A900 DRO ???

[[SiC]]

My brain may be dead this morning...what is FW?

-Sonolta

No problem Don - FW = FirmWare

/Zeb!

[maratrs13]

[quote="Sonolta"]


I have already proved the similarity of the raw and jpg HI200 files as compared to the ISO 200 files.
No! You haven't! They are as different as they should under condition that the ISO 200 is ISO 200 exposed 'correctly' by the camera judgment and HI200 is ISO 125 underexposed by 2/3. I examined your MRW files of a greenish wig (?) and they clearly show this! You are contradicting to yourself...

For some reason you are making several posts here but you are not presenting any new information, and you have not shown me how I can get to ISO 125, and you have not been able to tweak the ISO 200 files to recover the highlights. Geesh...
I don't have to tweak 'normally' exposed ISO 200 file which has lost highlights - that's impossible. But if a file is slightly underexposed then it is easier to recover midtones and shadows while preserving highlights at the same level. If you shoot in RAW only then using ZM has no meaning - with the same success you may shoot with constant -2/3 compensation. Another story if you shoot using ZM in JPEG or RAW+JPEG - then the camera does the shadow and midtones recovery for you automatically, but in JPEG files ONLY! MRW files are left intact (i.e. underexposed) so if you want to use them and get the same result as the corresponding JPEG shows you will definitely have to apply curves.



Again. Something special is done, it is minimum a 125 -EV exposure and this is not a setting that can be set any other way than by using Zone Matching!

'Something special' is underexposure/overexposure (HI/LO) of a 'special' ISO setting (125 in this case) which you cannot set manually and application of 'special' curves to JPEG files (not to MRWs!). If you don't like wasting your time in PP and you shoot JPEGs (or at least RAW+JPEG) then the ZM is for you.

But if you shoot in MRW only then it is almost useless, its benefit is only ISO 125 setting that cannot be set manually. But nothing prevents you setting any regular ISO and dial in negative or positive compensation (depending on the scene's key). Please note that here I am talking about shooting MRW only!


Look buddy, it's quite clear you have never used ZM in the field. You can not easily get the exact same results frame after frame!
On more or less similar subjects with more or less similar backgrounds??? Are you kidding? And then, what made you think that I have never used ZM?

LOL...that is the whole advantage of using ZM! Geesh man....how much extra time do you need to waste?
As I said - if you like results you get from ZM then it is for you!

What is so special about ISO 125 besides that it is set in ZM only?

Try to recover he details on those ISO 200 samples...you can't!
I don't have to - it's useless. But if you'd shot the same scene in ISO 200 with -2/3 compensation then recovering shadows and midtones and preserving highlights would be a matter of a few seconds!



It's is NOT underexposed, it is more PROPERLY EXPOSED...notice the HIGHLIGHTS are NOT BLOWN to the MOON.
See my above comment - the difference between two MRW files you had posted earlier clearly shows underexposure in the second file - everything is a little bit darker, starting in shadows and ending in highlights. Consequently, highlights are not blown out!

Before you speak another word on the subject show me how I can recover the ISO 200 HI Key shots...you can't!
No, I can't if they are shot in ISO 200 with 'normal' (from the camera's point of view) exposure. But I can easily recover shadows and midtones in ISO 200 files with some underexposure (of course, if the subject and lighting conditions are the same in both shots).

Again, what is so special in ISO 125? Does it have some magic in itself?

Yeah....if you notice the ZM JPG tone curve gives wider Dynamic range than the default ACR conversion. ZM can give peak DR at either end of the spectrum even when shooting JPG!
Probably so, but only with JPEGs. Dynamic range of MRW files stays the same regardless HI, LO or regular ISO setting.


Thanks man, but the samples clearly show the hi200 raw has probably the most preserved detail, followed by the hi200 jpg, and both of those blow the ISO200 shot to the moon. You can not dial back -o.6 from the raw and recover the highlights and this situation is a very similar scenario as shooting flowers on a bright Sunny day.
Who is talking about recovering highlights in 'normally' exposed ISO 200 shots??? But if you dial in -2/3 DURING shooting flowers on a bright sunny day you will easily be able to recover shadows and midtones if you PP raw files. But the ZM does it nicely for you to your JPEGs (only)! And that's fine!


Like I have said a half-dozen times already...set -0.6 at any ISO and shoot an hours worth of flowers on a sunny day. Then set Hi200 and shoot the same flowers on a sunny day and see which one gives you better exposures. I don't need to do this test because I have already done these sorts of shoots dozens of times and I have found hi200 to be the way to go! Three years of using ZM tells me this...not 10 minutes of talk!
Won't argue with you on this! I just want to say that ZM works fine as intended BUT for JPEGs ONLY. If you shoot MRW only then ZM is next to useless!

