Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 11 Nov 2013 (Monday) 15:22
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon users, how much do you value Dynamic Range?

 
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
40,147 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2009
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Nov 12, 2013 00:18 |  #16

vengence wrote in post #16444382 (external link)
I'd love more DR. But a LOT more, not just the couple of EV difference we see now. Wouldn't mind if someone made a FF with about 3 stops more ISO too. We'll see, just give them time...

There are already some dSLRs with 25600 availability...+6EV more sensitivity than the fastest color film. What's the point of +9EV sensitivity?!


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support http://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
basketballfreak6
Goldmember
1,288 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 1591
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Nov 12, 2013 00:18 |  #17

just gimme cleaner shadows :P

but yes while nice to have issue a bit overblown imho


https://www.instagram.​com/tony.liu.photograp​hy/ (external link)
flickr (external link)
https://500px.com/tony​_liu_photography (external link)
5DIV, 5DIII, modified 760D, 16-35L f/4 IS, 24-70L II f/2.8, 70-200L IS II f/2.8, S150-600 f/5-6.3 SPORT, S14 f/1.8 ART, S50 f/1.4 ART, S135 f/1.8 ART, 100L IS Macro f/2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
speedync
Goldmember
1,203 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 167
Joined May 2011
Location: Geelong, Australia
     
Nov 12, 2013 00:54 |  #18

Not enough to sell up all my gear, change camps at my expense, relearn all new settings and menus, just for the sake of being able to lift the odd shadows 20 stops. Especially in the event that if I'm a tiny bit patient, the same capabilities will come to the system I am already using and invested in. Patience grasshoppers, patience.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gregg.Siam
Goldmember
Avatar
2,383 posts
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Bangkok
     
Nov 12, 2013 02:37 as a reply to  @ speedync's post |  #19

For me it's overrated. Double what we currently have and I will be excited.

Who cares about shadows? I really fail to see any reason why I would care about shadows. Does anyone go to a gallery and say "damn, those are some nice shadows?" Shadows are dark because.... they are meant to be shadows. Most modern day cameras can easily recover from a 2-3 stop under exposed image already. I had one I exposed incorrectly for the bright back ground, making the girl invisibly black, and I was able to recover her like it was shot correctly.

If you need 3 more stops DR, run Magic Lantern.

I do see some landscape guys saying better DR lets them use a different ND filter, which I can understand, but it's not that game changing in my opinion.


5D MKIII | 24-105mm f/4 L| 50mm f/1.8 | 600EX-RT [FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=bl​ue][FONT="]|
∞ 500px (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,265 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 404
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Nov 12, 2013 03:52 as a reply to  @ Gregg.Siam's post |  #20

I'd say that more dynamic range is always better as long as it doesn't in itself cause other problems in the sensor or digitised data. If you don't need it, you just don't make use of it (so no big deal).

How often is it important? Well that totally depends on your subject.

If you can control the lighting (studio) then it probably doesn't matter much. If you're trying to hold for highlights and keep some detail in the shadows on a landscape shot then it matters a lot (filters are useful, but won't rescue every situation).

I've even bumped up against the problem with large outdoor group portraits. On a couple of occasions I've had to shoot large groups (mostly wearing light shirts/dark trousers) in a particular setting (in front of a specific building, at a specific time of the day). On a day with strong sunlight, holding for the white/light shirts means inky black trousers - and banding if I try to bring out any detail in post (everyone ends up wearing pinstripes :().

For my current subjects, it's an occasional problem; but if I went back to regular landscape shooting, Sony or Nikon would be opening my wallet.


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lowner
"I'm the original idiot"
Avatar
12,924 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Salisbury, UK.
     
Nov 12, 2013 04:07 |  #21

As a landscapist DR is very important to me. Far more so than this fixation with ISO speeds. But its only one item, and I would also want better sensors, like Sony are providing Nikon with for their 800E.

The claimed DR seems far more than I can achieve. As sploo says (#20), shadow and highlight detail is important and if we really were achieving the figures claimed by Canon (and others, it must be said), there would be no problem.


Richard

http://rcb4344.zenfoli​o.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snowyman
Goldmember
Avatar
3,513 posts
Gallery: 57 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 815
Joined Oct 2011
     
Nov 12, 2013 04:24 |  #22

I dislike banding, would like more DR and underexposure is something I run into with monotonous regularity. But Nikon doesn't have an MP-E 65mm.


Snowy's Gear
Deviant Art (external link)
Flickr (external link)
Blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
adas
Goldmember
Avatar
1,496 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Aug 2004
     
Nov 12, 2013 05:07 |  #23

I could not care less about noise at ISO 100. Most people are unable to capture more than 10 stops (lens flare etc.), yet they crave for 14 stop cameras.
Others, more skilled can, but are exaggerating the shadow pushing and highlight pulling and produce grotty images. I don't like HDRs that show halos either.
And BTW, Sony and Nikon sensors (or are they the same?) are not better, they only moved the analog readout (ADC) closer to the sensor (or on-chip), but the sensor itself is noisier than Canon's, which shows at higher ISOs, where the ADC low-noise no longer counts.


6D, 20D, G7X

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,265 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 404
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Nov 12, 2013 05:45 |  #24

adas wrote in post #16444705 (external link)
And BTW, Sony and Nikon sensors (or are they the same?) are not better, they only moved the analog readout (ADC) closer to the sensor (or on-chip), but the sensor itself is noisier than Canon's, which shows at higher ISOs, where the ADC low-noise no longer counts.

