Sony A9III Dynamic Range TESTED | NOT What I Expected!

[@skyscraperfan]

ISO 125 does not really exist. Base ISO is the lowest ISO that the camera can do. For an "ISO 125" image the camera uses ISO 250, exposes twice as long and digitally halves the signal. So the camera overxposes by one stop. That's while you lose a stop of dynamic range in the highlights and gain a stop of dynamic range in the shadows. It is the same with ISO 50 on Canon cameras that have a base ISO of 100. So you should never use ISO below base ISO. If you want a cleaner image, use multiple exposures instead! Then you will not lose the highlights. I had to learn that the hard way in 2006. I took tons of night shots with ISO 50 because I wanted the cleanest shadows. In Lightroom I could not recover the highlights. The "extended ISO" at the high ISO end also is not real. The camera will use the highest "real" ISO and then underexpose the image and amplify the result.

[@learningcameras]

So that's why this test was interesting. The A9III has a very high base ISO so using the extended low ISO actually made a noticeable reduction to noise and grain if you are pulling up shadows in post

[@skyscraperfan]

@@learningcameras That's because you pull up shadows that have previously been pulled down by one stop by the camera. That's what happens when you use ISO 125. The camera takes an ISO 250 photo, but that one is overexposed by one stop. So it gets pulled down by one stop in the camera. The ISO 125 number is pretty fake. In theory they could even offer ISO 62.5 taking the ISO 250 shot and then pulling it down by two stops. Then the shadows would look even cleaner, but two stops in the highlights would be lost.

[@learningcameras]

@@skyscraperfan Right....I just wanted to see the real life impact of these because ISO 250 is NOT a native ISO on most cameras so how bad is the noise level with underexposed images on it...and how does that compare to the low extended ISO. This test wasn't JUST to see what happens with extended ISO, it was to see the impact of having a native ISO of 250 and how the A9III handles overexposed and underexposed images. I just did the side by side with the extended ISO because I feel like it's something more people will want to use on this camera than any other camera to reduce shadow noise or drag your shutter speed

[@godsakes]

In summary shooting outside your native ISO range is a bad idea... would have been more interesting to see some comparisons between a older model A9 and see how their dynamic ranges compared with the mk3

[@Cervin_Suisse]

@@learningcameras Yes I agree with you. What counts 1st are the practical effects in the final picture. Interesting. Thank you Sir.

[@TheCameraStoreTV]

Great tests Dan! This was fun to watch. Looking forward to seeing more.

[@learningcameras]

Appreciate that!!! Hope all is well

[@BobN54]

'Base ISO just really indicates where the camera should have the highest image quality' - wrong. Image quality is primarily determined by how much light is captured - exposure times sensor area. The ISO determines the exposure that you use, so a high base ISO limits the amount of light that can be captured and hence the image quality. "Sony has amazing dynamic ranges,,, and we should be able to bring all of that [blown highlights] back" - wrong. You can't recover blown raw highlights, whatever. DR mainly occurs at the bottom of the range due to low read noise (which the A9III has), it has pretty normal raw headroom (which is what lets you get highlights back, not DR). Below 'base ISO' you're using up the raw headroom. 'You can just bring up the exposure in post' - wrong. Exposure was set when you took the shot. "It might not be up to a back side illuminated sensor". It is a back side illuminated (and stacked) sensor. The reason your ISO 125 images looked better is that you had more exposure simply through shooting with half the ISO thus double the exposure. You have not tested 'dynamic range' at all. What you've tested (sort of) is shadow noise. The A9III sensor DR is ISO for ISO about the same as other Sonys, but it doesn't have the lower ISOs where the larger DRs occur - so you won't 'get that DR' by pushing the ISO higher - you'll just get the same DR as you would other Sony cameras at the same ISO. Most DR tests usually test a signal to noise ratio' - no they don't, if they are proper DR tests. The test the DR, which is not a signal to noise ratio. I know it's a complex technical subject, but it comes out here mangled. Sorry to be critical, but if you can't get it right, stick to the photography practice, which I'm sure you're excellent at, and avoid the deep technical stuff.

