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
snake0ape
Goldmember
Avatar
1,223 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 11
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
     
Sep 18, 2014 01:08 |  #121

I can agree with this ^


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
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,210 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6291
Joined Sep 2007
     
Sep 18, 2014 01:19 |  #122

brettjrob wrote in post #17162412 (external link)
I wouldn't doubt for a second that the type of person in the market for a 7D-series body might prefer Canon. The 7D has always prioritized AF, speed, and build quality (all things I don't care much about at all) over pure image quality (the one thing I do care about above all else). It's the antithesis of a landscape camera, which is where my interests and needs lie.

For pure sports and action shooters, as well as DSLR video shooters, I freely admit that Canon is still an equal or better option over Nikon or Sony right now.

For pure landscape photographers, Nikon and Sony bodies are clearly superior, if you take lens selection out of the picture. And even with lenses considered, only its TS-E options tilt in Canon's favor.

For everyone else who shoots a mixture of those and other styles, there's a lot to consider. But my point is this: I don't want to be told by sports pros or Canon fanboys that dynamic range "doesn't matter" and that "any shot you couldn't get with a Canon, you also couldn't get with a Nikon/Sony." It's simply untrue in some situations, particularly handheld landscapes, and the issue has nothing at all to do with photographer competence -- there is such a thing as the gear/tech limiting you, much as some hate to admit it. It would be like me telling them AF doesn't matter and that "any BIF or sports action shot you couldn't get with a Rebel, you also couldn't get with a 1Dx."

I would like to see some shots that can be made with a sony sensor that couldnt be made with a canon sensor.

That should be pretty interesting.


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
gnome ­ chompski
Goldmember
1,252 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 136
Joined Jun 2013
Location: oakland, ca
     
Sep 18, 2014 01:22 |  #123

dont even bother Charlie. Its all about DR, no matter what. The DR Mafia wont rest, even if more DR doesn't suit one's shooting style.

-admit Sony sensor superiority: Check
-listen to the same argument in multiple sub-forums all across this forum: Check
-admit that having more DR really wouldnt do much to one's shooting style: Somewhere a horse is missing its head, and said head will end up in your bed


Tumblr (external link)
Flickr (external link)
Instagram (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 18, 2014 01:25 as a reply to  @ gnome chompski's post |  #124

Check out #810 in this thread. https://photography-on-the.net …ead.php?t=13979​35&page=54

This image was pushed 3.5 stops and the shadows are clean. The 7dii has a new sensor.


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
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,210 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6291
Joined Sep 2007
     
Sep 18, 2014 01:32 |  #125

snake0ape wrote in post #17162435 (external link)
Check out #810 in this thread. https://photography-on-the.net …ead.php?t=13979​35&page=54

This image was pushed 3.5 stops and the shadows are clean. The 7dii has a new sensor.

nice link, would like to fiddle with this when lightroom officially supports it. Would be great moving forward. 3.5 stops is a LOT, pretty much on level with what I would pull with the sony sensor (not really, a little less).


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
sploo
premature adulation
2,447 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 482
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Sep 18, 2014 03:16 |  #126

brettjrob wrote in post #17162412 (external link)
For pure sports and action shooters, as well as DSLR video shooters, I freely admit that Canon is still an equal or better option over Nikon or Sony right now.

For pure landscape photographers, Nikon and Sony bodies are clearly superior, if you take lens selection out of the picture. And even with lenses considered, only its TS-E options tilt in Canon's favor.

+1

Exactly. The fundamental problem is that when someone says "xxx doesn't matter", what they mean is "xxx doesn't matter to me". It's like IS vs. non-IS arguments for wide angle lenses; for many it's pointless, for some, it's really useful. Rarely can one camp see the world from the other guy's perspective.

