The sensor is a full-frame 60 MP BSI CMOS type with what Leica calls ‘Triple Resolution Technology’ – offering three DNG raw data recording options – 60 MP, 36 MP, and 18 MP, respectively. In addition to the conventional 60 MP capture, the two lower-res options adopt pixel binning from the native resolution and are saved at the smaller image sizes. There’s also a new low base ISO sensitivity setting of ISO 64 and an upper limit of ISO 50,000. Continuous shooting maxes at 4.5 fps regardless of setting either RAW (DNG) or JPEG.

Besides the impressive pixel count, the Leica M11 is the first M-type model to adopt an electronic capture mode with a mechanical shutter. Shutter speeds max at 1/16,000 sec using the electronic option and run to 60 mins in B using the mechanical shutter. At the rear, the Leica M11 features a 2.95-inch (2.3m-dot) LCD touchscreen, a revised control layout, and a menu in line with the current Leica Q2 and SL2 models.

Further improvements over the outgoing M10 include a fixed baseplate with quick access to a new higher capacity battery and the SD UHS-II card slot. While it has just the one card slot, there’s a useful hardwired 64GB of memory just in case. Connectivity options include dual-band WLAN with the Leica Fotos app, and USB-C (with charging option). Bluetooth LE and GPS, again via the Leica Fotos app, are promised later in the year following a firmware update.

The Leica M11 is available now in chrome and a lighter-weight black model at $8995/8350€.

Key specifications

• 60.4 MP BSI CMOS sensor
• ISO 64-50,000
• 4.5 fps (RAW/JPEG)
• 0.73x optical rangefinder (EVF optional extra)
• 2.95-in 2.3 m-dot LCD touchscreen
• Single card slot (SD UHS-II) plus 64GB internal.
• WLAN (2.4/5GHz), USB-C

Overall performance

Click on the score chart above to open the Leica M11 product page.

The 60 MP sensor in the Leica M11 achieved 100 in our benchmarks, indicating this is a state-of-the-art high pixel count full-frame 35mm format sensor. It ranks alongside the 45.7 MP Nikon D850 and 47 MP Panasonic Lumix S1R and is just fractionally behind the highest sensitivity sensors in our database, which are larger medium format types anyway. The Leica M11 is also 4 points higher than the Leica Q2  at 96, the last best performing Leica sensor we tested.

As for the individual metrics, the Leica M11 sensor exhibits a very high color depth at a low native base (ISO 64) of 26.3 bits. The new Leica M11 also has a high maximum dynamic range of nearly 15 stops (14.8 EV) at that same ISO setting. In the Sports (low-light ISO) category, which is a calculated figure based on specific minimum quality thresholds for noise (SNR), color depth, and dynamic range, the Leica M11 performed quite strongly at ISO 3361.

In-depth comparisons

The high price and rangefinder focusing means the Leica M11 occupies a rather niche space in the camera market sensor, however, it makes sense to compare it with the standard $6,895 (at launch) 24 MP Leica M10 variant it replaces. We’ve also pitted the new Leica M11 with the $3,499 Sony A7R IV for no other reason than the fact it has a similar 61 MP full-frame BSI type CMOS sensor.

Portrait (color depth)

The low base of ISO 64 helps the Leica M11 wring every last bit of color depth from the sensor, however, the difference is just +0.3-bit between that and the Sony A7R IV at base. Still, the two display a similar response throughout the sensitivity range albeit with a small boost in the latter’s curve from ISO 25,600 which mostly corresponds to its high-ISO expanded values.

When it comes to the Leica M10, there is a significant improvement, especially at low ISOs. At ISO 64 through ISO 800 for instance there’s a variance of around +1.5 bits over the older model. While that’s not surprising given the five years between them, it is indicative of the progress in sensor tech. Also interesting is the change regarding manufacturer ISOs. Where the M11’s measured ISO settings are just -0.2 EV lower than the manufacturer setting, the M10’s measured result is significantly lower at around -1 EV behind the stated value, from ISO 200 onwards anyway.

Landscape (dynamic range)

In this category, the curve showing the dynamic range of the Leica M11 is again practically identical to the response of the Sony A7R IV. In this instance, the Leica’s lower native base doesn’t leverage any advantage over the Sony at its true base of ISO100, with both reporting a maximum DR of 14.8 EV. And, while the Leica’s DR falls slightly at ISO 100, a dual gain boost at ISO 200 puts it back in contention with the Sony A7R IV.

What’s more striking of course is the improvement over the Leica M10. When comparing the two curves the newer M11 has more than a one-stop wider dynamic range throughout the sensitivity settings at the measured values. But, this narrows to around a +0.7 EV difference from ISO 400 and up at the manufacturers’ settings. This disparity when there is one is the reason why we show the measured results instead.

Sports (low-light ISO)

In this area where we calculate an ISO value that satisfies minimum quality standards of DR, SNR, and Color Depth, both the Leica M11 and Sony A7 R IV return practically the same result (ISO 3376 and 3344). The Leica M10 is less impressive in reaching the same thresholds at a significantly lower value of ISO 2133, which equates to being around -2/3 of stop noisier.

Conclusion

The Leica M11 is the most refined version of the digital M-type rangefinder models to date. Operation between the M-models and others has been unified and the sensor performance is at the leading edge, especially regarding dynamic range and color depth. Sure, it’s a pricey option for most people, but no one can say the Leica M11 is lacking in any way. Small and stealthy and with the black model now weighing less than its film siblings, the Leica M11 is going to appeal to a wide audience. Every practitioner of social documentary, street, portraiture, and landscape genres will want one.

In this review, we have mentioned the Leica M11’s most relevant rivals from other brands. As usual, you can compare it with these and with other models and create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image sensor ranking tool. 

The post Leica M11 Sensor test appeared first on DXOMARK.

The sensor is a “stacked” 45.7 MP CMOS type and various functions are handled by a super-fast EXPEED 7 processor, a native sensitivity of ISO 64-25,600, with expansion to ISO 32-102,400 and a maximum of up to 20 fps in RAW and up to 30 fps in JPEG. While not the first camera to use a totally electronic shutter, the Z9 is the first pro-grade full-frame camera to eschew a mechanical one. Shutter speeds max at 1/30,000 sec and run all the down to 30 secs, extendable to 900 secs (15 mins) in manual mode.

The Nikon Z9 features a ‘black-out free’ 3.69 m-dot OLED electronic viewfinder (EVF) built-in, along with a 3.2-inch quad-axis vertical and horizontal tilting LCD touchscreen. There’s also in-body stabilization with up to 6 stops compensation, working in combination with supported lenses. Autofocus is another highlight. The Nikon Z 9 is the first in the mirrorless series to add 3D subject tracking in stills and video.

Further advances include new High-Efficiency RAW file compression options, plus dual CFexpress Type B card slots with compatibility with older XQD cards. In addition, the Nikon Z9 has some pretty impressive video capabilities such as full-width 8K/60p and oversampled 4K up to 30p, plus 12-bit N-RAW and 4K ProRes RAW are promised in a future firmware option.

Connectivity options include full-size HDMI, Bluetooth LE, and USB-C (3.2) with charging and ethernet (1000BASE-T). The Nikon Z9 is available now when stocks can be found for $5496/€5999.

Key specifications

• 45.7 MP full-frame stacked CMOS sensor
• Native ISO 64-25,600, with expansion to ISO 32-102,400
• 20 fps (RAW), up to 30 fps (JPEG)
• 493-point phase-detection AF system
• 3.69 m-dot OLED electronic viewfinder (EVF)
• 3.2-in 2.1 m-dot quad-tilt TFT-LCD
• 8K/60p, 12-bit N-RAW, 4K (oversampled)
• Sensor shift, up to 6 stops compensation
• Twin card slots (CFexpress Type B)
• Ethernet (1000BASE-T), WiFi (2.4/5GHz) Bluetooth LE connection, USB-C (3.2), HDMI (Type A) connectivity

Overall performance

Click on the score chart above to open the Nikon Z9 product page.

