1st Sinarback eMotion 75 LV "generation 2" Real condition shooting

[nicolas claris]

At the end of last week, I received a nice box from Sinar:
The new Sinarback eMotion 75 LV "generation 2" with enhance electronic board for less noise/better sensitivity
Another lens: Schneider AFD S-Angulon 2.8/50 PQS - I guess this one will be glued to the Hy6 with its hood, for the helicopter shots, thanks to AFD…

But for now, no heli! I had a shoot to do this morning of a great moment during the construction of a yacht: the aluminum hull being turned upside… up!
These hulls are being built lying on their deck, then turned… today was the day, and for the first time since I have the Hy6, I felt confident enough to shoot more with the Sinar than with the Canon 1Ds Mk3!

Then at the end of the work (turning the hull), as everything was quiet for a few minutes, I could try the different ISO settings…

Note the huge difference of light there, facing windows on top to the sky and down below with all the shadows one could think of…
Of course 100 ISO is better than 200 which is better than 400 which is better than 800 but, beleive me, the difference is now not that big anf I know that Noise Ninja would get rid of it easily…
There's a bunch of improvement there, now I know that in bright sun, if I need more speed, I won't hesitate to increase the ISO. Good news!

Now the image, it is a cloudy day in Bordeaux with a lot of wind, hence some difference in lighting you may see… Also note that it is a quite dusty environment.

The boat? 86 feet long…

The files were DNGed with eXposure 6.01 then opened thru ACR 4.4.1, a slight light/shadow in CS3 That's all… no sharpening, nothing else…

ISO 100 - 50mm - ƒ11 - 1/2.5s

 

[nicolas claris]

100% Crops below:

ISO 100 - 50mm - ƒ11 - 1/2.5s

ISO 200 - 50mm - ƒ11 - 1/4s

ISO 400 - 50mm - ƒ11 - 1/6.3s

ISO 800 - 50mm - ƒ11 - 1/12s

 

[nicolas claris]

Another area cropped 100%

ISO 100 - 50mm - ƒ11 - 1/2.5s

ISO 200 - 50mm - ƒ11 - 1/4s

ISO 400 - 50mm - ƒ11 - 1/6.3s

ISO 800 - 50mm - ƒ11 - 1/12s

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Hi Nicolas,

Thanks for sharing.

Of course 100 ISO is better than 200 which is better than 400 which is better than 800 but, beleive me, the difference is now not that big anf I know that Noise Ninja would get rid of it easily…
There's a bunch of improvement there, now I know that in bright sun, if I need more speed, I won't hesitate to increase the ISO. Good news!

The noise seems pretty well controlled for the higher ISO's, assuming you indeed turned the default noise reduction in ACR to 0. Especially at the higher ISOs I do see some softening, but that could come from firmware or software, or both (ACR being the most likely).

However, (but this is not specific for the 75 LV) one does lose some dynamic range when ISO goes up. This is inherent to how ISO is implemented in a CCD/CMOS device, by boosting the analog gain for the Analog Digital Converter (ADC).

The effect is clear from your examples, assuming you fixed the aperture and let the camera set the exposure time in function of ISO. When the exposure time was adjusted in proportion with the ISO setting the overall exposure signal is halved with each higher ISO step, and amplified by 2 as well. That should result in the same output level, if it were not for the addition and amplification of noise (there's no free lunch). This will (and does) manifest itself most visibly in the shadows, and will result in loss of dynamic range. It is visible in your crops in the dark areas as a loss of definition (as if there was less light in the shadows, they just go dark). The loss at ISO 200 is small, but visible. The losses at higher ISOs may be problematic unless one needs the sensitivity for shorter shutterspeeds.

I fully recognize the trade-off between getting a usable shot without motion blur, but with a compromised Dynamic Range, or no usable shot at all. Especially when one is faced with the difficult/dynamic shooting situations you have to cope with. In that respect the improved performance at higher ISOs is most welcome. However, I wouldn't underestimate the importance of Dynamic Range for Image Quality (IQ) either. It's good that the 75 LV has some IQ to spare, it makes the compromise more palatable.

