Sony's New a7RII Camera Delivers World's First Back-Illuminated FF Sensor

[CaptureWhatYouSee]

I was instantly excited by the news of the A7RII. I started looking for a native (FE mount) 24-70 2.8. It doesn't exist. Sony said that they will announce more lenses by year end. But, I think there is a technical limitation/difficulty with wide fast zoom lenses on the a7 series due to their desire to keep the body small and hence absolute minimal mount diameter.

 

[3kramd5]

Thanks, that was a great explanation jrista.

As I read your initial question (perhaps with bias since I was wondering it myself) is does: it also help low ISO?

It seems to me that the answer is yes, and for the same reason it help high ISO. However, given linear (or even non-linear) amplification requirements with an increase in ISO, it stands to reason it will help high ISO *more* than it will help low iso. So if I buy one, I don't expect my base ISO shots to be much cleaner than those from my A7R - indeed perhaps I won't even notice since noise is already so low on the Exmor platform at base ISO (a small percent of a small number is a tiny chance). But I do expect my high ISO shots to be noticeably cleaner.

 

[psolberg]

1. Will the back-illumination only really help at high ISO?

ISO setting is associated to how much amplification you need to apply to get a certain luminance, right (Neuro can likely quote the standard)?

Light is light. If your pixels are blocked by circuitry, you need more amplification to achieve a given luminance than if they aren't. So, low ISO settings should have less associated noise due to less required gain. It may be approaching diminishing returns with Sony's architecture at low ISO since noise is so low already, though. I suspect Canon would see greater benefits from such an approach.

Consider all the above as an uneducated guess.

The amount of amplification required is based on how much light you gather and convert to charge. The two primary factors that affect that are quantum efficiency and pixel area. With BSI, pixel area is literally maximized. The entire sensor surface area is sensitive to light with a BSI design...fill factor would be around 99%. So yes, absolutely, BIS will have a meaningful impact to high ISO performance. It had a meaningful impact to high ISO performance with the Samsung NX1, which has scored higher than the 7D II in high ISO tests thanks to it's BSI APS-C sensor.

The benefit here, when BSI is combined with Sony's already superior sensor technology, is that you can get both excellent low ISO performance as well as excellent high ISO performance, with small pixels, in the same camera. No need to make a tradeoff for one or the other.

Interesting is also the stacked sensor on the 1 inch models, which sony calls the next step after BSI where the circuitry and the photo sensitive components are completely separate that combined with the on-chip RAM to speed up readout rates and allegedly produces less noise and less rolling shutter than standard BSI CMOS.

These are just some of the things we have to look forward in full frame. I think those out there that believe current CMOS technology is as good as it is going to get because canon hasn't lead the pack for years are failing to consider that many improvements yet to make it to the full frame format. I recall the same arguments being made years ago about how sensor development would stop... and yet we still don't have enough DR, we still have rolling shutter issues, we still have noise even at low ISOs, we still have bayer artifacts, we still have moire on video or pixel binning problems, and a host other set of issues which are areas to improve both in software and in sensor.

It seems one thing is clear: sony's RD arm isn't satisfied with "good enough CMOS" when it comes to their sensors and I for one applaud them because companies that lead down the road are companies that are always looking to push the edge.

 

[emko]

1. Will the back-illumination only really help at high ISO?

ISO setting is associated to how much amplification you need to apply to get a certain luminance, right (Neuro can likely quote the standard)?

Light is light. If your pixels are blocked by circuitry, you need more amplification to achieve a given luminance than if they aren't. So, low ISO settings should have less associated noise due to less required gain. It may be approaching diminishing returns with Sony's architecture at low ISO since noise is so low already, though. I suspect Canon would see greater benefits from such an approach.

Consider all the above as an uneducated guess.

The amount of amplification required is based on how much light you gather and convert to charge. The two primary factors that affect that are quantum efficiency and pixel area. With BSI, pixel area is literally maximized. The entire sensor surface area is sensitive to light with a BSI design...fill factor would be around 99%. So yes, absolutely, BIS will have a meaningful impact to high ISO performance. It had a meaningful impact to high ISO performance with the Samsung NX1, which has scored higher than the 7D II in high ISO tests thanks to it's BSI APS-C sensor.

The benefit here, when BSI is combined with Sony's already superior sensor technology, is that you can get both excellent low ISO performance as well as excellent high ISO performance, with small pixels, in the same camera. No need to make a tradeoff for one or the other.

Interesting is also the stacked sensor on the 1 inch models, which sony calls the next step after BSI where the circuitry and the photo sensitive components are completely separate that combined with the on-chip RAM to speed up readout rates and allegedly produces less noise and less rolling shutter than standard BSI CMOS.

