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...

 
CRCchemist
Senior Member
961 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Apr 2014
     
Aug 13, 2014 17:15 |  #256

jdizzle wrote in post #17094031 (external link)
I shoot asian weddings more often and I find that Asian skin tones are better with Nikon. With Canon it can be difficult to correct. Ever since I used the Passport ColorChecker the point becomes moot. Profile from the Canon and use that same profile on Nikon files. Done! Look into the Passport ColorChecker. I recommend it.

Yes, I use the Passport ColorChecker too. Everyone should get one of those.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,139 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6241
Joined Sep 2007
     
Aug 13, 2014 18:09 |  #257

CRCchemist wrote in post #17094396 (external link)
Yes, I use the Passport ColorChecker too. Everyone should get one of those.

only guys I've seen use it were nikon guys ;)

not really practical in a lot of scenarios. I'm mostly a snapshot shooter, so that doesnt do much for me.


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
DTBaan
"male gigolo"
Avatar
14,106 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 1479
Joined Apr 2011
     
Aug 13, 2014 18:19 |  #258

jdizzle wrote in post #17094035 (external link)
I stroke them all the time. :lol:;)

explains your gear hoarding.. you keep shooting.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mornnb
Goldmember
1,646 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 23
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Sydney
     
Aug 15, 2014 04:01 |  #259

davesrose wrote in post #17092480 (external link)
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.

It is a fair comparison because resolution has little to do wiry what we are talking about. We are talking about dynamic range and the level of noise and banding in the shadows! we are not tasking which camera has higher resolution. Fred's examples quite clearly back up dxomark's testing which shows a 19% advantage to the D800 in dynamic range.

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.

The scene has some very dark areas and the dynamic range of the camera is of course directly related to how much shadow detail you can recover, which is the main way in which dynamic range is relevant to photographers.


Here's another example.

IMAGE: http://photographylife.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Canon-5D-Mark-III-vs-Nikon-D800-Dynamic-Range-Comparison.jpg
http://photographylife​.com/reviews/canon-5d-mark-iii/3 (external link)


However, the 5D3 has a clear advantage in high ISO performance. So it is a question of what is more important.

ISO 3200
D800
http://lh6.ggpht.com …age014%25255B6%​25255D.jpg (external link)

5D3
http://lh4.ggpht.com …age016%25255B6%​25255D.jpg (external link)

http://www.ronmartblog​.com …800-vs-canon-5d-mark.html (external link)

Canon 5D Mark III - Leica M240
EF 16-35mm F/4 IS L - EF 14mm f/2.8 L II - - EF 17mm TS-E L - EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II - EF 70-200mm IS II f/2.8 L - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art - Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX
Voigtlander 15mm III - 28mm Elmarit-M ASPH - 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M FLE - 50mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH
500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jdizzle
Darth Noink
Avatar
69,419 posts
Likes: 56
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Harvesting Nano crystals
     
Aug 15, 2014 06:22 |  #260

DTBaan wrote in post #17094513 (external link)
explains your gear hoarding.. you keep shooting.

Haha! :p




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jdizzle
Darth Noink
Avatar
69,419 posts
Likes: 56
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Harvesting Nano crystals
     
Aug 15, 2014 06:23 |  #261

Mornnb wrote in post #17097331 (external link)
It is a fair comparison because resolution has little to do wiry what we are talking about. We are talking about dynamic range and the level of noise and banding in the shadows! we are not tasking which camera has higher resolution. Fred's examples quite clearly back up dxomark's testing which shows a 19% advantage to the D800 in dynamic range.


The scene has some very dark areas and the dynamic range of the camera is of course directly related to how much shadow detail you can recover, which is the main way in which dynamic range is relevant to photographers.

Here's another example.

QUOTED IMAGE
http://photographylife​.com/reviews/canon-5d-mark-iii/3 (external link)

However, the 5D3 has a clear advantage in high ISO performance. So it is a question of what is more important.

