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 15 Sep 2014 (Monday) 01:34
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

why is Canon considered to have bad dynamic range?

 
this thread is locked
kf095
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,533 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 287
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Canada, Ontario, Milton
     
Sep 16, 2014 10:02 |  #46

78962 wrote in post #17154824 (external link)
...When I take pictures of people and the sky is behind them (not even the sun just the regular sky) the faces are usually pretty dark and that's a bit discouraging...

Is SUN behind faces also?


Old Site (external link). M-E and ME blog (external link). Film Flickr (external link). my DigitaL and AnaLog Gear.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
mclaren777
Goldmember
Avatar
1,482 posts
Likes: 85
Joined May 2012
Location: Olympia, WA
     
Sep 16, 2014 10:03 |  #47

Canon just needs to license Sony sensors like Nikon is currently doing.

I would happily give Canon $6000 if they did this.


A simple comparison of sensor technology: Nikon vs. Canon (external link)
A technical comparison of sensor technology: Exposure Latitude (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
snake0ape
Goldmember
Avatar
1,223 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 11
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
     
Sep 16, 2014 10:14 |  #48

mclaren777 wrote in post #17158206 (external link)
Canon just needs to license Sony sensors like Nikon is currently doing.

I would happily give Canon $6000 if they did this.

It certainly would be nice to gain another 2 stops of DR. But for me, fast and accurate AF is more important since I like shooting wide open and events. For you, why is 14 stops of DR a paramount issue? 12 stops isn't so bad.


5Diii | 50D | 8-15L 4| 16-35L 2.8 II| 24-70L 2.8 II | 70-200L 2.8 IS II |Tamy 150-600 | Σ35Art 1.4 | 40 2.8 | Σ50Art 1.4 | 85L 1.2 II | 100 2.8 Macro | Helios 44-3 58mm f2.0 |Helios 40-1 85mm f1.5 | 1.4x & 2x teleconverters

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pkim1230
Senior Member
Avatar
746 posts
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Providence, RI
     
Sep 16, 2014 10:36 |  #49

snake0ape wrote in post #17158233 (external link)
It certainly would be nice to gain another 2 stops of DR. But for me, fast and accurate AF is more important since I like shooting wide open and events. For you, why is 14 stops of DR a paramount issue? 12 stops isn't so bad.

Because it's settling.



Gear | 6D, 550D, 1000D IR Modified, Samyang 24mm f/1.4, Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, Canon 40mm f/2.8, Tamron 70-300mm VC f/4-5.6, iOptron SkyTracker

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
David ­ Arbogast
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,487 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 8302
Joined Aug 2010
Location: West Point, Georgia
     
Sep 16, 2014 10:39 |  #50

12 stops isn't so bad until you need 14...


David | Flickr (external link)
Sony α7R II | CV 12mm, FE 12-24mm, Loxia 21mm, Loxia 35mm, Sigma 35mm F/1.2, Loxia 85mm, Batis 85mm, Batis 135mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikeivan
Goldmember
Avatar
1,318 posts
Gallery: 306 photos
Likes: 3963
Joined Aug 2005
Location: houston
     
Sep 16, 2014 10:50 |  #51

snake0ape wrote in post #17156781 (external link)
Canon sensor architecture uses an off-sensor analog to digital conversion . Sony has this A/D conversion in the sensor. Thus Canon has a longer signal pathway which has lead to more interference and noise issues. fundamentally, a key obstacle is the longer pathway to the off sensor A/ D conversion.

Wow, thank you, clear, straightforward and understandable. Unfortunately, I am stuck with Canon telephotos. I await the 7DII raw comparisons with credit card at the ready. I am hopeful and doubtful, simultaneously.


MIKEIVAN

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chinch
Member
185 posts
Joined Jun 2005
Location: USA
     
Sep 16, 2014 11:39 |  #52

The OP is facing a METERING issue. Backlighting underexposing subjects.

This thread highlights how embarrassing it has become that the self-anointed DR crusaders litter each thread spewing buzzwords like "advanced process", EXMOR & DR stop (not realizing how many stops film has nevermind the human eye).

I guess it's easy for smart tekkies to be fooled by cooked RAW photos & explain them as "advanced process" or other signal path rationalizations.

BTW maybe get a sharp 800E photo for reference (without the obliterated text from on-chip cooked RAW NR...

mclaren777 wrote in post #17155596 (external link)
Canon is still using an antiquated manufacturing process (0.50 µm) while Sony is using a much newer, more advanced process (0.18 µm).

5D3
IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image%2fjpeg'


D800E
IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image%2fjpeg'




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
magwai
Goldmember
1,094 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Guildford, UK
     
Sep 16, 2014 12:03 |  #53

mclaren777 wrote in post #17158206 (external link)
Canon just needs to license Sony sensors like Nikon is currently doing.

I would happily give Canon $6000 if they did this.

I hope they do not. We need as many companies as possible producing high quality sensors to keep the rate of progress up there.

I mean we have Fuji and Olympus but Canon must be Sony's main competitor on the imaging front, now Nikon are using their sensors.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
maximus_73
Senior Member
297 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2012
     
Sep 16, 2014 12:04 |  #54

what we need is dual sensor system, on the low ISO, it uses Sony sensor, but when it is high ISO, it then uses Canon sensor. :)


Cameras: Canon EOS M, FujiFilm X-T1| Lenses: FD 50mm 1.4, Fujinon 23mm 1.4, Fujinon 56 1.2, Zeiss 32mm 1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CRCchemist
Senior Member
961 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Apr 2014
     
Sep 16, 2014 12:10 |  #55

Guys -- use this technique to eliminate the pattern noise in the shadows. It works. I found this in the he Raw, Post Production, and Printing forum:

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1223867

This is a great fix.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Thomas ­ Campbell
Goldmember
Avatar
2,105 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Kingwood, TX
     
Sep 16, 2014 12:13 |  #56

tonylong wrote in post #17154893 (external link)
Canon has for the past 10 years or so led the way in high quality High ISO low noise.

