All Activity

I don't think any camera guide mentions it, most manufacturers remain mute. It is discussed regularly and typically pointed out during new camera reviews. If Sony were trying to keep it a secret, they wouldn't let their shills say anything. There's no chance of keeping anything like this quiet these days, someone is going to spill the beans. I suspect they, like other manufacturers, don't discuss it in print for some technical reason. I have discussed it with Sony reps at local camera events on several occasions, it's no secret. In fact, they like to tell you about the advantages in practical application. One thing I noticed in the chart above. The DR chart shows a smaller gain at ISO 400 than the read noise chart. This one is more accurate for noise, and you can see that ISO 400 is actually similar to ISO 126. That's a huge advantage. If you check this chart for your A7 RV you'll see that ISO 320 gets you down to between 126 and 159, seems plenty usable to me. And a different look. The shadow improvement charts show where the shadows are improved for DR, and how much. In the A7 IV there's about a 2-1/2 stop improvement at ISO 400, and then no additional improvement at all until you get to ISO 56K, where Sony applies in-camera NR. According to the primer on this chart, there is no degradation of noise along these flat lines, like from 400 to 51K. Not sure I can agree with that, but I can certainly recover image into ISO 50K in testing and shoot ISO 16-20K successfully.

It is 320 for stills on my A7R5 so it’s 5/3 stops. I have used it on occasions but it’s a bit low to be any huge deal. It is much more use in video where it is 2500. Have a search for any of those terms you mentioned above in any current Sony camera online guide & I doubt you will find anything. I was at an event yesterday where there were two Sony reps & they wouldn’t discuss it even though one of the presenters mentioned it when talking about his A7S3.

Yes, I would always wait a week before installing just to see if anyone has problems. This is good advice for any software updates to be honest.

'Dual ISO', 'Dual Native ISO', or 'Dual Gain Amplification'. Almost every Sony camera has it. In APS-C since the 6100, in the A7 series since the A7R MII, The A9 series all have it, and the A1 series. Sony certainly 'admits' to it, it's not a secret and was a selling point early on. Now almost every manufacturer has it. Essentially, the signal goes through an analog amplifier, is then changed to a digital signal and then goes through a digital amplifier. There is a greater advantage on FF cameras than on APS-C. Of the A7 series, the A7 IV is the most pronounced. ISO 400 is about the same as ISO 225 or so. I have shot inside museums with the A7 IV and the 24-105/4 with no flash and gotten excellent results. My A1 is better yet, the second stage kicks in higher at ISO 500 or so, but it still delivers about ISO 250 noise. Everyone should learn where the second stage on their camera kicks in. You could assign it to a custom shooting set or a custom key to provide quick access if needed.

Agreed. Sony's crappy firmware updates fail enough on their own, you don't need to help them along.

Thank you so much for this answer! I was just having the same issue on my A1 II. It was driving me nuts.

En mode photo je ne sais pas,j car je fais très peu de photo en mode film et en LOG le 200iso valeur mini en log donne de bons résultats 800iso faut y être obligé. (ça peut bruiter) J'ai fait un test 200iso et 800iso en log même cadrage même moment de la journée ..En 800 j'ai un peu de bruit vidéo. Pas une grosse expérience mais depuis un certain temps je filme tout en Log par bonne lumière. Merci de ta réponse

Yes. You can shoot video at whatever ISO you want. But it's like shooting stills at ISO 80, 64, or 50 when the native ISO is 100 - it's not recommended for best quality. You will notice that when setting ISO, some settings will have a line above and below them (as mentioned in the video I linked to). These are 'Extended Settings'.

You're very lucky. You really need to follow instructions to the letter when doing firmware updates as it is easy to 'brick' your camera if you do it incorrectly.

I thought I'd write up what happened to me to help others with similar predicaments. I stupidly didn't read the instructions when I updated the firmware on my a6700. I inserted a freshly a6700 formatted SD card with the firmware update. And proceeded to start the update process. When the screen went black for a few seconds, I thought there was an error and shut off the camera, not realizing this was part of the update process. (I think it's a dumb idea to have a black screen for the update process.) My camera wouldn't turn on. All I'd get was a black screen and a blinking red light on the bottom left side of the camera. I tried all sorts of things for hours upon hours. None of them worked. Here's what did work: I erased the SD card and formatted it in exFAT format on my Mac. Then I added the firmware update. Then I inserted the card and turned the camera on. After a few minutes, the screen turned on. (I think this should be done with a full battery.) Anyways, I thought I'd have to have my camera repaired. But it turned out to be a simple solution.

