Photoclub Alpha

My review of the Alpha 550 has caused controversy because of the blue sky noise. I might as well say that over the last week, I’ve used the 550 in a wide range of conditions – some very bad conditions included – and its failure to match ISO 100 finesse would not worry me at all. The performance at higher ISO settings is so much improved it’s worth putting up with the minimum of ISO 200, and a touch more noise than the best ISO 100 results from the Sony CCD sensors.

Even so, something was clearly happening during the period of sunnier weather used for my earlier A550 tests. I used Auto ISO initially, because I had not realised how readily the camera will select settings right up to 1600. Auto ISO has thrown up some surprises. Here’s something to consider:

Please note that although ‘process’ symbols are shown with these Adobe Bridge/ACR images, the defaults were restored and then each picture was set back to defaults. They are all shown relative to each other in density, the image preview built by ACR. There is no question of DRO or any other tonal setting interfering with the apparent exposure – DRO does not affect the .ARW file, ACR discards any DRO generated embedded preview in my setup prefs, and DRO was not being used anyway.

It has already been noted by other reviewers that the A550 has considerably more headroom without clipping, even compared to the A350 which was already a top-ranking camera for dynamic range. This is what I meant when I compared its default images to Canon with Highlight Tone Preservation switched on, or KM/Sony older models using the Hi200 setting. This can mean that the A550 is really ISO 100 at its lowest on-sensor gain setting, but the exposure system is programmed to underexpose by a stop and the post-processing (BIONZ) is set up to boost the gain.

Why would Sony do this? Perhaps they read the many posts referring to the Alpha 900 and 700 ISO settings. The on-sensor gain controls the main ISO steps, but a rather cleaner post-process gain adds the 1/3rd step intervals. Experienced Alpha 900 users set ISO 320 manually because the sensor is at its optimum at roughly ISO 160 (DxO tests bear this out). The standard ISO 200 setting can produce more noise than ISO 320 because two different digital stages are used to produce the gain.

In search of superior high ISOs, they may have realised that the early gain stage (on the chip assembly) is inferior to the later BIONZ processor, and you can indeed get better high ISO by underexposing a lower ISO setting, then processing it with clipped blacks. That’s a Nikon technique, which has served them well. It’s also a technique used by experienced DSLR owners.

Now consider the four shots above. They are all taken at ‘ISO 200′ but the camera was set to auto ISO. Other shots in the same set show ISO 250, 500 etc confirming the auto ISO was in operation. They are taken in the afternoon in Scotland, so it is fairly near to the end of the day for sunshine by 14:49hrs, around an hour away. But the two locations at 50 minutes apart, 14:00hrs and 14:49hrs, should not have the extreme variation in exposure shown here.

Just what is going on for an exposure of 1/400th at f/11 to look correct at ISO 200, with the dark sandstone buildings of Jedburgh at the end of October? 1/400th at f/11 is the ISO 200 exposure for full sunshine in midsummer (aka f/16 light). You hardly ever find f/16 light in Britain unless you are on the beach, surrounded by pale concrete, in a field of golden corn or out on a lake.

50 minutes later, exposures range from 1/60th at f/11 to 1/100th at f/11 – that is, more or less, from two to three stops more. In fact these exposures are in line with what I would expect, it’s the 1/400th at f/11 which is the odd one out. I have no evidence to suggest that my CZ 16-80mm has an aperture which fails to stop down consistently.

Now look at some sky samples:

Here is an in-camera JPEG version which shows less noise – the in-camera process is equal to using much stronger NR in raw conversion than I would normally choose for ISO 200:

Now for the same processed from raw – notice that despite the noise, it is slightly more detailed or sharper:

This is a reprocessed second version of the original noisy sky instance. Here, I have used Adobe Camera Raw 5.6r1 defaults, which include some basic sharpening and also 25 on the chroma NR scale. No exposure adjustment is made at all. This view, by the way, looks more or less due north and it is not a case of a brighter sky underexposed; also, the stone and the chimney pots look normally exposed.

This is the 1/100th at f/11 shot, processed exactly the same way. It’s interesting in that I expected to see much lower noise, but in fact it’s much the same. The sky density is similar as well. The view is slightly more towards the east. While my Alpha 380, 200, 100 and even 700 shots are capable of showing blue sky noise at ISO 100 and as much as this as 200 it’s not as obtrusive.

Finally, this is the 1/60th exposure – perhaps more what would be expected at ISO 100 in this light with f/11. Here, I have set -1 EV exposure reduction in Adobe Camera Raw to get much the same final sky tone density. The noise is lower.