[@BobN54]

@@GreatCassian I wouldn't be so harsh. You Tube is not a refereed academic journal. Its whole point is to open up content production. The downside of this is that people gain their information from people who haven't a clue what they're talking about. My test for You Tubers is not whether they don't make mistakes. It's whether when informed of the mistakes they do the research they should have done in the first place or just try to defend the indefensible.

[@rickymcc8624]

Well now I'm just a tad confused. In simple terms I thought there was much to like about the a9iii, but wasn't a fan of having base ISO as high as 250. Why? Mainly because it's harder to depress ambient light when you want to punch in flash without being concerned about the regular flash sync speed (typically 1/250 on most Sony bodies, but 1/400th on a1). Another concern with flash, having no sync limitation sounds pretty attractive, until you realise that really powerful flash units have a much longer 'burn' time so the likes of 1/10,000th plus sync speed are limited. OK that probably only applies to those situations where you are reducing shutter speed significantly to facilitate flash lighting overpowering bright ambient sunlight.

[@BobN54]

@@rickymcc8624 I'm not surprised you're confused. There's so much disinformation around about exposure, ISO and related topics that it clogs up people's thinking. DR at its simplest is just the ratio of the biggest to smallest signal. In a photographic context signal is exposure ( which many don't get because they've been misinformed about what exposure is) We're talking here about how exposure varies across the frame, not the overall integrated exposure that you use for non-spot metering. The biggest exposure you'll use is determined by the ISO setting - the exposure that blows the highlights at that setting. With a base ISO of 250 the A9 iii can only handle 1/2.5 the exposure of a camera with a base ISO of 100, this its best DR is 1/2.5 smaller. SNR ( how noisy the image looks) is also primarily determined by exposure (for cameras with the same sensor size). That gives it a worse attainable SNR than a camera with base ISO 100. You're right about flash sync. In the end there is no magic bullet that creates more light and mitigates the effects of the tiny exposures you get at ultra-high shutter speeds.

[@mmc5261]

Exactly I think most of these KZbinrs just repeat other nonsense they pic up from other KZbinrs who have know idea what they are actually talking about, the a9 is a fast action camera and in my experience you rarely ever shoot at the base iso shooting fast moving subjects

[@BobN54]

@@mmc5261 It's a very specialist camera, and looks to be great at what it's designed for. But that specialism does mean it is less good than a general purpose camera for everyday use.

[@alyousuf]

This is exactly how extended low iso works in any Sony camera. You will loose some highlight detail if youre close to highlight clipping terrirory but youll get cleaner shadows since the camera is sinply shooting the inage at the native minimum ISO and digitally darkening the image.

[@RMalayeri]

That's great to know Dan! I typically shoot for highlights on all my Sony bodies, so it should be pretty easy to take advantage of the extended ISO 😊🙌

[@paulfairchild8942]

Very informative as always Dan! Thanks!

[@learningcameras]

Appreciate it!

[@Rationalific]

Excellent tips! I'm still rockin' my a7 III, but for those with the a9 III or those thinking of getting it, this is some important information.

[@Vlaakster]

Interesting stuff. Thanks for sharing!

[@cogmission1]

That’s awesome that it has very respectable dynamic range! Thank you for the review!

[@learningcameras]

Yeah, as long as you don't go under 250 ISO, I haven't found a big loss in dynamic range

[@georgetran1766]

It could be the Sony Global Shutter Readout affect the Base ISO in terms of circuitry. Thank you so much for sharing.

[@HK-NYC]

So really a video camera?

[@marcgilles4520]

I was thinking the same thing.

[@dave_mcbain]

Nice video! Can you compare the DR in Video with the a7siii please?

[@dqstudios]

Great info! q: do you find the global shutter resolves the flickering car light issue?

