>>3578527>RP have old 6dm2 sensor which is really behind the market in terms of iso and dr. It is not behind in ISO. In fact, no shipping FF sensor with, the exception of the A72, is behind in ISO because high ISO shots are dominated by photon shot noise which is a physical phenomenon unrelated to sensors. Except for the A72 you have to go back 10 years or more to find a FF sensor with read noise that makes it noticeably (i.e. >1ev) worse at high ISO. And high ISO is not going to get significantly better. Even if there was a sensor with perfect QE (impossible btw) it would increase high ISO ability by less than 1ev over current sensors.
I wish people would quit believing DxO nonsense and marketing propaganda about high ISO. Read noise and photon loss were both minimized by around 2010. With photon shot noise the only thing you can do is gather more light.
The RP is behind on base ISO DR which is dominated by read noise. You can push RP RAW files 3ev where you can push Z6/A73 files 5-6ev depending on the scene. That's great except nobody is pushing their shots 5 stops. The only time anyone does this is to show off their high DR by photographing black socks at -5ev. Very few photographers even know how to exploit this difference much less need it. It's the most overrated metric ever devised. Fucking masters of landscape photography shot 6-stop Velvia 50 for years but YOU are so special you need 15 stops instead of 12?
>though it tuned by nikon so iso is better than on a7m3There's not 1/3rd ev difference between them at high ISO. And the only reason why the Z6 is behind the A73 on DR is because there's a banding issue which starts to appear at +5ev.
Having said that: the real reason to choose between the RP, Z6, or A73 is because you want to be in a particular system. Lenses, ergonomics, color science, etc. Not some silly damn spec which will never matter.
