# High ISO : Sony A7rII vs Canon 1Dx



## Neutral (Sep 1, 2015)

Comparison now available on DPR.
Tells for itself, no comments required


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 2, 2015)

The noise figures are truly excellent, I'm surprised, to be truthful.

They are apparently downsized to some common denominator though. Those who buy a 42 mp camera and then downsize the image to 18mp will see little difference.

However, if you are buying the high mp to sharply crop the image and think you will have high ISO detail, you might think there is more noise.

You need to align your expectations with reality. Per pixel, there is more noise, but if you reduce it to a smaller size, its almost the same. So, don't crop high ISO images and you will be fine. The 7D MK II is a hair more noisy for 1/3 the price.

These are all at ISO 12800.

Sony A7R II:






Canon 1D X:





Canon 7D MK II


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 2, 2015)

Neutral said:


> Comparison now available on DPR.
> Tells for itself, no comments required



Other than I'd take the 1DX over the A7rII any day.

The difference between the two sets is very illuminating, and shows how utterly irrelevant most of these 'reviews' are now, this model is 'better' than that model in this specific metric if you do this and that to 'normalise' the output.


----------



## Neutral (Sep 2, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> The noise figures are truly excellent, I'm surprised, to be truthful.
> 
> They are apparently downsized to some common denominator though. Those who buy a 42 mp camera and then downsize the image to 18mp will see little difference.
> 
> ...



For me, I was not surprised, I expected something like that, equal or slightly better than 1DX.
In reality, it is slightly better than I expected, just between 1Dx and a7S.
In DPR they have option to normalize to smallest image (comp) or normalize to print as for DXO.
I usually use normalize to smallest image in DPR so if comparing a7rII to 1Dx (as I have both) this will be normalization to 18mp.
What I was interested is overall sensor efficiency comparison which proved to be better for a7rII than for 1Dx
So no more talks that Canon is better at higher ISO.

In addition to this high frequency, noise from higher mpx sensor is more easily filtered out.
DXO Prime NR is especially good doing this, I was checking with 5DsR image ISO 12800 and result was surprisingly clean image. Also LR is doing that fairly well.

I would not say that the 7D MK II is a hair more noisy than a7rII or 1Dx, difference is very noticeable.

All the rest I agree with you, it is not good idea to crop high ISO image.
I think people need to understand that sensor final Perceptual Megapixel is reversed function of ISO.
The higher ISO the less Perceptual Megapixel resolution due to image noise.

DXO measures Perceptual Megapixel for lenses /sensor combinations:
http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Looking-for-new-photo-gear-DxOMark-s-Perceptual-Megapixel-can-help-you

I think if they could provide the same for sensors as function of ISO value then this could be very useful for many people as it would be easy to see what would be Perceptual Megapixel resolution for any given ISO for particular sensor/lens combination 
I evaluating that for myself using resolution chart shots done at different ISOs.
There were some tests published somewhere showing that a7S provides better resulting resolution at high ISOs compared to 5DmIII. And 5DmIII red channel was especially bad, starting smearing details at ISO about 400. 

I think we are still at least 2 or 3 generations of sensor tech away from the time when sensor could reach theoretical limit of 2.5 stops better high ISO performance than now.
Most limiting factor here is Bayer sensor itself as R and B channels gather only 25% of light hitting sensor and green channel only 50%. So ideal Foveon type sensor theoretically could provide 2 stops improvement for Red and Blue channels and 1 stop for green channel compared to Bayer sensor. In addition to this about 0.4 stop improvement resulting from improving sensor quantum efficiency close to theoretical limit close to 100% from current 60-65 %.


----------



## YellowJersey (Sep 16, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> The noise figures are truly excellent, I'm surprised, to be truthful.
> 
> They are apparently downsized to some common denominator though. Those who buy a 42 mp camera and then downsize the image to 18mp will see little difference.
> 
> ...



I know you've been rather critical of the 36mp sensor (not damning, but more pointing out it's not perfect), so to hear this coming from you is really a huge point in the A7RII's favour. This uncompressed RAW news is also encouraging, though I'd like them to clarify whether they mean truly uncompressed or lossless compressed. Totally uncompressed files might be a bit of a headache for memory card storage, clearing the buffer, processing on more modestly powered computers, and even harddrive storage, but it is encouraging nonetheless. 

These results even seem encouraging for using the A7RII for astro work, which boggles my mind since you'd think such a huge MP count would be unusable at 6400 ISO. As someone who can't afford multiple cameras and does landscape and astro shooting, the A7RII looks like it could be great, perhaps even the best, option. I'll wait a while to see how things develop before I really make up my mind, though. It's not like I can afford a new camera anyway. 

Ultimately, I'm pretty impressed with the A7RII. I may very well go this route (or another A7 camera) when it comes time to buy a new camera in a few years. Ok, 5DmkIV, don't disappoint. 

What interesting times in which we live.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 17, 2015)

YellowJersey said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > The noise figures are truly excellent, I'm surprised, to be truthful.
> ...