The Nikon Z9 sensor achieved an excellent high score of 98 in our benchmarks. In our rankings, this places the new Nikon flagship in joint 9th position for all sensor sizes, including medium format. In terms of sensitivity, peers of the Nikon Z9 include the 50 MP Sony A1, which ranks directly alongside, and the 60 MP Sony A7R IV at 99 points, which is only just fractionally above in sensitivity.

As for the individual scores the Nikon Z9 sensor retains a very high color depth at the base setting (ISO 64) of 26.3 bits and has a wide dynamic range, peaking at 14.4 EV at the same ISO sensitivity. In the Sports (low-light ISO) category, which is calculated and based on minimum values for SNR, color depth, and DR, the Z9 didn’t fare quite so well at ISO 2451.

In-depth comparisons

While the Nikon Z9’s blazing speed will appeal to sports, and wildlife photographers, the 45.7 MP sensor and competitive price will also attract photographers working in other genres. We’ve also lined up the Nikon Z9 against the  $6,499 Sony A1, which has a similar stacked CMOS sensor and a 50 MP tailored for speed, albeit without the double-gripped body.

And, we’ve also pitted the Nikon Z9 against the similarly priced ($5,999) Canon EOS R3. With its lower 24 MP resolution, the EOS R3 is touted as a sports-oriented camera and like the Nikon Z9 and Sony A1, it features a stacked CMOS sensor and fast maximum continuous frame rate.

Portrait (color depth)

The Nikon Z9 has a particularly strong result for maximum color depth at 26.3 bits due to the sensor’s lower native base of ISO 64 over rivals. This contrasts with the Sony A1 at 25.7 bits at ISO 100 (and practically identical to the Nikon Z9 at ISO 100) and 25 bits for the Canon EOS R3 at the same setting. Note all three have lower extended settings but they all share a similar result with their respective native bases.

While the Nikon and Sony share a similar curve, both seeing a similar bump in color, with the Nikon Z9 maintaining over 22 bits at ISO 800, the Sony has a slight (0.4 bit) advantage. Above that all three cameras share a similar At ISO 25,600, however, the Nikon Z9 reports some 15 bits but loses out to both the Sony A1 and the Canon EOS R3 by a difference of 1.7 and 1.2 bits, respectively.

Landscape (dynamic range)

In the landscape category, the Nikon Z9 is slightly below (within 0.3 EV) of the Sony A1 and Canon EOS R3 in the maximum dynamic range at the base ISO setting, but that gap widens over ISO 100-400. Interestingly, both the Nikon and Sony share another similar curve to that seen with color depth. The Canon clearly has a very different response, though. It displays a second gain at ISO 400 (manufacturer setting) as opposed to the Nikon and Sony’s at ISO 800. This results in quite a sizable difference between the Canon EOS R3 at 13.3 EV and Nikon Z9 at just 12 EV. Still, the Nikon Z9 and Sony A1 recover somewhat at ISO 800 putting the Canon EOS R3 in third place, albeit by just 0.39 EV against the Z9. From ISO 1,600 upwards the Canon EOS R3 has the widest DR of the three with around +0.7 EV advantage over the Nikon Z9 and the Sony A1 sitting in between.

Sports (low-light ISO)

In this category, both the Canon EOS R3 and Sony A1 have the edge over the Nikon Z9 with slightly noisier results. Compared to the best of the three, the Canon EOS R3, the calculated low-light ISO of 2,451 for the Nikon Z9 vs 4086 ISO corresponds to a difference of 0.73 EV. Against the Sony A1, the Nikon fares a bit better but even then there’s around 0.36 EV advantage over its rival.

Conclusion

Given the balance between quality and high frame rates, the Nikon Z9 is a phenomenal performer. Strong results at base ISO with maximum dynamic range, and excellent color depth at most ISOs are highly attractive, even if both the Sony A1 and Canon EOS R3 have a slight edge in dynamic range at just about every other ISO setting. Nevertheless, the Nikon Z9 is a formidable rival to both, especially the latter, given that camera’s lower pixel count. With such an incredibly aspiring specification along with the sensor performance to match, the Nikon Z9 is a pioneering product for the Z series and is easy to recommend.

In this review, we have mentioned the Nikon Z9’s most relevant rivals from other brands. As usual, you can compare it with these and with other models and create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image sensor ranking tool. 

The post Nikon Z9 Sensor test appeared first on DXOMARK.

With its predecessor, the A7 III and many rivals, fielding the hugely popular 24 MP Sony sensor, the A7 IV is the first camera to leave that behind and adopt a completely new sensor — a 33 MP BSI-CMOS device. Sony has paired it with the high-end BIONZ XR processor, enabling a native sensitivity range of ISO100-51,200 and a maximum continuous shooting rate of up to 10 fps (12-bit lossey) and up to 6 fps (14 bit lossless).

AF has also been upgraded in line with other “IV” Gen models, including improved subject tracking in both stills and video.

In addition, the Sony A7 IV has full-width oversampled 4K (3840 x2160) 10-bit video recording up to 30p, and up to 60p in a Super-35 (roughly APS-C) crop.

The Sony A7 IV features a 3.68M-pixel OLED electronic viewfinder (EVF) built-in, along with a 3-inch, 1.03M-dot vari-angle LCD touchscreen and in-body stabilization with up to 5.5 stop compensation. Further advances include the new touch-sensitive menu interface and improvements to the body’s ergonomics. There are also lossless compressed Raw and HEIF (10-bit) file options, plus dual SD card slots with slot 1 also compatible with CFexpress Type A cards.

Connectivity options include full-size HDMI, Bluetooth LE and USB-C 3.2 (Gen 2) with charging. The Sony A7 IV is available now for $2800/€2800.

Key specifications

• 33 MP full-frame BSI-CMOS sensor
• ISO 100-51,200, with expansion to ISO 50-204,400
• 3.68 M-pixel OLED electronic viewfinder (EVF)
• 10 fps (12-bit lossey), up to 6 fps (14 bit lossless)
• 4K/30p 10-bit full-width video
• In-body stabilization up to 5.5 stops compensation
• Twin card slots (CFe A/SD UHS-II, SD UHS-II)
• Bluetooth LE, USB-C 3.2, HDMI connectivity

Overall performance

Click on the score chart above to open the Sony A7 IV product page.

The Sony A7 IV sensor achieved a high score of 97 in our benchmarking, which puts it in joint 7th position in our rankings for all sensor sizes, including medium format. That places the Sony A7 IV sensor performance alongside the older high-res full-frame sensors in the Nikon D810 and Sony Cyber-shot RX1R II compact, and just behind the Sony A1 and Sony A7R IV at 98 and 99 points, respectively.

At base ISO, the Sony A7 IV has solid results for color depth and dynamic range, peaking at 25.4 bits and 14.7 EV respectively. The Sony A7 IV also faired well in our low-light ISO (Sports) category, which takes minimum SNR, DR, and Color Depth values into account, where it achieved a high computed sensitivity of ISO 3379.

In-depth comparisons

As a camera aimed at amateurs and enthusiasts, we’ve compared the Sony A7 IV with the 20 MP Canon EOS R6. That camera doesn’t have a BSI-type CMOS sensor, but it’s claimed to be based on the sensor in the top-of-the-range Canon EOS-1DX Mark III.

