Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
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 28 Jul 2014 (Monday) 15:27
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Why Canon, when Nikon...

 
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,606 posts
Likes: 415
Joined Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
     
Aug 12, 2014 20:16 |  #211
bannedPermanent ban

davesrose wrote in post #17092325 (external link)
Please read my posts: I've stated quite a few times in this thread that bumping up the shadows +4 stops and upscaling the 5D shots up to 36MP is not an apples to apples comparison.

Well then define what a valid test would be. Personally I like the idea of up sampling the 5d3 to the resolution of the Sony sensor as I make large prints and that is where the rubber meets the road. Down sampling to web sized images equalizes everything to mediocracy.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,800 posts
Likes: 554
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Aug 12, 2014 20:31 |  #212

Hogloff wrote in post #17092274 (external link)
That's like saying a camera with 1-stop better high ISO noise is really nothing as there are so many other shots it still falls short on.

Why is it that we even break down the high ISO abilities into fractional stops...yet when it comes to DR, a breakthrough sensor like the Sony sensor which provides more than a full stop...more like 2 or even 3 stops...is down played?

Again, my argument is the DR advantage with the Sony sensors isn't 2-3 stops better then Canon. At best, I'm thinking it might be around 1 stop. In the digital realm, this could have some good leeway in certain situations...but I have yet to see it as "breakthrough". In the high ISO arena, it is great how less noise current sensors are getting. Certainly we are getting great details at ISOs that would only be grain with film equivalents. The best in dynamic range, though, still goes to B&W large format film. Current digital sensors are getting very good, and are great considering they are trying to have a good dynamic range with 3 channels of color.

I have yet to see any examples of the best Sony FF sensors approaching the DR of B&W film though. We can debate how much better they are at selectively pushing regular shots, but there's still a ways to go for them to to truly get into high dynamic range.


Canon 5D mk IV
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,800 posts
Likes: 554
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Aug 12, 2014 20:36 |  #213

Hogloff wrote in post #17092331 (external link)
Well then define what a valid test would be. Personally I like the idea of up sampling the 5d3 to the resolution of the Sony sensor as I make large prints and that is where the rubber meets the road. Down sampling to web sized images equalizes everything to mediocracy.

Again, as I've stated before: upsampling the 5D images to 36MP introduces artifacts. I especailly chuckled that they criticized CA and noise with the upsampled 5D images. To get a fair comparison of the camera IQ, I would think downsampling the equivalent D800 image would be more equal. Or also for some aspects, actual 100% crops of native crops. Actually blowing up one set of images is not a fair comparison IMO.


Canon 5D mk IV
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jdizzle
Darth Noink
Avatar
69,419 posts
Likes: 56
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Harvesting Nano crystals
     
Aug 12, 2014 21:13 |  #214

Hogloff wrote in post #17092316 (external link)
Obviously if you don't shoot in challenging lighting conditions you won't notice any affects of the increased DR...sort of if you always shoot in daylight you won't notice the high ISO abilities of today's cameras.

This us why I chuckle when someone says the DR of the Sony sensor is over hyped...they just don't shoot under the conditions where the sensoe's abilities are really noticeable.

Hogloff, I don't know why you continue to waste your time trying to convince these people that DR is beneficial. These people simply don't understand why us landscape shooters need it. I've been down this road many of times with other shooters on this forum and I just plain give up!! :lol::lol: I know for sure with confidence that Nikon and Sony's kick butt in comparison to Canon's current line up of bodies. :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jdizzle
Darth Noink
Avatar
69,419 posts
Likes: 56
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Harvesting Nano crystals
     
Aug 12, 2014 21:18 |  #215

davesrose wrote in post #17092367 (external link)
Again, as I've stated before: upsampling the 5D images to 36MP introduces artifacts. I especailly chuckled that they criticized CA and noise with the upsampled 5D images. To get a fair comparison of the camera IQ, I would think downsampling the equivalent D800 image would be more equal. Or also for some aspects, actual 100% crops of native crops. Actually blowing up one set of images is not a fair comparison IMO.

Oh ok. If you want a fair comparison, then the D600/D610 sensor should be a good comparison. I mean sensor vs. sensor. I'll put up a wager that the D600/D610 can recover shadows better and not exhibit any banding. ;)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AJSJones
Goldmember
Avatar
2,647 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 92
Joined Dec 2001
Location: California
     
Aug 12, 2014 21:29 |  #216

davesrose wrote in post #17092325 (external link)
Please read my posts: I've stated quite a few times in this thread that bumping up the shadows +4 stops and upscaling the 5D shots up to 36MP is not an apples to apples comparison.

I didn't read the whole thread so if you addressed this before I missed that too.