[@learningcameras]

So it doesn't remove it but it changes it and I would say makes it better. I'll have examples in the full review but basically instead of the flicker moving down the frame in this accordion pattern with a typical sensor, the global shutter means the light is either completely on or completely off. So you will still see the light flicker, but it just flickers on and off and doesn't make the entire frame look like crap. There is an auto scan feature to try and match the shutter speed to the flicker but I couldn't get it to work effectively

[@dqstudios]

Thanks for taking the time to reply! Looking forward to the full review 👏👏

[@JACKnJESUS]

I have found the same thing with exposure and Sony cameras. The usual advixce given is to always overexpose a little...but I found that is not optimal with my Sony...so I ignored the standard advice and underexpose most of my images...everything instantly improved.

[@learningcameras]

Yeah, definitely underexpose photos but OVEREXPOSE video. For whatever reason I can bring down highlights no prob with video at 2-3 stops overexposed but if you lift those shadows in a video file, prepare for major noise

[@BlueBomberTurbo]

Overexposing depends on the scene. For outdoors, I always trust Highlight Metering with +2.0 EV dialed in. Keeps ALL highlight data intact, minus specular highlights and bright light sources (what should properly be clipped). Though on this camera, you might want to go to +2.3 or 2.7, since the shadows will be noisier than usual.

[@JACKnJESUS]

@@BlueBomberTurbo Yes, what I have always been taught...which is why I found my Sony to be ...not what I expected...at first. Then I started underexposing by a half stop or full stop...everything changed in post processing. Sony seems to like it on the darker side... a tad.

[@Photogopinion]

I’ve been using Sony’s for years and I’ve often found slight under exposure is best. But I shoot mostly stills. The advice to overexpose I always thought wrong: but perhaps (@learningcamers, I’d not thought of that) that’s because so many KZbinrs concentrate so much on video?

[@JACKnJESUS]

@@Photogopinion Yes, I should mention I am also a still photographer...dabblei n video...but not experienced.

[@realMysta]

Honestly on my a7r v it’s very sensitive to over exposure too, it’s almost always better for me to underexpose

[@IMDABROWN]

I think you have me sold. Now I just have to convince myself that its ok to go backwards to 24mp images. I have a used A1 in my cart at a price less than the A9iii. I'm holding out to see Sony slips in a few more features in the A1 firmware update.

[@learningcameras]

Haha. I'm waiting to see what they add too but so far the A1 has been a fairly minor update. I find the 2 places resolution helps the most is retouching (portraits/products) and large prints but honestly, Topaz Gigapixel AI is so good these days you can always do it in post if you only need to upscale a few images

[@BlueBomberTurbo]

Should be a lot of new (to the A1) features added, but none of them are global shutter, 120fps, or AI enhanced AF.

[@IMDABROWN]

Very true , but today I want +40mp at 20fps, the only Sony camera that gives me that is the A1, @@BlueBomberTurbo

[@justruppert1]

i‘m confused. why would it surprise anyone if the raw files of two images exposed with the same shutter speed and aperture but one at iso 250 (EV 0) and one at iso 125 (EV -1) turned out to be identical.

[@learningcameras]

Wait, nothing was identical?

[@justruppert1]

@@learningcameras …my bad then, i must have misunderstood

[@karllincoln6859]

I know this is going to sound stupid but if you wanted to drag the shutter at iso 250 and needed to drop to 125 to do, couldn't you just throw on a light ND?

[@learningcameras]

Yes but anytime you add a filter, you technically lower the quality of the image, add a color shift, and obviously it's something else you have to do. Adding an additional piece of glass in front of your lens means you are now at the mercy of the quality of that piece of glass so better make sure it's good. VND filters will add a color shift so you will want to find a good quality standard ND filter to reduce the light.

[@karllincoln6859]

@learningcameras thanks for the reply and explanation, I have only ever used a standard ND, folks I know that have used vnd filters always said its a convenience but with to many draw backs. I think it is a trade off, the extra glass vs the noise if you want the highlights, the WB can always be corrected in post. I would hope if one is going to fork out 6k for the 9iii that they would invest in some decent NDs if it is something they are going to use. I am not sure you would use the 9iii for this type of image, I get the impression it is a more niche camera for moving subjects.