While the 24 MP Nikon Z 6 II and Panasonic Lumix DC-S1 and S5 are also competing in the same space as the Sony A7 IV and Canon EOS R6, we’ve opted instead to take a detailed look at the Sony A7 III to see how the new sensor and processing differ. It was just $2000 upon introduction back in February  2018.

Portrait (color depth)

Across the ISO sensitivity range color depth in the Sony A7 IV isn’t so different from the camera it replaces. Sony uses a base of ISO 100 but the ISO 50 extended option is essentially the same and both measure ISO 68 on the A7 IV. In our tests, there’s a slight improvement at those settings of 25.4 bits in the A7 IV vs. 24.1 for the A7 III (measured at ISO 74) through to ISO 400, where color depth has dropped in the new sensor to 24 bits. That’s around +0.7 bits better than the outgoing model. After that, the values and downward trajectory of the two sensors are similar. However, there’s a very slight reversal in performance, with the older sensor having around +0.2-0.3 bits advantage up to ISO 6400 (manufacturer settings).

Comparing the Sony A7 IV against the Canon EOS R6 reveals that the former has better color depth at just about every sensitivity setting. Values of 1.3-1.0 bits difference were measured against the Canon sensor over the ISO 50/100 to ISO 400 range.

Landscape (dynamic range)

Small improvements can also be seen in dynamic range at low ISOs from ISO50/100 to ISO200. For example, there’s a negligible +0.1 EV improvement at the ISO50/100 settings over the A7 III. However, it is interesting to see the implementation of the second read-out mode at ISO 400, instead of ISO 800 in the A7 III. Although this results in DR of just over 14 stops at ISO 400, equating to around +1.2 EV uplift over the A7 III, this has little bearing overall. The older sensor’s second gain a step later at ISO 800 results in a smaller uplift of +0.3-0.2EV that persists throughout the higher ISOs to ISO 25,600. After that their responses are similar until further noise reduction is applied at their very highest sensitivities.

The Canon EOS R6 sensor on the other hand has slightly lower maximum DR, albeit still a respectable 14.2 stops at base. After that, it has a very gentle decline in DR of about -0.6 EV per ISO step to ISO 800, increasing to around -1.0 EV per step after that. While there’s possibly a second gain, or perhaps smoothing applied, resulting in a bump in DR at ISO 400 and beating the A7 III, the EOS R6 only matches the Sony A7 IV at higher ISOs.

Sports (low-light ISO)

In this category, which gives an indication of noise levels and image quality, with higher ISO values showing better low-light performance, the Sony A7 IV sensor shows a very similar response to that of the Sony A7 III (ISO 3379 vs. ISO 3722), a difference of just -0.14 EV. Contrast that with the Canon EOS R6 sensor, calculated at ISO 3394, which is effectively identical to the Sony A7 IV.

Conclusion

As the 24 MP BSI-CMOS full-frame sensor equips the out-going Sony A7 III, and the majority of Sony’s rivals at this level, the new 33 MP BSI-type CMOS in the Sony A7 IV will also probably appear in forthcoming competitor’s models, so the results are doubly interesting.

While the new sensor doesn’t perform a lot differently from the outgoing device, there has been a useful increase in the overall pixel count of 37.5% (albeit a 16.8% increase in linear pixel count on the long-edge). This may appear somewhat incremental, but when combined with the various improvements in stills and video features, the new Sony A7 IV is an incredibly well-rounded hybrid and a highly attractive option for all sorts of genres.

In this review, we have mentioned the Sony A7 IV’s most relevant rivals from other brands. As usual, you can compare it with these and with other models and create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image sensor ranking tool. 

The post Sony A7 IV Sensor test appeared first on DXOMARK.

As a BSI type sensor, the electronics are located behind the light-gathering pixels instead of being placed in front, which improves sensitivity. The sensor eschews an AA filter and features micro-lenses and an IR filter that’s less than 1 mm in thickness, and so promises to be well-suited to the characteristics of M-mount lenses.

As a camera targeting rangefinder enthusiasts the Pixii has an optical viewfinder, with an x 0.67 magnification, and a coincident rangefinder patch for focusing. There are also backlit LED frames for focal lengths from 28 mm to 50 mm.

Interestingly for a small independent company, the Pixii features an electronic-only shutter with a range from 2 seconds to 1/32,000. And, the camera forgoes a rear display, instead you can view captured images directly on your mobile via Bluetooth or direct USB-C connection.

The camera also shuns the usual removable memory cards for hard-wired internal memory, ranging from 8 GB up to 128 GB depending on the model. If the internal memory isn’t enough, images can be saved to a thumb drive via the USB-C connection. The same USB-C connection also allows in-camera charging, though the battery — a Sony NP-FW50 type — can be removed and charged separately.

Files can be saved using a choice of two Raw file formats; DNG and compressed General Purpose Raw (GPR) plus there are the usual in-camera JPEG options. There’s also a dedicated monochrome DNG option for black and white, giving you the option use your favourite converter on mono Raw files.

The Pixii is available now in Matte Black or Space Gray finish from €2499, plus VAT for the 8 GB model rising to €2950, plus VAT for the 128 GB version.

Key specifications

• 26 MP APS-C BSI CMOS sensor
• Native ISO 160-12,800, with expansion to ISO 80-51,200
• Optical viewfinder with coincident rangefinder
• LED backlit frame lines for 28/35/40/50 mm
• Leica M-mount compatibility
• Manual focus only
• Electronic shutter 2 seconds to 1/32,000.
• DNG (color and mono), GPR (compressed) RAW, plus JPEG options
• Bluetooth, plus USB-C for charging, display and transfer
• Built-in memory, 8-128 GB depending on model.

Overall performance

Click on the score chart above to open the Pixii (A1571) product page.

The Pixii (A1571) achieved an overall sensor sensitivity score of 90 in our tests, which puts it in 28th position in our ranking for all sensor sizes, including medium format. That places the Pixii sensor performance on the same level as some of the more recent full-frame sensors in cameras, such as the Canon EOS R6. It also now takes first place for sensor performance in an APS-C format camera, replacing the former best model, the Nikon D7200 and the newer D7500.

It’s interesting to note that from our tests the Pixii has noticeably lower measured ISO values than those set on-camera (manufacturer settings) when compared to rivals. Many manufacturers implement this as a strategy to protect highlights, but the measured values are significantly lower. Our measurements reveal the measured values are 1 to 1.5 stops lower over the range of ISO 200 to 25600. At ISO 80 and ISO 100, however, the measured values are very close to the manufacturer’s settings.

At ISO 80, the Pixii has a strong result for both color depth and dynamic range, peaking at 25.1 bits and 13.5 EV respectively. However, the smaller APS-C sensor doesn’t compare as well overall to larger sensors in our low-light ISO (Sports) category, where it achieved a value of ISO 1939.

In-depth comparisons

As the Pixii camera is aimed at the high-end, we’ve compared it with the 24 MP Leica M10 rangefinder and the 47 MP Leica Q2 compact camera with a fixed 28mm F1.7 Leica Summilux lens. Both Leica cameras are full-frame models, with sensor scores of 86 and 96 respectively, however the Pixii is currently one of the only independent interchangeable lens rangefinder cameras with an M-mount outside of Leica’s offerings.

Portrait (color depth)

The Pixii outperforms the ageing Leica M10 full-frame sensor (we are still to test the new Leica M11) in all but the highest sensitivities. However, it is the newer Leica Q2 sensor that outdoes both, except at the mid-ISOs, where a gain in the Pixii brings some parity in sensitivity.

