Z9 has way more chroma noise than Z7. (Matt Granger test video)

[sid_19911991]

According to Matt Granger, stacked sensors have 1 stop worse performance than traditional sensors. Based on my experience of using Sony A9 i, I guess that's true.

To my eyes, the Z9 starts getting a faint green cast from ISO 400 & is quite apparent at ISO 3200 onwards, while Z6 & Z7 holds up well. At ISO 6400, the chroma noise on Z9 is bad, IMO.

None of the cameras have any luminance noise issue. Z9 is sharper than Z6 which has an AA filter, but perhaps a tiny bit less sharp than Z7.

What do you think folks?

Also, Ricci confirms that the Z 100-400 is sharper than the F mount 180-400.

 

[John Navitsky]

Maybe. But his test methodology makes his test useless.

He compares an image with low dynamic range against an image with a large dynamic range and in a very uncontrolled way. His histograms looked pretty yucky with the shadows falling off the left side of the histogram. This is where you want to break out a static control image with the exact same scene for both cameras.

And even if you get that, you still have a host of other variables like each camera may have different performance at different ISOs so you'd really have to a lot of work to get to the bottom of this.

My (also) very unscientific test suggested the A1 performed very similar to my Z6ii at high ISOs and since they're both stacked sensors, I don't see any particular reason the Z9 *has* to perform worse than the A1. I guess we'll see.

FWIW, I did see some color funkyness on the A1 at super high ISO compared to the Z6ii tho. But at higher ISOs than most people would be shooting.

 

[FB101]

Maybe. But his test methodology makes his test useless.

He compares an image with low dynamic range against an image with a large dynamic range and in a very uncontrolled way. His histograms looked pretty yucky with the shadows falling off the left side of the histogram. This is where you want to break out a static control image with the exact same scene for both cameras.

And even if you get that, you still have a host of other variables like each camera may have different performance at different ISOs so you'd really have to a lot of work to get to the bottom of this.

My (also) very unscientific test suggested the A1 performed very similar to my Z6ii at high ISOs and since they're both stacked sensors, I don't see any particular reason the Z9 *has* to perform worse than the A1. I guess we'll see.

FWIW, I did see some color funkyness on the A1 at super high ISO compared to the Z6ii tho. But at higher ISOs than most people would be shooting.

Agree 100%, also up to now he's been doing his tests on a pre-release version of the camera and color profile tweaks are quite common between pre-release and production units so I wouldn't even dream about drawing any final conclusions on a pre-release body (let alone doing it in an uncontrolled way as he is doing).

I am actually surprised at some of the content he's put out lately - typically some areas of evaluation are out of bounds with pre-release bodies because the brand knows they can still be tweaked and I wonder if he is going to get in trouble with Nikon Singapore for jumping the gun - nobody else is putting out similar "analysis" and I think there is a reason for that.

 

[John Navitsky]

i think the z9 is really breaking the dry spell for clicks for nikon youtube folks, so i think maybe he's a bit caught up in his enthusiasm and rush to capitalize on his early access to the camera

 

[thelordofthelight]

All that I see is some very subtle difference in tones. Z9 is a bit towards greenish and Z7 towards magenta but I don't see a big difference in iso performance. Also, the raw color profiles can change for new cameras so we will have to wait and see.

 

[John Navitsky]

All that I see is some very subtle difference in tones. Z9 is a bit towards greenish and Z7 towards magenta but I don't see a big difference in iso performance. Also, the raw color profiles can change for new cameras so we will have to wait and see.

i saw some color cast issues when I really pushed the A1 as well. i could totally believe this is an attribute of these large megapixel stacked sensors. on the other hand, it wasn't really that bad, and i was pushing the hell out of the exposure (black dog, f4.5, 1/1600s, in poor indoor light, with flicker reduction on. so..... iso 51,200)

 

[eaj101]

At this remove (images processed by author to some unknown profile, then posted to website in either reduced resolution sRGB or low-res compressed video, then viewed via some browser's rendering engine) I doubt we as the end viewer cam conclude anything.

 

[Venkatesh VT]

This image was shot at 12800 ISO today & got tolerable with denoise.I am sure Z9 will be able to do the same.These cameras are really going to change the rules of the game

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[FB101]

This image was shot at 12800 ISO today & got tolerable with denoise.I am sure Z9 will be able to do the same.These cameras are really going to change the rules of the gameView attachment 27373

Have you tried DXO pure raw? They have a free trial period (just need to download the full software and it will give you the option when you first open it), see if you like it. I am processing all my A1 files through it now.

