Sony NEX-7 - comparison with a77 sensor

I've revisited this question of how similar (or otherwise) the sensors in the a77 and NEX-7 are. This time I used the 16-50mm f/2.8 kit lens from the a77. 

I've done a series of comparisons from ISO 100 to ISO 6400. I've left out ISO 12800 since its quite difficult to see anything in the mess of noise that those files produce. All images were processed in the same way using the default Adobe Camera Raw settings in Photoshop.

Clicking here or on the image below takes you to a folder on flickr, with all the (full-size) comparison shots.

Each image has a metadata screen shot attached to it, so you can see the settings. I used f/11 throughout. By clicking on the comparison shots > Actions > View all sizes > Original you will see a full-size jpg version of the file. (Saved at jpg. level 8)

Hopefully, even with flickrs rendition of the images, you should be able to see that there is a (very slight) difference in the files. Once again the NEX-7 files are slightly softer, slightly less noisy and also slightly darker. You will see from the metadata that the shutter speeds are pretty consistent between the cameras, with one or two exceptions.

It doesn't prove much, and for my uses, mostly at low ISO settings I have no problem with either. On the NEX-7 I will be using lenses like the Zeiss 24mm and m-mount lenses anyway, which will eliminate that slight difference in sharpness.

By using the 16-50mm lens on the NEX-7 with the mirrored adapter, I think I have taken the possibility of the a77's translucent mirror affecting the results out of the equation, and my only guess at what is causing this is either a slightly stronger Anti-aliasing / low pass filter in the NEX-7 or a difference in the processing engine. Another possibility, I suppose, is that the mirror a-mount adapter is affecting this.

And while it may be of interest to pixel-peeping geeks like me, for the most part its not that significant, and certainly doesn't affect my opinion on either camera. I've more or less decided (well for today anyway!) to keep both the NEX-7 and a77, and ebay my 5n's and Samsung NX200. Ann is now trying out the GX1 to see if she prefers it over the GF3 for a go anywhere camera, and I'm hoping that she will opt for that, since I'd love to keep that around, and even if I don't use it much (since it won't be mine!!) it would be good to know that its still in the house.

Sony NEX-7 - A few tests and samples

Here are a few full-size jpgs. from the NEX-7.

Click on image > flickr > Actions > View all sizes > Original

ISO 100

ISO 800

ISO 6400

Some comparisons with the a77 - using the same lens - 30mm f/2.8 Macro.

ISO 100

ISO 800

ISO 6400

Interestingly it seems the NEX-7 files are slightly less noisy and slightly less sharp. Indicating possibly a slightly stronger Anti-Aliasing / Low Pass filter?

Finally here are three raw .dng files available for download. As ever these are copyright, for personal evaluation and must not be shared, or re-posted without permission or used in any other way whatsoever.

There's nothing here that surprises me - having used the a77 I knew what to expect, and I'll be working out my own processing parameters when I get some "real world" files to work with.

As I think can be clearly seen, this isn't a great sensor for high ISO work, but then I'm sure nobody is surprised by that.

Irresistable

I always knew I wouldn't be able to resist the silver Panasonic GX1. As soon as I saw the magic "in stock" on the dealers websites any resistance I might have had crumbled. I always loved the GF1, and the upgraded GX1 with 16MP, decent viewfinder AND retro styling pushes all my buttons.

It is very pretty, very well made, the viewfinder works very well and as usual my latest period of time without a m4/3 camera has lasted a few days only. 

My wife Ann, has also decided to give the GF3 a try, and because of a complicated kit deal with christmas cashback offers we ended up getting a couple of lenses pretty cheaply with the GF3 almost "thrown in" or at least at a "real" price that we should exceed when (and if) its sold on ebay. Certainly not my kind of camera, as its VERY small, and doesn't have a you know what. I'll be giving it a review in the near future as I will with the GX1.

Multi-image stitched panoramas with a Sony a77

All images - Sony a77, 30mm f/2.8 Macro, Multi images stitched together using photomerge in Photoshop. All original files, when edited are in excess of 100MB. Who needs a Nikon D800!?

Samsung NX200 review - Part 13 - Comparison between a77, NEX-5n and NX200

Some interesting results here.

I firstly compared the Sony a77, Sony NEX-5n and the Samsung NX200 using the same lens. My Sony a-mount 30mm f/2.8 macro lens, which via adapters I can use on all three cameras. I used an aperture of f/8, and three different ISO settings 100, 800 and 3200. All were processed identically in Capture One from raw. In the first version of each test the files are kept at their relative sizes, in the second version I downsized both the a77 and NX200 files to the same size as the NEX-5n files.

As usual for a large high-res version, click on the image > flickr > Actions > View all sizes > Original.

ISO 100

ISO 800

ISO 3200

Since the tests were carried out using the translucent mirror technology in the a77 and the 5n adapter, the Samsung has faster shutter speeds for all images. 

The second test was carried out using the kit lenses for each system. I used ISO 100. f/8 and a 35mm focal length.

Again the first is with the files at their relative sizes and the second with the a77 and NX200 files being downsized to the same size as the NEX-5n.

I will let you you decide for yourselves what the results indicate, but one thing struck me straightaway. That is just how much impact the Samsung kit lens is having on the impressive files I'm seeing from the NX200. I noticed yesterday when I was looking at the results from the Sony lenses I was using that they didn't have the same crispness that I was getting off the Samsung 18-55mm kit lens. That seems to be case here also.

