# Weird A7R II Banding



## 3kramd5 (Jul 8, 2015)

From the first ISO 6400 raw out there:







Looks maybe like the effect of an adjacent hot component?

Seems fairly simple to NR is out (processed by a sonyalpharumors user in Capture One), but it gets waxy. Disclaimer: this is likely from a pre-production camera.

Full res jpeg here.


----------



## Bennymiata (Jul 8, 2015)

Not exactly perfect is it?


----------



## Viggo (Jul 8, 2015)

But LOOK at the DR! Oh, wait...


----------



## Larsskv (Jul 8, 2015)

No worries! They will fix the banding with the A7R_III_, which will be announced later this year.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 8, 2015)

Larsskv said:


> No worries! They will fix the banding with the A7R_III_, which will be announced later this year.



haha!

Evidently it was Capture One creating the effect. DCRAW (see below), RawTherapee, etc. don't do it. Lotta chroma noise in the DCRAW image.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jul 8, 2015)

There is reason why, we shouldn't look at early pre-production bodies.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 8, 2015)

Dylan777 said:


> There is reason why, we shouldn't look at early pre-production bodies.



Well, if this is software-dependent (as it looks), files from the production body could exhibit the same problem on the released (not beta) Capture One 8.3.1.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 8, 2015)

Dylan777 said:


> There is reason why, we shouldn't look at early pre-production bodies.



Or use software that is not yet ready for the new body.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 8, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > There is reason why, we shouldn't look at early pre-production bodies.
> ...



Certainly not the first time that's been an issue leading to inappropriate conclusions.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 8, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > There is reason why, we shouldn't look at early pre-production bodies.
> ...



At what point do you deem it "ready"? The release notes state:



> Highlights, Capture One 8.3.1
> This is a service release providing bug fixes, lens and camera support
> 
> *Camera support*
> ...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 8, 2015)

3kramd5 said:


> At what point do you deem it "ready"?



I'd deem it 'ready' when it doesn't introduce artifacts into images.


----------



## NancyP (Jul 8, 2015)

Interesting demonstration of software effect.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 8, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > At what point do you deem it "ready"?
> ...



... which you won't know until you use the software


----------



## jrista (Jul 8, 2015)

3kramd5 said:


> Larsskv said:
> 
> 
> > No worries! They will fix the banding with the A7R_III_, which will be announced later this year.
> ...



This is probably because no color NR has been applied. DCRAW is just a low level RAW processor. CaptureOne is a high level processor, and like Lightroom, it applies a certain amount of color NR by default. EVERY RAW image actually has this color noise...you usually don't see it because high level raw editors are cleaning it up for you.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 8, 2015)

3kramd5 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > 3kramd5 said:
> ...



...which should have been tested – and corrected – before the software was released purporting to support a given camera.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 8, 2015)

jrista said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > Larsskv said:
> ...



Yes, Matt Grum said as much. There is zero NR applied to the DCRAW render.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 8, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Indeed. Should. Pitty these companies race to get things out there. It's like they want bragging rights for saying "first." Similar infection as many news companies.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jul 8, 2015)

3kramd5 said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > There is reason why, we shouldn't look at early pre-production bodies.
> ...



Few issues I have with a7 series are battery life and AF tracking. IQ and high ISO(including a7r) never been an issue.


----------



## psolberg (Jul 9, 2015)

I was worried the had copied the canon shadow banding feature /jk

at first it looked like moire, I'm glad you found the cause before we popped the champaign to celebrate at sony's misfortune.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 9, 2015)

dilbert said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



8.3.1 is an official/final release.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 24, 2015)

First raws I've seen surface...

http://blog.proimagenz.com/2015/07/sony-a7r-ii-hands-on.html


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Jul 24, 2015)

psolberg said:


> I was worried the had copied the canon shadow banding feature /jk
> 
> at first it looked like moire, I'm glad you found the cause before we popped the champaign to celebrate at sony's misfortune.



I am sure people here will find something else to write something uncomplimentary about Sony.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 24, 2015)

AcutancePhotography said:


> psolberg said:
> 
> 
> > I was worried the had copied the canon shadow banding feature /jk
> ...



I have a lot of uncomplimentary things to say about the A7R. Hopefully my experience with the 2 will be better. They have allegedly fixed or improved a lot of the things I don't like about using the original.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 24, 2015)

I once again considered renting a A7R II and a adaspter for my Canon lenses for a upcoming event in the latter part of August. However a 10 day rental was enough to make me ask myself what advantage I'd see. While the camera will be smaller, there will be no flash allowed, and the lenses plus adapter will be bigger resulting in little advantage to pay $400 or more for.

I wanted 10 days to have time before to test out the camera thoroughly and make sure it was going to function. In the end, I decided that my G1X II will make for a smaller camera when I need small, and does a reasonable job in low light.

I'm still interested in the a7R II, but having been bit by the Nikon D800, I'm not going to jump out and get one until I see results from trusted photographers. Renting would be OK, but developing the raw images might be a issue with my existing software, and I'm not going to learn something new.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 25, 2015)

dilbert said:


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



Maybe, although the PP package(s) I use depends on the camera I use, not the file type. Even if I converted to DNG, I assume I'd use differing software solutions since, even if they can all natively read my files, they have differing strengths.


----------