Checking other images I’ve taken since, I am now suspicious about the Auto ISO function in the Alpha 550, and whether it reports the gain applied to each shot accurately. It’s hard to reconcile the same ISO 200 setting shown in EXIF with the range of exposures encountered, and the actual exposure of the raw file. Yet ISO 250 was also selected for this shot taken a few minutes before the chimney shot:

This is also included in the main report (click image to view full size on pBase). If I darken the sky as much as the other examples, I get noise similar to the 1/60th ISO 200 clip, or better.

Since making these tests, I’ve started using the Alpha 550 only on fixed ISO settings, with some misgivings as intermediate gain like ISO 250 or 320 might possibly be yielding better results. I just feel something is happening in the BIONZ stage, perhaps involving analysis of the Auto ISO images and compensation for deviations from the reported EXIF Auto ISO setting. This is just a hunch. Fixed settings seem to be equal to the worst case from Auto ISO. Here’s a textbook example, 1/125th at f/16 for a blue sky on November 3rd, facing due north, at 14:19hrs, ISO 200 fixed setting, ACR 5.6 defaults as above:

The answer seems to be to overexpose your manual ISO 200 shots by not simply one stop, but as much as two stops when shooting raw. At least if Adobe Camera Raw is used, recovery of normal tones (not burned out highlights) will fully restore the exposure from 1 or 2 stops over depending on the subject.

Here is an overexposed image, taken at 1/80th at f/10, ISO 200, in mid-day sunshine:

Below is what the sky looks like in a normally exposed image (1/250th at f/10), processed using Adobe Camera Raw defaults (including sharpening at 25/1/25/0 and NR at 0/25), looks like:

And here, finally, is what an adjusted ACR process from the overexposed image looks like with sharpening turned off, NR set to 25/50, exposure and brightness determined by the simple process of using Auto (which can be set as a default in ACR if you want to consistently make generous – over – exposures ‘to the right’):

This is much more how I expect to see a sky looking from the base ISO of a 2009 DSLR release, viewed at 100 per cent. From this stage, different types of sharpening can be applied to suit resized versions for different purposes.

Results with other raw converters, as more become available for the Alpha 550, may be finer in noise structure than ACR or may offer less scope for overexposing – ACR is well known for its ability to recover highlights. I do not intend to go much further into this with tests of converters, but I hope I have shown how the ‘true ISO’ of the A550 is difficult to pin down especially in Auto ISO mode, and how it is possible to benefit from the great high ISO performance of the camera (just use it!) and at the same time secure good low ISO results for travel and landscape shots where a clean blue sky is important.

It’s important to note that in-camera JPEGs will not necessarily show similar noise levels. If they do it’s not so easy to fix without using NR software. I prefer to shoot raw for many reasons.

So, why not be very happy with the Alpha 550 as a choice? Here are two pictures. You can view the full size Alpha image, and the Nikon D3S image resized to match 14 megapixels, by clicking on the smaller size here. Of course the Nikon image is better, though 1/250th at f/5.6 and ISO 400 is more of a step away from 1/250th at f/9 and ISO 200, and I’m not sure the light was SO different on the two occasions:

- DK

Sony has announced the Alpha 500 and 550 today with an official release to all press. No press conference was held for the UK press and any advance information received has been given indivudally to journalists. There is a press event tonight in London but this is VERY specifically stated to be for trying out the new Cyber-Shot models at twilight. The official release follows.

There is no need to dismantle the mount of the original series Sigma AF TELE 400mm f/5.6 lens, to bring non-functional versions (old chip) up to speed with later film and current digital SLRs. The whole process takes under five minutes, and requires two tools – a small Philips screwdriver, and a precision end cutter.

There is a white paper by Sony Semiconductor on the imaging processing which I think is in the HX1, http://www.sony.net/Products/SC-HP/cx_news/vol55/pdf/featuring55.pdf. I assume it is the IMX-032 CMOS sensor (http://www.sony.net/Products/SC-HP/cx_news/vol55/np_imx032cqr.html) mated to a CXD4109AGG image processing chip. There seem to be some interesting techniques employed, multi-plane synthesis to combine several frames for low light and HDR capture.

With the IMX-032, it is interesting to note that the on-board programmable gain amplifier has a gain value of up to 18dB or a factor of 8, so if base ISO is 80, then maximum “analogue” ISO is 640. If we compare the IMX-032 versus Sony’s first column ADC CMOS chip (IMX-017), the IMX-32 has an 11.8% better photo-electron efficiency per unit area (2300e per 1.75 micron square pixel compared to 4500e per 2.5 micron square pixel). Might be a sign that Sony is improving the process and design used to make their CMOS chips.

