The Blog

Sony A7r: A better APS-C camera than the Sony A77?

A provocative title – but a real consideration

Ok, it’s not really fair to call the A7r a “better crop camera” than an A77… but a comparison between the two is quite interesting. One really cool thing about the Sony A7r that has become more and more apparent is that it is an excellent APS-C camera. Follow me here… in the “crop mode” on the A7r, the camera captures a 1.5x cropped image (4200 x 3200 pixels or 15.3 MP if you’re counting) and you get the benefit of a cropped view in the EVF for framing.

In theory, a dedicated, higher megapixel camera body like the Sony A77 should provide more detailed images than using such a “workaround” feature. Actually, if you simply followed the stats, you’d expect the A77 to give you over 40% greater linear resolution (the A77 is a 24 megapixel camera, 6000 x 4000 image size).

In practice, this is really not the case. Actually, the A7r sensor has a number of advantages over the A77: 1) There is no translucent mirror in front of it 2) There’s no anti-aliasing filter to blur the image 3) The photosites are larger.

A quick test – is the A7r a better APS-C camera than the A-mount A77?

Certainly a camera is about more than simply a sensor and image quality. BUT – with the LA-E4 adapter for A-mount lenses, the A7r is actually quite responsive, and the AF is in the same ballpark as the A77.  But how does the image quality compare?

Below are a few 100% crops at different ISOs to give you an idea. For this comparison, I used a very simple studio setup with bounce flash lighting. The only difference you’ll see is a slight shadow in the A7r images – because a radio trigger was used vs. the on-camera flash trigger in the A77. This does not impact image quality. These results are actually very representative if the images you could expect from either camera. More details are at bottom.

CLICK FOR FULL SIZE – Right click to download and pixel peep

 

Conclusions / Observations:

Shooting birds with a Sigma 180mm lens with both cameras, I was surprised at first by getting a little more detail and a little less noise from the A7r – even with a lower pixel count. That’s where this all came from. These comparison shots simply reflect the reality of the A77 and the quality of the A7r. These include:

  • Megapixels get you very little on their own – the A77 24MP sensor can be easily matched by a better 15-16MP sensor
  • The noise performance of the A77 is pretty poor, even at lower ISOs (200-400), even at web sizes. It’s really at the bottom of the pile, and there’s no way around it
  • The AA filter does the A77 no favors, blurring fine detail… while the lack of AA filter on the A7r really helps with fine detail
  • The 15MP images from the A7r match or nearly the 24MP A77 in terms of detail and overall quality at lower ISOs (up to 400) and surpass it at anything above 400
  • The A77 handles better in “big lens” applications – so this isn’t a total hit-job. There’s room for a nice SLR-style body like this (and presumably the A77II)

All in all, it’s pretty amazing what a very good 15MP sensor can do. And for those who might have or want an A7r – and think they will get a significant Image Quality boost with a 24MP crop body (maybe as a second body, etc) – the “Crop mode” on the A7r is actually a very good solution. Instead of $700-800 on an A77, you might consider a new lens instead!

QUICK EDIT: John, below, was kind enough to share a comment about moire. If you view the flower photo at 200ISO, the A7r displays some moire in the petals (they are nylon). Thoughts on this are in the comments.

 

More details on the comparison / procedure

There are a number of ways that you can set up a comparison like this, but the results are always essentially the same. For this, a Sigma 35mm f/1.4 A-Mount lens was used on both the A7r and A77 – which were set up on a tripod and shot sequentially. An HVL 43M flash was set up off-camera and bounced off of a white ceiling from the same location for each camera. A radio trigger was used from the A7r and the on-camera flash was used to wirelessly trigger the flash from the A77. Images were taken into LR5.5, processed with no sharpening or noise reduction, Adobe Standard color profile for each. 5500K with zero tint correction was set for white balance on each image. Full size 80% sRGB JPGs were exported for the A7r images, and the A77 images were downsampled to the same dimensions and exported. (Downsampling typically yields a noise reduction benefit).

You may also like:

FacebookEmailPrintFriendlyShare!

Tags: , ,

About Leica BOSS

I heart grain. I'm also an unapologetic Leicaphile - bringing original content and photography goodness from around the web with gear, photos & tutorials. Pay it forward.

11 Awesome Comments So Far

Don't be a stranger, join the discussion by leaving your own comment
  1. john
    May 11, 2014 at 5:27 am #

    Well, AA-less 15mp obviously get you very visible moire in the flower image comparison. Apply a moire-removal tool of your choice and the image will be less sharp than the A77 image. Imo AA-less cameras are just too inconsistent for the minor advantage in sharpness they offer.