At its lowest manufacturer setting of ISO 80 (ISO 63 measured), the Pixii has a very strong response for color sensitivity, where it peaks at 25.1 bits. It outperforms the Leica M10, which maxes at 24.4 bits at base ISO 100 (ISO 89 measured). The Leica Q2 sensor is better still at a very high 26.4 bits at its lowest true base sensitivity setting of ISO 50 (ISO 47 measured).

The second gain at ISO 1600 (ISO 613 measured) in the Pixii sensor boosts the color sensitivity above the Leica Q2 at ISO 800 (ISO 693 measured) at 22.4 bits vs 21.7 bits, respectively. Color sensitivity of the Leica M10 at that point (ISO 1600, or ISO 787 measured) is just 20.5 bits. At ISO 6400 and above the color sensitivity results for the A1571 are comparable to the Leica M10, while the newer Leica Q2 sensor retains its lead in performance up to ISO 5000.

Landscape (dynamic range)

At base ISO, the smaller APS-C sensor in the Pixii has around the same peak 13.5 stops of dynamic range as the full-frame Leica Q2 at its base when normalized to the equivalent of a 12 x 8 print, which is impressive. However, as ISO settings increase, the Pixii has the better, wider dynamic range than the Q2 at every ISO setting up to ISO 25600, even when accounting for the one-stop disparity in manufacturer ISOs.

A second gain is noticeable at ISO 1600 on the Pixii, which corresponds to a similar boost in sensitivity on the Leica Q2 at ISO 800, but the former has around a +0.5 EV advantage and maintains that throughout the ISO range up to its maximum ISO 25600 setting anyway.

The Leica M10 on the other hand has slightly lower maximum DR at base than either the Q2 or the Pixii, but then has a similar response up to ISO 800. After that point though, without a second gain, the sensor shows its age and drops behind both.

Sports (low-light ISO)

It’s at this point that the smaller APS-C size BSI CMOS sensor in the Pixii concedes any advantage in overall sensitivity to the larger surface area of the full-frame sensors in the Leica M10 and Leica Q2.

With this metric, we calculate the ISO value which satisfies certain KPIs: minimum 30 dB SNR, 18-bit color and 9 EV dynamic range, all three when normalized to the equivalent of a 12×8 inch print at 300 dpi). The Leica M10 and the Leica Q2 sensors maintain acceptable quality at slightly higher ISO, corresponding to a difference of just 0.14 EV and 0.36 EV, respectively, which remains a small difference given the relative difference in sensor sizes.

Conclusion

Announced a few years ago, the Pixii rangefinder, in its latest iteration as the A1571, is certainly an intriguing proposition. Although not full-frame, at least it has a state-of-the-art APS-C size BSI CMOS sensor, while the absence of a rear screen and a dedicated monochrome DNG option lends a more analog-like user experience that enthusiasts will find attractive. It’s still not exactly cheap either, but rangefinder alternatives such as Leica M10 and the latest M11 model are much more expensive. Even the Leica Q2 fixed-lens compact isn’t low priced either. Pre-owned Leica rangefinders tend to hold their value as well, with the 12 1/2-year-old Leica M9 and its highly prized full-frame 18 MP CCD available at around the same price as the Pixii. Some may argue about the inconvenience of the 1.5x crop, especially when pre-visualizing the use of full-frame lenses, but as a rangefinder camera with a Leica M mount, there’s still a lot to like about the Pixii.

In this review, we have mentioned the Pixii A1571’s most relevant rivals from other brands. As usual, you can compare it with these and with other models and create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image sensor ranking tool. 

The post Pixii (A1571) Sensor test appeared first on DXOMARK.

Besides offering silent operation (with the option to add a shutter sound) the fully electronic shutter option is said to have very low rolling shutter distortion and maxes out at an impressive 1/64,000th sec. Flash sync tops just 1/180th sec, though faster synching to 1/250th sec is available with the electronic first curtain shutter option.

An improved Dual Pixel CMOS AF II system features 1053 AF ‘zones’ that cover the entire sensor area, and offers vehicle recognition to the more usual eye and animal AF options.

The EOS R3 also has built-in 5-axis sensor stabilization, which is claimed to reduce camera shake by up to 8 stops with certain IS equipped RF lenses.

Additional high-end features include the re-introduced Eye-controlled AF point selection from the company’s film-era cameras, a 5.76m dot OLED viewfinder with black-out free viewing and a pull-out and tilting 3.2” 4.15m-dot touch-sensitive LCD.

As well as offering high speed RAW stills the EOS R3 has high-grade video capabilities that include full-width 6K 12-bit RAW with internal recording and 4K up to 120p. Also of note the EOS R3 features unrestricted recording times.

The camera has dual card slots; one CFexpress (Type B) for high speed and high data capture and one SD UHS-II for back-ups and less demanding shooting. There’s also HDMI D (micro) and USB Type C (USB 3.2 Gen 2) with external charging, plus Wi-Fi (2.4/5G), Bluetooth, GPS and 1000BASE-T Ethernet (RJ45) for camera control and image sharing.

Key specifications

• 24.1 MP Full Frame ‘stacked’ BSI CMOS sensor
• 5-Axis image stabilisation (up to 8 stop with specific IS lenses)
• Dual-pixel CMOS AF II with 1053-zones, Eye control AF
• Native ISO 100-102,400, with expansion to ISO 50-204,800
• 30 fps with electronic shutter, 12 fps mechanical
• 5.76 m dot viewfinder, 120 fps refresh
• 3.2” touch-screen LCD, 4.15 m dots
• 6K RAW (internal), 4K 120p in 10-Bit
• 2.4/5 GHz Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, GPS, USB-C, micro-HDMI, Ethernet
• Dual slots: one CFexpress (Type B), one SD (UHS-II compatible)

Overall performance

Click on the score chart above to open the Canon EOS R3 product page.

The Canon EOS R3 achieved a high DXOMARK sensor score of 96, which puts it ahead in image quality of any previous Canon sensor in our rankings, even in advance of the EOS R5’s 45 MP sensor, albeit by just a tiny fraction (95). Image quality from the Canon EOS R3 is also ahead of its closest market rival, the 24 MP Sony A9II at 93 points in our sensor ‘ranking’.

It has excellent maximum color depth measured at 25 bits at native base and just short of 15 stops (14.7 EV) of dynamic range. The new ‘stacked’ CMOS sensor also compares exceptionally well in the low-light ISO (Sports) category; a computed figure that’s based on certain thresholds for color depth, dynamic range and noise levels. Indeed, with a extrapolated figure of ISO 4086 the new Canon sensor ranks in first place for all full-frame models, which is just ahead (+0.13 EV) of the next best, the Sony A7 II at ISO 3730, and ahead of the Sony A9 II at ISO 3434.

In-depth comparisons

As this is a camera aimed at news, sports and wildlife photographers, we’ve compared the 24 MP Canon EOS R3 with the output from incumbent DSLR flagship, the 20 MP Canon EOS-1DX Mark III. We should probably also compare the EOS R3 against its direct competitor the 24 MP Sony A9 II from 2019, which also features a 24 MP stacked and stabilised CMOS. However, the EOS R3 will inevitably be compared with the newer Sony A1. Featuring a similarly advanced AF system the Sony A1 is a 50 MP camera also using a ‘stacked’ CMOS that can also clock-up an impressive 30 fps, albeit using lossey rather than lossless RAW of the EOS R3.

Portrait (color depth)

The Canon EOS R3 has a strong response in color sensitivity, particularly at low ISOs compared with the Canon EOS-1DX Mark III. Indeed it outperforms the Canon EOS-1DX Mark II throughout the majority of the sensitivity range with the exception being at the manufacturer’s ISO 51,200 and 102,400 settings, where it drops below that camera by 0.4 and 0.3 bits respectively.