If you insist on apples to apples, then no-one can compare them and we can all go home. He specifically addressed your issue by choosing "same print size" - an excellent way out of the pedantry:D

For the purpose of this test, my files were normalized in order to compare them on a monitor screen. It's unfair to downsize the D800 36MP file to 22MP in order to compare the advantage of higher resolution. Doing so, would throw away detail from the higher resolution file. Instead, I interpolated the 22MP file to 36MP. I believe this is a fair comparison because both files will be printed at the same paper size. Since I can not demonstrate print detail on the web, I will show 100% magnification crops displaying identical size dimensions for both cameras.

That's full disclosure and the only rational way to compare the performance of the two sensors by "printing" the captures. The raising of the shadows IS the way to show the improved signal to noise (therefore DR). How well did you fare making a quality comparison between the shadow areas before they were raised?


My picture galleries (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,800 posts
Likes: 554
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Aug 12, 2014 21:34 |  #217

jdizzle wrote in post #17092438 (external link)
Oh ok. If you want a fair comparison, then the D600/D610 sensor should be a good comparison. I mean sensor vs. sensor. I'll put up a wager that the D600/D610 can recover shadows better and not exhibit any banding. ;)

Maybe it's because I did have a workflow with a 12bit RAW system...but I have yet to get much banding or noise adjusting contrast. There is clipping, and because the Sony/Nikon system also is limited to 14bit, I can't see it being *that* much greater. Maybe there is an impasse with you Nikon shooters vs us Canon shooters. Some will think it just boils down to the fanboyism of *oh, my camera has the best sensor specs* vs *oh, my camera has the best AF specs*. When I bought the 5Dc when it was new, the overall Nikon vs Canon camp was completely reversed. If we ignore some rumors about the overall state of camera sales, and Nikon stays solvent and the big camera companies keep going at it, then it's possible the specs of the brands will be reversed again.


Canon 5D mk IV
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,800 posts
Likes: 554
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Aug 12, 2014 21:49 |  #218

AJSJones wrote in post #17092455 (external link)
That's full disclosure and the only rational way to compare the performance of the two sensors by "printing" the captures. The raising of the shadows IS the way to show the improved signal to noise (therefore DR). How well did you fare making a quality comparison between the shadow areas before they were raised?

Well as all has been sampled from this thread: everyone is comparing the web images of the normal sized Nikon images vs blown up 5D images. Just as my first response to MornnB's selected screens of the blown up 5D crops vs native D800, selectively comparing a native (D800) vs interpolated (5D) is not a fair comparison. Because you're reducing the resolution and introducing noise by upsampling the 5D image, it's never going to be an apples to apples comparison. The author didn't list a specific print resolution, just that he blew up the 5D images to the D800 resolution. From a print perspective, you tend to want to keep native resolution. No one ever interpolates and rescales upwards: instead, you tend to reduce DPI and see what's acceptable. So even then, this is not a real world comparison.

As for pushing up shadows up to 4 stops, it is relational to DR, but is not DR directly. DR is the amount of tones between your greatest white vs black. With photography, it's your greatest luminosity vs darkest shadow. In that particular example, it's not an extreme DR Scene. The brightest light level is not going to be blown. The native resolution of the D800 is one of the main aspects of the better IQ of that still. In the darkest stops, all cameras are limited to the light intensities being values of 2,4,8,16, then on up.


Canon 5D mk IV
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RayinAlaska
Senior Member
425 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 39
Joined Sep 2013
Location: Alaska's interior
     
Aug 12, 2014 21:52 |  #219

So much arguing about cameras and sensors. :)

Me would enjoy the "shadow pushers" and the rest to stop arguing and post some photos at both the Nikon and Canon threads. Now, that would be interesting. I look at the Canon and the Nikon photos in these forums, and see no difference other than as follows: the most interesting photos have nothing to do with camera brand or model, but with the persons taking the photos. "Some" of the photographers are nothing but amazing.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Road ­ Dog
Goldmember
1,316 posts
Gallery: 168 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1117
Joined Jul 2014
Location: St. Augustine, Florida
     
Aug 12, 2014 22:13 |  #220

I use Canon now because I've used Canon since 1976.

If it ain't broke...


Just shut up and smile...
My Current Line-Up

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rawshooter
Member
Avatar
89 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2011
     
Aug 12, 2014 22:17 as a reply to  @ RayinAlaska's post |  #221

why Honda and not Nissan??
I used to wonder what people shot with.Now i find I look at and appreciate the image itself, and not wonder what they shot it with.I've seen amazing images shot with an iphone.(selfies and food not included). It really all depends on what you do with the equipment you have.