Marat. And off to bed now. Let's continue tomorrow if you wish!

[[SiC]]

Nah.... This KM7D was announced 15 Sept 2004 and this was the first camera to include Zone Matching. The KM5D was announced on 15 July 05, and the A100 was announced on 5 June 2006, and both had similar ZM functions. The KM7D and A100 both received firmware upgrades and there is nothing that I know of that changed regarding ZM or ISO 125.

So, no, do not expect any sort of ZM firmware upgrade. Besides, it's way to late for that, even if it was possible!

-Sonolta

I'm not talking about an upgrade, the camera is loaded with a FW from factory you know... Geesh
I meant that if the engineers wanted the camera to shoot iso200 valued shots at sensor iso125 and write iso200 in exif they sure could. Nothing more nothing less...
But was it done this way? I dont know, who does?

/Z!

[[SiC]]

To be honest, I am growing tired of this conversation.


-Sonolta

Wow! DK better take a backup of this fast

[Javelin]

Is the Zone matching in the A700 the same thing? Your camera must be gone by now right? Maybe i'll play with it tonight. does the scene have to have high contrast predominatly bright for the higher setting and predominatly dark for the lower setting?

[[SiC]]

Gahh. . I give up.
And yes, I have used ZM and know the basics about what it does.

[David Kilpatrick]

OK, I have done a slightly scientific test - at least one with controlled values - on the Alpha 100 (no D5D to test) and this shows, I think, that the Hi200 on the Alpha 100 is actually using the ISO 100 EI of the sensor and underexposing by a full stop. I have not tested the Lo80 setting but it may, I guess, use a sensor EI value between 100 and 200 - only using 100 seems like too little effect, just 1/3rd stop, while 200 would be a bit extreme.

Here's how the actual density of raw and JPEG files selected to show Hi200 raw (true density), Hi200 JPEG, Hi200 RAW given one stop overexposure (equals ISO XXX no zone matching given normal exposure), ISO 200 given one stop under (looks the same as the 'normal' Hi200 density) and ISO 200 given normal exposure, plus its resulting JPEG:



http://www.pbase.com/davidkilpatrick/image/103984124

So what I was told back in 2004 about the D7D - the ISO being set between the Lo100 and Hi250 settings - may apply to the D5D (being EI 125) or the D5D may be like the Alpha 100. Either that or the explanation I was given was not technically informed, but a result of Japanese-English translation (I was discussing the camera with an interpreter and one of the D7D designers). Whatever the exact figures the principle is clear. You could get the same raw file as Hi200 produces by just dialling in -1.0 on the Alpha 100 +/- override permanently. In fact, I have always done this - not -1.0, but values between 0 and -1.0. I often had my Alpha 100 set to -0.3 or -0.7 for whole shoots, for exactly the reason Hi200 exists - to avoid burned out highlights.

NB: Anders Uschold has DCTau tested the A900! The dynamic range maxes out at a fraction over 9, not quite 9.1, and is as its highest with ISO 200. He explains, in very difficult German-English, that unlike Canon and Nikon - Sony is not clipping the blacks at high ISO settings. He says there is much more shadow detail present, and (in an obscure technical way) that the noise in the high ISO files may look bad to you or me, but it's actually very good when measured against the level of loss of shadow details.

David

[Javelin]

I can set the zone matching on all these options Standard,vivid,neutral,adobeRGB,Clear,Deep,light,portrait,landscape.. and ones that change the colour a lot like sunset,night,Autumn,B/W and sepia on my A700. All of them have Zone matching.. and actually another setting is available for the same ones that isn't in the others called "brightness" I actually playedwith ZM once before and asked if it worked with RAW files and nobody answered me. It appears to . at least the lower settings for predominantly dark scenes but what I wanted to know (which is being argued here in this thread) was if it just tweaked the ISO and overexposed the whole shot slightly or if it did anything smarter. I interjected in this thread because I was following it hoping that it would get back around to Sony's ZM version and now your all getting tired of the chase before that happened.. so here I am

You can use it only with the Portrait, Landscape, and BW "creative styles", and it most certainly does not do the same things in the same manner as the KM style ZM did. In-fact, you can't use the a700 "Zone" when shooting AdobeRGB, Standard, Vivid or Neutral! Basically, on the a700, it is a tweak *sorta-similar* to contrast and brightness, as it makes slight adjustments in the tonal range but it does not do anything with the ISO values etc.