Against output from the similar stacked CMOS of the Sony A1 the Canon EOS R3 (when scaled to same print size) has a somewhat lower response at ISO 100 of 0.9 bits increasing to 0.5 bits at ISO 200, and then widening again to 0.8 bits difference at ISO 800. However, RAW output from the R3 sees an uplift at ISO 400 over the Sony A1’s and then more generally between 1600-12800. This appears to show the EOS R3 is tweaked more generally for high ISO performance than the Sony A1.

The Canon EOS R3 easily stays within our high quality range (above the 20-bit threshold) when set to ISO 1600, and just stays within our acceptable range (above 14-bit) when set at ISO 25,600 (measured ISO 21112), which is an improvement on the Mark III, although surprisingly around 0.5 bit lower than the Sony at ISO 25,600.

Landscape (dynamic range)

At its native base of ISO 100 the Canon EOS R3 captures slightly more dynamic range both than the Sony A1 and its sibling the Canon EOS-1DX Mark III. In both cases it’s a small difference though of less than 0.2 EV. At ISO 200 the EOS R3 and Sony A1 are practically identical, with both mirrorless models very slightly behind the Mark III.

It’s not until ISO 400, however, where we see a slight difference in strategy between them, with the two Canon models displaying an earlier uplift in sensor gain than the Sony A1; the EOS R3 sees a bump of +0.9 EV and the Mark III nearly +1.3 EV.

The Sony A1 sees a similar hike in gain at ISO 800, lifting DR over the EOS R3 by around +0.7. EV, however it still only matches the Canon EOS-1D Mark III’s gentle decline in DR at around 13 stops. What’s interesting is what looks like the EOS R3’s two deliberate boosts in gain at low to mid ISOs, instead of the Sony’s one and the Mark III’s more consistent and gentle decline. This results in the EOS R3 sensor’s DR being stable at around 13.5 stops at ISO 200 and ISO 400, and then at just over 12 stops at both ISO 800 and ISO 1600.

After the leapfrogging at lower ISOs, it is the Canon EOS R3 that has the slightly better DR in the higher ISO range when compared to the Sony, with the exception of ISO 102,400 where the latter has around a +0.4 EV advantage. The Canon EOS 1-DX Mark III has the slightly better DR at 25,600 than the other two but we noticed some smoothing in the Mark III RAW files at ISO 102,400.

Sports (low-light ISO)

The Canon EOS R3 is the best full-frame low light performer we’ve seen to date with output at 30dB (where we compute ISO with both a minimum 18-bit color and 9 stop DR) more than +0.3 EV cleaner than the Sony A1 (4086 ISO vs 3163 ISO) and the Canon EOS-1DX Mark III (4086 ISO vs 3248 ISO).

In cameras with full-frame sensors it is the Sony A7 III that comes closest, where it’s just -0.13 Ev behind the EOS R3. Even the best sensor in our database with the lowest noise capable of meeting the our low-light criteria; the cropped (44 x 33mm) medium format 50 MP CMOS in the Pentax 645Z, is just slightly better (+0.14 Ev) than the EOS R3.

Conclusion

The introduction of a ‘3’ series pro-oriented camera with a built-in vertical grip sitting mid way between the existing top-of-the range ‘1’ series and the popular ‘5 ‘ series is a little confusing, especially as the new model appears to take on the role reserved for the Canon EOS-1DX Mark III DSLR. While we’ll have to wait and see what form a possible top-of-the-range EOS R1 takes, the Canon EOS R3 is certainly a compelling contender for its intended market. Not only does it have excellent dynamic range at key low, mid and high sensitivities, it has the best low light performance of any full-frame camera in our database. This makes the Canon EOS R3 a very attractive option for Canon EOS-1DX Mark III users transitioning over to Canon’s mirrorless RF system and it’s a solid option for any photographers new to the Canon brand.

In this review, we have mentioned the Canon EOS R3’s most relevant rivals from other brands. As usual, you can compare it with these and with other models and create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image sensor ranking tool. 

The post Canon EOS R3 Sensor review: Best low light performer appeared first on DXOMARK.

With a strong leaning towards video like the original, the GH5 II can now capture full-width cinema 4K/4K UHD 4:2:0 10-bit up to 60p and simultaneously output 4K 4:2:2 10-bit over HDMI. In addition there’s C4K/4K UHD 4:2:2 10-bit up to 30p recording internally, pre-installed V-log L for easier grading and no recording time restrictions.

Further tweaked features include 5-axis dual image stabilization (I.S.2) up to 6.5-stops (from 5 stops), a 3.68 M-dot OLED display, a 0.76x (equiv.) viewfinder with a higher refresh rate of up to 120 fps and a new tilting 3.0”, 1.84 M-dot touch-sensitive LCD with improved color and luminosity when used outdoors. Another welcome addition is a new high-capacity 2200 mAh battery, which can be charged via USB-C.

The camera has two SD UHS-II card slots. There’s also full-size HDMI and USB 3.1 Type C with external charging, plus Wi-Fi and Bluetooth for camera control and image sharing including wireless live streaming (using the RTMP/RTMPS protocol).

Key specifications

• 20.3 MP Four Thirds Live MOS sensor
• 5-axis image stabilization, now up 6.5 stops
• 225-point DFD AF, Advanced Subject Detection
• Native ISO 200-25,600, with expansion to ISO 100

Overall performance

Click on the score chart above to open the Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 II product page.

The Panasonic Lumix GH5 II achieved an overall sensor score of 79, which puts it in 102nd position in our overall sensitivity ranking (which includes medium format, full format, APS-C, and Four Thirds sensors). The GH5 II comes in 2nd place for Four Thirds cameras currently in our database, just fractionally behind the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II (we’ve not yet tested the newer Mark III).

The Lumix GH5 II sensor has excellent though not class-leading maximum color depth for a Four Thirds size sensor, and is especially impressive at high ISO settings. Dynamic range is also excellent at its native base of ISO 200, plus there’s an impressive uplift in DR at high ISOs. High color sensitivity and wide DR at high ISOs has a knock-on effect in our computed low-light ISO (Sports) category, helping the Lumix GH5 II achieve a relatively high (but still not quite class-leading) score for a Four Thirds sensor of ISO 1136.

In-depth comparisons

As previously mentioned, the Panasonic Lumix GH5 II has a similar 20.3 MP sensor to the outgoing GH5, so this makes for an obvious comparison. We’ve also chosen to compare it to the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II, which has a similar 20 MP sensor.

Portrait (color depth)

The Panasonic Lumix GH5 II outperforms the original GH5 for color sensitivity at every ISO value except at the extended ISO 100 setting. While it’s practically identical at ISO 100, it is slightly less (23.7 bits vs 23.9 bits) than the original. However, the GH5 II has the advantage of a slightly higher ISO sensitivity at ISO 100, measured at ISO 76 vs ISO 60, and by having the same result (23.7 bits) at ISO 200. Most impressive is the response after ISO 400 through to ISO 12800, where it ranges from an impressive 2 bits of better color sensitivity at ISO 800 to an astonishing 4 bits higher at ISO 6400.

From ISO 100 to ISO 800, the Olympus more or less matches the Lumix GH5 II, but after that the OM-D E-M1 Mark II’s color sensitivity follows the same trajectory as the original GH5’s, albeit with a slight edge — but still far short of the new Lumix GH5 II’s.

The Lumix GH5 II images just dip beneath our high quality range when set at ISO 3200 (measured 1801 ISO), and they stay well above the 14-bit threshold — just under 17 bits at ISO 1280 (measured ISO 7622).