The backside illuminated chip is called the IMX-061, http://www.chipworks.com/uploadedFiles/Aliased_Pages/CMOS_ImageSensors_Spotlight/Chipworks%20-%20Sony%20IMX061%20EXR-0902-813.pdf
6MP and 1.75 micron pixels in ClearVID (45 degree) layout with a 1:6:1 RGB Bayer filter array, sacrificing colour resolution for spatial resolution.

The Nikon D90 chip is called the IMX-038 (not the IMX-021 as for the A700), so this suggests it has significant revisions compared to the IMX-021 (possibly linked to LiveView and HD Video?).

– Dr Daniel K. L. Oi

Sony’s new back-illuminated CMOS sensor design makes its first appearance – along with technology borrowed from the Alpha system – in a new HD Handycam video model, the HDR-XR520VE/500VE. Hopefully presaging future DSLR developments, the range also includes models with built-in GPS tracking to record the location of shots as you film.

Following the review on dPreview – more than anywhere else – Sony’s extremely poor JPEG engine with its associated wide radius chroma blur and strong luminance smoothing noise reduction has proved to be a dog well capable of biting its master. Definitely a dog, anyway. But this performance is not what the camera can really achieve. In fact it’s perfectly capable of delivering good high ISO shots in typical situations.

Following announcements that Sony has developed a backlight technique to enable extremely low noise exposures, we receive this press release which may or may not be related – a Sony CCD astrophotography camera capable of one-hour exposures and programmed sequences. Resolution seems a bit basic though.

The introduction of a £399 (street price, RRP £449) DSLR with 14.2 megapixels – with or without a useful type of Live View – should have been applauded by reviewers. It’s the single most important point about the camera. No other DSLR approaches this image size and resolution at such a low price.

Sony Corporation today announced the development of a 35mm full size (diagonal:43.3mm) 24.81 effective megapixel, ultra-high speed high image quality CMOS image sensor designed to meet the increasing requirement for rapid image capture and advanced picture quality within digital SLR cameras.

THE specifications of the CMOS 13.1 megapixel, 12.3 effective megapixel sensor used in the Sony Alpha 700 and the Nikon D300 continue to provoke discussion. On the one hand, we have Sony’s own announcement of the ‘commercialisation’ of the IMX21 sensor in August, preceding Nikon’s advance publicity by a few days. On the other hand, we have people who refuse to believe that Nikon, who openly bought Sony CMOS technology to create the D2X, is not entirely responsible for its own sensor.

BEFORE we publish a fuller assessment of the Sony Alpha 700, here is a taster of just one improved function, the Dynamic Range Optimisation (DRO) system built into the camera. For social, wedding, sports, music, theatre, news and event photographers DRO Advanced Manual settings are a real magic bullet zapping the bugbears of excess contrast, poor lighting, and inadequate flash penetration.

October 16, 2007, Burlingame, CA — FotoNation (www.fotonation.com), a leading provider of embedded imaging solutions for the imaging industry, announced today “FastTrack IPC” (IP-Core) hardware acceleration technology that improves Face-Tracking quality and performance up to 400% in digital cameras and camera phones.

THE high ISO image quality of the Alpha 700 is important if it is to appeal to news, sports and wildlife photographers. Sony claims the A700’s three-stage noise reduction process (on-chip, RAW file NR, and user controlled High ISO NR) will match the best results from competing Canon and Nikon models. These are excerpts from full resolution pictures, not resized pictures, you can find full pictures on the links stated under the pictures. Please be aware that entire picture is almost 6 MB.

TOUGH, RESPONSIVE Alpha 700 DELIVERS STUNNING NEXT-GENERATION PICTURE QUALITY – FROM SHOOTING TO VIEWING

Sep 6, 2007

• Superb picture quality with newly developed Sony 12.24 effective megapixel Exmor CMOS sensor and brand new high-speed BIONZ processor with RAW noise reduction
• Ultra-responsive operation with fast, high-accuracy 11-point autofocus and 5fps continuous shooting
• New Quick Navigation function for instant access to camera settings
• Rugged magnesium body with dust/moisture resistant seals
• PhotoTV HD Full HD image display on new BRAVIA televisions
• 3-inch 921k dot photo-quality LCD screen and bright, high-magnification viewfinder

TEMPORARY Sony website pages on the afternoon (GMT) of September 5th managed to leak the entire specification sheet and several new PR images of the advanced amateur Alpha model, along with its name – the Alpha 700. You wouldn’t pick a wife or husband on the basis of their on-paper specification, so remember, the only way to partner up with a DSLR and be happy is to try it in your hands first.