Jump to content

Pixel binning vs bigger pixel camera? Models that use it?

avalon

By avalon,
in Sony Alpha Full Frame Cameras

 Share

Recommended Posts

avalon Explorer

avalon

Posted
Posted

Hello. I wanted to know if pixel binning works in mirrorless camera‘s to boost sensitivity as do larger pixels or it has no significant impact on signal gain? Which models support pixel binning? Maybe there are other techniques that help boost low light performance without resorting to longer exposure times?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pieter Mentor

Pieter

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, avalon said:

Which thread?

This one:

36 minutes ago, avalon said:

I'm interested in high ISO settings even above 102400 for cases where light is extremelly scarce.

Photo or video?

36 minutes ago, avalon said:

Where I can find database specifying pixel binning supported models?

I guess all models released after the A7Rv have it, and was apparently also added to A1 and A7iv via firmware. But I daren't make any claims on this anymore 😉 Google is your friend.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
MikeInOr Rookie

MikeInOr

Posted
Posted

With my A7RIV I rarely have noise issues.  But if I am shooting high ISO in a dark environment I will run the RAW through the denoise on my computer before downsizing it with the same software.  I know it isn't in camera and it isn't automatic but it is VERY effective!  The cameras that have this built in is doing the same thing as far as downsizing the JPEG from the original RAW. 

Maybe I am wrong but I doubt the A7RV, A7IV and A1 will output a downsized RAW file?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Cameratose Rising Star

Cameratose

Posted
Posted

W

1 hour ago, FunWithCameras said:

The problem with the reduced resolution files is that they are not RAW. They have been de-mosaiced. So you don't get regular RAW processing on these files.

To get optimal results I'd prefer to shoot the native resolution, process it as a regular RAW, and then down-res the result.

They are Small, Medium, and Large RAW. And if needed, turning off de-mosaic in your software isn't that difficult.

Link to post
Share on other sites
FunWithCameras Community Regular

FunWithCameras

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Cameratose said:

W

They are Small, Medium, and Large RAW. And if needed, turning off de-mosaic in your software isn't that difficult.

No, they are not RAW. RAW files contain single colour samples taken at each of the sensels in the sensor.

These files are some half-way stage between RAW and fully processed. They are not accepted by a variety of de-noise processing software which requires RAW files.

Even the software which does process them has certain limitations, precisely because they are not RAW files. 

Use them if the idea of having smaller files appeals to you, but don't pretend that they are true RAW files.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Cameratose Rising Star

Cameratose

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, FunWithCameras said:

No, they are not RAW. RAW files contain single colour samples taken at each of the sensels in the sensor.

These files are some half-way stage between RAW and fully processed. They are not accepted by a variety of de-noise processing software which requires RAW files.

Even the software which does process them has certain limitations, precisely because they are not RAW files. 

Use them if the idea of having smaller files appeals to you, but don't pretend that they are true RAW files.

Cite please. Not going to argue about it, Sony says they're RAW. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Cameratose Rising Star

Cameratose

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, MikeInOr said:

That kind of goes against my definition of RAW but if it works for you... cool!

Not sure exactly what that means? Do you know what it means? Sony says it's RAW, not lossy RAW, not compressed, not jpeg, not HEIF, but RAW. So, unless and until someone can show me a cite stating that it's not, then it's RAW. It doesn't matter if anyone defines it as RAW or not. Show me a cite. 

For the record, I don't use them. I didn't buy a 50MP camera so I could shoot 20MP.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pieter Mentor

Pieter

Posted
Posted (edited)

I guess if you're a purist who defines RAW as the actual raw data produced by the sensor then people have a point: M and S RAW formats are post-processed in camera, where the initial 60 MP of data (in case of A7Rv) is downsampled. The downsampled pixels contain RGB data instead of just R, G or B as it was in the full-size RAW. Does it matter? No, you can just process M or S sized RAW images as if they were shot natively, with the same post-processing headroom. Shouldn't matter much whether you post-process a 60 MP RAW image and store it as 26 MP, or take a 26 MP M-sized RAW and post-process it to your liking.

Edited by Pieter
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • Pieter
      Blurry images on Sony 70-350

      By Pieter · Posted

      I've been using this lens extensively without any sharpness issues. At long focal lengths, you'll have to factor in the need for a faster shutter speed (< 1/500-ish at 350mm) and other factors like atmospheric distortion, fog/dust haze, etc. All these factors contribute to a deterioration of image quality at longer focal lengths.
    • Cameratose
      Blurry images on Sony 70-350

      By Cameratose · Posted

      That's supposed to be a pretty good APS-C lens. Can you try it on a different camera just for the heck of it? Friend? Camera shop? The lens is noted for sharpness, so if you're having as much trouble as you say, you may want to look into a replacement or repair. 
    • broz_tito
      Blurry images on Sony 70-350

      By broz_tito · Posted

      Hi everyone, I’m reaching out to the community because I’m facing a persistent image quality issue with my Sony 70–350mm f/4.5–6.3 G OSS lens, and I’d like to know if this is normal behavior or if my copy is defective. Problem description: I’ve extensively compared the 70–350mm G OSS with my Sony 18–135mm f/3.5–5.6 OSS, using a Sony A6700, under controlled conditions: • Identical lighting and background • Same subject and position (LEGO figure, consistent framing) • Tripod or steady support • Manual focus or AF with center point • Same shutter speed (e.g., 1/200s), similar ISO (ISO 4000–6400), RAW + JPEG • OIS turned on (and also tested with OIS off) My observations: • At 135mm, the 70–350mm G OSS delivers softer, flatter images than the 18–135mm, even when stopped down. • At 350mm, the sharpness drops significantly – the center is soft, and textures (like LEGO tiles or fabric) appear blurred or smudged. • Contrast and micro-detail are noticeably inferior across all focal lengths. • The 18–135mm at 135mm (even cropped) retains better edge sharpness and detail definition. • Both JPEG and RAW files confirm the issue – this is not just JPEG processing or noise reduction. Question to the community: • Have others experienced similar softness with the 70–350mm? • Is it possible I have a decentered or optically misaligned copy? • Is there a known issue with OSS introducing softness at long focal lengths? I wanted to love this lens due to the range and portability, but currently it’s unusable for anything where image quality matters. I’m considering returning or sending it for service. Thanks in advance for any feedback or comparison results you can share.  

  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...