Landscape (dynamic range)

At its lowest (extended) ISO setting, the Lumix GH5 II captures just slightly less dynamic range than its older sibling (12.83 vs 13.00 EV). However, it does so with the theoretical benefit of around a 1/3 stop increase in sensor sensitivity (ISO 76 vs ISO 60 — but this is at ISO 100 only; the two have practically the same measured sensitivities at higher native ISOs).

More relevant of course is the difference between the extended ISO 100 setting and ISO 200, where the dynamic range increases by 1/4 of a stop over the extended setting to 13.09 EV, which shows there’s a small advantage to keeping to the native ISO 200 setting. What’s more, this equates to a 1/3 stop over the original GH5 (at ISO 200). Between ISO 800 and ISO 1600 (manufacturer’s settings), a second gain results in a significant widening of mostly one stop in dynamic range over the original GH5 at every ISO setting thereafter (and pushes nearly 1.5 EV or one and a half stops at ISO 6400).

Compared to the aging but still current Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II, the improvement in DR is less at these high ISOs. Even so, the Lumix GH5 II maintains a comfortable advantage of around 1/3 stop at ISO 1600 to 3200, rising to 2/3 of a stop (0.6 EV) at ISO 6400.

Sports (low-light ISO)

With better color sensitivity and dynamic range at high ISOs, you would expect the Lumix GH5 II to see this reflected in its Sports score, and it is indeed higher than the original GH5. The new updated model has a little over a +0.3 EV advantage at 30 dB (where we compute the low-light ISO score) over the original. However, it is the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II that has the slightly better result here, equating to an advantage of just over +0.2 EV, thanks to its lower measured ISO throughout the sensitivity range. While it’s a relatively small difference at each setting, this typically translates into lower noise and is the reason why the Olympus is slightly ahead in our rating.

Conclusion

The original GH5 had been showing its age lately, and while the launch of the GH5 II was overshadowed somewhat by the announcement of the GH6, the GH5 II as an interim model sees some welcome updates — and not just to its video specs. Although the sensor appears to be similar to the original, the addition of an AR coating has resulted in enhanced transmission by reducing reflection. This in turn appears to have improved the overall sensor SNR, leading to welcome gains in color sensitivity and dynamic range, notably at high ISO settings. Couple that with a lower list price at the time of announcement compared to the original model and the GH5 II seems like a highly compelling update, and that’s regardless of the incoming, more pro-oriented GH6, which is sure to be much more expensive.

In this review, we have mentioned the Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 II’s most relevant rivals from other brands. As usual, you can compare it with these and with other models and create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image sensor ranking tool. 

The post Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5 II Sensor review: Enhanced high ISO performance appeared first on DXOMARK.

Besides the impressive sensor, it has built-in sensor stabilization, which Sony claims can reduce camera shake by up to 5.5 steps, plus there’s also multi-shot capability of outputting a 199 MP image. Other high-end features include a 9.44 million dot OLED viewfinder with impressively large 0.9x magnification, and a tilting 3.0”, 1.44M dot touch-sensitive LCD. On a camera destined for press and studio use, the electronic shutter can now sync with flash and can do so at up to 1/200s. If a higher sync speed is required, the mechanical shutter can sync at up to 1/400 second.

Besides the pro-oriented stills specs, the Sony A1 also has a full complement of video capabilities, including full-width 8K/30p and full-width 4K/60p (though the latter is binned, not oversampled, which accounts for the higher frame rate). It can also shoot 4K 120p from a slightly cropped region, and Sony promises a 4.3K 16-bit RAW option over HDMI in the future.

The camera has two CFexpress (Type A)/SD UHS-II card slots. There’s also full-size HDMI and USB Type C for super-fast transfer speeds or external charging, plus there’s Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and Ethernet for additional camera control and image sharing options.

Key specifications

• 50.1 MP full-frame stacked BSI CMOS sensor
• 5.5-stop, 5-axis image stabilization
• Fast hybrid AF with 759 points, Real-time Eye AF
• Native ISO 100-32,000, with expansion to ISO 50-102,400
• 12 fps mechanical, 30 fps with electronic shutter
• 9.44-M dot viewfinder, 240 fps refresh
• 3.0” touch-screen LCD, 1.44 M dots
• 8K 30p, 4.3K 16-bit RAW (over HDMI), 10-bit 4K 120p
• Dual band (2.4/5 GHz) Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, USB-C, 1000BASE-T Ethernet
• Dual CFexpress (Type A)/SD slots (UHS-II compatible)

Overall performance

Click on the score chart above to open the Sony A1 product page.

The Sony A1 achieved an overall sensor score of 98, which puts it in 9th position in our overall sensitivity ranking (including medium format) and in 7th place for full-frame 35 mm. That places the Sony A1 fractionally behind the Sony A7R IV and Nikon Z7 II at 99 and 100 respectively, and just slightly in front of the Canon EOS R5 at 95 points by less than 0.2EV in overall sensitivity. There’s really not much between them on the face of it, but it’s always worth looking at the individual metrics and how the sensors perform throughout the sensitivity range.

The Sony A1 sensor has excellent maximum color depth and dynamic range at base, measured at 25.9 bits and 14.5 EV ,respectively. While still very good, the sensor doesn’t compare quite so well in our low-light ISO (Sports) category, however, where it achieved a computed value of ISO 3163. Given the pixel count (and smaller pixel size), though, it is still impressive.

In-depth comparisons

As this is a camera aimed at working professionals, news agencies, and well-heeled enthusiasts, we’ve compared the Sony A1 with the 20 MP Canon EOS 1 DX Mark III and the 24 MP Leica SL2 S. We’ve also chosen these to compare because the Canon adopts a high-end but conventional CMOS sensor design, now known as a front-side illuminated type, while the Leica has also has a BSI-type sensor (though not the more advanced “stacked” type found in the Sony A1).

Portrait (color depth)

The Sony A1 has a very strong response for color sensitivity, especially at low ISOs, up to ISO 200, where it peaks at 25.9 bits at ISO 50/ISO 100 (overlaid on the graph), compared with the maximum 25.2 bits recorded by the Leica SL2-S. There’s also slight bump of around 0.5 bit between ISO 12,800 and ISO 25,600, though otherwise there isn’t much between them, which is pretty remarkable given the difference in pixel count.

For a conventional front-side CMOS sensor, the Canon EOS 1DX Mark III performs very well at high ISOs, practically matching the A1 from ISO 3200 and up, but it doesn’t compare quite so well at lower ISOs up to ISO 200, nor between ISO 800 and ISO 1600. In fairness, though, the difference there is minimal.

Images from the Sony A1 remain within our high quality range when set at ISO 1600 (measured ISO 1175), and thanks to a second gain in the response, they stay comfortably above the 14-bit threshold (measured at 15 bits) at ISO 25,600 (measured ISO 17859). However, so do both the Leica and the Canon, though the latter records exactly 14 bits at at ISO 25,600 (measured ISO 18,482).

Landscape (dynamic range)

At base ISO, the stacked sensor in the Sony A1 peaks at around 14.5 stops of dynamic range, which is close enough to parity with the very best results from full-frames at around the 14.7 EV mark. Even against the impressive BSI CMOS in the Leica SL2-S, the Sony A1 has around +0.5 EV more at base. While that’s a small amount, it may give the A1 a slight edge when adjusting highlights and shadows in high-contrast scenes, such as dimly lit interiors with brightly lit windows.

Although the Sony A1 beats the Leica SL2-S, the conventional FSI CMOS in the Canon EOS-1DX Mark III has the same 14.5 EV dynamic range at base, and the Canon trumps both rivals up to ISO 800. After that point, though, a gain in the response of the Sony and Leica put them both on a similar trajectory as the Canon, with the DR diminishing by around -1 EV per whole ISO step — up to ISO 102,400, anyway (although the Canon can go higher).

