Wierd: A99 JPG quality beats the RX1 in Dynamic Range and Noise handling according to Techradar.
Image courtesy: Techradar.
The latest RX1 test made by Techradar (Click here) shows an unexpected result. The JPG quality of the RX1 is worse than the one delivered by the A99. While RAW files for Dynamic Range and Noise are very similar (with the A99 having the edge on mid ISO). I am surprised to see that the JPG quality shows that huge(!) difference. I actually was expecting a better result!
The only real image quality of the advantage of the RX1 can be seen at Low ISO when shooting RAW. Than you will get the best results (and better than the A99).
Click these links to check price and in Stock status: Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Wex UK ,Wex Germany, Sonystore DE-UK-FR-IT-ES-NL-SE-FI-CH and more links at Alphacameradeals. Save $170 by simply purchasing the $7 cheap chinese metal hood (there is one here on eBay) instead of the original expensive Sony hood.
oVan
5 months ago |The RX1 ships with jpeg quality setting as Fine. Maybe they forgot to set it as Extra Fine?
a900andanex5
5 months ago |I wonder if these results could purely be down to the amount of noise reduction applied to the jpeg?
I’d personally prefer less noise reduction, so more pleasing pictures to my eye but that might give worse technical measurements
Ryan
5 months ago |This only proves the tech radars tests are just ridiculously terrible.
spam
5 months ago |Exactly, Techradar produce unreliable results all the time.
mkln
5 months ago |Techradar has consistently shown wrong results compared to DxO even though they use DxO software. I would not consider those results as valid and I suggest waiting for DxO.
ArtoS
5 months ago |Hoh hoh hoh, they all are good enough for me!
No need to sell my A99
Bengt Nyman
5 months ago |It seems to me that electronics and signal processing in the RX1 might have been compromised in favor of the very small camera body. Pixel peeking RX1 images suggest the same thing; the RX1 image quality is good but not as good as some of the best 24 MP FF cameras out today.
Also; the Zeiss lens is a macro lens with less than stellar performance at longer distances.
HAPPY NEW YEAR.
Vlad
5 months ago |Really? Bad performance at long distances according to whom?
mict
5 months ago |I dont like your fantasies. Sonnar is not a macro design.
Torsten Bronger
5 months ago |I wonder how sensful such tests are. The JPEG dynamic range is a matter of taste of the manufacturer. Sometimes I want high dynamic range in my JPEGs, sometimes I want high contrast. If you don’t like it, use the RAWs.
simon
5 months ago |exactly the point, often a lower dynamic range picture will look better than a high dynamic range photo. but if you want to decide yourself how your pictures look like it is of course better to have a higher dynamic range available (not in the final picture, that is something entirely different). but then of course in that case you are not going to shoot jpg.
it is a bad test, but it is even worse to pick it up. sorry. pleas don’t worry too much about measurements. I like them to compare the raw!!!! dynamic range between cameras, but in the end that is only one surprisingly tiny part of the quality (note: not “image quality” just quality, it is more important if you are talking about “image quality” but still not everything.) of your images.
Vivek
5 months ago |Even if the tests are flawed, I am not surprised.
Are there any images from the Rx1 that shows incredible DR (not “great for a P&S cam”) to be put in the league with better, more capable cameras?
The bottom line that a sensor alone does not make a camera, however cute the camera may be.
Vlad
5 months ago |The bottom line is that this test means squat.
Vivek
5 months ago |Ingrate! Can’t you even appreciate the efforts in to making the nice color charts?
Mike
5 months ago |This website is testing phones, computers, all kinds of cameras, printers, TVs, …
Do we really expect them to be expert testers with a level of experience comparable to dedicated testers like DXO?
Karen G.
5 months ago |That is true, Mike.
GrauUhu
5 months ago |You’ve hit the nail on the head.
Boooe
5 months ago |Only weird thing there is that Andreas still mentions crap that Techradar writes
Bob D
5 months ago |Read Techradar’s Canon G15 review and look at the RAW dynamic range plot for the G12. Compare that to DxOMark’s G12 dynamic range score, then tell me if Techradar has any idea what they’re doing.
tesilab
5 months ago |There are two or possibly three factors at work here:
1. Differences in jpeg settings and or jpeg engine.
2. Difference between nominal ISO and measured ISO (which is Techradar really using?)
3. Possible differences in sensor support hardware due to size limitations, or possibly even cost limitations given the limited anticipated production run.
IMO, buying an RX1 to shoot jpegs is just plain wrong.
emopunk
5 months ago |Come on guys, does someone get surprised of Sony flagship model boasting such great IQ? It’s just what it’s supposed to be. A great camera with great IQ.
Steve Jones
5 months ago |Using JPEG quality as a measure of a camera’s underlying capability is wholly pointless. A JPEG is the result of processing the RAW data through a series of predefined settings chosen by the camera’s manufacturer based on a whole series of assumptions over what might be considered desirable or not (albeit many cameras have processing options which can be applied – like increasing the DR of a camera’s JPEG by applying a different tone curve. As such, it is measuring the output and a high dynamic range might not be appropriate in all circumstances (for instance, it can flatten the apparent contrast in the output for some images).