[@BlueBomberTurbo]

@@learningcameras Could always use a clip in filter. Won't cause nearly as much image degradation as one on the lens. The same reason super teles have filters drop in from the back.

[@learningcameras]

@@BlueBomberTurbo yep, rear ND is definitely the best from a quality perspective

[@MaestroDK]

@@learningcameras Not if you're using a good filter. That has been tested many times in the past. But some filters are indeed terrible.

[@steveh1546]

I do a lot of slower shutter motorsport panning, is it worth using a low ND filter to bring it down?

[@learningcameras]

Absolutely...going lower than the base ISO has a major impact on dynamic range. Here is the filter I use for automotive: bhpho.to/3BNpSuM

[@RM-hy4so]

FYI, this global sensor is a BSI sensor too.

[@JjackVideo]

If you could test of the video handheld stabe, it would be awesome.

[@BlueBomberTurbo]

Would be the same as the A7R V. Gimbal smoothness.

[@Slipsch]

My issues with this camera is that their 1,5k price increase but yet still have some trade off and no CF Express Type B? It takes longer to transfer photos from CF Express Type A vs B especially when you have tons of them. a price increase of 500-700 would sound more palatable. If there's no trade off, 6k for the camera makes tons of sense. But I'm not a sport shooter, nor do I make money from needing the 120fps, so I'm definitely not who this camera is made of and it's not something I value. Let's hope the A1 Mark II has global shutter and better dynamic range and dual cf express type b card slot.

[@learningcameras]

I'm with you. I wish they released this version and the exact same camera with a regular stacked cmos sensor like from the A9II for $1500. Like what they did with the A7CII and A7CR...identical cameras with different sensors

[@maconor007]

I'm having a hard time figuring out how to save "Bracket" settings in the memory recall function. Is the a9iii capable of doing this?

[@cameraprepper7938]

For video many have wished for stacked sensors and hoped for global shutter, but neither of those are any good for dynamic range !

[@pentagramyt417]

Hi Dan! I have so important quesiton to you. What is the max shutter speed with sync flash, to focus bracketing, on ELECTRONIC / MECHANICAL shutter? For example OM-1 is 1/100 on electronic shutter, something around 1/250 on mechanical (both sync flash)

[@learningcameras]

This camera can actually shoot unlimited shutter speeds with flash sync in electronic shutter! That sounds awesome but we need to temper that with reality. So for example, the camera can technically flash sync at 10,000th of a second, but some flashes don't fire fast enough to pull off full power in a 1/10,000th of a second. Plus if you are shooting with multiple different lights, they might not fire at the same time which can complicate things. Add to that, the minimum ISO is now 320 so you need to shoot faster shutter speeds just to get the same exposure other cameras at 100ISO

[@pentagramyt417]

@@learningcameras So it became complicated there, A9III though is really great to portrait shooting with those syncs.. But have you tried focus bracketing (stacking) speed for macro? Does the global sensor changed there a speed of bracketing the photos? What I mean, A7RV and A6700 does have this feature, but it is really slow. Is A9III any different? Thanks in advance!

[@chikstarws]

Thank you.

[@archascents5157]

great vid. what was the context of that snow clip at the end?

[@learningcameras]

Actually spent the last week in Colorado shooting with the A9III testing it out even more...but that view from the side of the mountain was actually the beginning of a crazy adventure to find a crashed FPV drone

[@archascents5157]

oh cool you should post that. also noticed the great pic of pikes peak. well done!@@learningcameras

[@TonyC0101]

Hey Dan, this was a really informative video! Just a quick question, did you happen to have DRO turned on when you ran your tests? Most people don't know that DRO affects the RAW files as it applies a tone curve that lowers the overall exposure in order to preserve highlights.

[@learningcameras]

I just checked....DRO was on but it was my understanding this only affected JPEG images. I turned it off though and I'll let you know if that changes anything

[@TonyC0101]

@@learningcameras Thank you in advance, it'll definitely be interesting to know!

[@Eye-V.]

Preset?