    • Leica BOSS
      May 11, 2014 at 7:03 am #

      I agree with this assessment, but not the conclusion. The flower – which is a nylon fabric, was chosen specifically because it’s one of a few things that cause moire for me. In these rare instances, you have the flexibility to judiciously blur if desired – in a local fashion. It takes almost nothing to make it go away. On the other hand, the A77 forces you to blur the whole image, every time.

      So you are kind of left with the choice of camera A that provides a better image at any ISO 400 and above, and in 95% of images below (that requires a little moire fix here and there) OR a camera that will rarely if ever give you moire, but underperforms most of the time. (Assuming you are only looking at 100% crops / image quality)

      • john
        May 12, 2014 at 11:05 am #

        Yes, it’s just a matter of personal preference. However, in my experience moire appears a lot more often than people pretend. The thing that I hate about moire is that no two instances of moire are the same. You always have to find an optimal balance between blurring and maintaining sharpness, use some local adjustment tool etc. And that’s very time consuming compared to fixing other optical defects like distortion or vignetting… or bumping up the sharpness slider.

        As a suggestion, what about a comparison between the images after more elaborate processing? In my experience less sharp images leave a little more headroom for sharpening than an image that’s already sharp, similar to how tones in a low contrast images can sometimes be easier to work with.

        • Leica BOSS
          May 12, 2014 at 3:41 pm #

          I can take a look at a comparison like this. Sharpening is so specific to the output medium and sensor, that the results will be quite subtle. My experience is “detail lost is detail lost” – and I’ll start with the more crisp RAW image every time, given the choice. To me, the A77 files are not as easy to work with after base ISO as the A7r files are. Unsharp images that are coaxed to appear sharp always look different than sharp images that were always sharp to start with. But it’s all really just pixel peeping and engineering at that point.

          • john
            May 13, 2014 at 6:56 am #

            Yes, detail lost is detail lost, there is no way around that. However, I found that having fake sharpness can still be reasonably close to the real thing. For instance, something very simple as a radial gradient sharpening filter in LR can improve the impression of uniformity with wide lenses quite well without introducing noticeable artifacts in the center (for me).

          • Leica BOSS
            May 13, 2014 at 7:19 am #

            Yes. I’m completely on-board with this. Bottom line for me is that I always feel better able to get finer results without an AA filter – with all the caveats.

  2. Paul Ferzoco
    May 12, 2014 at 2:04 am #

    I agree with your assessment. The only drawback to using auto-crop mode is for those time when I want to use the wonderful 10-18 wide-angle. Hopefully Sony will come out with a similar lens FE mount. I have a great Canon 14mm it can’t match the convenience of the 10-18 (including the latter’s OSS).

    Love your blog and find myself getting upset when you haven’t written anything new. Sorry!

    • Leica BOSS
      May 12, 2014 at 6:52 am #

      You’re very kind. For wide angle shooting, the world is so very different. That 14mm is really an epic lens.

  3. Billy
    June 3, 2014 at 6:40 am #

    The general problem with the A7(R) for me was how sluggish the camera operated. From turn-on time with the occasional few seconds blackout over formatting time up to response time for menu settings. I always had the feeling of high-end sensor with a low end firmware. If one can pass “full frame” the NEX-6 / A6000 are much better cameras overall if you ask me: Much faster to respond and a lot cheaper.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Sony A7r: A better APS-C camera than the Sony A... - May 12, 2014

    […] Ok, it’s not really fair to call the A7r a “better crop camera” than an A77… but a comparison between the two is quite interesting. One really cool thing about the Sony A7r that has become more and more apparent is that it is an excellent APS-C camera. Follow me here… in the “crop mode” on the A7r, the camera captures a 1.5x cropped image (4200 x 3200 pixels or 15.3 MP if you’re counting) and you get the benefit of a cropped view in the EVF for framing. In theory, a dedicated, higher megapixel camera body like the Sony A77 should provide more detailed images than using such a “workaround” feature. Actually, if you simply followed the stats, you’d expect the A77 to give you over 40% greater linear resolution (the A77 is a 24 megapixel camera, 6000 x 4000 image size).In practice, this is really not the case. Actually, the A7r sensor has a number of advantages over the A77: 1) There is no translucent mirror in front of it 2) There’s no anti-aliasing filter to blur the image 3) The photosites are larger…….  […]

  2. Sony A7r: A better APS-C camera than the Sony A... - May 18, 2014

    […] Ok, it's not really fair to call the A7r a "better crop camera" than an A77… but a comparison between the two is quite interesting. Hint. The A7r wins.  […]

Leave a Comment

Remember to play nicely folks, nobody likes a troll.