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 Oct 2014 (Wednesday) 06:30
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Amazing !!

 
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,052 posts
Gallery: 547 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1643
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Oct 17, 2014 10:48 |  #61

AJSJones wrote in post #17217955 (external link)
Thanks Alan. It was more of a rhetorical question, based on exactly the points you emphasize. Often you neeed to "sacrifice" some part in order to get the part you really want, because the camera/film/sensor you have can't get it all. We've all lived with this for years and had to make those decisions on what to keep and what to sacrifice. I used to use slide film and chose to live with the lower DR because of the immediacy of slides when viewed with a loupe or projector, even though negative film had more DR.

I was just responding to a comment that implied that "if you think the extra DR might be useful, you don't know how to get the mythical "proper exposure" - obviously a ludicrous argument. As you desribe, the "proper exposure" is often one in which you make the sacrifice in the less important part of the image. The extra DR just means you make less of a sacrifice in those situations where the image you are capturing has important highlights and shadows.

Yes I supplied the answer as it seems that there are quite a few who just want to ignore this issue. Until we get sensors with thirty or forty stops of useable DR (assuming some new magical materials are developed that will provide those sensors) we are always likely to find situations where we need more DR, and so are faced with these choices. Even the magic Exmor sensor will find situations where it runs out of DR so you are back to making choices.

Would it be nice for Canon to be able to use the Exmor technology, of course, but while they are prevented from doing so by patents that is unlikely to happen. Then there are all those users who are having to regularly shoot in very low light conditions, with ISO values above ISO 1600. For those users the Canon sensor is actually still superior although you very seldom seem to hear about that fact. Of course what would be optimal would be to combine Canon's analogue amplification, with the on chip Exmor ADC. If it were possible to do this one could potentially have extended DR at both low and high ISO values, the best of both worlds.

The Canon sensor also offers the possibilities of dual ISO, as has been shown by Magic Lantern in some bodies. Combine dual ISO with say a FF 40 Mpix sensor and you have the potential to leap in front of Sony and the Exmor sensor for DR again. Imagine 20 Mpix at 100 ISO and 20 at 1600 or 3200, that would I think answer the current critics of Dual ISO and it's effect on usable resolution, although of course 80 million sensels, sampled to 20 Mpix would give the optimum results in a dual pixel scenario. A sensor like that would offer real options wouldn't it.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CanonVsNikon
Senior Member
255 posts
Joined Jan 2013
     
Oct 17, 2014 11:07 |  #62
bannedPermanent ban

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #17217439 (external link)
That's a horrible analogy for a myriad of reasons... but I get your argument ;)

All I'm saying is that it's not worth jumping ship for for 95% of shooters or more, and for sure not worth the constant internet whining about Canon's cameras, I happen to like my Canon gear very much and the majority of other Canon users do as well ;)

Notice I said Canon has an inferior sensor, not camera.

I am not dumping on Canon or it's system. But let's not be apologists for Canon and just accept it. Don't be content with what they are offering. Canon needs to step up their SENSORS




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,827 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 4487
Joined Oct 2012
Location: GA Mountains
     
Oct 17, 2014 11:22 |  #63

CanonVsNikon wrote in post #17218145 (external link)
Notice I said Canon has an inferior sensor, not camera.

I am not dumping on Canon or it's system. But let's not be apologists for Canon and just accept it. Don't be content with what they are offering. Canon needs to step up their SENSORS

There's nothing to "accept", many people have done side by side tests and lots prefer the look of Canon files when it comes to higher ISO shots (I'm one of those people). I've shot with my friend's D800 at ISO6400+ and it really made me appreciate my 6D.

They're slightly behind in low ISO performance and slightly above in high ISO performance, for my type of shooting the latter is more important. Just a few years back everyone was complaining about Nikon being behind in sensor tech, it's a back and forth, it always has been and always will be.


Fuji X-T3 // Fuji X-Pro2 (Full Spectrum) // Fuji X-H1 // Fuji X-T1
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)www.LucasGPhoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jaomul
Goldmember
Avatar
1,236 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 66
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Cork, Ireland
     
Oct 17, 2014 11:38 |  #64

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #17218176 (external link)
There's nothing to "accept", many people have done side by side tests and lots prefer the look of Canon files when it comes to higher ISO shots (I'm one of those people). I've shot with my friend's D800 at ISO6400+ and it really made me appreciate my 6D.

They're slightly behind in low ISO performance and slightly above in high ISO performance, for my type of shooting the latter is more important. Just a few years back everyone was complaining about Nikon being behind in sensor tech, it's a back and forth, it always has been and always will be.

Can I just ask about that comparison with the 6d and d800, did you resize your worked raw file to the same size from both and compare then?
There would likely be more noise showing in the 36mp if viewed at 100% for example. I bought a nikon d7100 after getting rid of my canon gear (strictly to go m4/3 but then decided I needed a dslr system for tracking, so not at all because canon were anyway not good enough for me) and thought the 5d I had was much better at high ISO than the nikon d7100, but the files were twice the size and 100% when working in lightroom appeared to give more noise on the nikon. When I resized some examples I found the d7100 to be as good

Back to the sensor debate, I do find (the key word here is "I", everyone has their own preference) the nikon raws to be more workable. I recently upped a shot from a wedding taken with a d800 that didn't fire flash and it recovered brilliant pushing exposure about 4 stops. This to me was a great thing to be able to do. I don't think the 5d could have done it as well.

This is only 1 part of the camera function. Canon dslrs offer a great system also imo.

POTN is a great learning site but the "Canon vs Nikon sensor" thing is done very frequently, and often ends up with members insulting each other. I suppose thats people passionate about hobby/job/ equipment, but I often see posters say in many threads that they are to invested in a brand to change. Its easy to change. Generally except for the rarest of equipment you sell at a loss, and buy secondhand different brand at knockdown prices. If one brand isn't good enough, better to change and be happy than complain constantly


flickr (external link)
Olympus EM5,Nikon d7200,
Olympus 12-50mm, 40-150mm,17mm f2.8,Nikon 50mm F1.8, Tamron 90mm vc, 18-105mmVR, Sigma 18-35 f1.8

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

7,528 views & 0 likes for this thread
Amazing !!
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 kenf
686 guests, 281 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.