7D
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/lookwhatidid (external link)
http://500px.com/jstcr​oix9 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AJSJones
Goldmember
Avatar
2,647 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 92
Joined Dec 2001
Location: California
     
Aug 12, 2014 22:21 |  #222

davesrose wrote in post #17092480 (external link)
As for pushing up shadows up to 4 stops, it is relational to DR, but is not DR directly. DR is the amount of tones between your greatest white vs black. With photography, it's your greatest luminosity vs darkest shadow. In that particular example, it's not an extreme DR Scene. The brightest light level is not going to be blown. The native resolution of the D800 is one of the main aspects of the better IQ of that still. In the darkest stops, all cameras are limited to the light intensities being values of 2,4,8,16, then on up.

DR is the ratio of light intensity of the brightest and darkest parts of the image, regardless of the number of tones it is divided into. The lattter, I believe, people refer to as "tonality".

A scene has a range of light intensities which can be measured accurately. A sensor can record a range of intensisities from saturation down to a value where the signal and noise are comparable (we can pick a 1:1 or 2:1 or 3:1 etc) The ratio of the saturation value to the "noise floor" is the sensor's DR.

In Fred's example, the exposure was a typical choice for a scene like that where you don't want to blow the highlights. The only way to see how well the shadows were captured (how close they are to the noise floor) is to raise the shadows somehow (or use mathematics to evaluate the atual S/N ratio but many people don't uderstand such technical aspects and want to see "real" pictures). When the 22 and 36 MP images are both printed to 24x36 or so, one has to be interpolated more than the other, rather than one has to be downsized more than the other, so "degree of upsizing' is a reasonable variable to make them all apples:D


My picture galleries (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,800 posts
Likes: 554
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Aug 12, 2014 22:44 as a reply to  @ AJSJones's post |  #223

Fred's article is quite clear: the 5D image was scaled up to 36MP while the D800 image wasn't interpolated.

DR is the total tones of contrast from the largest intensity vs blackest black. On the sensor level, it is the saturation point vs SNR...again, white to steps of black. It can be quite academic to try to compare the difference in DR between the sensor DR vs the recorded RAW DR. In the end of the day, though, the highest DR of a digital image is up to 14 stops of light: 14bpc file size. That's the maximum DR of any DSLR recorded medium. The math is quite specific: it's a log that goes like this in tonality: 2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256​,512,1024,2048,4096,81​92. If the Sony sensors are able to fill more values in all stops, then there may be some more wiggle room with the darker blacks. However, in my real world post processing, I have yet to push my shadows up 4+stops.


Canon 5D mk IV
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,118 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6183
Joined Sep 2007
     
Aug 12, 2014 22:45 |  #224

AJSJones wrote in post #17092526 (external link)
In Fred's example, the exposure was a typical choice for a scene like that where you don't want to blow the highlights. The only way to see how well the shadows were captured (how close they are to the noise floor) is to raise the shadows somehow (or use mathematics to evaluate the atual S/N ratio but many people don't uderstand such technical aspects and want to see "real" pictures). When the 22 and 36 MP images are both printed to 24x36 or so, one has to be interpolated more than the other, rather than one has to be downsized more than the other, so "degree of upsizing' is a reasonable variable to make them all apples:D

Also on print, the differences in DR differences would be minimized since noise is generally suppressed.

Looks a lot worse when pixel peeped.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AJSJones
Goldmember
Avatar
2,647 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 92
Joined Dec 2001
Location: California
     
Aug 13, 2014 00:31 |  #225

davesrose wrote in post #17092568 (external link)
Fred's article is quite clear: the 5D image was scaled up to 36MP while the D800 image wasn't interpolated.

Indeed - we are agreed on that. Similarly, when prints of the same size are made, the same extent of upsizing difference exists - so a "real world" comparison, i.e. same size large print, will have the same difference in degree of upsizing. As he said the best he could do (short of sending people actual prints:D) is to present upsized 5D 100% crops, to simulate a loupe view of the large prints.

davesrose wrote in post #17092568 (external link)
If the Sony sensors are able to fill more values in all stops, then there may be some more wiggle room with the darker blacks.

At low ISO there is no "may" about it - it's not a matter of opinion when the data are measured.

davesrose wrote in post #17092568 (external link)
However, in my real world post processing, I have yet to push my shadows up 4+stops.

So you are saying it's not so far something that's important to you. A fair opinion, but of course, a personal one. You may not choose to raise them 4 stops to benefit from the better DR of the sensor, but others have different opinions and choices for their images.

Hypothetically, for example, if there had been a couple of people in Fred's image in the shadows and he wanted to be able to show some emotional message in their faces, but keep the rest of the shot exposed as it was, he would have needed to raise the shadows somewhat. The Sony sensor would have yielded a better result in terms of image noise in those areas. Horses for courses.


My picture galleries (external link)

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

56,830 views & 0 likes for this thread
Why Canon, when Nikon...
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?
Register to forums
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 fitactions
677 guests, 297 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

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.