Merci pour vos réponses je vais continuer à filmer en LOG Oui Sony et muet la dessus ! Je vais donc continuer à filmer en LOG à 200 iso avec mon A6700 ...ça fonctionne très bien et d'après test que j'ai fait c'est mieux que 800 iso où le bruit apparaît Sur vos appareil avez vous la possibilité en LOG de descendre à 200 Iso comme moi ?

Started with a Minolta film camera, bought a Canon Rebel t6i, upgraded to my a6400 last year, main reason being it's megapixel count, size, lens options, and needing a faster fps for shooting sports.

I had the 18-135 as it came with the body, but I replaced it with the 55-210. I noticed a lot of vignetting on the wide end and it was not quite enough reach for outdoor sports. What I'm mainly after is a replacement for the 16-50 that has a little extra reach but maintains sharpness at the wide end. I have a personal vendetta towards power zoom lenses, so I'm not even considering the 18-105. At some point I do intend to replace my 55-210 for a 70-350 G OSS.

I'd till shoot for the 18-105 or 18-135. Both are top drawer lenses.

A6300 for APS-C / small pixel A7C2 for FF / large pixel pretty amazing how much stuff they have packed into these computersinsmallbox when compared to my very old olympus om1 which still works and gives me an excuse to roll up a film canister once in a while ☺️

I also have the exact same issue, has anyone found a solution?

Thanks for the info. That’s good to know. I haven’t used my camera in crop mode. I believe that Sony doesn’t document or even admit to any of their cameras having dual ISO. I don’t even know if that’s the correct term for it.

I did mean the 16-50. I have a 55-210mm lens that I use for sports, and I find that that is too big for some sports, especially indoor ones.

The difference between the focal length you have and the focal length you want to buy is negligible. Rather than try to replace the 15-50, buy a lens that will augment it. 70mm is way too short for sports, even on an APS-C sensor. Or if you really want and all-in-one, look at the 18-135. At least you'll be getting closer to a proper sports focal length. Also, I am not aware of a 15-50. There's an 16-50 power zoom.

It does, and it behaves the same as the A7R5. In fact, the ISO performance of the A6700 is identical to the A7R5 in crop mode. https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Sony ILCE-6700,Sony ILCE-7RM5

The age old question: Tamron vs Sony. I'm upgrading from the powerzoom 15-50 kit lens Sony gives you on my a6400, and I need something with a larger maximum zoom range, hence the 17/16-70mm range. I mainly shoot sports, portrait, and automotive, with some video on the side. The main reason I am torn between the two is the varying price, with the Sony being almost 1/3 the price of the Tamron. If anyone has shot extensively with either lens and would be able to show some demo photos, please tag onto the thread!

I have an A7R5 but I use Sony flashes. I think you will have to look to Godox to rectify this.

The A7R5 has dual minimum ISO. For shooting S-LOG 3 video, those minimum ISO's are 800 and 2500. For shooting stills they are 100 and 320. I don't believe the A6700 has dual ISO. Have a look at this video: Sony a7R V Dual ISO EXPLAINED! Best Low Light Performance ISO Settings

Problem with the Sony A7R5 and the Godox AD600pro, V860 ii and X3s. The high speed sync (HSS) only works in the camera's "fill flash" setting and there when you set TTL it fires 5 consecutive flashes instead of one. Furthermore, it works, let's say correctly (rather overexposed) up to a speed of 1/320s. From there, the more you lower the speed to 1/1250 or 1/2000, the more it underexposes them. The flash illumination remains stuck at 1/8, that is, as it was at a speed of 1/320, although there is the possibility of increasing it to 1/1 as is done in the manual setting. Can someone solve the underexposing problem in the high speed sync mode of the Sony A7R5?

Merci beaucoup de ta réponse. Pourquoi tant d'iso ? c'est de nuit 2500 iso ...Pourtant c'est un plein format Avec le A6700 j'ai d'excellents résultats en LOG à 200 Iso et pas besoin de filtre neutre Mais Le A7R5 est sans doute différent ...Pas donné le boitier ! Perso je me casse pas la tête pour l'expo LOG 4:2:2 10bits ça supporte pas mal les corrections d'expo Mais je ne suis qu'un modeste amateur ...Ce qui n'empêche pas des exigences en qualité d'images. Avec le A7600, Sony a sorti un très bon boitier APS-C à un tarif abordable Les gars de l'autre forum ont finalement trouvé pour son LOG à moins de 800 iso Tu devrais pouvoir descendre les ISO jusqu'à 200 en LOG et que 800 iso c'est mieux c'est des blagues en tout cas pas avec le A6700 A+