In the past few years Sony has produced sensors that get very good low ISO noise, and Nikon has "inherited" these qualities, so that the Nikon/Sony bodies have gotten a good reputation for underexposing shots at a low ISO and then bumping the exposure in post-processing, similar to what was done in film days.

It's a toss-up, you make it in capturing a photo and then processing it!

Nikon passed Canon in 2007 on noise. And Sony doesn't make all of Nikon's sensors. Nikon's best noise handling sensor, the 16MP D4s, is not a Sony sensor.


Houston Wedding Photographer (external link)
Houston Sports Photographer (external link)
Current Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mclaren777
Goldmember
Avatar
1,482 posts
Likes: 85
Joined May 2012
Location: Olympia, WA
     
Sep 16, 2014 13:26 |  #57

magwai wrote in post #17158505 (external link)
I hope they do not. We need as many companies as possible producing high quality sensors to keep the rate of progress up there.

I mean we have Fuji and Olympus but Canon must be Sony's main competitor on the imaging front, now Nikon are using their sensors.

Samsung is going to become Sony's biggest competitor. Mark my words.

Canon is fully out of the game at this point. Even if the 7D2 had been given a modern sensor, it would be the only camera in Canon's entire lineup to have one. At this point, Canon is so far behind that Sony's next-gen sensor will probably come out around the same time that Canon finally gets its act together.


A simple comparison of sensor technology: Nikon vs. Canon (external link)
A technical comparison of sensor technology: Exposure Latitude (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AJSJones
Goldmember
Avatar
2,647 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 92
Joined Dec 2001
Location: California
     
Sep 16, 2014 20:42 |  #58

chinch wrote in post #17158427 (external link)
The OP is facing a METERING issue. Backlighting underexposing subjects.

This thread highlights how embarrassing it has become that the self-anointed DR crusaders litter each thread spewing buzzwords like "advanced process", EXMOR & DR stop (not realizing how many stops film has nevermind the human eye).

I guess it's easy for smart tekkies to be fooled by cooked RAW photos & explain them as "advanced process" or other signal path rationalizations.

BTW maybe get a sharp 800E photo for reference (without the obliterated text from on-chip cooked RAW NR...

What's embarassing is those who seem not (willing) to understand sensor technology and the fact that the Sony (Sony-patented) on-chip ADC allows a readout with far less noise than from the Canon sensor at low ISO - this extended DR is important to some people, while the high ISO noise performance is more important to others. No crusaders involved in the production of this post (see post #22 for facts on noise). The performance of film is irrelevant to the comparison of two digital sensor designs.


My picture galleries (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
woos
Goldmember
Avatar
2,224 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Dec 2008
Location: a giant bucket
     
Sep 16, 2014 20:55 |  #59

David Arbogast wrote in post #17156068 (external link)
Do you get a lot of banding in the 6D's shadows? I've read several POTN members claiming Canon finally fixed that in the 6D, so I'm curious to see your thoughts.

I too like the Sony sensor better, but went the a7R route so I can use all my Canon-mount lenses.

There's no banding, we have both. The 6d has no banding at all, however, don't mistake this for it having some sort of mind blowing DR boost. It doesn't. Maybe half a stop more usable base iso DR. Where the 6d owns is in long exposure and especially long exposures in low light.

Canon has nothing to compete with the amazing exmor base iso dr though (unless you use magic lantern and lose resolution, w/e).

I think it's less to do with any sort of process tech and more to do with the huge advantage that having a ton of ADCs gives you. Or rather, for process tech it's probably more about Canon not having the digital circuitry experience--hard to say. Canon might be reluctant to give up the advantages that having the sensor clocked high provides them. But having an adc per column lets you get away with a lot, things can be read out slower, and the digital CDS that sony uses is nice. Though I believe the leica M has digital cds and on chip ADCs, and it's low ISO looks worse than Canon imho--and it's high ISO is terrible. Proving that experience counts for a lot. Sony didn't just start magically making the D800 chip when they started using on chip per column ADCs. It took time and experience.


amanathia.zenfolio.com

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
woos
Goldmember
Avatar
2,224 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Dec 2008
Location: a giant bucket
     
Sep 16, 2014 20:58 |  #60

AJSJones wrote in post #17159755 (external link)
What's embarassing is those who seem not (willing) to understand sensor technology and the fact that the Sony (Sony-patented) on-chip ADC allows a readout with far less noise than from the Canon sensor at low ISO - this extended DR is important to some people, while the high ISO noise performance is more important to others. No crusaders involved in the production of this post (see post #22 for facts on noise). The performance of film is irrelevant to the comparison of two digital sensor designs.

Might want to look at where that "sony patented" adc and digital correlated double sampling came from. :P The answer might surprise you. Sony either bought or licensed the use of the patents, not sure which. They didn't invent it. Sony's sensor division was forward thinking and didn't suffer from the "not invented here" crap that you often see.


amanathia.zenfolio.com

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

35,445 views & 0 likes for this thread
why is Canon considered to have bad 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?
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 JohnBlackburn
3205 guests, 324 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.