[David Kilpatrick]

All that Zone Matching in the A700/A900 disables is the Contrast adjustment as far as I can tell. It almost certainly does not change raw data, but does change the embedded preview and tags for IDC. If you use the camera screen, you only ever see the preview, never the real raw data - same with IDC. ACR will show you the raw data, so will Raw Therapee (PC) and Raw Photo Processor (Mac). So before you try to see whether a setting affects raw data, you must view the file with a program which ignores the preview image, and ignores header tags.

David

[David Kilpatrick]

A scientific test of Zone Matching HI200 would be a test that uses high key subjects specifically to test for highlight retention.

My studio test uses back illumination of the opal perspex to go into highlight clipping - it does test highlight retention, very accurately, in a neutral (white) gradient. It is subtle, but you can see (and measure) how the Hi200 JPEG pulls the brightness in at the near-255 level.

f/11 exposure using regular ISO 200, raw file, clipping warning turned on ACR for highlights:

f/11 exposure using Hi200 raw file, clipping warning turned on as before:

David

[Javelin]

I feel privileged that Sony let me have the only A700 that has zone matching on Almost all the image styles but in the end You just never looked beyond the 4 static ones you can't change for the 3 that you can, and I'm not so privileged.

Pg 67 A700 book
"The camera is equipped with four unswitchable styles (“Standard”, “Vivid”, “Neutral”, and “Adobe RGB”) and three styleboxes, to which you can assign image styles of your choosing. “Portrait”, “Landscape”, and “B/W” are assigned to the styleboxes as the default settings."


Focal length ... something like 60mm
F... dunno. it's going to be horrible anyway
Camera: Nokia mobile phone cause my F717 is at work

[ianmiddy]

I have always done this - not -1.0, but values between 0 and -1.0. I often had my Alpha 100 set to -0.3 or -0.7 for whole shoots, for exactly the reason Hi200 exists - to avoid burned out highlights.

Hmm - same here - but now finding I have to be a little more cautious when using the 18-250 as its all too easy to use the long end and either (a) suffer shake at ISO100, or (b) suffer noise with AutoISO getting set to 400 - but glad to see I'm not doing something too ridiculous...

...and, oh dear, if only Pandora could close the box [or this topic???] - will it reach 10 pages ? !

Cheers

IDM

[[SiC]]

I have always done this - not -1.0, but values between 0 and -1.0. I often had my Alpha 100 set to -0.3 or -0.7 for whole shoots, for exactly the reason Hi200 exists - to avoid burned out highlights.

Hmm - same here - but now finding I have to be a little more cautious when using the 18-250 as its all too easy to use the long end and either (a) suffer shake at ISO100, or (b) suffer noise with AutoISO getting set to 400 - but glad to see I'm not doing something too ridiculous...

...and, oh dear, if only Pandora could close the box [or this topic???] - will it reach 10 pages ? !

Cheers

IDM

Me too, my dial is almost always at -1/3'rd exposure compensation.

/Z!

[David Kilpatrick]

I have to be a little more cautious when using the 18-250 as its all too easy to use the long end and either (a) suffer shake at ISO100, or (b) suffer noise with AutoISO getting set to 400 - but glad to see I'm not doing something too ridiculous...

If there is no sky is the picture, and the subject is not light in colour, I set -1 for all shots at tele length - such as zoos, wildlife, plants, still life, rock, sports on grass, architectural details (but not people, their faces are bright enough to get correct exposure). The meter system is intended to give correct exposures to an average scene but most tele shots are selective and need around -1 compensation to avoid them coming out much too light. B-I-F are an obvious exception as are airshow pix, seascapes and surfers, track sports on sand and anything else with a light tone.

If you don't give minus compensation or use manual exposure for shots at say 100-250mm, you risk more camera shake or more subject movement or less depth of field. Giving the correct minimum exposure is a vital part of good telephoto technique.

David

[pakodominguez]

All that Zone Matching in the A700/A900 disables is the Contrast adjustment as far as I can tell. It almost certainly does not change raw data, but does change the embedded preview and tags for IDC. If you use the camera screen, you only ever see the preview, never the real raw data - same with IDC.

It wasn't the case with the D7D/D5D? The RAW (MRW) stays raw, Zone Matching On or Off. The Zone Matching has always work on JPGs only -that was one of my criticism about the KonikaMinolta software, even the "professional" Dimage Master is unable to reproduce that effect.

BTW, Sony could implement a more sophisticated DRO controls in the IDC.