A closer look reveals the BSI CMOS in the Leica SL2-S performs slightly better than either the FSI Canon or the stacked Sony, and from ISO 3200 on, the Leica and the Canon have a slightly wider DR than the Sony, around +0.3-0.5 EV. Interestingly, a second gain in the response of the Sony A1 between ISO 12,800 and 25,600 increases DR to the same level as the Canon and Leica, but it falls back by the same amount at ISO 102,400.

Sports (low-light ISO)

Given the Sony A1’s much higher pixel count, it isn’t really surprising to see slightly noisier images reflected in the Sony’s Sports score. However, what is perhaps surprising is that at low ISOs, the Sony is cleaner than the Canon and only marginally noisier than the Leica. At higher ISOs, the differences between the results reduce as the ISO sensitivity increases, with the Sony A1 only slightly noisier than both at our 30 dB quality threshold. That said, the +0.15EV difference between the Leica SL2-S (3163 ISO vs 3504 ISO) is barely noticeable, and it’s negligible when compared to the Canon EOS-1DX Mark III (3163 ISO vs 3248 ISO). At least that’s the case when output is normalized to 8 MP (equivalent to a 12×8 inch print at 300 dpi); when viewed on-screen, the difference in noise levels is more apparent.

Conclusion

After the introduction of the Sony A9 it seemed that Sony had established a flagship series; with the appearance of the Sony A1, however, that’s clearly not the case. Indeed, on paper the Sony A1 combines the best of the A9, A7R, and A7S series in one package, and naturally that doesn’t come cheap.

The Sony A1 has a high-resolution 50 MP sensor that produces exemplary images and is practically identical in performance to existing high-end sensors which feature far lower pixels counts, such as those found in the superb Leica SL2-S and in Canon’s equally superb flagship EOS-1DX Mark III. Combined with the wide range of available native-mount lenses, its sensor makes the Sony A1 a highly attractive option for professionals working in a wide range of genres and markets, and will no doubt be on the wish lists of a tranche of enthusiasts and amateurs alike.

In this review, we have mentioned the Sony A1 most relevant rivals from other brands. As usual, you can compare it with these and with other models and create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image sensor ranking tool. 

The post Sony A1 Sensor review: Speed and quality in one appeared first on DXOMARK.

However, while substantially smaller than the original DC-S1, Panasonic has pared down some features and specs to make the DC-S5 more affordable. Instead of the 5.76 m-dot EVF of the S1, for instance, it has a lower-resolution 2.36 m-dot OLED viewfinder. And it has 3.0-inch, 1.84 m-dot fully articulating touchscreen to the rear instead of the larger 3.2-inch (2.1 m-dot) LCD of the DC-S1. The S5 also drops the XQD/CFexpress (Type B) card format and adopts two SD card slots, though only one is UHS-II compatible right now.

As for video, it’s perhaps unsurprising to see the Lumix S5 with very credible specs, such as full-frame 10-bit 4K 30p and up to 4K 60p video from an APS-C crop. Panasonic has also improved autofocus accuracy for body, face, and eye detection during video capture.

The Lumix DC-S5 has a mini HDMI port and USB-C with external charging, plus Wi-Fi and Bluetooth for wireless camera control and image sharing.

Key specifications:

• 24.2 MP BSI CMOS full-frame sensor
• 5-axis IBIS, up to 6.5 stops with Lumix S OIS lenses
• Contrast detect 225-point DFD AF system, object tracking and face detection
• Native ISO 100-51,200 with expansion to ISO 50 to 204,800
• 7 fps in AF-S, 5 fps in AF-C mode
• 2.36 m-dot OLED viewfinder
• 3.0-inch, 1.84 m-dot fully articulating touchscreen
• UHD 4K 30p or up to 4K 60p from APS-C size crop
• Wi-Fi, Bluetooth connectivity
• Dual memory slots: one SD (UHS-II ) and one SD (UHS-I)

Overall performance

Click on the score chart above to open the Panasonic Lumix DC-S5 product page.

With a 24.2 MP full-frame BSI CMOS sensor, the Panasonic Lumix DC-S5 ranks very highly, achieving a DXOMARK score of 94. Sensor output is at a level similar to the Panasonic Lumix DC-S1, the Nikon Z 6 II, and the Sony A7C and A7 III mirrorless models.

The DC-S5’s sensor has very good maximum color depth of 25 bits at base and it has excellent dynamic range there (ISO 100) as well, peaking at 14.5 EV, which is very similar to the performance of the 24 MP BSI CMOS-equipped Sony A7 III. However, it doesn’t compare quite so well in our low-light ISO category, where we measured a sensitivity of ISO 2697. Note that this is a measured value derived from our minimum quality threshold of at least 9 stops (9 EV) of dynamic range, 18 bits color depth, and a 30 dB SNR.

In-depth comparisons

In this comparison we’ll look at the DC-S5’s sibling, the Panasonic Lumix DC-S1, which we suspect has the same sensor as the DC-S5. We’ll also compare it with a high-end offering, the Sony A9 II. While this Sony model adopts a 24 MP CMOS sensor, which is also a BSI type like that found in the S5, it’s a state-of-the-art “stacked” type with built-in memory. Although this type performs well across the board, there are some aspects of the design that impacts its output slightly, mainly at low ISOs.

Portrait (color depth)

The Panasonic Lumix DC-S5 performs well in terms of color depth at all ISO settings and has a particularly strong maximum of 25.1 bits at both the extended ISO 50 and base ISO 100 settings, which have the same measured sensitivity of ISO 70.

As the Lumix DC-S1 is likely to have the same sensor, it isn’t too surprising to see it perform similarly to the S5. However, while the Lumix DC-S5 is only fractionally behind the DC-S1, averaging around 0.2-0.3 bits lower between stops, the DC-S1 also has around a +0.3 EV advantage in sensitivity at each ISO setting throughout the range from ISO 200 onwards. The Sony A9 II behaves similarly to the DC-S1 in terms of better sensitivity up to ISO 800, with around a +0.3 EV improvement over the DC-S5 for a similar color depth. Above that, though, the A9 has a little lower color depth than the DC-S5.

Landscape (dynamic range)

Like the color depth response, the Panasonic Lumix DC-S5 performs very well at low ISOs, especially at base, where it has a wide dynamic range (DR) of 14+ stops (14.45 EV). The DC-S5 also has a very good response throughout the sensitivity range, with a more pronounced uplift in DR occurring between ISO 400 and ISO 800 than seen in the colour sensitivity results. At that point, the decline in DR is reversed with an 0.5 EV increase from ISO 400 to 13+ stops at ISO 800. Dynamic range drops again with a relatively large one-stop (1 EV) loss at ISO 1600, though after that DR falls around 0.75 EV for each one-stop increase in ISO.

For the most part, the DC-S5 and DC-S1 have practically the same dynamic range at each ISO setting throughout the range, with the same gain seen at ISO 800. However the DC-S1 has the near-identical +0.3EV benefit in sensitivity at each ISO setting shown in the color depth response, which suggests the DC-S5 has slightly higher noise levels. Compared to the Sony A9 II, the dynamic range of the Panasonic Lumix DC-S5 is around half a stop (+0.5 EV) wider, though like the DC-S1, this is offset somewhat by the Sony’s +0.3 EV advantage in measured sensitivity.

Sports (low-light ISO)

When comparing noise levels between cameras using the data below from an 18% grey patch as an example, the Panasonic Lumix DC-S5 has practically the same SNR response as the Lumix DC-S1 at base ISO. However, SNR is marginally lower than the DC-S1 at all other ISO settings and it’s behind by about a third of a stop (0.3 EV) in measured sensitivity.