I am one who tends to crop extremely high ISO images and often by a amazing amount. I've been able to crop ISO 12800 images taken with my 5D MK III to nearly 1:1. With a high MP sensor, the crop to the same finished image should be better than what I get now, based on what I've seen.

I take photos of our local high school plays in very low light. The director helps me turn out a photo book for each play, and often wants a crop to a individual who is very tiny in the original photo. That's a challenge, but most of the time, I can do it. Prints in a photobook are usually small, so its not like I'm making a large print. I do make one large panoramic print of the cast lined up across the stage. (24 X 36) I have to use the uneven (for photographs) stage lighting, and more DR would be very welcome, since I always have to reduce light in some areas and boost shadows in other areas. The panorama is well lit, so I'm usually using more normal ISO ranges for that.

I've been reading reviews of the camera, and will go try one out in the next month.


----------



## sdsr (Sep 17, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> The noise figures are truly excellent, I'm surprised, to be truthful.
> 
> They are apparently downsized to some common denominator though. Those who buy a 42 mp camera and then downsize the image to 18mp will see little difference.
> 
> However, if you are buying the high mp to sharply crop the image and think you will have high ISO detail, you might think there is more noise.



Quite so. It's also worth remembering that the good performance of the sensor is enhanced by the effect of the camera's IBIS when using lenses that don't have IS; the two together are rather impressive.


----------



## YellowJersey (Sep 17, 2015)

sdsr said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > The noise figures are truly excellent, I'm surprised, to be truthful.
> ...



And an IS lens and it gets even better, from what I hear.


----------



## bwud (Sep 21, 2015)

YellowJersey said:


> sdsr said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



AFAIK there is no way to compare lens IS to IBIS; if you attach an IS lens, IBIS is unavailable. Hence its possible attaching said IS lens makes it even better merely because the lens is better all around.


----------



## sdsr (Sep 23, 2015)

bwud said:


> AFAIK there is no way to compare lens IS to IBIS; if you attach an IS lens, IBIS is unavailable. Hence its possible attaching said IS lens makes it even better merely because the lens is better all around.



You can perform such a comparison if you attach a Canon IS lens via updated Metabones IV: if you switch IS off on the lens, the IBIS automatically takes over; if you switch IS on, IBIS automatically turns off. (I don't own any Sony FE lenses with IS and don't know if you can turn IS off on those; you can't on the couple of Sony E primes I've tried - not on the lens, anyway.)


----------



## bwud (Sep 23, 2015)

sdsr said:


> bwud said:
> 
> 
> > AFAIK there is no way to compare lens IS to IBIS; if you attach an IS lens, IBIS is unavailable. Hence its possible attaching said IS lens makes it even better merely because the lens is better all around.
> ...



Interesting.

Previously, when I attached a Canon IS lens, the camera told me I had to use lens IS; IBIS was disabled regardless of the switch on the lens.

I have the second-to-latest firmware (the one which added PDAF, not the one which fixed whatever that one broke), but haven't tried IBIS with a canon IS lens yet. Thanks for the tip!


----------



## dmosk4 (Oct 31, 2015)

Hi,

I am considering buying either the Sony A7rII($2800) or the Canon 1DX($4000) via BestBuy. 

What are the current thoughts.. Is the 1DX worth the additional $1200? 

I plan to do sports, beach, and dog show photography...


----------



## mkabi (Oct 31, 2015)

dmosk4 said:


> Hi,
> 
> I am considering buying either the Sony A7rII($2800) or the Canon 1DX($4000) via BestBuy.
> 
> ...



Forget the ISO test above.
A7rII gives you resolution.
1DX gives you speed.

Do you have any camera at the moment? Lenses? Just asking to see if you have already invested in a system.


----------



## Orangutan (Oct 31, 2015)

dmosk4 said:


> Hi,
> 
> I am considering buying either the Sony A7rII($2800) or the Canon 1DX($4000) via BestBuy.
> 
> ...



What are you using now? How does it fail to meet the needs? 

If this will be your first DSLR (or high-end mirrorless) then I suggest you buy neither until you've had a chance to learn on cheaper (or rental) gear, or find someone to take you out for a few hours of practice. High-end gear demands more of the photographer: until you know how to use it you may believe your money is wasted.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 1, 2015)

dmosk4 said:


> Hi,
> 
> I am considering buying either the Sony A7rII($2800) or the Canon 1DX($4000) via BestBuy.
> 
> ...



Don't forget, lenses will cost you multiple times the cost of a camera body, budget 5X the cost of a camera body for lenses to start.


----------



## scottkinfw (Nov 1, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> dmosk4 said:
> 
> 
> > Hi,
> ...



True Mt. Spokane. They will also be around for a lot longer as well. Consider focusing, and I think the 1DX will be a better bet. If you can wait until the II comes out, I bet the price will really drop just before launch to clear the decks. I'm hoping it does, but also waiting on word about 5DIV specs.


----------



## tpatana (Nov 1, 2015)

1DX is awesome for sports.

>50% of my clicks are sport-shooting at ISO6400.


----------