These are just some of the things we have to look forward in full frame. I think those out there that believe current CMOS technology is as good as it is going to get because canon hasn't lead the pack for years are failing to consider that many improvements yet to make it to the full frame format. I recall the same arguments being made years ago about how sensor development would stop... and yet we still don't have enough DR, we still have rolling shutter issues, we still have noise even at low ISOs, we still have bayer artifacts, we still have moire on video or pixel binning problems, and a host other set of issues which are areas to improve both in software and in sensor.

It seems one thing is clear: sony's RD arm isn't satisfied with "good enough CMOS" when it comes to their sensors and I for one applaud them because companies that lead down the road are companies that are always looking to push the edge.

the example shots they show of rolling shutter is insane it looks like its fixed.

if we get that into a FF sensor and they figure out a global shutter that can sync with flash at any shutter speed there wont be much else to improve

 

[zlatko]

I was instantly excited by the news of the A7RII. I started looking for a native (FE mount) 24-70 2.8. It doesn't exist. Sony said that they will announce more lenses by year end. But, I think there is a technical limitation/difficulty with wide fast zoom lenses on the a7 series due to their desire to keep the body small and hence absolute minimal mount diameter.

The A7RII is definitely very exciting. As a camera, it looks fantastic! But you've hit on one of the ways in which Canon is way ahead of Sony and that is system options and specifically key lenses like the 24-70/2.8.

 

[kphoto99]

Oh, I was thinking more along the lines of contrast and phase detection AF in DSLR's vs. mirrorless cameras. Thanks for the responses.

I don't see Pros shooters would walk away from DSLR - 5D and 1D. With bigger lenses, the grip on bigger body is better. I strongly believe Canon will have some good stuffs in up coming 5D and 1Dx line.

Looking at a7rII specs, it looks like Sony still using same battery. This is one of the weak points in current mirrorless system. You can't shoot a sport event with a battery life that can only shoot up to 300-400 photos. It's more for soccer moms or regular dads(me) that want high IQ images in smaller body.

Why is 300 photos not enough for pros, in the film days you got max around 100 before a change was needed. Changing a battery takes less time then that.

 

[darrellrhodesmiller]

i shoot both a 5dmk3 and a sony a7r now.. both are great.. but different tools for different jobs..

the 5dmk3 is an amazing all around camera.. if you dont know what kind of conditions i'm getting myself into i bring this camera and i know i'll get some good shots. Batteries last for days.. and the interface and controls are very comfortable and well designed (for a DSLR) Focusing is as fast as you can expect from a digital camera.

the sony a7r (current generation) is a remarkable little camera. it does have a wider dynamic range than the canon. it is 36mp.. controls are usable.. lenses arent bad.. the 50mm f1.8 FE lens is VERY good.. the others are just okay.. (most of the other lenses are F4) focusing is slow but usable. the metabones adapter works very well with canon lenses.. but autofocus is VERY slow.. i typically just use focus peaking. (amazing tool for focusing). Battery life is downright miserable.. 250-300 shots per battery. Which is fine for a landscape photographer with a pocket full of batteries. but if you are doing long exposures its drastically less.

the a7rII will use the same battery. dpreview says the battery is rated for 290 shots with this camera.. but with an even bigger sensor, image stabilization, and lots of other bells and whistles i wonder how long these small batteries will really last. Focusing should be dramatically improved. Some forums are saying with the metabones IV adapter its almost as fast focusing as a canon dslr with a canon lens.. (i'll believe that when i see it) i think its an amazing camera.. but it'll be a tool like any other tool.. make sure its really the right tool for the photography you do. I wouldnt be selling your canon gear just yet.

I keep hoping canon will come out with some contender in the mirrorless market.. but ive been hoping for years. EOS-M doesnt count.

just my thoughts.. a hopeful canon & sony user

 

[RobertG.]

idiots because CANON could add all that and more but because we keep buying what ever they sell us they will keep doing this. Only thing that will stop this is competition that drives Canon to step up because people will start to go to Sony or other companies.

It has better DR,ISO,VIDEO etc just because you don't use higher ISO does not mean Canon should just sell you a product like this when other Companies are making the best Camera possible...

Or...what you think is important and how you define best for yourself is different than the majority of ILC buyers.

Naah, couldn't be. We've already established that you're the expert.

Expert troll, that's what I am. : : :

Just made a little correction.

Some much nonsense, hate and sarcasm and nobody stops him... why? Achievements of the past?