 

[Venkatesh VT]

Have you tried DXO pure raw? They have a free trial period (just need to download the full software and it will give you the option when you first open it), see if you like it. I am processing all my A1 files through it now.

I just downloaded it. While i already have Adobe i used Sony's Image edge to process the raw files.Has any one tried Image edge for comparison ?

 

[FB101]

I just downloaded it. While i already have Adobe i used Sony's Image edge to process the raw files.Has any one tried Image edge for comparison ?

I have not, sorry. I am so used to LRc and PS, they are comfortable like old sweaters I just process the raws I want to edit in DXO first but thats about my only deviation in my workflow.

 

[arbitrage]

I downloaded the RAWs. First off the images he shows in the video must have had Chroma NR on in LR for the Z7II and I bet default sharpening also where as the Z9 had everything turned off. When I compared them in LR there was a lot of chroma noise in the Z7II also. Not to mention most of the higher ISO RAWs were shot 2/3 stop darker on the Z9 vs the Z7II.

 

[thelordofthelight]

Didn't he say he was using Nikon NX studio? If it was LR I totally missed it. I will also download the raw files and compare it on NX studio.

QUOTE="arbitrage, post: 119582, member: 193"]
I downloaded the RAWs. First off the images he shows in the video must have had Chroma NR on in LR for the Z7II and I bet default sharpening also where as the Z9 had everything turned off. When I compared them in LR there was a lot of chroma noise in the Z7II also. Not to mention most of the higher ISO RAWs were shot 2/3 stop darker on the Z9 vs the Z7II.
[/QUOTE]

 

[fcotterill]

As suspected, the more scientific comparisons will have to wait for Bill Claff, Jim Kasson, also Photography Life, and others who apply the basics of objective comparisons, including standardized methods

 

[sid_19911991]

Maybe. But his test methodology makes his test useless.

He compares an image with low dynamic range against an image with a large dynamic range and in a very uncontrolled way. His histograms looked pretty yucky with the shadows falling off the left side of the histogram. This is where you want to break out a static control image with the exact same scene for both cameras.

And even if you get that, you still have a host of other variables like each camera may have different performance at different ISOs so you'd really have to a lot of work to get to the bottom of this.

My (also) very unscientific test suggested the A1 performed very similar to my Z6ii at high ISOs and since they're both stacked sensors, I don't see any particular reason the Z9 *has* to perform worse than the A1. I guess we'll see.

FWIW, I did see some color funkyness on the A1 at super high ISO compared to the Z6ii tho. But at higher ISOs than most people would be shooting.

The test was good enough for me. Accurate enough for practical purposes. Yeah, Steve too found a green cast in A1. I guess we will have to wait for the next gen flagships for dynamic range & ISO to be far better.

 

[sid_19911991]

Agree 100%, also up to now he's been doing his tests on a pre-release version of the camera and color profile tweaks are quite common between pre-release and production units so I wouldn't even dream about drawing any final conclusions on a pre-release body (let alone doing it in an uncontrolled way as he is doing).

I am actually surprised at some of the content he's put out lately - typically some areas of evaluation are out of bounds with pre-release bodies because the brand knows they can still be tweaked and I wonder if he is going to get in trouble with Nikon Singapore for jumping the gun - nobody else is putting out similar "analysis" and I think there is a reason for that.

I truly hope Nikon corrects that in the consumer model.

 

[sid_19911991]

i think the z9 is really breaking the dry spell for clicks for nikon youtube folks, so i think maybe he's a bit caught up in his enthusiasm and rush to capitalize on his early access to the camera

I don't think so. Matt Granger spoke about his business briefly on Vahagraphy YouTube channel.

He says that YouTube adsense money barely makes him money for him. He has 2000 videos prior to rhe Z9 if I am not wrong. He makes money from actual shoots & tutorials.

 

[sid_19911991]

All that I see is some very subtle difference in tones. Z9 is a bit towards greenish and Z7 towards magenta but I don't see a big difference in iso performance. Also, the raw color profiles can change for new cameras so we will have to wait and see.

At ISO 6400 the Z9 had significantly more colour noise on the model's face as opposed to Z7.