I'm a (mostly) happy Canon shooter, and these days usually end up taking high ISO shots - so the whole low ISO shadow banding thing doesn't bite often; but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist, or that it isn't a problem. Granted I used to mostly do landscape and macro, so I've got experience of having to bracket and blend due to DR problems.

gnome chompski wrote in post #17162432 (external link)
dont even bother Charlie. Its all about DR, no matter what. The DR Mafia wont rest, even if more DR doesn't suit one's shooting style.

-admit Sony sensor superiority: Check
-listen to the same argument in multiple sub-forums all across this forum: Check
-admit that having more DR really wouldnt do much to one's shooting style: Somewhere a horse is missing its head, and said head will end up in your bed

So... because most people have a very small risk factor for catching Ebola, they should never discuss the fact the disease exists or that it's a problem for the world?

My experience is more that people that haven't come across the problem are the ones that (quite understandably) indicate they can't see what the fuss is about or why Canon has a problem. But that's no different to a low ISO landscape shooter not being tripped up by, e.g., an AI Servo AF problem on their camera.

There are those whose shooting needs are greatly affected by Canon's sensor problems, and I can understand their frustration (lots of investment in a system [glass] and knowing that Canon's DSLR offerings are very inferior to the competition). They've got the A7R now, but it isn't a panacea.

Even for those that don't shoot low ISO/want to recover shadows that often - there's no downside to having a sensor with low noise in the darkest stops (i.e. more ability to pull shadows => more DR).


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
magwai
Goldmember
1,094 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Guildford, UK
     
Sep 18, 2014 03:31 |  #127

snake0ape wrote in post #17162435 (external link)
Check out #810 in this thread. https://photography-on-the.net …ead.php?t=13979​35&page=54

This image was pushed 3.5 stops and the shadows are clean. The 7dii has a new sensor.

Reading the thread it looks like that just demonstrates that the jpg is clean, not the raw.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jdizzle
Darth Noink
Avatar
69,419 posts
Likes: 57
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Harvesting Nano crystals
     
Sep 18, 2014 06:30 |  #128

brettjrob wrote in post #17162412 (external link)
I wouldn't doubt for a second that the type of person in the market for a 7D-series body might prefer Canon. The 7D has always prioritized AF, speed, and build quality (all things I don't care much about at all) over pure image quality (the one thing I do care about above all else). It's the antithesis of a landscape camera, which is where my interests and needs lie.

For pure sports and action shooters, as well as DSLR video shooters, I freely admit that Canon is still an equal or better option over Nikon or Sony right now.

For pure landscape photographers, Nikon and Sony bodies are clearly superior, if you take lens selection out of the picture. And even with lenses considered, only its TS-E options tilt in Canon's favor.

For everyone else who shoots a mixture of those and other styles, there's a lot to consider. But my point is this: I don't want to be told by sports pros or Canon fanboys that dynamic range "doesn't matter" and that "any shot you couldn't get with a Canon, you also couldn't get with a Nikon/Sony." It's simply untrue in some situations, particularly handheld landscapes, and the issue has nothing at all to do with photographer competence -- there is such a thing as the gear/tech limiting you, much as some hate to admit it. It would be like me telling them AF doesn't matter and that "any BIF or sports action shot you couldn't get with a Rebel, you also couldn't get with a 1Dx."

Well said. :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,606 posts
Likes: 415
Joined Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
     
Sep 18, 2014 07:07 |  #129
bannedPermanent ban

magwai wrote in post #17162534 (external link)
Reading the thread it looks like that just demonstrates that the jpg is clean, not the raw.

Yes, we've seen Canon work on their jpeg engine quite often at the expense of smearing pixels. Raw will tell all.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davebreal
Senior Member
Avatar
894 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jul 2007
Location: new jersey, usa
     
Nov 11, 2014 08:08 |  #130

78962 wrote in post #17154824 (external link)
Not saying it does or that it does not have bad dynamic range. 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. But other times I'll take say a flash picture with the background pitch black, bring it in lightroom and recover tons of information in the shadows.

