Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
GAS attack imminent
Page <prev 2 of 2
Feb 4, 2016 13:20:27   #
Forrestloop Loc: Los Angeles
 
jerryc41 wrote:
Old is good. I tell myself that every time I look in the mirror. :D



Me Too....

:thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
Feb 4, 2016 21:05:47   #
picturedude Loc: Yosemite natl. park, Ca.
 
But it's not Halloween!

Reply
Feb 4, 2016 21:52:01   #
JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA
 
John_F wrote:
Reading deeper in the dpreview article I discovered the sensor is the same size as the a6000, namely 23.5 by 15.6 mm. Something about copper wiring, but I don't have the faintest meaning about what this means beyond that 'what the a6000 uses no copper' which seems a stretch. The a6300 ARW (Sony version of RAW) remains at 14 bit depth pixels. Using 2 bits as inter-pixel separation bits leaves 12 for colors, 4 each for R, G, and B. This means 16 shades of R, G, and B. So this digital data is fed to Photoshop will get interpolated up to 8 bit color RGB channels, or 256 shades of each. Given this sparse bit depth, might it be that a 'camera' pixel is for either R, G or B such that it takes 3 'camera' pixels to capture any intermediate color, such as orange. :?:
Reading deeper in the dpreview article I discovere... (show quote)


This isn't correct. A JPEG stores it's information in 8-bits for each color. This gives you 2^8 = 256 levels.

If you shoot RAW, different cameras store the information as either 12-bits, 14-bits or even 16-bits. A 12-bit RAW file is 2^12 = 4K levels for each of the 3 colors. A 14-bit file contains 4 times that amount or 16K levels for each color. There are cameras that can store 16-bit information, including the CCDs that people buy for astrophotography. With 16-bits, you have 4 times the 14-bit value, or 64K levels per color.

There is no information in the 8, or 12, or 14 or 16 bit value that identifies which color it is describing. Instead, the JPEG or RAW file is structured such that the SW that reads it knows that it is reading a red pixel, or a blue pixel or a green pixel. The camera uses a Bayer Matrix over the sensor in which 25% are covered with a red filter, 25% with a blue filter and 50% with a green filter. Thus out of every 4 pixels, you have 1 red, 1 blue and 2 green pixels. The SW you use to read the file uses this information present the image so you can see it.

Also, Photoshop only downscales an image to 8-bits if you decide to save it as a JPEG. If it is saved into other formats such as TIFF or PNG, it retains the same bit-depth. If you use Photoshop Elements, it processes the file in 8-bits and you lose the additional bit information.

Thus going back to the A6300, it can save in 14-bit non-compressed format. If you compare to the A6000, it doesn't offer 14-bit non-compressed format. It offers 12-bit lossey compression (the A6300 also offers this format as an option if you want to use it). But what you see here is that the A6000 is 4K levels for each color and the A6300 is 16K levels for each color, and it remains at this number of bits as you edit in Photoshop and don't save as a JPEG.

But there is more. The A6300 can use Silent Electronic Shutter Mode which doesn't use the mechanical shutter. There will be some restrictions on how this can be used, but the big advantage is that the mechanical shutter is not subject to where out while using this mode. This might be nice for time lapse images such as imaging the night sky over a period of time and turning it into a movie.

Now for the copper wires. They offer two big advantages.

1) They can be thinner than traces on the sensor and use up less real-estate meaning that there is more room for pixels. In the case of the A6300, they ended up making the sensors larger. The larger the sensor, the more light it picks up and the lower the noise.

2) The copper wires will transfer the data from the sensor much faster meaning that the camera can do things much faster than previous conventional sensors.

These are very good things to have.

So, my take on this is that perhaps the IQ is not that much better, but the camera can do things that the A6000 may not be able to do. If you compare images taken under ideal conditions, both the A6000 and A6300 will produce similar results. But make the conditions less favorable, the A6300 will outperform the A6000.

I was hoping for IBIS, and my luck would be that as soon as I purchase one, that Sony will announce an A7000 that does have IBIS! But I am leaning to get this camera. I have an A6000 and these cameras are small enough to carry two cameras, one with a wider angle lens and one with a longer type lens and have everything covered without the need to be changing lenses.

I also intend to make use of HDR photography more with this camera too. Using Silent Electronic Shutter, taking 3 or 5 images at a time does not wear out the mechanical shutter. When I go to look at the images, perhaps I want to use or don't want to use the extra images, but it is of no extra cost to take them and to discard what is not wanted.

Reply
 
 
Feb 5, 2016 00:51:19   #
picturedude Loc: Yosemite natl. park, Ca.
 
The older the Fiddle, the sweeter the tune!!&#128121;

The older the Buck, the stiffer the horn. (Your smileage may vary.)

Reply
Feb 5, 2016 01:15:02   #
BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA
 
jerryc41 wrote:
Old is good. I tell myself that every time I look in the mirror. :D

Strange...... Every time I do that, I get a stark reminder of Agatha Christie's The Mirror Crack'd.

Reply
Feb 5, 2016 03:46:15   #
tdekany Loc: Oregon
 
rmalarz wrote:
The question that might be asked is, have my photographic skills exceeded the capabilities of the equipment I'm currently using? That should end your GAS problem.
--Bob


:thumbup:

Reply
Feb 5, 2016 04:06:30   #
SonnyE Loc: Communist California, USA
 
I am an old Sonny....

Oh wait...

Gas freely John. :twisted:

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 2
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.