ISO 3200
D800
http://lh6.ggpht.com …age014%25255B6%​25255D.jpg (external link)

5D3
http://lh4.ggpht.com …age016%25255B6%​25255D.jpg (external link)

http://www.ronmartblog​.com …800-vs-canon-5d-mark.html (external link)

Check out the new DXO marks on the D810 vs. the 5D III. The D810 takes the lead in ISO. :)

http://www.dxomark.com …antage-over-nearest-rival (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,806 posts
Likes: 554
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Aug 15, 2014 06:23 |  #262

Mornnb wrote in post #17097331 (external link)
It is a fair comparison because resolution has little to do wiry what we are talking about. We are talking about dynamic range and the level of noise and banding in the shadows! we are not tasking which camera has higher resolution. Fred's examples quite clearly back up dxomark's testing which shows a 19% advantage to the D800 in dynamic range

You're still missing my point. Upscaling the 5D image then introduces artifacts not present on the original image. The 5D image has had 40% more pixels added to it from whatever computer program was used to blow it up. The image comparison is not DR per say. Both cameras recorded the full DR of the scene (the original image doesn't show clipping in either darks or whites). By pushing shadow contrast up, you're encountering inherent noise (both from the digital file having less tones at the lower stops, and how well the sensor's noise floor is). The Nikon may have better noise handling, and it's a factor of both sensor AND resolution. I have yet to see examples of it having %19 better DR (where areas of the native resolution images are clipped).

How much better the DR is with Nikon is very much debatable. That it has more resolution and better noise handling looks apparent. It is a winner in IQ for landscapes. But it's still not the end all be all: sensor technology still has a way to go to be able to capture high dynamic range scenes.


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 15, 2014 06:26 |  #263

Charlie wrote in post #17094482 (external link)
only guys I've seen use it were nikon guys ;)

not really practical in a lot of scenarios. I'm mostly a snapshot shooter, so that doesnt do much for me.

Actually, the ColorChecker Passport is a great tool. And surpisingly enough there are many on this forum who don't understand color management.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jdizzle
Darth Noink
Avatar
69,419 posts
Likes: 56
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Harvesting Nano crystals
     
Aug 15, 2014 06:33 |  #264

davesrose wrote in post #17097446 (external link)
You're still missing my point. Upscaling the 5D image then introduces artifacts not present on the original image. The 5D image has had 40% more pixels added to it from whatever computer program was used to blow it up. The image comparison is not DR per say. Both cameras recorded the full DR of the scene (the original image doesn't show clipping in either darks or whites). By pushing shadow contrast up, you're encountering inherent noise (both from the digital file having less tones at the lower stops, and how well the sensor's noise floor is). The Nikon may have better noise handling, and it's a factor of both sensor AND resolution. I have yet to see examples of it having %19 better DR (where areas of the native resolution images are clipped).

How much better the DR is with Nikon is very much debatable. That it has more resolution and better noise handling looks apparent. It is a winner in IQ for landscapes. But it's still not the end all be all: sensor technology still has a way to go to be able to capture high dynamic range scenes.

If you dig deeper on the internet, the D800E has been matched against the Phase One IQ180. You can be technical all you want but it's clear when pushing shadows in the D800/D800e/D810/A7r vs. Canon's sensors.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,806 posts
Likes: 554
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Aug 15, 2014 06:40 |  #265

jdizzle wrote in post #17097453 (external link)
If you dig deeper on the internet, the D800E has been matched against the Phase One IQ180. You can be technical all you want but it's clear when pushing shadows in the D800/D800e/D810/A7r vs. Canon's sensors.

Matched in what? You can spend all money you want on camera gear, that still doesn't change the physical limitations of a sensor recording DR.


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
electricme
Senior Member
Avatar
472 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 23
Joined Jul 2014
Location: Philly PA
     
Aug 15, 2014 06:46 |  #266

I never understood side by side comparisons of the same picture. Different equipment will give different results. the picture on the left isnt worse than that on the right it just needs to be approached differently based on the equipment your using.

I was always told with cameras. Grab it, play with it. If it feels right in your hands and you like the layout thats what you use. Forget the fanboys and the statistics.

Same as Handguns. Two handguns sitting side by side locked onto a target will ALWAYS hit different places on the target because they are two completely different pieces manufactured by different people in different ways.

/ End Thread lol or not.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mornnb
Goldmember
1,646 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 23
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Sydney
     
Aug 15, 2014 07:15 |  #267

davesrose wrote in post #17097446 (external link)
You're still missing my point. Upscaling the 5D image then introduces artifacts not present on the original image. The 5D image has had 40% more pixels added to it from whatever computer program was used to blow it up. The image comparison is not DR per say. Both cameras recorded the full DR of the scene (the original image doesn't show clipping in either darks or whites). By pushing shadow contrast up, you're encountering inherent noise (both from the digital file having less tones at the lower stops, and how well the sensor's noise floor is). The Nikon may have better noise handling, and it's a factor of both sensor AND resolution. I have yet to see examples of it having %19 better DR (where areas of the native resolution images are clipped).