In terms of any kind of conclusions, it does seem that the NEX-5n sensor lives up to its reputation as being very impressive indeed. It was interesting that the NX200 files seem to be better at higher ISO's than the a77 files. Indeed the a77 files seem to be pretty much the worst overall. What this means for the NEX-7 which uses the same unit is open to question. Obviously no SLT means that all shutter speeds will be "shifted down" about 1/2 stop, which will improve the low light performance and it remains to be seen as to whether the 24MP sensor will be exactly the same as the one in the a77, or whether it has been "tweaked" in the cameras software. 

To be honest at low ISO's all of these results from the three cameras are spectacularly good, and all are capable of huge reproductions. However since this is a Samsung NX200 review, it does show once again just how good this sensor is. It also indicates that Samsung know how how to design and build a kit lens as well.

Noise comparison between Sony a77 and NEX-5n - the jpg version

Below is a comparison of the Sony a77 and NEX-5n cameras using the same 30mm f/2.8 a-mount lens. The lens was fitted to the 5n using the translucent mirror adapter. All images are out of camera jpgs. completely unaltered.

N.B. The a77 images were all taken using the very latest firmware v1.04. 

To see the high-res file click on image > flickr > view all sizes > original.

As before the NEX-5n shows way less noise.

Noise comparison between Sony a77 and NEX-5n

There are two recent pieces that give a somewhat strange verdict on the noise levels between Sony cameras.

The first is the dreaded DxO and their comparison of the NEX-5n, NEX-7 and a77 cameras. They have a much better result for the NEX-7 as compared to the a77. This according to Sony is the same sensor, so how can it have a "worse" reading? This is skewed by the high ISO results. The comparison between those two cameras and the NEX-5n is here:- http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/734|0/%28brand%29/Sony/%28appareil2%29/736|0/%28brand2%29/Sony/%28appareil3%29/737|0/%28brand3%29/Sony

The other is a piece by Michael Reichmann at Luminous Landscape on the NEX-7 compared to the NEX-5n in terms of noise. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sony_nex_7_rolling_review.shtml#28

Despite providing evidence to the contrary this article asserts:- "But, and it's a very big but, now go to the top of the samples where the NEX-7 files have been downsampled to the same size as the NEX-5n. What you'll see, or at least what I and several other photographers to whom I've shown these agree on, is that the differences are reduced to a quibble, even at 100% on screen. In prints or any non-pixel-peeping use of the images, there is really little to choose between them, except maybe at ISO 12,800 where the 5n has a slight advantage on screen, if not in real-world prints. Like I said – a quibble."

I don't have a NEX-7 to compare but I do have an a77 so I decided to do my own tests to see what was going on here.

The following is a comparison between the a77 and NEX-5n using the same lens, a Sony a-mount 30mm f/2.8 macro. Since I attached the lens to the NEX-5n using the translucent mirror adapter, this should take the effect of the mirror out of the equation. Many are currently speculating that the light loss from the mirror has affected the DxO results. We however have no confirmation of this since DxO are.... well.... DxO!!!

By clicking on this file through to flickr then Actions > View all sizes > Original you can see a large high-res version of this file. I also downsized the a77 files to the same size as the NEX-5n files, as Michael Reichmann did.

N.B. The a77 images were all taken using the very latest firmware v1.04.

As ever I processed these files from raw using the default setting in Adobe Camera Raw in Photoshop. Processing for each file was identical.

The first thing that becomes immediately obvious is that the a77 has a "cooler" colour balance. This isn't particularly significant as it can be very easily altered in processing. In terms of noise the a77 files are worse than the 5n equivalents, and by the time it gets to ISO 3200 and above the a77 images start to look quite unpleasant. Incidentally the jpg files from both these cameras are a lot better, but I thought a raw comparison would be more useful to see how they compare.

I followed this up by doing a comparison between a77 and NEX-5 files when the NEX-5n images are upsized to the same size as the a77 files. These are full-size files and are pretty huge. You can access them in the same way as before. Click on them > flickr > Actions > View all sizes > Original. Because of the size, I haven't done an all in one comparison but uploaded 4 separate files at particular ISO points.

ISO 100

ISO 800

ISO 3200

ISO 12800

Again the a77 files are noisier. They are sharper, but that tends to disappear when you apply some noise reduction to the files. 

So what does this prove? Well as ever I'm going to say what I think on the results from the cameras I have at my disposal. The NEX-5n I have produces "cleaner" files from raw than the a77 I have, when the files from the a77 are downsized to the same size as the 5n I have, and also when the 5n files are upsized to the same size as the a77. I obviously cannot make any comments on how this will apply to a NEX-7, though I might speculate a bit!!

I'll post a jpg comparison soon.

Weather for editing

Sony NEX-5n 18-55mm

The weather has been terrible lately, grey skies, mist and drizzle. However I've got a lot of editing and uploading done. Tomorrow hopefully - SUN!

Leica M9 Zeiss 50mm f/2 T* Planar

Sony NEX-5n Voigtlander 28mm f/2 Ultron

Sony A77 30mm f/2.8 Macro

Sony NEX-5n 18-200mm

Sony NEX-5n 30mm f/2.8 Macro

Olympus E-P3 12mm f/2