I believe the high ISO advantage held by the current Canon sensors only really kicks in at very high ISO speeds, and then the difference is relatively minor. Certainly a sports/low light/journalist shooter wouldn't have much reason to prefer a Sony/Nikon sensor over Canon. Arguably though, good AF and fast glass are way higher up the list for these shooting styles.

For the landscape guys, quality (sharpness, colour, DR) at ISO 100 is king. Slow lenses (and slow, or even no, AF) is acceptable (or at least much less of an issue).

Horses for courses - I wouldn't take an F1 car to an off road race, but it doesn't mean an F1 car isn't special.


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lowner
"I'm the original idiot"
Avatar
12,924 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Salisbury, UK.
     
Nov 12, 2013 07:56 |  #25

A very fair and balanced way of looking at the differing requirements.


Richard

http://rcb4344.zenfoli​o.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,346 posts
Gallery: 39 photos
Likes: 456
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Nov 12, 2013 12:00 |  #26

Lowner wrote in post #16444658 (external link)
As a landscapist DR is very important to me. Far more so than this fixation with ISO speeds. But its only one item, and I would also want better sensors, like Sony are providing Nikon with for their 800E.

Your needs are quite the opposite of mine, but that is because we have different subject matter.

I'd take more DR, for sure. But most of the time I shoot to the right and wind up increasing contrast in my photos anyway. But I do see how the Exmor sensor has left Canon landscape shooters feeling like they need to change equipment.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scotchtape
Member
152 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2013
     
Nov 12, 2013 12:51 |  #27

Gregg.Siam wrote in post #16444584 (external link)
For me it's overrated. Double what we currently have and I will be excited.

Who cares about shadows? I really fail to see any reason why I would care about shadows. Does anyone go to a gallery and say "damn, those are some nice shadows?" Shadows are dark because.... they are meant to be shadows. Most modern day cameras can easily recover from a 2-3 stop under exposed image already. I had one I exposed incorrectly for the bright back ground, making the girl invisibly black, and I was able to recover her like it was shot correctly.

If you need 3 more stops DR, run Magic Lantern.

I do see some landscape guys saying better DR lets them use a different ND filter, which I can understand, but it's not that game changing in my opinion.

I care :)
A lot!

It's not about "shadows" as in an object casting a shadow, it's about raising up the darker parts of an image if your scene has a high DR.

Right now I've been doing 95% sunset / night time urban timelapse photography.
In almost every shot I see the shadow banding / noise issue and wish I had more DR as well.

DR and shadows are a huge deal to me.

Understandably if you don't don't do either of these things (which lots of people probably don't) you probably won't care. But if you do, it really really makes a huge difference.
Those extra stops and cleaner shadows the Sony sensors get DO make a difference. For anyone that says it doesn't matter, go shoot into a bright sunset and try to expose for a dim foreground / subject, and then blow up the results. Or shoot dark skies and enjoy the canon noise machine.

Of course most of the times you can get a "useable" result, but it could be SO much better (Sony sensor!). And sometimes, it does become unuseable.

I get it, probably 5% of people actually use it, but for those 5% it actually makes a huge difference.

I use a 5D3 and 6D. While they still amaze me technologically (I mean, compare this to 5 years ago!), when you see the results of the Sony sensors you can't help but be a bit disappointed. I'm mostly shooting at ISO 100 - 400 and the shadow noise is really annoying.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,412 posts
Likes: 342
Joined Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
     
Nov 12, 2013 14:24 |  #28

adas wrote in post #16444705 (external link)
I could not care less about noise at ISO 100. Most people are unable to capture more than 10 stops (lens flare etc.), yet they crave for 14 stop cameras.
Others, more skilled can, but are exaggerating the shadow pushing and highlight pulling and produce grotty images. I don't like HDRs that show halos either.
And BTW, Sony and Nikon sensors (or are they the same?) are not better, they only moved the analog readout (ADC) closer to the sensor (or on-chip), but the sensor itself is noisier than Canon's, which shows at higher ISOs, where the ADC low-noise no longer counts.

That simple huh. Then what is holding up Canon?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pjay
Senior Member
Avatar
619 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Australia
     
Nov 12, 2013 15:24 |  #29

Recently a friend lent me a book of landscape photography from the 70s, taken in the scenic Granite Belt of Queensland. I was amazed at the large areas of black shadow with absolutely no detail at all - quite the norm with film apparently... Some of our digital age expectations of full detail in both highlights and shadows my be a tad unrealistic? My early morning rocky seascapes look pretty scary if I try to pull up detail in shadow areas, so sometimes it's best to just let shadow be shadow.


Gear List
Flickr (external link) http://instagram.com/p​ixels_n_film (external link)
'Photography is a love affair with life.' Burk Uzzle

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
40,147 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2009
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Nov 12, 2013 15:58 |  #30

Pjay wrote in post #16446146 (external link)
Recently a friend lent me a book of landscape photography from the 70s, taken in the scenic Granite Belt of Queensland. I was amazed at the large areas of black shadow with absolutely no detail at all - quite the norm with film apparently... Some of our digital age expectations of full detail in both highlights and shadows my be a tad unrealistic? My early morning rocky seascapes look pretty scary if I try to pull up detail in shadow areas, so sometimes it's best to just let shadow be shadow.

The offset press is well understood to have LESS dynamic range than film is capable of capturing. In photographing artificially illuminated sets for use in brochures, etc. which are printed by the offset press, it is common for photographers to light their scenes to deliberately narrow the dynamic range.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support http://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

6,224 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon users, how much do you value Dynamic Range?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is livingHi
773 guests, 296 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.