[@learningcameras]

You can get my preset pack here: www.dan-sally.com/shop and use coupon code dansfan50 for 50% off!

[@JoelRiveraMD]

Amazing review ! Dan do you add the preset after you do all the adjustments you show on this video , or do you add the preset first then adjust highlights , shadows etc ?

[@learningcameras]

Thanks! I typically get the exposure where I want it and then apply the preset. You can technically do it the other way but the preset preview will be more accurate if your exposure is where you want it first. But in this case since I was intentionally way overexposed and underexposed, I really wanted to fix that first

[@OkwyUgonweze]

A9iii vs used a1 and a7rv . I rather have the later than the former.

[@learningcameras]

The RV definitely gives you the most dynamic range. Unless you need the frame rates, it's the best camera from Sony at the moment

[@Garbid]

​@@learningcamerasI would also go for RV. More megapixel. The sync speed issues can be solved by ad300-400 or nd filter. Any way if for wedding (not for sport) it's better to go with cheaper RV.

[@Benjamin_Jehne]

Sorry Dan, but as other described how a pushed ISO125 works on a native ISO250 camera and for the point, that one can assume that someone like you have to know this, as this is done for 20 years now and the effect is always the same - I don't get the point of this video. Try the ISO 50 of an A7RV, or Canon or whatever. They all do the same, when they offer a lower ISO as the native base ISO.

[@BlueBomberTurbo]

Sorry, but this is common knowledge, and it's been around for almost 2 decades now. Expanded ISOs aren't native. Lower than base (what you're showing) is the camera exposing at base ISO, then reducing exposure after capture to give the look of a lower ISO. You can do the exact same thing in post if you wanted to. And you'd get the same result: sacrificing highlights to expand shadows. Higher than max native ISO is the camera capturing at max ISO and raising the exposure, at the heavy expense of noise, which is always located in the shadows. A very good idea to avoid doing this, because images will look terrible. If you need slower shutter speeds than ISO 250 can provide, you're better off just getting a clip in ND filter. Then shoot like you always would without worrying about a higher than normal base ISO.

[@learningcameras]

You're missing my point. It's about seeing how expanded iso works in this camera for 2 reasons. 1 is because the native iso is so high, I'm tempted to use a low expanded iso to get a lower noise floor. The other is you might need to use it to lower your shutter speed. ND filters can add a color shift and have issues with flare/reflections and also don't work well with wide angle lenses so ND is not always the best solution either

[@TW-iu9zy]

@@learningcameras… exactly, that‘s the reason to use ISO 125 with the a9 III.

[@canmtb4676]

Thanks for the great review. I’m planning on shooting F1 Vegas in this Nov with A9III + FE 200-600. Any suggestions as for camera setting pls ?

[@learningcameras]

Got a seat next to you for me! I'll give you whatever tips you need haha...not joking though!

[@Scratchen2]

Nothing new actually. This is how extended (low) ISO works. It’s just an overexposed shot of the base ISO, which is then compensated the negative number of stops. This gives better shadow detail but worse highlight detail. It’s the same on all cameras that have a low-setting.

[@learningcameras]

Yes but it's more important to see the effects with the A9III since 250 iso vs 100 has a more noticeable affect on noise and you might be tempted to use extended low more often since the base is so high

[@BestxBelieve]

Could care less about the photo side of this camera, been waiting for more in depth video review that no one seems to be covering. Would love to see it on the full review!

[@learningcameras]

I'm so undecided on this for video! In so many ways it's the perfect camera but it has a few things that make me question it. I'll try and create this though because honestly, I've been using it more for video than photos lol

[@j5daniel182]

How can you keep saying it’s harder to lower the exposure coz of the base iso 250 . The shutter speed can go 1/80,000 . Im sure you can make it dark enough. Lol. The only the dR related drawback with the high base iso for the a9iii is when you want to shutter drag. But stopping down should fix it. Shalllow dof is not as important in Shutter drag shots anyway.