As for the A9 II, the SNR in the DC-S5 is higher at base and then comparable at each ISO setting afterwards up to 51,200 ISO, where the Sony sees a jump. However, like the DC-S1, the A9 II has around a third of a stop (0.3 EV) advantage in measured sensitivity. This one-third stop (0.3 EV) improvement over the DC-S5 is backed up by our low-light score. At our selected 30 dB SNR threshold, where the camera has at least 9 EV dynamic range and an 18 bit color depth, the Lumix DC-S5 has a sensitivity of ISO 2697 against ISO 3333 for the Lumix DC-S1, some -0.3 EV behind.

Conclusion

Given the smaller and lighter body, not to mention the price difference, the Lumix DC-S5 looks like a highly tempting alternative to the Lumix DC-S1 for those on a tighter budget. However, while the Panasonic Lumix DC-S5 is a very capable performer, with practically the same output as the excellent Lumix DC-S1, it has slightly higher noise levels and fractionally worse low-light performance. That’s all relative, of course; the Panasonic Lumix DC-S5 is still a superb performer and remains an excellent choice for a wide range of genres.

In this review, we have mentioned the Panasonic Lumix DC-S5’s most relevant rivals from its own and other brands. As usual, you can compare it with these and with other models and create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image sensor ranking tool. 

The post Panasonic Lumix DC-S5 Sensor review: Smaller than the Lumix DC-S1, but similar appeared first on DXOMARK.

Notable updates include twin Expeed 6 processors instead of one previously, and a redesign of the memory card slot interface to include two slots. In addition to the original XQD/CFexpress (Type B) slot, the Z6 II adds an SD (UHS-II compatible) slot for a wider and more affordable choice of media.

With the increased processing capabilities comes a new higher burst rate of 14 fps with a larger buffer and reduced viewfinder blackout times. There’s also improved autofocus with support for Eye-AF in Wide Area AF modes including during video capture as well as a promised 4K/60p video option with an APS-C crop via a future firmware update.

Key specifications

• 24.5 MP BSI CMOS full-frame sensor
• 5 stop, 5-axis image stabilization with Z-mount lenses
• Phase detection AF with 273-points, object tracking and face-detection
• Native ISO 100-51200, with expansion to ISO 50 to 204,800
• 14 fps with single point AF, 12 fps in other AF modes
• 3.69 m-dot OLED viewfinder
• 3.2” tilting, touch-screen LCD (2.1m-dot)
• UHD 4K/30p (up to 60p with firmware 1.10)
• Wi-Fi, Bluetooth (BLE) and SnapBridge connectivity
• Dual memory slots, CFe/XQD and SD (UHS-II compatible)

Overall performance

Click on the score chart above to open the Nikon Z6 II product page.

The Nikon Z6 II achieved a DXOMARK score of 94, which is practically the same as the model it replaces. Like its predecessor, the Nikon Z6 II has one of the highest performing sensors with a 24 MP pixel count in our database, ranking alongside the likes of the Panasonic Lumix DC-S1, Leica SL2-S, Sony A7C and Sony A7 III mirrorless models.

The Nikon Z6 II sensor has very good maximum color depth at 25 bits at base, which is just 0.3 bits lower than the original Z6 and the reason for the slightly lower score of 94 (vs. 95). It also has excellent dynamic range, measured at 14.4 EV at base ISO. It also has an excellent low-light ISO (Sports) measurement of ISO 3303. BSI sensors like that found in the Z6 II perform well at all ISOs including high sensitivities where they have wide DR and high Color Depth, which is what we take into account with the Low-light score. Although a measured value and not an ISO setting you can select on your camera, it’s a good way of comparing potential image quality in low-light between sensors.

In-depth comparisons

In this comparison, we’ll look at a more recently released model using a 24 MP BSI CMOS sensor, the 24MP Sony A7C, rather than the now somewhat aging Sony A7 III even if that model is more in line with the target market of the Z6 II. We will also take a look at output from a more conventional front side illuminated sensor in the 20 MP Canon EOS R6.

Portrait (color depth)

The BSI CMOS sensor performs well at all ISO settings, and the Nikon Z6 II hits a peak color sensitivity of 25 bits at its lowest base sensitivity (ISO 100). The same value was measured at ISO 50, but this is an extended setting as opposed to a genuinely lower base, such as the ISO 64 base found in the Nikon Z7 II. The Sony A7C behaves similarly, with a color depth of 25 bits for the extended ISO 50 setting and the ISO 100 base. The Sony A7C continues to match the Nikon Z6 II through to ISO 1600 after which the Nikon has a very slight advantage of up to 0.2 bits through to the extended high ISO settings where the Sony sees an uplift.

Although the Canon EOS R6 has very good color sensitivity, it doesn’t quite achieve the same lofty performance of the BSI sensors in the Nikon Z6 II, or the Sony A7C through the ISO range. Counterintuitively for this type of sensor (FSI), it’s particularly noticeable at low sensitivities where, for example, the maximum color depth is 24.1 bits, some 0.9 bits lower.

Landscape (dynamic range)

Measuring 14.43 EV, the Nikon Z6 II sensor has an excellent dynamic range at its base ISO, but the Sony A7C manages to extract a little more, close to +0.3 EV. While not much of an advantage there, the Nikon Z6 II can’t claim a wider DR at any sensitivity as the Nikon and Sony are practically identical in their response throughout the ISO range.

Against the Canon EOS R6, the Nikon Z6 II performs better generally, with a wider DR at base and at higher ISOs where BSI sensors perform well. Even so, the Nikon Z6 II loses out at ISO 400 where a gain applied between ISO 200 and ISO 400 sees output from the Canon EOS R6 with a significant and meaningful +0.9EV advantage in DR. At least that’s the case when we consider the performance when normalized, with the output scaled for a 12 x 8 inch print at 300dpi, which equates to an 8 MP image. There are fewer differences in DR on a computer screen at 100% magnification (actual pixels).

Sports (low-light ISO)

Noise levels are low in the Nikon Z6 II throughout the ISO range, meaning it has excellent low-light performance. However, it is very slightly behind the Sony A7C. While the slope in the SNR 18% graph (below) is practically identical between the Nikon and Sony, the lower measured ISO of the A7C contributes to the better response of the Sony. The Canon EOS R6 on the other hand matches the Nikon and Sony at higher ISOs, which is a good result for an FSI type sensor, however, over the ISO100-200 range noise levels are a bit higher and lagging behind output from the two BSI types.

At the 30dB SNR threshold, where we calculate the ISO value while also having at least 9 EV dynamic range and an 18-bit color depth for our low-light score, the Nikon Z6 II is only -0.04 EV behind the Canon EOS R6, which is too close to make any difference.

Conclusion

While it’s good to see Nikon moving forward with its second-generation models, the sensor performance of the Nikon Z6 II hasn’t really changed a great deal over the original. As a state-of-the art 24 MP BSI CMOS sensor, it was already an excellent performer. What’s more interesting perhaps is that while Nikon and Sony share similar sensors, there isn’t much to differentiate between the performance, while Canon, which makes its own sensors, has been making some inroads.

Even so, with its excellent all-around sensor performance, the Nikon Z6 II remains a worthy choice for photojournalism, wedding and portrait photographers, and it’s also a good fit for occasional video projects.

In this review, we have mentioned the Nikon Z6 II’s most relevant rivals from other brands. As usual, you can compare it with these and with other models and create your own comparisons and in-depth analyses using our interactive image sensor ranking tool. 

The post Nikon Z6 II Sensor review: Familiar sensor performance appeared first on DXOMARK.