The Original Poster (seems to be banned) does not understand that quality portraiture is achieved with proper lighting techniques. A person with insufficient skill to make a commercial-grade photograph will not be able to grasp optimal image quality and dynamic range. When we dive heavily into shadow recovery, we are entering amateur waters.

The fact that Sony sensors can recover more detail from an underexposed photo is certainly a great technological advancement though.


Dave
flickr  (external link)Twitter  (external link)Wordpress Blog (external link) YouTube (external link)
My Gear--> Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AJSJones
Goldmember
Avatar
2,647 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 92
Joined Dec 2001
Location: California
     
Nov 11, 2014 12:07 |  #131

davebreal wrote in post #17264797 (external link)
When we dive heavily into shadow recovery, we are entering amateur waters.

For a professional in a studio where they can control the lighting, that doesn't sound very arrogant, but rather practical. They can remove the shadow areas by adding lights.

For waterfalls (or any other high DR *SCENE*) where you wish e.g., to prevent the white water falls blowing out but need to capture the detail in the rest of the shot, those are anything but amateur waters (unless you can bring enough lights and power on the hike to light up the shadow areas :D:D)


My picture galleries (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
David ­ Arbogast
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,488 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 8303
Joined Aug 2010
Location: West Point, Georgia
     
Nov 11, 2014 12:08 |  #132

davebreal wrote in post #17264797 (external link)
The Original Poster (seems to be banned) does not understand that quality portraiture is achieved with proper lighting techniques. A person with insufficient skill to make a commercial-grade photograph will not be able to grasp optimal image quality and dynamic range. When we dive heavily into shadow recovery, we are entering amateur waters.

The fact that Sony sensors can recover more detail from an underexposed photo is certainly a great technological advancement though.

Why oh why did you have to go and dredge up this thread. :confused:


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
CanonVsNikon
Senior Member
255 posts
Joined Jan 2013
     
Nov 11, 2014 16:44 |  #133
bannedPermanent ban

AJSJones wrote in post #17265298 (external link)
For a professional in a studio where they can control the lighting, that doesn't sound very arrogant, but rather practical. They can remove the shadow areas by adding lights.

For waterfalls (or any other high DR *SCENE*) where you wish e.g., to prevent the white water falls blowing out but need to capture the detail in the rest of the shot, those are anything but amateur waters (unless you can bring enough lights and power on the hike to light up the shadow areas :D:D)

What, you don't bring your own lights for landscape shots? :eek: Amateur ;)

I ALWAYS bring along a cargo van of lights for this very purpose.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davebreal
Senior Member
Avatar
894 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jul 2007
Location: new jersey, usa
     
Nov 11, 2014 21:13 |  #134

AJSJones wrote in post #17265298 (external link)
For waterfalls (or any other high DR *SCENE*) where you wish e.g., to prevent the white water falls blowing out but need to capture the detail in the rest of the shot, those are anything but amateur waters (unless you can bring enough lights and power on the hike to light up the shadow areas :D:D)

7D MK 1 shot, ACR set to 0 on shadows, highlights at -5. No further shadows/highlights actions taken. Slight Curves adjustment in CS 6.

No lighting equipment brought, other than years of experience in shooting landscapes.

Yes, lack of understanding of quality of light is ABSOLUTELY amateur waters.

IMAGE: https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5520/14642530413_51d9327868_z.jpg

Dave
flickr  (external link)Twitter  (external link)Wordpress Blog (external link) YouTube (external link)
My Gear--> Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davebreal
Senior Member
Avatar
894 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jul 2007
Location: new jersey, usa
     
Nov 11, 2014 21:16 |  #135

Canon 50D, no shadow lifting, highlights at -5 in ACR.

No strobes, no reflectors, no Shadows/Highlights to cause amateur greying of water.

IMAGE: https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5153/14137830732_28ddd05499_z.jpg

Dave
flickr  (external link)Twitter  (external link)Wordpress Blog (external link) YouTube (external link)
My Gear--> Facebook (external link)

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

35,487 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 Mjennis
1045 guests, 329 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.