# Sony's RAW compression



## pedro (Sep 11, 2015)

Hi everyone,
There are no intensions for label bashing by posting this.
But it might be a good reason for staying away from A7 series (e.g. A7s for astro as a second body) until this issue gets resolved.
*"A Raw file is a Raw file, right? Well, not exactly. Lately, there's been a lot of talk (and a lot of anger) about the compression Sony uses in its Raw files. Compressed Raw files aren't uncommon, but they're usually compressed in a way that retains all the original 'raw' data from the sensor."* More here...
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2834066212/the-raw-and-the-cooked-pulling-apart-sony-raw-compression?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=features-default&utm_medium=homepage-block&ref=features-default


----------



## bwud (Sep 11, 2015)

I took some A7R II photos in which I totally expected artifacts (very high contrast adjecent to smooth gradient) but didn't get them. So far about 2k into the camera with no obvious adverse affects from lossy compression. If they can and do enable lossless via a firmware upgrade is probably use it because storage is the least of my concerns, but so far lossy compression is moving quickly down that ladder as well.


----------



## tomscott (Sep 11, 2015)

Problem is with the size of the camera if they weren't compressed the camera would be really sluggish.

If they gave the option you can choose between a slow camera with probably similar files or a fast one.

Its a compromise sony obviously feel is one without too much detriment.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 12, 2015)

tomscott said:


> Problem is with the size of the camera if they weren't compressed the camera would be really sluggish.
> 
> If they gave the option you can choose between a slow camera with probably similar files or a fast one.
> 
> Its a compromise sony obviously feel is one without too much detriment.



All camera manufacturers compress their raw files, Speed is not a issue.

The issue is lossy compression, not compression. Sony lossy raw compression is a carry over from years ago when memory was super expensive. There is no justification for it any longer. No one else uses lossy compression for their full raw files.


----------



## emko (Sep 12, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> tomscott said:
> 
> 
> > Problem is with the size of the camera if they weren't compressed the camera would be really sluggish.
> ...



yes this is not true about slow camera unless a D800 is slow? that uses same sensor as the A7R no? with compressed RAW losseless files.


----------



## xps (Sep 15, 2015)

pedro said:


> Hi everyone,
> There are no intensions for label bashing by posting this.
> But it might be a good reason for staying away from A7 series (e.g. A7s for astro as a second body) until this issue gets resolved.
> *"A Raw file is a Raw file, right? Well, not exactly. Lately, there's been a lot of talk (and a lot of anger) about the compression Sony uses in its Raw files. Compressed Raw files aren't uncommon, but they're usually compressed in a way that retains all the original 'raw' data from the sensor."* More here...
> http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2834066212/the-raw-and-the-cooked-pulling-apart-sony-raw-compression?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=features-default&utm_medium=homepage-block&ref=features-default



Maybe Sony reacts on this faster as you can believe...
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7665355870/sony-brings-uncompressed-raw-to-a7s-ii-and-a7r-ii


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 24, 2015)

xps said:


> pedro said:
> 
> 
> > Hi everyone,
> ...



Probably not, there have been complaints for many years.


----------

