EOSHD a7II hands on review~

I am mostly disappointed by the aliasing and moire'.


I didn't have high hopes for 5x stabilizer, but saw it for what it is, stabilizing static handheld shots. Most OSS does not help with pans and tilts.
If the video was up to spec, then I would care enough to see what the S-log is all about, but as of now, I am just dumbfound by the implementation of 1600 minimum ISO for s-log.
 
James0b57 said:
... If the video was up to spec, then I would care enough to see what the S-log is all about, but as of now, I am just dumbfound by the implementation of 1600 minimum ISO for s-log.
Click to expand...
But doesn't it make sense to expand the DR where it's at its lowest?

The only (recently known) way to up the max DR would be via Alexa type multiple exposure solution and would probably be beyond the capabilities of a $1,500 consumer camera (that is not named Samsung).
 
Well, I had high hopes for the IBIS, and this killed them. Back to my happy "I have exactly the camera I want to have" peace of mind.


I wasn't surprised by the high ISO requirement for slog2. What slog2 does is similar to the following: "shoot a RAW still image at ISO 100, and bring shadows up big time". If you don't want all your new DR to be in the shadows, you have to underexpose your image a few stops, i.e. you shoot at ISO 100 but call it ISO 1600, then all your newly found range is on your highlights.
To get slog2 working at ISO 100, you'd need a camera that can take RAW stills at ISO 12.
 
Last edited:
I don't think LOG increases exposure, it just lowers down the contrast aggressively, lifting up the shadows to a higher greyer point and the highlight down from white. If you shoot in S-LOG at a certain exposure, say 3200 ISO, and shoot the same but in Rec709 at also 3200 ISO, the Log will have identical exposure to the rec.709 once it's gamma-corrected to rec.709. Before correcting it a bit appears brighter for the lack of contrast level,

I really wonder why the A7s doesn't have below 3200 in Log. The Canons can do it (C100-300-500/1DC) and the Arri log and the Blackmagics. It's particularly strange to me because the sensor raw performance has the highest dynamic range at 100 ISO, while at 3200 it drops significantly. So why not give the extreme low contrast LOG curve to the 100ISO image? As far as I know Log gamma is not nuclear science it's just a inverted S curve aggressively before compression to lift the shadow detail and lower the highlight clipping. Is there anything else involved in a Log gamma that might restrict using the curve at 100 ISO?
 
If something bright is crushed in a RAW still at ISO 100, you can't bring it back to life, no matter what you do. That's why the extra range is usually in the shadows, and this means that an image that is designed to start with a very wide DR has to have a lower grey point (i.e. you keep all the electronics like they are on a ISO 100 RAW still but you call it ISO 3200).
 
After seeing this and other tests including the AF - I cancelled my preorder and I'm sticking with my A7/A7s combo for the time being. My next A7 body will have the A6000 AF. The IS in the 16-35 and 70-200 are pretty good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top