 

[LOALTD]

The battery life is really the only real weakness of most mirrorless systems. Although you could carry many spare batteries and still be lighter than a DSLR body.


Have any of the A7 series users here tried the vertical battery grip?

 

[mkabi]

Why is 300 photos not enough for pros, in the film days you got max around 100 before a change was needed. Changing a battery takes less time then that.

I'm not a pros. so this is just guess work.
Pros. nowadays have found out that "moments" happen on a microsecond if not nanosecond type basis.
Many seconds in a day. And if you are missing those "moments" that other pros. are capturing b/c they are not swapping batteries as often... then...

Other than that... this camera is definitely enticing. Wish they put 120fps @ 1080p... that would have put this camera as a definite on my wishlist.

 

[ecqns]

Are we now going to start a double standard...Canon's high read noise is perfectly OK, even though it can exhibit right up into the midtones on an all too frequent basis...but Sony's lossy compression is just completely unacceptable all the time despite the fact that it rarely exhibits artifacts in most images? ???)

This is why I upgraded to a Sony a7r from canon - the canon noise and branding in the shadows and midtones was unacceptable (at 100 iso). I never imagined the tonal depth I can get in the Sony, I've never seen any compression artifacts either. It's truly improved my post production work flow.

 

[raptor3x]

So yes, absolutely, BIS will have a meaningful impact to high ISO performance. It had a meaningful impact to high ISO performance with the Samsung NX1, which has scored higher than the 7D II in high ISO tests thanks to it's BSI APS-C sensor.

Are you sure about that? According to DxO the NX1 and 7D2 have nearly identical SNR while the 7D2 wins in DR at high ISO even with less overall sensor area.

 

[bdunbar79]

Wonder where all the "gear doesn't matter" hypocrites are?

 

[Orangutan]

Are we now going to start a double standard...Canon's high read noise is perfectly OK, even though it can exhibit right up into the midtones on an all too frequent basis...but Sony's lossy compression is just completely unacceptable all the time despite the fact that it rarely exhibits artifacts in most images? ??? )

This is a legitimate question. In this case, I think Neuro was poking fun at some of the critiques of Canon (of course, he can speak for himself on these matters). From my perspective, there's a bit of a difference here: the Canon banding problem (to whatever degree it exists) is an artifact of the sensor/readout tech Canon put into their products. Sony's choice of lossy-only compression is a clear and unmistakable choice to deny an easy-to-implement software feature, one that Nikon does implement with the same sensor tech.

It's legitimate to criticize Canon for failing to put better (and presumably more expensive) sensor tech in their cameras, but it's more legitimate to criticize Sony for failing to put in a better (and nearly free) data format.

 

[Orangutan]

Wonder where all the "gear doesn't matter" hypocrites are?

Gear matters. Choosing the right gear for what you do matters more.

 

[Perio]

I find it also interesting that Sony for the first time (?) implemented its new sensor in Sony's camera's and did not sell it to Nikon first.

 

[vscd]

Wonder where all the "gear doesn't matter" hypocrites are?

They are outside, taking pictures.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

My PC is ready for 4K, my monitor is not :-[

Dude, the 4k+ monitors are awesome. I'd almost make that the #1 priority.
I got a Dell (UHD (8MP), internal programmable high bit LUT, wide gamut, programmable screen uniformity compensation, 24") and wow. Best photo purchase I've made in a long time. It's like getting free, decent-sized 8MP prints and even for stuff like web browsing/programming the text is so much crisper and nice. It's like reading a magazine. Video games look awesome too. 4k video, nice!

And man the new 14MP ones, wow. I'm sure the 14MP Dell will come way down in price in another 6months or so, man.

I have this one in my BH account. Waiting for A7rII so I can do checkout at one: http://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-31MU97-B-4k-ips-led-monitor ;D

nice

 

[mkabi]

I find it also interesting that Sony for the first time (?) implemented its new sensor in Sony's camera's and did not sell it to Nikon first.

That's cause Nikon used their sensor better with the D800, no I mean D800E, no they definitely perfected it with the D810. I'm only guessing that they didn't want Nikon to outshine them again (after 3 different bodies).

Besides, if they just put in IBIS... anyone from either Canon or Nikon can keep their lenses, buy a Sony body and use an adapter to use their existing lenses. Lesson learned from Canon users??? In any case, more users...

 

[bdunbar79]

Wonder where all the "gear doesn't matter" hypocrites are?

They are outside, taking pictures.

+1

Although as a side note, most of the people I know who say that (not on here) are always the ones with the most expensive, latest and greatest.