Although difficult to do well, not only due to the number of variables in the Raw processing workflow, it would be interesting to see a comparison between the 75 LV and your 1Ds3. I know from personal experience how easy it is to lose shadow definition with the 1Ds3, even at ISO 100, the 75 LV should be a bit better (16-bits, slightly larger sensels, Raw processing). A simple static scene with something white to calibrate the exposure level on, and something dark either in the shadow or just underexposed, would be telling.

It remains a fine balancing act between high enough speed for the situation at hand, with the lowest possible ISO, regardless of the camera one uses. It therefore helps to start with the best quality, so one can afford to lose some along the way.

Bart

 

[Thierry Hagenauer]

hi Bart,

you are absolutely right: it is a fine balance and it is like "walking on a thin rope", being careful not to slip left or right.

But not speaking now specifically about a brand, I am still positively surprised by what is possible and the information contained in such a file. I remember when shooting ISO 800 with film, and though not excatly comparable, it is not the same kind of information you are able to keep at the end.

Best regards,
Thierry

However, (but this is not specific for the 75 LV) one does lose some dynamic range when ISO goes up. This is inherent to how ISO is implemented in a CCD/CMOS device, by boosting the analog gain for the Analog Digital Converter (ADC).

I fully recognize the trade-off between getting a usable shot without motion blur, but with a compromised Dynamic Range, or no usable shot at all. Especially when one is faced with the difficult/dynamic shooting situations you have to cope with. In that respect the improved performance at higher ISOs is most welcome. However, I wouldn't underestimate the importance of Dynamic Range for Image Quality (IQ) either. It's good that the 75 LV has some IQ to spare, it makes the compromise more palatable.

It remains a fine balancing act between high enough speed for the situation at hand, with the lowest possible ISO, regardless of the camera one uses. It therefore helps to start with the best quality, so one can afford to lose some along the way.

Bart

 

[nicolas claris]

Hi Bart and Thierry

Thanks for taking time to look and comment.

Re the thin rope, during the rest of the shoot (the one for the client), depending of what were happening, I have used ISO from 100 to 400 (no need for 800).

I agree with Bart for the loss of DR, but once again, let me draw your attention on the high DR of the scene…

As you may see in the exif infos I posted, I maintained the same ƒ11 for all shots.

See below the ACR infos (sharpeness/noise) used to devellop each pic:

I'll may find a corresponding pic done with the 1Ds3… I'll dig…

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

See below the ACR infos (sharpeness/noise) used to devellop each pic:

I see that you have some default Luminance an Color noise reduction still activated in ACR (I have changed it to 0 for my camera defaults). It is a bit of a gamble how ACR uses that for the different ISO's, on DNGs. I'd set them to zero, and hope they are mostly taken out of the loop as variables. In earlier versions of ACR, just changing the ISO value with an editor in the EXIF already produced different results in output for Canon Raws. Maybe there is still something similar going on for other cameras or DNGs, who knows. I'm also pretty sure that NoiseNinja/NeatImage can do a better job than ACR noise reduction.

Also, with the current quality of sensor arrays, I'm not too worried about some noise, it can sometimes even help printed output. It's the Dynamic Range that's becoming important again, now that noise is better than it used to be. Dynamic Range requires relatively large sensels (at the expense of speed), paired with quality electronics, to keep read noise levels under control.

Bart

 

[nicolas claris]

Hi Bart

yes some little NR in ACR but quite a few in fact and the same for all 4 pics…

I'll give a try tomorrow with no NR and Noise Ninja in PP, we'll see!

Thanks again for taking time to read and comment…

 

[Theodore Diehl]

Hi Nicholas,
Fantastic comparison shots that really show some of the variables in the process. Thanks for these. Also nice to see the 50mm in action after our previous discussion ;-)
Ciao,
Theodore

 

[nicolas claris]

Thanks Theodore

so see some more below!

Bart, one's again you're fully and plenty right!

So below are the same crops from the same DNGs, still developped with ACR 4.4.1 but with both NR set to zero, then in PS the same highlight/recovery and Noise Ninja denoising…

100% crop 100 ISO:

100% crop 200 ISO:

100% crop 400 ISO:

100% crop 800 ISO:

 

[nicolas claris]

Second crop:

100% crop 100 ISO:

100% crop 200 ISO:

100% crop 400 ISO:

100% crop 800 ISO:

I'm sure that with a little more time than a few minutes, this last one (800 ISO) could be far more enhanced…

 

[nicolas claris]

And, now, still at Bart Request, below are 2 crops of almost the same image shot at 100 and 400 ISO, sorry, I didn't shoot any at 800 ISO…

BTW, look at one of the interest of 33 Mpix beside 21 (only!) the size!