In-camera JPEGs are for those that want (or need) instant image gratification (e.g. journalists on a tight timescale). If you want the best IQ appropriate to your image requirements, then only processing from RAW will give you that, and that’s only way where the fundamental basic performance of the camera’s sensor and optics will be demonstrated. By definition JPEGs will lost basic information in the image that can never be recovered.
SonyCyberPunk
5 months ago |Oh yeah? What if I don’t want to spend hours behind a computer processing RAW which be dumbed down to a JPG for output anyway?
I’m looking for the best in JPG output from the camera.
…and I’m not a photojournalist, either.
Stan
5 months ago |If you’re one of those, who buys RX1 – you will be shooting in RAW. You’re forgetting that the camera is targeted at Pro’s, who would like to have a secondary, high quality camera handy.
As far as Semi-Pro crowd goes – there are plenty of other choices that make RX1 pointless for us. I used to shoot JPEG+RAW on my A55, so that I could provide pre-processed images to anyone, who isn’t patient enough, as well as being able to tweak RAW files if/when needed.
SonyCyberPunk
5 months ago |Troll.
Funny
5 months ago |For canon fanboy,
With tests out there suggest raw in mkd3 not as good as D800 and A99.
Now with tests out there suggest jpeg in mkd3 is best in class.
That makes mkd3 as a camera for amateur who just want a FF or for those pro (?) who never need to due with raw.
SonyCyberPunk
5 months ago |Shooting in RAW does not make you a “pro”. Troll.
simon
5 months ago |well I guess you misunderstood. I think these images all have a very very very similar dynamic rang, from pure white to pure black (with the right subject of course) but what this bogus review is talking about is how much subject dynamic range the jpg captures. and that is by no means a measure for image quality in a jpg. your final image is probably much better when the subject dynamic range is smaller. (a higher contrast image, you often don’t want just the very very very darkest parts of the image to be black and the same goes for the highlights).
in raw (which with the right software (e.g. LR) only takes a few minutes to significantly improve images (and you can batch process them) it is of course better to have a high subject dr available to choose from. of course that doesn’t mean that you are going to show all of it in the final image. that would give you an ugly tone mapping effect, and nobody wants that (unfortunately that is not true, but it is too sad to accept, so I’m ignoring it
SonyCyberPunk
5 months ago |If I’m shooting in RAW, I’m spending an hour or more post-processing it in Photoshop. Lightroom? Really? Troll.
ottonis
5 months ago |@SonyCyberPunk: why are ou calling all these people trolls? You just admitted that you need like an hour to post-process a RAW picture. Nobody in the world needs on hour for that! Basic and quality image adjustment in Lightroom or Adobe Raw take no more than 5-6 minutes, even when using the advanced selective processing tools.
Vlad
5 months ago |You are replying to Steve Jones by asking him a question to which he already gave an answer. Weird.
SonyCyberPunk
5 months ago |Ummmm, whatever. Troll.
Vlad
5 months ago |Lol, learn how to read.
Realq86
5 months ago |I’m also very baffled by the current reviews of the A99 by dpreview and DxO. According to dpreview the A77 has a slightly wider dynamic range than the a99. It also shows the 5D3 with a wider DR than both the A99 and D800.
While every other review with side by side shot and DxO says the D800 is a DR king.
The only consistency I gathered regarding the A99 is its a bit noisy than the other FF, but we expected that from SLT.
I’m putting everything down in IQ as splitting hairs, and still put Liveview AF, EVF, swivel LCD as standouts. But I like to rest in mind that all these “reputable” sources at least are consistent with their findings.
BlackLegSanji
5 months ago |5DMk3 seems to have more dynamic range than D800 in standard tests because Canon hugely inflated the ISO rating in the Mk3. D800 ISO800 is as bright as 5Dmk3 ISO1600. Look at this comparision video: http://vimeo.com/42381520
John Maverick
5 months ago |This really deserves to be better known. I’ve seen similar things suggesting that Olympus (omd-em5) and Fuji (XPro) are doing similar ISO inflation.
Clyde
5 months ago |You’d think Sony would purchase DxO and run tests for themselves before release to other testers.
krugorg
5 months ago |It’s Techradar, it must be true! They have never posted questionable test results before.
SonyAlphaLab
5 months ago |Very surprising indeed!!
Jay
Linh
5 months ago |People who read too much into JPEG comparisons shouldn’t view comparisons too much.
DM
5 months ago |Someone shoots in JPG? really?
If you are interested in the final actual use of A99 you can see -
500px.com/search?q=a99
SonyCyberPunk
5 months ago |Yes. It’s quite liberating.
Torsten Bronger
5 months ago |The news could also be: Body colour of A99 darker than that of RX1. Really, JPEG settings are a software issue and a matter of the Sony engineer’s preferences. You could wish to have it configurable for the user, but we have already enough menue options.