Any real measurement data on mirrorless sensor heating?

[Frans Waterlander]

Indeed, just in this thread, thanks for pointing them out  :

Look who's talking!

[digitaldog]

Look who's talking!

As a wise man once said here:
” You appear to confuse argumentum ad hominem with simple abuse.”

[Frans Waterlander]

Enough of the ad hominem and simple abuse stuff. To determine if mirrorless is a viable option for me, I'm still looking for measurement data on mirrorless camera sensor heating. Anybody?

[digitaldog]

Enough of the ad hominem and simple abuse stuff. To determine if mirrorless is a viable option for me, I'm still looking for measurement data on mirrorless camera sensor heating. Anybody?

https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/a7rii-self-heating-for-long-exposures/

https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/a7r-self-heating-for-long-exposures/

https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-100/gfx-100-self-heating-read-noise-and-edr/

https://blog.kasson.com/a7riv/sony-a7riv-self-heating-read-noise-changes/

[Frans Waterlander]

https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/a7rii-self-heating-for-long-exposures/

https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/a7r-self-heating-for-long-exposures/

https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-100/gfx-100-self-heating-read-noise-and-edr/

https://blog.kasson.com/a7riv/sony-a7riv-self-heating-read-noise-changes/

That's old and - regretfully - not applicable data. As I said before in this thread: "Those tests are mostly aimed at astrophotography and don't cause a lot of sensor heating. Having live view on and shooting video for extended periods of time (when shooting sports events, etc.) would cause way more heating and dynamic range degradation."
And Jim commented: "Caveat: I didn't test video."

[faberryman]

Enough of the ad hominem and simple abuse stuff. To determine if mirrorless is a viable option for me, I'm still looking for measurement data on mirrorless camera sensor heating. Anybody?

Have you tried making a photograph with a mirrorless camera and looking at it?

[digitaldog]

That's old and - regretfully - not applicable data.

Indeed: reject actual, well structured and researched facts and data that doesn't confirm to an expected Confirmation bias. Nothing new here.

[digitaldog]

Have you tried making a photograph with a mirrorless camera and looking at it?

That would require effort (testing, examining). And it might result in seeing a result that wasn't predetermined prior to the testing. But yeah, it's a great idea, all one needs to do is find a good VAR, ask to examine the cameras for testing and come to a conclusion. Not in the cards..... 

[Frans Waterlander]

Indeed: reject actual, well structured and researched facts and data that doesn't confirm to an expected Confirmation bias. Nothing new here.

If you know of actual, well-structured data sources that include dynamic range degradation measurement resulting from working for extended periods of time in live view and video modes, then by all means share those sources with us.

[digitaldog]

If you know of actual, well-structured data sources that include dynamic range degradation measurement resulting from working for extended periods of time in live view and video modes, then by all means share those sources with us.

Any you'd accept? Doesn't exist. 

[Frans Waterlander]

That would require effort (testing, examining). And it might result in seeing a result that wasn't predetermined prior to the testing. But yeah, it's a great idea, all one needs to do is find a good VAR, ask to examine the cameras for testing and come to a conclusion. Not in the cards..... 

Measurements of this nature require an extensive test facility like those of DxoMark and other test houses.

[Frans Waterlander]

Any you'd accept? Doesn't exist. 

Show me the data.

[Manoli]

It looks like the situation hasn't changed since I started to look into this a year ago; data on image quality degradation, due to sensor heating in e.g. live view and video modes, particularly for mirrorless cameras, is not available. Oodles of users reporting problems and user manuals warn of image degradation, but no hard data. For me, this is a major shortcoming of manufacturers, test houses and technical reviewers alike. If this situation doesn't change when I need to replace my DSLR, mirrorless cameras will be a no-go for me.

I'm not, Jim, but your published data on mirrorless cameras is limited to a handful of Sony's, one Nikon and one Fujifilm, all higher-end, expensive cameras, none include video mode and most don't specify if the camera was in EVF or LCD mode and if they were in the worst case EVF or LCD mode. Yes, your blog gives me more info than any other source, but it's not giving me warm, fuzzy feelings about mirrorless, let alone mirrorless cameras that would be more in my price range.

To determine if mirrorless is a viable option for me, I'm still looking for measurement data on mirrorless camera sensor heating. Anybody?

Isn't it interesting to see that the recently announced Canon R5 and R6 mirrorless cameras have significant overheating issues? Not only very limited video run times and long cooling down periods but also significant heating up when the cameras are switched on and not in video mode. But again, no image degradation data available.

No, its clearly of no interest to you as both cameras are well outside your more modest price range. Shooting 8k has its own problems.  Regardless, you started this in-depth investigation with ‘concerns’ over dynamic range. Now you’ve apparently moved on to motion and filming sports.

My suggestions to you are:

1/ Buy any entry level FF MILC and do your own tests if it’s that important. I doubt you’ll be competing with Gursky in the art sales, so there’ll be little DR variation, and almost certainly nothing that you’ll be able to discern.
2/ If you’re that interested in motion, buy a RED and be done with it.
3/ Stop trolling

[digitaldog]

Show me the data.

Why do you need a camera? 

[Frans Waterlander]

No, its clearly of no interest to you as both cameras are well outside your more modest price range. Shooting 8k has its own problems.  Regardless, you started this in-depth investigation with ‘concerns’ over dynamic range. Now you’ve apparently moved on to motion and filming sports.

My suggestions to you are:

1/ Buy any entry level FF MILC and do your own tests if it’s that important. I doubt you’ll be competing with Gursky in the art sales, so there’ll be little DR variation, and almost certainly nothing that you’ll be able to discern.
2/ If you’re that interested in motion, buy a RED and be done with it.
3/ Stop trolling

Any chance you have knowledge of the data that I'm looking for?

[digitaldog]

If you know of actual, well-structured data sources that include dynamic range degradation measurement resulting from working for extended periods of time in live view and video modes, then by all means share those sources with us.

See folks, predetermined confirmation bias and outcome before even testing or examining any data or doing any testing.
Yet another example of asking a question and the result being CWOBaT (colossal waste of bandwidth and time).
See what's about to be posted if you don't believe me....... 

[Frans Waterlander]

See folks, predetermined Confirmation bias and outcome before even testing or examining any data or doing any testing.
Yet another example of asking a question and the result being CWOBaT (colossal waste of bandwidth and time).
See what's about to be posted if you don't believe me....... 

Tell me where to find the information I'm looking for.

[Manoli]

Tell me where to find the information I'm looking for.

Tell me why you need it

[digitaldog]

Tell me where to find the information I'm looking for.

It's all in your head Frans. Just tell yourself what you want to hear and maybe someone will parrot it for you. Then if you need a camera, go test one, or maybe even buy one assuming you need or use a camera.
You've been asking this question here, and on PhotoNet for like a year+. I suppose the need for a camera isn't that pressing. Meanwhile, the rest of us are making (or taking) images without all the CWOBaT (colossal waste of bandwidth and time).

[digitaldog]

Tell me why you need it

It's not the answers that are important for some postering agendas. It's the question and the attention from asking a question, again not any answers.

This is more aligned with such a concept and from someone the OP may consider a reputable soruce:

"Reports that say something hasn't happened are interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns — the ones we don't know we don't know."
From: Donald Rumsfeld Wins 'Foot in Mouth Award'