Such differences in performance get accentuated when one crops for birds at far off distances.

But it shouldn't be a problem for those shooting with fast glass as the ISO will likely be lower.

 

[sid_19911991]

i saw some color cast issues when I really pushed the A1 as well. i could totally believe this is an attribute of these large megapixel stacked sensors. on the other hand, it wasn't really that bad, and i was pushing the hell out of the exposure (black dog, f4.5, 1/1600s, in poor indoor light, with flicker reduction on. so..... iso 51,200)
[/QUOTE

At this remove (images processed by author to some unknown profile, then posted to website in either reduced resolution sRGB or low-res compressed video, then viewed via some browser's rendering engine) I doubt we as the end viewer cam conclude anything.

This image was shot at 12800 ISO today & got tolerable with denoise.I am sure Z9 will be able to do the same.These cameras are really going to change the rules of the gameView attachment 27373

How well does Denoise deal with chroma noise on the subject itself?

I thought they typically correct the noise in the unfocused areas.

The Z9 image had croma noise on the woman's face.

 

[sid_19911991]

I downloaded the RAWs. First off the images he shows in the video must have had Chroma NR on in LR for the Z7II and I bet default sharpening also where as the Z9 had everything turned off. When I compared them in LR there was a lot of chroma noise in the Z7II also. Not to mention most of the higher ISO RAWs were shot 2/3 stop darker on the Z9 vs the Z7II.

Are you saying Matt Granger underexposed the Z9 images more than Z7 images? I thought he said that he shot them all with the same exposure/lens/aperture/shutter speed, etc.


Also, does Adobe do justice to the raw files?

According to Matt Irwin, Capture NXD & Capture One gives the best output.

I personally prefer Capture NXD over Adobe for basic edits.

 

[Hermann]

Too much noise about yet another highly suspect Youtube video. It's not really clear what exactly he did in this so-called "test". I'd put it firmly into the clickbait category.

Wait for Bill Claff, Jim Kasson, Photography Life and Thom Hogan. And of course Steve ...

 

[sid_19911991]

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[JerryF]

From Matts latest RAW's it did look like the Z9 had significant color noise that was not apparent on the 7II. BUT even if I set NX to neutral or flat for both images there was a major difference in color rendering. There was a difference in the measured CB with the Z9 5337 and 7II 5210 but even setting those manually the skin tones rendered were way different. The histograms were also quite a bit different which I would have expected to be much closer then also noticed the exposures were not the same. So bottom line is I am a little concerned but it still could be firmware and software related this early. This also could mean the sensor is quite different to the Sony ones adding fuel to the Tower sensor theory.

 

[sid_19911991]

From Matts latest RAW's it did look like the Z9 had significant color noise that was not apparent on the 7II. BUT even if I set NX to neutral or flat for both images there was a major difference in color rendering. There was a difference in the measured CB with the Z9 5337 and 7II 5210 but even setting those manually the skin tones rendered were way different. The histograms were also quite a bit different which I would have expected to be much closer then also noticed the exposures were not the same. So bottom line is I am a little concerned but it still could be firmware and software related this early. This also could mean the sensor is quite different to the Sony ones adding fuel to the Tower sensor theory.

Yeah, I think the colours & chroma noise on the Z9 could be an issue for the following reasons.

1) Use of a stacked sensor. The image quality on Sony A9 i isn't great. A1 is better as per DXO mark ratings, but Steve & others have noticed a green cast on the images from A1.

2) Sensor manufactured by Tower Jazz Semi conductor. Don't have a proven track record like Sony manufactured sensors doing well on Nikon bodies.

3) High FPS cameras typically have below average image quality. For example - D5, D6, A9i, 1DX Miii, etc.

4) It is Nikon's first go at such a sensor tech. Surely it will take them a couple of generations to get it to the usual top standards.

5) Of all the features that Nikon has highlighted about the Z9, ISO & dynamic range seem to be barely talked about, hinting that they are not going to be its strength.

6) Ricci made a bizzare statement on Greys of Westminister chat video that the D6 has excellent image quality & one can expect the same from Z9. I have used the D6, its dynamic range is not good at all. If Z9's dynamic range is similar to D6, then it not something I would be happy about.

7) Results from the Matt Granger's video.

 

[fcotterill]

Early days but this hasn't held back the forums drawing profound conclusions from ????

View attachment 27398