100% crop, Canon 1DsM3 - 24-70 L @34mm - ƒ8 - 100ISO - 1/4s

100% crop, Canon 1DsM3 - 24-70 L @34mm - ƒ8 - 400 ISO - 1/20s

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

So below are the same crops from the same DNGs, still developped with ACR 4.4.1 but with both NR set to zero, then in PS the same highlight/recovery and Noise Ninja denoising…

Hi Nicolas,

They're much better. The image quality suffers much less from the ISO boosts. While image quality inevitably suffers from increased ISO's, even ISO 400 looks quite usable. ISO 800 loses too much Dynamic range definition in the shadows, and I don't think that it is caused by NN. Maybe the Sinar uses some noise reduction in addition to the improved electronics?

Bart

 

[Ben Dearnley]

No, it doesn't. Thierry is quite specific about that in other posts/forums. Some other brands do that, but the Sinar doesn' t - it leaves the choice up to the user. Correct me if I'm wrong Thierry.

Ben

 

[Thierry Hagenauer]

hi Bart,

To make something clear: NO, Sinar eXposure DOES NOT use any NR when converting into DNG. In our philosophy this should be left entirely at the desire of the user.

Yes, IQ inevitably suffers when increasing ISO.

Concerning the ISO 800: I refer also to my ISO 800 sample posted here a few weeks ago. I do believe that the DNG showed does STILL have a very "decent" to not say "remarkable": look at the details still available in the shadows (and highlights).

http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5624&page=3

Admitted, I have worked on in PP with ACR: have applied "Colour Noise" 25, used "Highlight Recovery", "Fill Light" and "Black", changed the "Contrast" and "Brightness", and adjusted a bit the colours/tonalities with "HSL/Greyscale" (but this for my personal taste, not for IQ). All in all it took me about 5 minutes to get it. What I think it shows, is the amount of information still available in a ISO 800 file with 16 bit.

Best regards,
Thierry

Hi Nicolas,

They're much better. The image quality suffers much less from the ISO boosts. While image quality inevitably suffers from increased ISO's, even ISO 400 looks quite usable. ISO 800 loses too much Dynamic range definition in the shadows, and I don't think that it is caused by NN. Maybe the Sinar uses some noise reduction in addition to the improved electronics?

Bart

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

To make something clear: NO, Sinar eXposure DOES NOT use any NR when converting into DNG. In our philosophy this should be left entirely at the desire of the user.

And I fully agree with that. It should be left to the user. Thanks for clarifying it.

It does then however raise a question if perhaps ACR still applies NR (especially to the ISO 800) despite being set to zero, or Nicolas has not yet found the perfect NoiseNinja settings. As he said, he only had a few minutes with it. Maybe an ISO 800 crop without NN will show whether it is ACR or NN, now that we can rule out Sinar eXposure.

We're learning a lot as we go ..., and things are getting better all the time.

Bart

 

[nicolas claris]

We're learning a lot as we go ..., and things are getting better all the time.

Bart You're pushing me and the 800 ISO file beyond the limit! (and I like that…:

Still same DNG but processed with C1-4 :

800 ISO - 100% crop

800 ISO - 100% crop

Though a little to much sharpened…

 

[Graham Mitchell]

Interesting thread. Thanks for taking the time to post these comparisons.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Nicolas,

Thanks so much for the pretty substantial effort you have taken to bring to us the capability of the new Sinarback eMotion 75 LV "generation 2" and especially comparing it to the 1DsIII. Bart's point on dynamic range is important and Thierry's definitive statement on Sinar's "no hidden NR" policy in converting to DNG clarifies things well.

Now what do you personally think the differences are for you shooting Sinar versus the 1DsIII for this still work and again you more active shots (besides the obvious fact that your 700-200 IS and the 600mm IS lens wont fit on the Sinar body)?

Asher