Site Supporter
- Followers
- 21
- Following
- 1
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2021
- Posts
- 4,944
- Likes Received
- 3,821
- Name
- Tim
- Country
- United States
- City/State
- SE Michigan
I was watching a video comparing the A1 to a Z9 and the narrator made a comment that Sony underrates their sensors by 1/2 - 2/3 of a stop. They do this so you have less chance of blowing out the top end while still allowing enough lattitude to recover the shadows. Evidently some manufacturers go the opposite way to give better low-end detail, but the top end gets blown.
What this means is when you're shooting ISO 200, you're really shooting 130-150. Doesn't sound too unreasonable until you start getting farther up the ISO settings and realize ISO 8000 is really ISO 6000 if it's a 1/2 stop, closer to 5300 if it's 2/3.
At first this seemed a bit outlandish, but then some real-world experience started to creep into my mind. @spudhead says he overexposes his shots quite a bit. Another member started threads about not being able to get the exposure correct. And me, I noted very early on in my Sony ownership that it seems I need to add a 1/2 stop +/- to my images when processing pretty regularly, something I never had to do with other brands. I've also thought from time to time that my 200-600 @ 5.6-6.3 needs more light than my old Panasonic 100-400 5.6-6.3, when I'd expect them to be identical. Is it the underrated sensor?
I have searched the internet using every search term I can think of but cannot find another reference to this anywhere. Does anyone have something that could substantiate this?
What this means is when you're shooting ISO 200, you're really shooting 130-150. Doesn't sound too unreasonable until you start getting farther up the ISO settings and realize ISO 8000 is really ISO 6000 if it's a 1/2 stop, closer to 5300 if it's 2/3.
At first this seemed a bit outlandish, but then some real-world experience started to creep into my mind. @spudhead says he overexposes his shots quite a bit. Another member started threads about not being able to get the exposure correct. And me, I noted very early on in my Sony ownership that it seems I need to add a 1/2 stop +/- to my images when processing pretty regularly, something I never had to do with other brands. I've also thought from time to time that my 200-600 @ 5.6-6.3 needs more light than my old Panasonic 100-400 5.6-6.3, when I'd expect them to be identical. Is it the underrated sensor?
I have searched the internet using every search term I can think of but cannot find another reference to this anywhere. Does anyone have something that could substantiate this?