e-shutter in the K-1. Will report back when I receive an answer.
https://500px.com/macrero - Amateurs worry about equipment, Pros worry about money, Masters worry about Light

Beatsy
Posts: 2105
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 3:10 am
Location: Malvern, UK

Post by Beatsy »

JohnyM wrote:I just wonder, what's the advantage of pixel shift over taking 4x shots for panorama on 2x magnification?
It's not time, it's not resolution, what is it?

According to my guts A7rII sensor hits best sharpness on EA8 and absolute detail resolving on EA16. If there were half pixel shift mode available i would need EA 2.8 1:1 lens to get max sharpness.
I guess it dodges the issue of parallax errors (in "real world" panos, not macro "mosaic-style" stitching). Rotating the lens around the nodal point will fix that but you'd need more than 4 images to cover the same area at 2x mag (allowing overlap between images). So there's less image data to deal with too.

But IMO, a simple super-resolution technique would work just as acceptably - and with any camera. https://petapixel.com/2015/02/21/a-prac ... photoshop/

Edit: what's happened to the formatting on this thread? It's gone yards wide with really long lines so I have to scroll horizontally to see everything.
Last edited by Beatsy on Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:24 am, edited 1 time in total.

Lou Jost
Posts: 5944
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

Macrero, that's great!!!

JohnyM, I don't understand your question. Sony's version of pixel shift does not change the pixel dimensions of the image. It just makes sure that R,G, and B data are taken at each pixel location. There is no sub-pixel resolution, it is just fixing the defects caused by the Bayer sensor, and it does so in the most efficient way possible.

The Oly implementation does give sub-pixel resolution, in addition to fixing the problems caused by the Bayer filter. In this case, if you want to make full use of the sub-pixel resolution, you probably need a lens that is sharp at a wider aperture than you would need for standard shooting (see discussion above). But even if you don't have such a fast lens, you don't lose anything by using pixel shift. The image will be no worse than the normal image, and it will lose the defects caused by the Bayer filter.

Lou Jost
Posts: 5944
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

Beatsy, that method is very inefficient, requiring very many more photos and slight random camera movements in all directions. Controlled pixel-shifting algorithms use the minimum possible number of shots to achieve their effects.

JohnyM
Posts: 463
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2013 7:02 am

Post by JohnyM »

Im aware that Sony shift is full pixel - which does not improve resolution at all. Just wondering what if it was available.

Olympus 20mpx half pixel shifts should improve resolution. But with 3,3 pixel pitch divided by 2 = ~ 1,515 pixel pitch what EA would you need?
It's way eazier to get telecentric lens and shoot panorama on higher magnification IMO, also overall faster. Am i wrong?

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23561
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Beatsy wrote:what's happened to the formatting on this thread? It's gone yards wide with really long lines so I have to scroll horizontally to see everything.
It was that long and unbreakable URL that was exposed in Macrero's post a few above here, at http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... 355#233355 .

I edited it to hide the URL content behind a short text, seems to be OK now.

--Rik

Lou Jost
Posts: 5944
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

I suppose if the lens were perfectly telecentric, so that you had no stitching problems, it might be faster than the PEN F implementation, which requires about 16s for processing each set. I think the E1 Mark II does it much faster.

The result would not be the same, though, because the Oly takes eight shots rather than four, reducing noise more. If you did that, at a minimum of 2s per shot using your telecentric lens (1 sec delay between shots), your eight stacks will take exactly as long to shoot as the Oly PEN F's single stack, but you will also have to do eight stack set-ups, and stitching, and averaging. And you need a good truly telecentric lens at the desired magnification.

I think the pixel-shifting is easier, and on the latest Oly cameras it may also be faster.

Whatever EA you need for the pixel-shift, wouldn't you also need that same EA in twice-higher m telecentric lens in your approach?

Lou Jost
Posts: 5944
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

Macrero, I've been trying all day to find something definitive about the Pentax "electronic shutter". The balance of what I read is in favor of a fully electronic shutter. I think the fact that the flash is disabled in this mode strongly supports that conclusion. Are there any cameras that disable their flash for EFCS? I don't think so. In fact it is common for cameras to let us select first curtain or second curtain flash synch, and the latter would work just as well in EFCS mode. So if flash is disabled in this mode, it must be because they are using a fully electronic shutter.

Edit to add that I now see some websites that very clearly say it is just an EFCS. So I am worried again...

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 6052
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

Lou Jost wrote:Are there any cameras that disable their flash for EFCS?
Canon and Nikon do
Pau

Macrero
Posts: 1166
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 8:17 am
Location: Valladolid , Spain

Post by Macrero »

Lou,

I am pretty much sure now that it is EFCS in Pixel-shift mode and the FW update just extends it to single exposure in Live View. But I will tell for sure when I get a reply from Ricoh.
https://500px.com/macrero - Amateurs worry about equipment, Pros worry about money, Masters worry about Light

Justwalking
Posts: 137
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2018 3:54 pm
Location: Russia

Post by Justwalking »

Beatsy wrote: I've tested that and can't find any significant differences between 12-bit and 14-bit output - or compressed vs uncompressed RAW (an option on all the high-end Alpha cameras).
Small comment about examples with 12 and 14 bits
All .jpeg on our monitors are only 8-bits. )

Lou Jost
Posts: 5944
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

Monitors also have a very poor color gamut compared to print, especially in greens. Print applications are much more demanding than monitor-based applications.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic