- #SLEEPING DOGS HIGH RES TEXTURE PACK COMPARISON SKIN#
- #SLEEPING DOGS HIGH RES TEXTURE PACK COMPARISON ISO#
Think in terms of sports or of your kids running against the backdrop of a sunset where the action requires at least 1/500s shutter speed.
#SLEEPING DOGS HIGH RES TEXTURE PACK COMPARISON ISO#
Similarly, in brighter conditions where fast shutter speeds might require ISOs above 100 but below 500, you can use the exposure settings associated with the higher ISO, but keep the camera set to ISO 100 to retain highlights. By the time you brighten up the shot in post, the image won't be noticeably noisier than it would be if you had shot natively at a higher ISO, but you'll have saved many stops of highlight information. This means that in dim conditions, you can use the shutter speed and aperture settings of a high ISO exposure, but keep the camera set to ISO 500. The a1 essentially has two ISO invariant ranges, between 100 and 400, and 500 upward, as ISO 500 is the camera's second 'native' ISO where each pixel switches to its high conversion gain mode for better low light performance. In the crops above, the noise levels of the ISO 100 and 400 shots pushed +6 and +4 EV appear similar, while the noise levels of the ISO 8 shots pushed +3 and 0 EV appear similar. Even after a 6 EV push of an ISO 100 Raw file shot on the a1, noise levels remain modest in shadows, and are just ever so slightly behind the class-leading a7R IV.Īt first glance, the sensor in the a1 does not appear ISO invariant, but this is due to its dual gain design. Our Exposure Latitude test does what you might be temped to do in bright light: reduce the exposure to capture additional highlights, then brighten the shadows. But as we'll see below, the a1 brings a further improvement in low ISO dynamic range despite even faster sensor scan rates than either a9 model (or indeed any other consumer camera we've tested). Its first, the a9, traded off low ISO dynamic range for sensor read speed, with the a9 II improving matters by a little over 1/2 EV at its base ISO. The a1 is Sony's third camera to utilize a full-frame stacked CMOS sensor. With the a1, Sony chose to strike a slightly different balance, sacrificing a bit of fine detail for reduced luminance noise.Ĭompared to its sports-oriented peers, the a1 retains more detail at the highest ISOs than the Nikon D5 and Canon EOS-1D X III, no doubt helped by its resolution, but it does so at a slight cost of increased luminance noise and color blotches. Sony's own a7R IV looks to hold on to just fractionally more detail at these settings than the a1, which becomes a little more apparent when all are viewed at a common size, but it does so at the expense of more luminance noise. All cameras leave behind a degree of luminance noise, and honestly, all do a good job of holding on to low-contrast detail though the Canon and Nikon fall behind the other options here somewhat. Reds appear to have taken a slight dip in saturation and don't appear as Canon-esque as they did with the a7R IV.Īt higher ISO values, the Sony a1 unfortunately exhibits a fair bit of color bleed, with the Nikon putting up the strongest showing here by far.
#SLEEPING DOGS HIGH RES TEXTURE PACK COMPARISON SKIN#
Compared to the Sony a7R IV, it looks like the a1 offers a number of improvements, from these richer yellows to far less magenta-tainted blues, warmer greens and slightly less muted caucasian skin tones (similar to what we saw with the Sony a7S III). Despite the high degree of sharpening, the a1 does not suffer from the overshoot at edges that you can see in images from the Nikon.Īll of the options here output what we would call pleasing color, with the Sony exhibiting especially rich yellows. And, in spite of looking pretty similar to the Nikon Z7 II at first glance, the Sony holds on to fine detail much more effectively. Moving on to JPEGs, we can see that the Sony a1 has fairly aggressive default sharpening, and looks like it's been 'turned up a notch' compared to the Sony a7R IV. Compared to its pro-sports oriented peers, the a1 remains competitive, falling perhaps a tad bit behind the Canon EOS-1D X III and the Nikon D5, likely due to its increased pixel count. The Sony a1 can be prone to false-color artifacts though, just like the other options here, which will require a bit of work in post to remove.ĭespite being built to have absolutely insane readout speed, which often comes at a noise cost, the Sony a1 performs similarly well to the Canon EOS R5 at higher ISO values, and comes in a bit behind the Nikon Z7 II and a little ahead of Panasonic's Lumix DC-S1R. In fact, you have to look pretty closely to spot any extra detail extracted by the Sony a7R IV's higher-resolution sensor. In terms of Raw detail capture, the Sony a1 turns in a really impressive performance, easily on par with similar-resolution competitors across the scene.
0 kommentar(er)