You are wildly exaggerating the artifacts up scaling is likely to produce. The noise the 5D3 produces is very apparent and is not an artefact of scaling. The other point to remember is that you'll be viewing images from any camera on a same sized print or a same sized downscaled jpeg. Boosting exposure by 4 stops, the greater noise produced by the 5D3 is very apparent even in scaled down web images.
Here's another example from another reviewer. A 100% crop. Including the D600 which is comparable resolution to the 5D3. Though only the D800 is in focus properly in this part of the frame, but that is irrelevant to the topic of noise at low ISO in the shadows. Note that the greater resolution of the D800 in practise is usually wasted, as most lenses struggle to produce enough resolution to even feed a 22MP sensor.
And note this is with exposure raised by 4 stops.

5D3

IMAGE: http://caughtinpixels.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Canon-5D-Mark-III-dark-shadows-100-crop.png

D800
IMAGE: http://caughtinpixels.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Nikon-D600-dark-shadows-100-crop.png

D600
IMAGE: http://caughtinpixels.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Nikon-D800-dark-shadows-100-crop-v2.png

http://caughtinpixels.​com …-on-real-life-experience/ (external link)

Canon 5D Mark III - Leica M240
EF 16-35mm F/4 IS L - EF 14mm f/2.8 L II - - EF 17mm TS-E L - EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II - EF 70-200mm IS II f/2.8 L - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art - Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX
Voigtlander 15mm III - 28mm Elmarit-M ASPH - 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M FLE - 50mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH
500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,806 posts
Likes: 554
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Aug 15, 2014 07:31 |  #268

Mornnb wrote in post #17097500 (external link)
You are wi,duly exaggerating the artifacts up scaling is likely to produce. The noise the 5D3 produced is very apparent and is not an artefact of scaling.

No I'm not. My math is quite apparent: scaling a 22MP image up to 36MP, you're randomly adding 40% more pixels. You know, I work with graphic designers and printers. They try to avoid blowing up an image at all costs. A computer algorithm tries to average X number of pixels and then adds more of a similar color. If it averages one pixel of noise, it may amplify it quite a bit.

I've already stated that the noise handling of the D800 is apparently better then the 5D (both a factor of sensor AND resolution). You can keep showing examples of non-HDR photographs with noise in the shadows. That doesn't address what my point is: that I have yet to see examples of how well the Sony sensors handle clipping....one of the primary factors of DR.


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
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,186 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5935
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Aug 15, 2014 07:31 |  #269

electricme wrote in post #17097467 (external link)
I never understood side by side comparisons of the same picture. Different equipment will give different results. the picture on the left isnt worse than that on the right it just needs to be approached differently based on the equipment your using.

I was always told with cameras. Grab it, play with it. If it feels right in your hands and you like the layout thats what you use. Forget the fanboys and the statistics.

Same as Handguns. Two handguns sitting side by side locked onto a target will ALWAYS hit different places on the target because they are two completely different pieces manufactured by different people in different ways.

/ End Thread lol or not.

Comparisons makes sense when it comes to digitally based equipment that are supposed to produce the same final output, like a JPG or TIFF. In fact, analysis of said results are actually quite easy if you set up comparisons correctly, and use some of the software that analyzes images. When you make money from your results and want more business, you have a tendency to find the best value for the money you want to put into that equipment, and comparisons are the way to do it.

Since you bring up handguns, those in shooting competitions do exactly what is being done here with cameras, they run various comparisons between different guns, components on the guns, ammo, etc. Don't try to make out like that is any different with those passionate about shooting guns. When you make money from your photography, you are now in competition. If you are just a hobbyist, then sure, just get what feels good. :)


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,186 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5935
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Aug 15, 2014 07:35 |  #270

davesrose wrote in post #17097446 (external link)
You're still missing my point. Upscaling the 5D image then introduces artifacts not present on the original image.

This isn't true if you use good software to upscale. There are many algorithms out there to upscale, some very rudimentary, others more analytical in nature. The largest effect you would see from upsizing, if done properly, would be that artifacts that were originally in the photo are just larger. You should never see bad data introduced from good data.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

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

57,088 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 Dharmadme
1035 guests, 215 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.