[@learningcameras]

So there are a lot of asterisks with that shutter speed. To get continuous autofocus and to shoot wider than F1.8 for example, you can't go faster than 16,000. Also most flashes can't dump power that fast. So the camera is capable of 1/80,000, but in some cases you won't get near it. Plus if you want to drag your shutter for motion blur, that's not an option

[@j5daniel182]

@@learningcameras Ah. So if i love to shoot at F1.4 , my max would actually be 1/16,000 at iso 250. Which is the same exposure as 1/4,000 with base iso 64 (a7RC max) . WTF???

[@learningcameras]

@@j5daniel182 yep...and I criticized the A7CR for maxing out at 1/4000. For a $3000 camera, it should have been 1/8000. It's bright where I live in FL so I hit that limit often lol

[@j5daniel182]

@@learningcameras i was worried about it. But iso64 at least makes it on par with 1/8,000 base iso 100 cameras.

[@martinhommel9967]

All modern cameras are more than capable. All niggles are very slight

[@learningcameras]

This was a new sensor though so definitely worth checking to find out what all the niggles are

[@avinashrai11141]

‘More than capable’ is highly dependent on what you shoot. Even the best performing sensor cant produce clean images if you shoot low light wildlife where you cant modify light, cant use long shutter speed. I will happily buy a camera with slowest sensor readout paired with mechanical shutter with no video feature if it produces 2 or 3 stop cleaner images. Even f2.8 isnt all that fast in low light for late evening or night photography.

[@learningcameras]

@@avinashrai11141 so good news which you will see in my full review is that I really don't see worse high iso performance than the A1 and A7IV... It's almost the same despite the global shutter. But like you I would have taken 20fps and better IQ any day

[@danielkotronis]

@@learningcamerasI do alot of low light stuff around 10K ISO, should I be worried buying this?

[@learningcameras]

@@danielkotronis It definitely isn't the camera to buy for the best high iso performance but it wasn't worse than the A1 in my side by side tests enough for me to care. Right now Sony doesn't have a great high end camera though for low light. The SIII is a bit too low resolution to be useful for photos, the A7IV is probably the best but it's kind of that mid grade camera. The A9III has a global shutter which doesn't help, the A7RV has too many pixels, and the A1 is probably the closest but again, a LOT of pixels and an overpriced camera. If Sony just made a version of the A9III EXACTLY the same but with a regular 24mp stacked sensor instead of a global shutter, sure it wouldn't get 120fps but it still would be fast and would be insane in low light

[@thuantaybac]

👍👍👍👍👍👍

[@catchlite5196]

Just slap a ND on that lens and get to work.. 😎

[@learningcameras]

Lol. There are some disadvantages to ND filters though. They can have a color shift, they can affect lens quality unless you use a really good one, they can affect flare/reflections, and they usually don't work with lens hoods

[@catchlite5196]

@@learningcameras good points, although if somebody buys an A9 III , I would think they will be looking at quality filters. Also, if you choose the exact filter size, you will be able to still use your lenshood, but yeah… most people work with stepup/stepdown rings. But I agree with you.. it can still be a hassle when you constantly have to put on ND filters. Thanks for the video and your reply!

[@mmc5261]

😂😂😂 most of these comments are so stupid, stop looking at numbers and look at the shot you took and adjust settings accordingly lol.

[@Mr.Zen_73]

don't think Sony's global shutter tech is quite there just yet, nice attempt though

[@learningcameras]

Maybe not to match IQ with regular backside illuminated sensors but it's really close and yields 4x faster frame rates

[@johnappleseed7168]

Getting in the g wagon was so unnecessary for this video

[@learningcameras]

That was a client shoot I was doing anyway but as a consumer of youtube videos, real life cool examples from actual shoots are 10x better to me than test charts or something in your backyard and I will not apologize for trying to make it more interesting by brining in an insane custom gwaggon from a real world client shoot

[@christophkiendl4866]

The lowest ISO on the A9III is 125, it is not 250!

[@learningcameras]

The lowest base iso is 250. Iso 125 is not a real native iso... It's just the camera artificially lowering the exposure which is why the highlights get clipped